Metropol

Got a picture of the squares logo?

EDIT: And it looks like Cancer Research UK have a new logo.


It's too similar to KC's for my liking.

Not exactly high street, but eBay seem to have decided to go for an... uninspired... rebrand.


http://mashable.com/2012/09/13/ebay-new ... gle+Reader

Wow, I wonder if they will get a Gap backlash.

What's with all the aliasing!?

WillPS wrote:What's with all the aliasing!?

It seems that other sites have a version sans aliasing. Perhaps mashable used a poor quality version as the only image that is important to them is Pete Cashmore's smug fucking face staring out of their twitter avatar. You're not hot Cashmore, fuck off and take your stupid little centre parting bald patch with you.

Sorry got a bit sidetracked there.

EDIT: Non-alised official version
http://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/anno ... o/logo.png

Gamestation is rebranding as GAME. Seems stupid to me, when they were in administration, it's GAME's name that was all over the press, so they'd have been better keeping the Gamestation brand instead IMHO.

JAS84 wrote:Gamestation is rebranding as GAME. Seems stupid to me, when they were in administration, it's GAME's name that was all over the press, so they'd have been better keeping the Gamestation brand instead IMHO.

GAME was always the stronger brand. Plus, if there are more GAME stores than Gamestation stores, it makes sense to go with the majority brand.

Alexia wrote:

JAS84 wrote:Gamestation is rebranding as GAME. Seems stupid to me, when they were in administration, it's GAME's name that was all over the press, so they'd have been better keeping the Gamestation brand instead IMHO.

GAME was always the stronger brand. Plus, if there are more GAME stores than Gamestation stores, it makes sense to go with the majority brand.

In most places with both a GAME and Gamestation, the Gamestation shut, so to see it come back again in place of GAME would seem a bit odd.

bilky asko wrote:

Alexia wrote:

JAS84 wrote:Gamestation is rebranding as GAME. Seems stupid to me, when they were in administration, it's GAME's name that was all over the press, so they'd have been better keeping the Gamestation brand instead IMHO.

GAME was always the stronger brand. Plus, if there are more GAME stores than Gamestation stores, it makes sense to go with the majority brand.

In most places with both a GAME and Gamestation, the Gamestation shut, so to see it come back again in place of GAME would seem a bit odd.

Seeing as HMV are rubbish at games here, Gamestation was the only alternative to GAME. It looks like they'll be getting a monopoly on it, here.

GAME was always the stronger brand. Plus, if there are more GAME stores than Gamestation stores, it makes sense to go with the majority brand.

At the expense of dragging up a *very* old argument, that kind of logic escaped Morrisons, who had far fewer stores than Safeway (and had no brand awareness at all in large parts of the south whilst Safeway was pretty much universally recognised). But 8 years later, it's all forgotten about now, Morrisons is just as universally accepted as Tesco and Sainsburys, and a lot of people doubtless have forgotten that Safeway ever existed. No doubt Gamestation will go the same way.

Gamestation is rebranding as GAME. Seems stupid to me, when they were in administration, it's GAME's name that was all over the press, so they'd have been better keeping the Gamestation brand instead IMHO.

I would have kept Gamestation too - but for me because it appears a stronger and mature brand. It looks like something modern with added value which makes it worth going to and paying the extra penny for. Everything about Game, from their garish early 90's style logo to their handwritten sale tickets to their cheap pine laminate shopfits make it look like some forgotten relic selling cheap tat - except it isn't actually that cheap.

Whilst I wouldn't have gone with keeping Game over Gamestation, I do agree that merging the two makes sense. I completely take the argument that both brands serve different sectors of the market, but I don't feel the high street retail games market is a big enough arena to justify one company operating two completely different store formats which, ultimately, only sell the same products. Also, I doubt very much that those particular two sectors (i.e. those who actively favour one format over the other) represent a majority of customers - it's far more likely that the bulk of customers are just looking for a shop that sells what they want and couldn't care less about the format.

They are lucky to have survived administration (even if their store footprint was heavily reduced as a result) but if they are going to stay that way they certainly don't need expenses like this, and I'd much rather read about one particular group of customers mourning the loss of their preferred format, than see them plod on with it to keep a few people happy and then read about yet another tale of mass unemployment as Game group collapses alltogether.

Critique wrote: Seeing as HMV are rubbish at games here, Gamestation was the only alternative to GAME. It looks like they'll be getting a monopoly on it, here.

It already was!