Which one do you prefer: the new logo or the old one....

[Sir PMP]

with the Haelve Maan of Henry Hudson

no more Henry Hudson...

[Krazy Kruizers]

I love the first one.

[wales4ever]

Could not give a err ?? as long as the cruise is fine....

[sppunk]

New is much more aesthetically pleasing. I’m a professional graphic designer fwiw.

[ski ww]

I prefer the old one, more pleasing to the eye, it tells a story. It has a history with HAL.

Allan

[Shmoo here]

I prefer the old one, more pleasing to the eye, it tells a story. It has a history with HAL.

Allan

That's where my vote is, also.

[RuthC]

I've been around HAL long enough that there's more than one "old" logo. :D

 

But of the two pictured, I prefer the one with the two ships. It reflects that the present---and the future---have come from the past. I like the symbol of continuity it reflects.

[Fouremco]

This was the subject of much debate on this board when the new logo was introduced a couple or so years ago. Most people expressed their preference then for the old, but HAL chose nevertheless to continue with the new. I suspect that this thread will reveal that most people, myself included, continue to prefer the old.

[rkacruiser]

I really don't care about the logo. If I had to choose, I would select the historical "two ships" one.

 

But, if one wants another "modern" logo: what about the Holland America Cruises logo used in the 1980's?

[haladdict]

I believe that captain Albert said that the 1st logo looked like a hal ship running down a smaller one.

Sandra.

[Boatdrill]

I prefer the old one, more pleasing to the eye, it tells a story. It has a history with HAL.

 

Agree. The new logo looks generic.

[whogo]

I believe that captain Albert said that the 1st logo looked like a hal ship running down a smaller one.

Sandra.

A collision was my first thought, wouldn't know anything about the old ship if I did not spend too much time on Cruise Critic. I think the logo change was pointless, a waste of money, doubt that Holland America has seen an uptick in bookings attributable to the new logo.

[ellieanne]

I don't understand why they can't or don't use both. The old silverware on the ships have the older logo. The new materials have the new logo. There is no reason why they can't use both the more streamlined logo and the older one showing both ships. But that's just me. Why do they have to choose? Why do they have to recall everything with the old logo? It's not like changing the logo negates the old one or requires everything with the old logo to be destroyed. When the Queen ascended the throne, the old money with King George VI on it was slowly phased out, it was not rendered useless immediately. The logos are the same. Both can be used simultaneously on different things and in different places. I really object to this binary idea that you have to choose one or the other.

[ithaca gal]

Don’t care at all as long as I have a great cruise. And I always do.

 

IMO, much ado about nothing.

[Hlitner]

Call me an old fuddy duddy or just a horrible old man but its hard for me to get excited about cruise line logos, Medallions, or other such dribble that some folks find important :). What I do care about is the quality on my various cruises, the cuisine, crew, itinerary, and even fellow passengers. A few years ago HAL announced they were eliminating their Medallion program and you would have thought they were shutting down the entire line after reading some of the strong comments here on CC. They change their logo (most folks probably did not even notice) and it becomes a defining issue in some folk's lives. So I imagine you will find some here that have nothing better to do then debate logos, the color of hulls, Cruise Director uniforms, etc. I can honestly say that in our more than 500 days on HAL I cannot recall a single conversation about Logos :).

 

Hank

[Himself]

I prefer the old one

[portofrome]

I like the old one.

[MajMom96]

I like the old one. I loved the clipper ship. It was a nice combo of merging the new with the old.

[tntornadox]

The opinion of this 29 year old? The old one. HAL has a proud heritage and the old logo reflected its history. I feel like that should be embraced and could be used as a stronger selling point. They are trying to go 'too modern' with this new marketing campaign and are sailing (pun intended) into a very crowded 'middle market' competing head to head with other Carnival Corporation brands (notably Princess). I guess we will see in the long run if it makes any difference to the bottom line.

[Sea girl 23]

Don't care/new one. It DOES look like the big ship is running over the smaller one.Sorry.

[Tinknock50]

I believe that captain Albert said that the 1st logo looked like a hal ship running down a smaller one.

Sandra.

lol... that's what I always think when I see it.:D

[philbob84]

A lot of Seattle based companies have done this over the last 2 years. REI, PCC, Alaska Airlines, Amazon has made the smile more prominent , Starbucks has two depending if you go to a run of the mill shop or mall kiosks versus going to their Sbux reserve to name a few. That being said I get the purpose of the simplified modern aesthetic but i think i prefer the classic old one.

[jhannah]

I prefer the retired logo showing both ships. It's HAL's history. Seems we're all about abandoning/erasing history these days!

[KirkNC]

I would surprisedly (it surprises me) go with the new one. Like others, logos aren’t my thing.

[Overhead Fred]

Not that it is particularly important, but my initial reaction to the change was that I preferred the old logo since it incorporated some of HAL's history.

 

However, on looking at them side-by-side (thanks OP!), I think the new one is superior from an artistic and graphic design perspective.

 

My opinion now is that the new logo conveys more of what a logo is supposed to and the old one looks a little cluttered (or busy) in comparison.

 

But I won't be throwing out any of my tchotchkes that have the old logo!

 

(The kids will dump all of it eventually.....)