urbanSTL

TB1000 wrote:That logo is as craptastic as it gets. It looks like it belongs on a 1980's vintage tee you would find in a thrift store. I think the color of the tee would be a light brown.

Would the sleeves be three quarter length



actually I was walking the dog this morning and noticed it's very similar to the Anheuser Busch Employee Credit Union logo, so as much as I'd like to blame Belgium for the lame design it looks like it was hatched right here.



Oh well, as long as the "angry Eagle" is still the official logo for Budweiser.

I was talking to a guy in the AB Marketing Department last night, and he said that the Logo came down from InBev, and that they had nothing to do with it. He was not particularly happy with how it turned out.

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:

urban_dilettante wrote:devoid of detail and craftsmanship like everything else that gets built these days.

It's worth noting that similar complaints were made about the Arch (and most modern architecture).

that's why i don't like most modern architecture. the arch is somehow different though ...



maybe people's attention spans are so short these days they can't remember complicated logos. after next buyout the logo will just be a square.

urban_dilettante wrote:after next buyout the logo will just be a square.

By then I bet ABI will be a subsidiary of McAT&TWalmartToyota.



The debate over the new corporate logo reminds me of the debate over the new Missouri license plates. In both cases I think the execution could have been better, but then the choices made don't rise to the level of offending me either.



On one hand, I agree with others here that the new ABI eagle looks a bit too tame compared to the traditional Anheuser-Busch eagle. OTOH, I like that (1) the decision was made to emphasize Anheuser-Busch by putting its name first and including the eagle in the first place and (2) the traditional eagle will still be used on Budweiser and other A-B products that currently display the logo.



Now, if ABI removes "St. Louis, Missouri" from the labels and advertising of A-B products, that might rise to the level of offending me a bit.



(Of course, I wouldn't swear off A-B anyway. I wonder how many hoosiers are drinking Coors now?)



At any rate, as it's been said a million times before, it's just business. I may not like all of the decisions, but even with a Buffetesque load of stock, there isn't much I could do about it. And if anyone thinks this is bad, I just wonder how many automakers will remain in business in Detroit this time next year.

Likely most of it will be transferred into other types of accounts.



I've heard anecdotal stories of many lower income working class families with long-inherited stock who expected huge amounts of cash at the buyout. Especially in the current investment environment, I can imagine the family members using the cash on consumer spending.

^ gosh, the bargains to be had out there make my mouth water... just like after 911, this is when you go "all in" and bet on the market... If only I had a little more DI, I could retire early.

Arch City wrote:The new image stands in stark contrast to the old, which is more intricate and meaningful.

I also try to be a forward-looking person, but I think the same could be said for other corporate logos and for design in general. There are just a few standouts in a vast sea of blandness, whether we're talking about corporate logos, cars, buildings, or just about anything for that matter.

I think in the scheme of things, there are more important things than logos. Like jobs and stuff.

^ No argument there, but once someone's had their fill of depressing job news, it's time to move onto less significant matters like logo design.



And there won't be much more to talk about in this topic per se until Anheuser-Busch InBev makes its next move, hence the idle chatter about logos. At least I think we can all agree that this thread is still much shorter and better focused than the Ballpark Village thread.

^ I think you and many others are mistaken here. What's typically traditional are the individual beer brands. InBev was not a single beer brand -- it's a corporation that produced many well-known beers. InBev's logo was simple and represented its corporate culture. But since A-B was mainly a marketing company centred around one beer, the corporate logo was the same as Budweiser's logo (or close enough.)



It's just indicative of the cultural differences between the companies. A-B was the good-old-boy, country club, nepotist, cronyist company that looked to the past... InBev was a lean meritocracy that looked to the future. They're financial engineers and corporate raiders. That's why Inbev bought A-B.



The new and shared logo furthers the InBev culture and will serve to inculcate it within heritage A-B employees. It's just a matter of time when the monthly free beer goes away. Say hello to economy class flying too...



Heh, it just goes to show that logos don't really matter. The eagle wasn't so tough and mighty after all. It sure was in the past, which seems to be a thought that transcends so much these days.

And for what it's worth, AB-InBev has stated that Legacy Anheuser-Busch product will continue to use the current AB logo - the new logo will only be used when discussion the international corporation as a whole.



-RBB

lets not beat around the bush, that new logo is AWFUL, but then again, so is the name INBEV... innovation, i'm all for free market capitalism and too bad for AB, but I still don't understand how you think this will be better for the AB brands, they will loose more market share and will be tarnished, I guarantee it! as much as they were "stuck in the past", I still think the company's image/brands were far better under AB leadership, just wait and see.

JCity wrote:lets not beat around the bush, that new logo is AWFUL, but then again, so is the name INBEV... innovation, i'm all for free market capitalism and too bad for AB, but I still don't understand how you think this will be better for the AB brands, they will loose more market share and will be tarnished, I guarantee it! as much as they were "stuck in the past", I still think the company's image/brands were far better under AB leadership, just wait and see.

If you're going to make claims, please at least provide an argument. To be frank, A-B was forced to sell because of an abundance of decisionmakers within the company that possessed the kind of mindset that put the brand above all else. Let's just say that I won't repeat the contents of previous posts.



Suffice it to say, A-B's corporate culture was off. There was a disproportionate and unhealthy focus on marketing (or the brand) and not enough on the damn beer and smart business decisionmaking (with an end toward profit.)



The InBev folks are smart, disciplined and shrewd. They don't f around. Now I'm not saying that the A-B leadership team wasn't smart (I don't think they were wise), but they were undisciplined and rested on past laurels.



A-B folks will undergo a positive yet somewhat painful change in corporate culture. The corporate logo, bland as it may or may not be, helps drive that. The new company and its employees by extension will no longer be as wasteful or as free-wheeling as they once were. There will be an increased focus on discipline and meritocracy.



And I'm pretty certain that there is a place for successful marketing people (brand focus) within ABI. You know, in a meritocracy and all. So the marketing will still kick ass. They'll just spend a more optimal amount on it.

Merry Christmas to you InBev... .What a disaster!





A-B InBev will cut 1,400 jobs in United States

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

12/08/2008



Anheuser-Busch InBev announced today it would cut 1,400 salaried jobs in the United States.



About 75 percent of those cuts will be made in St. Louis, which is the North American headquarters for the new company created when InBev bought Anheuser-Busch this year.



Check STLtoday.com for more on this breaking story.



http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/busine ... enDocument

^ This is unwelcome news but was nonethless expected. Instead of growing shareholder value like InBev, A-B stagnated. We live in a global economy and unfortunately A-B was not successful enough to dictate its own destiny and that of its employees... This article is more thorough than the Post-Dispatch's: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081208/ap_ ... usch_inbev



Let me say another thing. On our internal social network, folks across the company are coming up with ways to save the company money. For example, I thought of an idea that could save $6 million/annum. This kind of thinking, especially if it spreads, can potentially save jobs...

A lot of these cuts were coming anyway. AB had realized there was too much fat and was already cutting. Just unfortunate how it all unfolded. But there's nothing we can do about that now. Good luck to those that are losing their jobs. Hopefully they will stay in the area and can find good jobs. Maybe some will start the next big business to come out of St. Louis. I'm sure there are some skilled people being laid off that would be great entrepreneurs.

innov8ion wrote:Let me say another thing. On our internal Boeing social network, folks across the company are coming up with ways to save the company money. For example, I thought of an idea that could save $6 million/annum. This kind of thinking, especially if it spreads, can potentially save jobs...

That sounds like a great idea. How receptive are the people at the top to the ideas? If the right people are reading these ideas, that could be a very successful system.

JCity wrote:lets not beat around the bush, that new logo is AWFUL

Can we beat around the Busch?

MattnSTL wrote:A lot of these cuts were coming anyway. AB had realized there was too much fat and was already cutting. Just unfortunate how it all unfolded. But there's nothing we can do about that now. Good luck to those that are losing their jobs. Hopefully they will stay in the area and can find good jobs. Maybe some will start the next big business to come out of St. Louis. I'm sure there are some skilled people being laid off that would be great entrepreneurs.

I think you said it all rather well. The news is very disappointing and the timing so close to the holidays couldn't be more unfortunate, but I think we all realize things would've played out the same if the headlines were different, i.e., if A-B pulled off some miraculous act to remain independent. Either way, we knew drastic cuts were in store.



Someone else can feel free to report back here about the inevitable trainwreck on the STLtoday.com forums. I'm sure the hoosiers are already planning to drink a real American beer like Miller Lite while they b!tch and moan about the impending demise of St. Louis as we know it. They should really eliminate the comment section from their articles, because the predictably mindless twaddle that passes for discussion there is a bit embarrassing.

Moorlander wrote:Merry Christmas to you InBev... .What a disaster!





A-B InBev will cut 1,400 jobs in United States

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

12/08/2008



Anheuser-Busch InBev announced today it would cut 1,400 salaried jobs in the United States.



About 75 percent of those cuts will be made in St. Louis, which is the North American headquarters for the new company created when InBev bought Anheuser-Busch this year.



Check STLtoday.com for more on this breaking story.



http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/busine ... enDocument

My new boss was talking about these layoffs last Thursday. His wife, an AB exec, was already planning for the reverberations of this news. Bummer. This points to Inno's comments made earlier. The lazy man's approach to business will not stand up to a globalized economy. nuff said, broseph.