Aldi rebrand – Like brands, only cheaper?
21st March 2017
As creatives we are constantly on the look out for fresh inspiration and what better conversation starter than when a huge brand has a brand overhaul. This past year we’ve seen an array of brands going for a more modern angle from Instagram’s old emoji look icon which last year morphed into a gradient app shape with the iconic white inversed ident on top and saw the Ministry of Sound’s complex globe and crown merge into a new flat design, which we’re seeing to be a common trend adopted by many big brands. However controversial, we like nothing more than to give our two cents and this past week we have seen a media storm of creative feedback from designers all over on the new Aldi supermarket rebrand.
The low cost supermarket enlisted the help from German consultancy Illion Markensocietaet to aid them in their brand overhaul, with the brief by the supermarket giant, to create a more “contemporary” image for their brand. This is to start a huge national store refurb to follow the colourful palette and “fresh” design.
So we had to put the logo to the team to see what they thought and lets just say it caused great discussion. Our main bug bear has got to be taken right from the brief itself, “contemporary.” The new identity uses the same colour palette, same design, shape, does this really express a sense of innovation? The new brand is just a glossier version of the last one, with the word ‘glossy’ used not as a compliment here. True the gradient is coming back slowly into fashion again, we can see that from such brands as n-power and Instagram, but the shadow gradient, 3D ribbon is just dirty and nostalgic of brands we saw over 20 years ago, although it does fit in with their adopted name for the ‘A’ symbol “Discount ribbon” as in, a cheaper version of the last brand. We wonder how Aldi can be happy with such a rebrand that delivers the opposite to the brief they supplied? Ok they have a new font and a brighter colour palette but it still, to a normal eye, looks the same. Another question here is since the brand’s revamp back in 2006, did they really need another rebrand in the first place? Especially one that almost cheapens the version they had. Ironically the identity does fit perfectly with the giant’s ethos… “Like brands, only cheaper,” a cheaper version of what could have been such a unique and memorable rebrand.
What do you think?