There something stoic about the new logo for Old Navy. It certainly fails to reflect the new "fashion forward" direction that the brand has tried to take.

The logo seems to be a boring reinterpretation of the Online News Association logo. By the way, Old Navy sales dropped a whopping 27 percent this March.

I guess the kids just don't look to Old Navy for edgy looks (duh). This is a lesson that should have been learned back when The Gap tried (and failed to convince America that Audrey Hepburn capri pants were cutting edge.

I disagree with Conde Nast's Porfolio Magazine on the topic of Old Navy. The company is simply not going to make any money by going head to head with the likes of Zara. Instead of trying to sell fashion forward looks, Old Navy should master the basics.

Zara and H&M have no great basics to speak of. The Gap and Old Navy should work on offering the best active, basic, and lounge wear in the softest fabrics, brightest colors and widest range of sizes.

I and a number of my girlfriends would be happy to buy more items at Old Navy stores but the boxy silhouettes and short inseams will not keep us coming back.

Currently Old Navy's warehouse stores are a messy mash-up of lounge wear, active wear and what the company refers to as "wear-to-work" looks.

I know what you're thinking and NO I don't know anyone who wears Old Navy to work.

They should continue to sell the short boxy styles (which look great on heavier folks) and add some range to include people who are not necessarily short and wide. Maybe petites or talls. Old Navy should up the quality (not quantity) of their basics offerings and let the consumers know about the changes.

Trust me when I tell you that not everyone wants to wear a 32 inch inseam, flammable "track" suit from Juicy. Old Navy can lead the way by bringing back relaxed basics clothes that aren't fire hazards.

Basics can sell if they are proportioned correctly. Just ask Dov Charney.