Hang Tag Review #36 - Joe B by Joe Benbasset Hang Tag

Today's hang tag is from the junior brand Joe B by Joe Benbasset. This tag hangs vertically although the text is all horizontal. The front has the JOE B sub brand set just above (and slightly offset) from the by JOE BENBASSET brand name. The tag is a stark white on thick paperboard. It is very similar to the Calvin Klein Jeans tag reviewed some years ago.

The reverse is similarly minimalist. It contains the full www.name.com webaddress, with icons for a few key social networking sites (namely, Facebook, Instagram, and Pinterest). And that's it!

Fear not, though - just because this hang tag is minimalist in design, it does not mean that there is not a lot to talk about. On the front, there is a lot of text and layout work. First of all, we see the JOE B sub brand in all caps, with the B in boldface. It is large, and dominates the front of the hang tag. Underneath, the main brand is handled almost like an attribution notice. JOE BENBASSET is all in caps, however the "by" is all lowercase. One not need to think hard about what is important here, and where the emphasis lies.

Although I personally dislike the awful amount of sub-branding that goes on, I do think the way the front of this tag is laid out is strong. There is just enough movement and variation going on to make it memorable.

The reverse is really terrible. I'll actually allow a pass on the full www.name.com since it is not at all clear from the front what the web address would be, and the trailing social media icons give the leading www. some visual balance. That cannot save the utterly bizarre and thoughtless inclusion of the icons for the social media websites. It is a hang tag - you cannot click on the facebook, instagram, or pinterest icons and go straight to the pages or follow! You still need to load up your browser or smart phone and look them each up individually! Why have the icons? Are they not on the web site that already contains a full address?

The use of app icons on printed materials is always a risky choice. Done right and you have communicated a modern and forward thinking product, but done wrong and it looks out of touch and unnecessary. That is the case here.  Furthermore, Instagram recently updated its app icon, and as such the button on this hang tag is no longer relevant.

The front of this hang tag doesn't really set me aflame, but it at least is interesting and has some design elements. The reverse, however, just doesn't work or make sense in any light.

Hang Tag Review #29 - Disney Baby Hang Tag

This hang tag is for Disney Baby, and it certainly has some interesting features. The front is pure Disney, in a series of pastel greens. There is Disney written in the Disney font with the magic castle logo above, rendered in building block treatment. The magic sparkles connect the two.

The reverse starts with a message encouraging purchasers to "Discover the magic on Disneybaby.com." Not quite a name.com example, as it appears in a sentence, although I am always critical of sub domains such as this.

Perhaps more fascinating is that we then see the licensee information below. This product (for infant shoes) was made by ABG BABY, distributed by Rising Star. While this is fairly typical for big brands, I'm surprised that so much is surfaced so readily here.

This tag falls a little flat for me. I'm really not enjoying the somewhat lazy color scheme. For some reason the world of infants is very sensitive to gender coloring, and this tag is safely gender neutral (soft greens, slate, and sometimes yellow being the widely accepted top picks in this area). Still, nothing about this screams Disney, which is generally the most overdone and on message brand in the existence. It feels uninspired, like someone figured if they just typed "MAGIC" a bunch of times it would fully qualify, but the Disney Magic isn't just about saying the words, its about fully committing to them.

I actually like the licensee's banding a little bit more, the ABG BABY in baby blocks is a nice treatment, if somewhat expected.

As I touched on above, I'm ok with a name.com if used in a sentence, and additionally, I think Disney is a brand where the sub domain makes sense. Disney has famous theme parks, famous movies, famous characters, and famous toys. I wouldn't go to the Disney homepage and expect to find baby clothing without a few additional clicks. The distributor also has a web address, and since it is slightly different from the name, I think listing it in full makes sense. Good web use here.