The most controversial rebrands of all time
A company's logo distils what a business does and what its values are - but what happens when a rebrand goes wrong?
Rebranding is risky for any company; if done correctly, it can modernise the brand image, expand into emerging markets, signal positive change and attract new customers.
However, it comes with the risk of losing brand equity and confusing your audience.
Here are some of the most controversial rebrands of all time.
Jaguar's old logo
Automotive company Jaguar has had a long heritage with luxury, British-made cars.
Jaguar's original logo was adopted when the company rebranded from its previous name Swallow Sidecars in 1945.
But a recent rebrand has attracted widespread commentary.
Jaguar's new logo
Jaguar attempted to bring a new lease of life into the brand by ushering in a new generation of EVs and a radical and controversial rebrand.
Jaguar sales have declined rapidly over the last few years, with only 581 new vehicles sold in Australia last year.
Attempting to save the brand, the newly revealed logo received widespread criticism.
Jaguar's "complete reset" was said to have alienated brand fans while disrespecting their rich heritage.
Twitter's old logo
Twitter was created as the social media platform for quick, rapid-fire news and thoughts.
Amid wavering user figures, Twitter was bought by Tesla billionaire Elon Musk in 2022 for a reported $USD 44 billion.
Musk made radical changes not just to the brand's logo but to its name.
Twitter - now X's - new logo
The Twitter 'bird' was killed off to make way for the single letter mark X.
This radical change has not been well received by users of the popular site, reflected in the value of Twitter/X falling from $AUD8.79 billion in 2022 to $AUD1.03 billion in 2024.
The success of the rebrand was made worse by the media refusing to use the site by its new name.
Gap's old logo
In 2010 American fashion retailer Gap wanted to modernize the brand by changing its highly recognisable 1990 logo.
Gap had a small footprint in Australia until 2018, when it closed its six remaining stores.
Gap's new, short-lived logo
The change to the new logo was immediately criticised, and the gap embarrassingly returned to its original logo six days later.
"We've learned just how much energy there is around our brand, and after much thought, we've decided to return to our iconic blue box logo," said Bill Chandler, Gap's vice president of corporate communications.
The disaster cost the gap a staggering $USD100 million, making it one of the most expensive branding mistakes.
Vegemite's old logo
It is perhaps one of Australia's most well-known and beloved brands - but Vegemite's stronghold on the market was nearly upended by a new product.
Vegemite's new iSnack 2.0
In 2009, Vegemite attempted to expand into the snack market by launching a new product aimed at being a less bitter "dippable" snack for children.
Part of the marketing strategy was to launch the product without a name - and to have Australians supply their own suggestions.
The "name me" marketing engaged the audience, but it went drastically wrong when the name iSnack 2.0 was chosen.
The name was widely criticised due to its similarity to tech products.
"The new name simply has not resonated with Australians," said Simon Talbot, Kraft's Head of Corporate Affairs shortly after the name changed to Cheesybite.
Kia's old logo
Jaguar is not the first car manufacturer to dip its toe in the world of rebranding.
Share a tip-off, video or photo with us
