<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Starbucks’ New Retro Logo</title>
	<atom:link href="http://karim.co.za/blog/2008/04/17/starbucks%e2%80%99-new-retro-logo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://karim.co.za/blog/2008/04/17/starbucks%e2%80%99-new-retro-logo/</link>
	<description>A Double Espresso in a Decaf World...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:54:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Muhammad</title>
		<link>http://karim.co.za/blog/2008/04/17/starbucks%e2%80%99-new-retro-logo/comment-page-1/#comment-12407</link>
		<dc:creator>Muhammad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 11:42:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karim.co.za/blog/2008/04/17/starbucks%e2%80%99-new-retro-logo/#comment-12407</guid>
		<description>Thanks for that RonBo, it really puts the new logo and the current one in context.  Also it gives perspective into the reasons for for having two different logo&#039;s on their ranges.

M.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for that RonBo, it really puts the new logo and the current one in context.  Also it gives perspective into the reasons for for having two different logo&#8217;s on their ranges.</p>
<p>M.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RonBo</title>
		<link>http://karim.co.za/blog/2008/04/17/starbucks%e2%80%99-new-retro-logo/comment-page-1/#comment-12400</link>
		<dc:creator>RonBo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:30:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karim.co.za/blog/2008/04/17/starbucks%e2%80%99-new-retro-logo/#comment-12400</guid>
		<description>This (retro) logo also needs to be in use since their other version (from 1998) is now up for the 10 year renewal as a federal trademark. This is why we suddenly see this new version. They dont want others going anywhere near their original logo style. By placing the new retro logo on a brand extension will keep the mark in future use as a going trademark. Clever but essential.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This (retro) logo also needs to be in use since their other version (from 1998) is now up for the 10 year renewal as a federal trademark. This is why we suddenly see this new version. They dont want others going anywhere near their original logo style. By placing the new retro logo on a brand extension will keep the mark in future use as a going trademark. Clever but essential.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

