Saturday, October 24, 2009

Strange Little Sodas Kept Alive

I found a GREAT article in Fortune magazine that I wanted to share/summarize for you.
It talked about 5 'niche' sodas that have not lived up to their owner's expectations, but will not die due to their cult following.

Which 5 sodas?

1) Moxie - in the 1900's this cola outsold Coke and Pepsi! Now, it's a cult favorite in the NorthEast and a virtual unknown elsewhere in the States.

2) Mr. Pibb - forget the 'MILF' articles I've written about Mr. Pibb, the bigger story is that the Coke-owned answer to "Dr. Pepper' sold 57 million cases last year. Of course, Dr. Pepper sold 586 million. And it has it's own museum.

3) Slice - strongly endorsed by Roger Enrico when he ran PepsiCo, it never achieved the 10% of market that he envisioned.

4) TAB - Owned by Coke, this diet beverage never surpassed competitor Diet Coke. But last year 3 million cases were bought..some dieters SOMEWHERE are drinking it!

5) Fanta - In the U.S., Coke sold 175 million cases of this tasty little beverage. That's about 7 times more than it's 2000 sales.

You can read the Fortune article in it's entirety here.

5 more sodas that deserve to be showcased on Coke vs. Pepsi!

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Soda Prices Going Up when New Taxes Kick In?

And now for something political...

I'm doin' the Google Search for a clever soda-term today, and in my travels I come across a few (recent) articles that debate and discuss the idea of a surcharge/tax on Soda!

Some claim it will help in the fight against obesity.
Others see it as just another way to fill the political coffers.
Others see it as an infrigement of their rights and freedoms!
(Ok, settle down there Thomas Jefferson...)

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom likens soda to Tobacco, and wants to tax the retailers who sell it! The American Beverage Association seems to share my view on politics and food. They released a statement that read in part, "If our goal is to address obesity, then educating consumers about the importance of balancing calories consumed from all foods and beverages with the calories expended through physical activity is what matters - not demonizing any one particular food."

CollegeNET Forum further discusses the act here.

A New York Times online article discusses taxing soda in an effort to fight obesity and other health-issues here. It's a very thorough article, and the author does a nice job of showing both sides of the equation.

It opens with an interesting quote. It's attributed to Adam Smith, the economist, and dates back to “The Wealth of Nations,” (1776) where he wrote: “Sugar, rum and tobacco are commodities which are nowhere necessaries of life, which are become objects of almost universal consumption, and which are therefore extremely proper subjects of taxation.”

Thanks, Adam. I like Rum AND Soda. In fact, I think it's called a "Captain and Coke" if I'm not mistaken....

Again, I am opposed hurting people who CAN manage their weight by making them pay (no pun intended) for the follies of those who cannot. But maybe that's just me? I'm not so sure. In fact, I found an interesting on-line article in the Delaware Libertarian where the author does a very nice job of showing the flaw in people's thinking when it comes to accepting such a tax. Very clever article here.

Lastly, when you want information quickly and not with all the New York Times stuffiness, there is always USA Today! Here is there on-line article on the subject of taxing sodas. Sorry, no pie charts in this article!

Remember, when it comes to taxes, you are essentially giving money to the government to do with what they will. It's important that no matter how you vote on such a topic, that you 100% understand the issue from all sides. It's equally important that your Senator/Representative is voting with your best interests in mind...regardless of what you weight, what you earn and what you drink.