3 ms·
I think this misses the issue I think Coke has on this subject. People believe HFCS is bad in part because companies like Honest are pushing against it. There'
by jshen 16y ago
I think this misses the issue I think Coke has on this subject. People believe HFCS is bad in part because companies like Honest are pushing against it. There's a real argument that public perception can be swayed one way or the other. You're assuming that the perception of people is preordained.
- barrkel 16y agoYes, but the non-Coke-owned competitors of Honest Tea won't have any difficulty in touting the absence of HFCS. This is a prisoner's dilemma; it does no good for just one competitor to stop pushing against HFCS, you need them all to collude to stop together. There's also arrogance on the behalf of Coke's execs. Not only do they think that these beliefs aren't preordained, but they believe that they themselves are doing the ordaining. It seems like they are myopic to the problems of competing in the space Honest Tea is in, and more interested in defending their cash cow.
- amohr 16y agoI wouldn't call it a prisoner's dilemma - competitors that oppose HFCS have no incentive to make the switch as the perception (or reality) of better taste/health are their top selling point. You don't fill up on salad before a pie eating contest and you don't get into the ring with Coca-Cola on their terms. The problem here is that Coke has to decide between a unified front and hedging their bets. One way kind of undermines the other.
- jshen 16y ago"you need them all to collude to stop together." Not really, and this isn't anything like a prisoners dilema. Coke doesn't need everyone to believe them, or everyone to collude. First and foremost they need their current customers to hear a believable story that HFCS is just fine. "Let the hippies drink that expensive stuff, we've got science on our side". Their customers already want to believe this for various reasons, so they will keep up this front.
- CapitalistCartr 16y agoMy opinions regarding HFCS is based on my limited review of the science, and I promote that view to friends and family. Coke stands no chance of winning by throwing advertising against word of mouth. Word of mouth takes awhile, but it's stronger. I think Coke will offer a sugar version of their main products in the USA soon.
- hugh3 16y agoForget the limited science, the HFCS version of coke just tastes worse than proper coke. I suppose if you grew up on the HFCS version you might be accustomed to it, though.
- LogicHoleFlaw 16y agoI grew up on the HCFS version and I still think the cane sugar version tastes best. And is more satiating.
- lurkinggrue 16y agoSame goes for the sugar version of Dr. Pepper. The sugar versions are smoother.
- jerf 16y agoDe facto they already are, for customers who care to chase it down. "Mexican Coke" has been getting easier and easier to obtain. And I live in Michigan.
- jshen 16y agoPR often creates word of mouth, even when it's clearly nonsense. Look at Sarah Palin or the elite funded and organized "grass roots" tea party. Given a big enough soap box, you can sway opinion. Another example is the idea that democrats want to spend tax dollars and republicans want to be fiscally responsible. A whole lot of people believe this meme, a clear majority in fact. Yet the facts clearly show the opposite, and many people try very hard to spread this truth via word of mouth. Why do people believe the opposite? Because they hear it over and over again from a top notch PR machine. Coke doesn't need everyone to believe them, what they need is to not lose their very large base so to speak. And for that they need a PR campaign that says what their base already wants to believe. Btw, their base will spread this via word of mouth just as rabidly as you will spread the opposite opinion.