Coca Cola vs Pepsi | Logo Design Case Study

The Soda Wars have been raging for well over 100 years and the
argument of Coca Cola is nicer than Pepsi or vice-versa is older
than the hills. People have different palettes and like different
things, that argument can never be settled.

Something that can be settled though, is why Coca Cola have

consistently trumped Pepsi in the soda market. Now, were not
talking about who makes the most money overall. Both Pepsi and
Coca Cola are huge corporations with a lot of other brand names
under their respective umbrellas. Were simply talking about cola
and cola alone. [1] PepsiCo may have brought in 38 percent more
revenue in 2011 than Coca Cola. But its archrival sold $28 billion
worth of soda while PepsiCo only sold $12 billion.
I believe that where Coca Cola have succeeded and Pepsi have failed
is with their branding. For over 100 years, Coca Cola have used the
same logo. The swirly typeface that everyone the world over can
recognise. Sure, its been sat on a couple of different backgrounds
and had the word Coke added to it now and again, but essentially,
its been the same logo. Pepsi on the other hand, started out with a
logo very similar to Coca Colas. A hand drawn red typeface. Over
the years, Pepsis logo evolved and changed with the times. The
1940s version of the Pepsi logo is great, and I wish theyd stuck
with it. However, they moved on, bringing in the blue and keeping
up with trends, a vital branding mistake. Have a look at this image;

Coca Cola and Pepsi Logo History

If you asked somebody to describe the Coca Cola logo, youd
probably get a response along the lines of its those red swirly
letters. And on the other hand, if you asked somebody to describe
the Pepsi logo, you would probably get a different version,
depending on what it was like when they remember it most. Coca
Colas branding is timeless. It hasnt aged and it still looks great.
Because Pepsi have elected to follow design trends, every several
years, they have to roll out a refreshed logo design.
Some people will argue that Pepsis circular imagery is
recognisable, and really, theres no denying that. However, how is it
remembered? Is it the circle thats got Pepsi wrote in the middle
(1973)? Is it the 1991 version of the logo with the big red tail? Or is
it 2008s slanted version of the circle? They seem to change their
icon whenever the mood suits. I have to argue that the Pepsi logo
would have worked better if theyd picked the positioning and
secured it with a classic typeface from the word go. It couldve been
timeless, classic and iconic (all words that are associated with Coca
Cola) but due to indecisiveness I feel the logo falls short of reaching
that summit.

Evolution of the Coca Cola can

Evolution of the Pepsi can

Looking through the cluttered history of the fizzy drinks cans of
both companies, the logo changes and evolutions become even
more apparent. The logo on Pepsis first can is completely different
to that on the last can. It also appears that in 1990, whoever was
responsible for designing Pepsis cans bumped their head and
created some sort of discotheque styled graphical monstrosity.
On looking at Coca Colas history of cans, their recognisable type
based logo is ever present, as are their brand colours; red and
white. They didnt seem to veer off their track too much until
between 1994 and 2000 where they seemed to get confused over
whether their can was actually a bottle. However, on realising their
mistake, it was dropped and in 2002 they adopted their classic
look and its been there ever since. Sure, they release limited
edition cans, seasonal cans and the like but that logo and those
colours are always there.
There are numerous other areas in which Pepsis strategy has
tripped up. In the 1980s Pepsis celebrity endorsement strategy ran
into several problems. The first being a pyrotechnic stunt gone
wrong which left Michael Jackson addicted to painkillers. In 1987,
David Bowie (another of Pepsis celebrity faces) was accused of
sexual assault, forcing the company to drop their new advert
immediately.
A string of other bad marketing errors, such as Pepsis advert that
makes fun of rival brand Coca Cola, actually helping Coca Cola, lead
to Pepsi seated safely in the number two fizzy drinks spot (until Diet
Coke overtook them). Pepsi targeted both Santa Claus and Coca

Colas famous polar bears in their hilarious advertising campaign,

that actually ended up helping their rivals.
In May 2012 Brad Jakeman, Pepsis new chief creative officer was
tasked with creating a new global campaign. He spent nine months
and over $5 million dollars to figure out Coke is timeless. Pepsi is
timely. Really Brad? It took you that long to figure that out? How is
that even possible? I think Id figured that out by the 3rd paragraph
of this article, and that was before researching where Pepsi were
going wrong.
[2] You dont need a consultancy to tell you that Coke has used the
polar bear and Santa mascots for decades. The product is named
Classic. Everything about the brand is traditional.
And therein lies the key problem. Coca Cola have their message and
brand identity, its the same as their logo; timeless and classic.
Pepsi on the other hand, have nothing. They havent got that key
hook to their brand that gets people. Theyve got nothing to hang
their advertising from. Everything related to the brand just seems
to be random. Random can be great, if done right .However, when
random isnt what youre going for, its just a term thats bandied
about because people dont quite know how to classify you or your
product.
Just as a fun little exercise, take a look at and compare the Coca
Cola and Pepsi websites;
How can Pepsi sort it out? They need to get hold of a concept. They
need to redesign their logo, packaging and entire brand identity to
reflect that. Essentially, they need to do what they shouldve done
years ago. They need to start again and rebuild their entire brand
message, or, get a brand message as at the minute, there isnt
enough to rebuild.
Do you think Pepsi are going wrong? Do you prefer Pepsi to

Coke?

Let us know your thoughts below.