A mistake? Probably. A massive mistake? I think that's an overstatement. So far, this is the only place other than the web site where this logo has appeared, right? So in the next crop of bracelets, they can go back to the old logo. I'm sure they can continue to use the current crop of bracelets until they run out, so the likelihood that they will have to even eat the cost of these bracelets seems low to me. And even if they did decide to eat the new bracelets on account of it being inconsistent, I don't think that would particularly wound them financially.Aesculapius wrote:
Using this newer version of the logo on the watches themselves is a massive mistake in my eyes as it introduces yet another variant in the logo - which is (a) just getting silly and (b) looks a bit shoddy an unprofessional - the smart branding approach is to stick to one consistent version and not mess about with different fonts and appearances.
The mistake is easily correctible. I agree with you that choosing to correct it is the better option. But if they choose not to correct it and they persist with using both fonts, I don't really think that it's going to make that much of a difference. As long as one version of the logo is eventually and properly phased out, they can chalk it up to a conscious design choice to use a different font on the clasp logo, and move on.