Complete Sky Rebrand - Again!

Lol - whilst Sky have re-branded MANY times in the past, I think it's actually quite good that they refresh their look all the time.

This way the company doesn't grow stale or out of date every 5 years - it kind of re-ittertates the cutting edge-ness of Sky as a company.

Of course the downside to this is the fact that many viewers become confused between identities, which can't be a good thing!

They've got a lot of building to do to get back the strong Sky brand - but I reckon they can do it.

Channel 6 could work well actually, being on DSat 106, but I don't see Murdoch letting go of the Sky branding. After all branding is more important to broadcasters than content.

On Sky 106 this would work well - however what about other providers such as Cable? Sky One is on loads of other channel numbers as well.

I'm sure the word SIX would come into it somewhere though: SKY / SIX / SEX / SFX are all similarly spelt, and this could be incorporated.

As long as we don't end up with the obvious 'SIX Mix'

I think it would be a good idea to rebrand Sky One, it is nowhere the channel as it used to be, as we know the channel has changed for the worse, but these days it has new and different programmes and fewer imports so a rebrand would be a good thing with the changing beat with the channel. I personally think that Sky Sports should get a new logo, it technically has had the same logo for 6 years now! Except for the font change in 2002, but a rebrand would be welcomed, especially in time for the new football season.

As long as they don't rebrand Sky Movies again!

Sky are rebranding AGAIN? Just after they rebranded all the movie channels?

How about spending the money on getting some of Sky One's decent programmes back?

Can't agree about renaming Sky One (I do note though that's it's only being touted as a 'possible' change of name). As with the UK Gold >> UKTV Gold nonsense which saw one of the twin towers of UK pay TV loose it's long established name in order to fall into line with the latest whimsical rebranding scheme to make design houses look like they have something to do, renaming the other twin tower - Sky One - is a similarly bad thing (and if they do, it looks like it won't be called anything remotely like Sky One).

Central to the Top Up TV debate is the lack of Sky One. When it was first being outlined, people assumed it would have Sky One. When it didn't have it, people asked why it didn't have Sky One. Even recently, people suggested means of putting Sky One on there. People wanted Sky One. Not for it's programming (which has completely gone to the dogs now), but because it's Sky One . The same channel with any other name wouldn't be half as lucrative and the service wouldn't seem half as incomplete without it.

The basic channel brand of Sky One is probably the strongest brand asset Sky have. Good on them for revamping it and seemingly attempting to bring it back to it's glory days (assuming there really will be a noticeable difference in it's output), but why get rid of the name? I hope they see sense and don't do it.

Ah well, I'm sure what we get will be a 'simplified new look' and it wouldn't surprise me if they go for a corporate look again in order to 'create coherence between the present situation of clashing brands' which 'doesn't make sense any more' just a few years after all the channels were allowed to have their own distinct identities.


The Iceland.co.uk brand worked? If by 'worked' you mean 'they had to hurriedly drop the .co.uk bit after only a year when it became woefully unfashionable and dated to make your website so prominent' then yeah, it's worked really well.

No, by 'worked', I mean it has beat all of the other competition in it's market, succesfully established it's name in the average British household - and been voted Frozen Food Retailer of the Year many times.