|
Originally Posted by TallTexan
(Post 13886296)
....I have thought of CO's livery as one of the better ones, and UA's new one as rather bland. UA's tail in particular is a waste of what *should* be a great billboard (as a brand-builder). Part of me wonders if UA put their current tail livery in place as a temporary solution - if they spent more than a dime on its design then they certainly wasted their money - but another part of me wonders if they are that clever. It will be interesting to see how they handle this.
(I may be newly-registered on FlyerTalk, but I have been a reader for years. So, actually, those of you who have contributed so much to my understanding get the credit!) |
Originally Posted by uastarflyer
(Post 13889263)
There is no reason to have to combine the logos/livery. Add the gold stripe if you wish, but do not lose the tulip!!!!!! this is a merger of equals. United didn't come in and "take over" a failed airline. Hence, there is no reason to think that the resulting company is going to look/act/behave/operate exactly like only ONE of the two predecessors. There are clearly going to be combined elements and likely a combined culture from both. A fundamental goal of mergers is to combine the "two" to make a stronger/better/more profitable "one". Keeping everything at the "new UA" looking/acting/operating exactly like it did in the old UA days would do nothing to make a stronger "two".... hence, it will never happen. For better or worse, this was an arranged marriage--- not an adoption.... we're all part of a blended family now.... |
Tulip? Funny, for YEARS, I've wondered what that thing was, other than a blurry U ... I guess now I know!
:D |
Originally Posted by Paul19
(Post 13890505)
Tulip? Funny, for YEARS, I've wondered what that thing was, other than a blurry U ... I guess now I know!
:D |
Originally Posted by TallTexan
(Post 13889402)
Not to brag....except a little....I think maybe I was onto something here. ;-)
Will there be three class cabins on international flights? Will there be E+ seating on all aircraft? Will the mainline fleet get Channel 9? Will PC stop serving free booze? |
Yuck.. Instead of taking the best of both images, it's like Bob, the onlyone familiar with photoshop 2 hours before release time, was told to merge them..
The worst part is the font, IMO.. With the word "Continental", it looks nice.. but with "United", it looks lame. As has been pointed out, thank goodness there is a lot of time between now and anything being rebranded :D |
Originally Posted by tanlines
(Post 13890339)
you're not serious, right?
this is a merger of equals. United didn't come in and "take over" a failed airline. Hence, there is no reason to think that the resulting company is going to look/act/behave/operate exactly like only ONE of the two predecessors. There are clearly going to be combined elements and likely a combined culture from both. A fundamental goal of mergers is to combine the "two" to make a stronger/better/more profitable "one". Keeping everything at the "new UA" looking/acting/operating exactly like it did in the old UA days would do nothing to make a stronger "two".... hence, it will never happen. For better or worse, this was an arranged marriage--- not an adoption.... we're all part of a blended family now.... Absolutely agree, well put. The NEW UA is a entirely NEW airline -- blended by original CO and original UA. |
Originally Posted by tanlines
(Post 13890339)
you're not serious, right?
this is a merger of equals.
Originally Posted by superEGO
(Post 13891231)
The worst part is the font, IMO.. With the word "Continental", it looks nice.. but with "United", it looks lame.
|
Originally Posted by TallTexan
(Post 13886296)
Part of me wonders if UA put their current tail livery in place as a temporary solution - if they spent more than a dime on its design then they certainly wasted their money - but another part of me wonders if they are that clever. It will be interesting to see how they handle this.
|
The new livery will look real nice. This will be an interesting 7-9 months.
|
count me in with the group that thinks that font looks bad with a shorter name. why not use the font UA uses on their current livery in that CO blue?
|
The font looks dumb. I don't think it's the exact same as the one as the current CO livery, it just looks very poorly Photoshopped.
I want battleship gray + CO globe in United navy blue. That would be fresh. |
Count me in the consensus that thinks the written 'United' word doesn't work well with the new treatment.
Was never a big fan of the Continental livery myself, but see the rationale, and it certainly left me with a visceral, though entirely irrational feeling that my consistent Continental product would spread across legacy United. I would like to see the over the top script used for the Presidents Club and Elite Access logos to stick around. Something nice and old school country club about it. Will miss the tulip, designer Saul Bass did an ahead of its time job with the original treatment in the mid 1970s. But heres to hoping they take the current United type and marry it with the gloe. Don't see much chance though -- during the investor call today Jeff smugly said of the livery "looks nice, doesn't it?" |
Originally Posted by cerealmarketer
(Post 13893366)
during the investor call today Jeff smugly said of the livery "looks nice, doesn't it?"
|
new United livery sucks
Seeing the new livery at "United, Continental airlines agree to merger" made me puke. I thought it was a bad dream, a bad joke, to see another name in the now familiar Continental font (whose font face I know not).
Then I read the above and oh how I wish to the heavens this was all a bad dream.
Originally Posted by GregWTravels
(Post 13887557)
I like it. I'm glad the globe is staying. Always loved the globe - it makes it feel very worldly.
Originally Posted by meFIRST
(Post 13889218)
OMG! . The new livery is ugly.
Why isn't this thread merged into United's Name and Continental's Logo and Livery to be Used Post-Merger? |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:24 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.