Select Page
This article was originally published on this site

“Back to the Quirky Future”

New Logo for Quirky (Again) done In-house

Established in 2009, Quirky brings inventors’ ideas to life and to market through an open process where community members provide ideas, which are then voted on, and each week the top five are discussed by the Quirky team to see which ones they’ll develop. They have launched over 300 products — from flexible power strips to egg yolk separators — that are sold online and across nearly 200 retail partners.

Design by
In-house

Related links
2017 Quirky blog post
2015 Brand New Noted post
2013 Brand New Review

Relevant quote
First, like an adolescent exploring who they are, Quirky has tried out a few different personas over the past 6 years. We’ve had multiple logos, icons, and color schemes. You may see one logo on a Quirky product in-store, a different one in your cabinet, and yet another one on our website.

It’s time to bring it all together under one cohesive identity, and we’ve gone with the one you told us you preferred. We surveyed our community forums, and the logo you see today was almost unanimously voted on as the favorite. We’re pleased you chose this logo, we like it the most too.

Images (opinion after)

New Logo for Quirky (Again) done In-house
Logo.

Opinion
Allow me to quote myself from almost two years ago: “Quirky seems to have commitment issues as the last logo was designed two years ago replacing a logo designed two years earlier. Tune back in 2017 for the next Quirky logo.” My prescience was on flick. However, I did NOT expect that they would change back to their 2013 logo, that was a real plot twist. I think this one will stick for more than two years. It’s definitely the better of the two (2013 vs. 2015) but I do wish they had made the effort to go for a more authentic Sharpie aesthetic — like, you know, actually drawing it with a marker — instead of the bezier-point-evident execution they had (and have). I think that would have honored the name better and would have signaled a better moving-forward decision than an undo decision.