Looking at that, the Caltex branding or the EG station branding look so much better IMO
1 Like
I read an article yesterday explaining the cost savings Caltex are implementing to rebrand all stations. Remember, there is a lot of them. The branding seen in the video (caps) has been designed to easily fit over existing Caltex branding and the current red awnings to save massively on costs.
2 Likes
The A shape looks better positioned to the left next to the AMPOL wording
1 Like
If I had to, I prefer the Ampol wording and logo with the white background
I had a peek at the Ampol test site in Gladesville. They are clearly moving signage around and testing them out on the awnings. A few signs which were in those news reports yesterday have disappeared.
9 Likes
Caltex probably shouldāve thought to trademark that shade of red for anything petrol related just as Cadbury trademarked purple for chocolate.
1 Like
But itās Caltex that is rebranding as Ampol. They were smart enough to keep the colour so that they donāt have to make a costly change.
The Puma petrol stations will be rebranded by the US owner Chevron as Caltex. Since Pumaās colours are mostly green and red, thereās a chance they will keep their green and replace their logo with Caltex.
2 Likes
I agree. Surely on rebadged Caltexās they could have used the red variant of the logo:
Then in the future, new stations or full revamps could move to the white/blue/red combo.
I wonder if thereās a wider argument for phasing out the term Unleaded? The term originated from a time when there was a difference between leaded and unleaded fuel, but now that leaded fuel has largely been phased out around the world, it seems that phrasing petrol as āunleadedā seems a bit redundant.
1 Like
Itās slowly going away. Thus why itās more common to hear U91 / U95 / U98 instead of Unleaded / Premium Unleaded these days.
Though Iām not sure how the labelling of E10 (94 RON) would work here.
There could be a misconception that it is nearly as good as 95 RON because of the numerical similarity, but it would need to be clear that it is NOT a premium fuel.
Maybe they need to colour code the numbers, green for U91-94 and maybe red for U95-98 - something like that?
Forgot about E10! (It doesnāt exist in WA).
1 Like
I thought there already was different colours for the different grades?
Caltex Australia is rebranding to Ampol. I suspect NW was referring to Chevron trademarking the colour for use on the Puma sites they intend rebranding to Caltex.
But as I said, Puma stations are green with a red logo. If they were to use red for all those, then all Puma stations will need to change everything from green to red which is more expensive.
Itāll be interesting to see what they do.
A multinational reporting over $150bn in revenue a year can probably afford new signs for their 350 stations if it means a consistent look for their brand.
4 Likes
Indeed.
Apart from fresh builds, Puma themselves already did this in the last 5-6 years from the numerous brands that they gradually took over nationwide. Iām sure Chevron can afford to do it again if a consistent corporate look and brand recognition is important.
The timeline will be interesting though, I assume Caltex/Ampol have to rebrand all locations by a specific date, after which Chevron can commence rebranding Puma locations. Part of me wonders if Caltex/Ampol delayed things until it was certain that no deal with CoucheTard was going to happen, as I expect they could have had a whole different plan in mind if they bought Caltex/Ampol out (Circle K?)
2 Likes
I think I read that theyāre hopeful the Canadians will come back with a revised offer a little way down the road
Almost every petrol station Iāve been to prominently labels an abbreviation, with unleaded fuels being referred to by their octane numbers, ethanol blends being referred to by their blend percentages.
NSW actually made it a requirement for E10 to be prominently labelled as 94 Octane on the pumps, rather than 91 Octane (which they were doing presumably to push people to their premium fuels).
Like so:
United (which places a special focus on ethanol fuels - with them being the most prominent retailer of E85 fuel) labels ethanol blends with their octane number most prominently displayed, despite there being no actual need for it. Their E10 blend is actually 95 octane, as well.
I think ethanol is an excellent fuel. It really should be used more - itās renewable (growing crops absorbs the CO2 burned in the ethanol engines), farmers get money for growing crop, and we wouldnāt be relying on overseas entities for our fuel supplies. All it takes is a few simple modifications to internal combustion engines to let them tolerate the fuel. Even a small market like Brazil can make it work. The only thing working against it is the status quo, and extremely cheap fuel these days (which might not be the case in the future)ā¦
2 Likes
Can we just take a moment to appreciate the great discussion going on in this thread 
5 Likes