I am not a big believer in conspiracy theories. I think that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting independently and of his own volition, assassinated John F. Kennedy with two rifle shots; that Al Qaeda was responsible for 9/11; and that the Harlem Globetrotters routinely defeat the Washington Generals based on their superior athleticism, not because the games are fixed. If I were to ever meet Jesse Ventura, he would yell at me in his deep baritone and I would sob like the weak, noodle-wristed half-man that I am. But there is one conspiracy theory for which I am an ardent supporter, even though there is basically no evidence for it: I believe with religious enthusiasm that soda companies consistently roll out products that they know will fail. The reason I believe this so fervently is because there is no mentally sound person alive that believes the below products could possibly succeed in the competitive soda market:
1. Crystal Pepsi
No product in the history of soft drinks can prove my thesis as thoroughly as Crystal Pepsi. No one could convince me that Crystal Pepsi was anything but a novelty product designed to sell well in the short term before quickly flaming out. If you are not familiar with this product, it was basically what it sounds like: Pepsi in which the brown food coloring had not been added, and was thus transparent. If you dedicate more than 1 second of thought to this concoction, you will begin to understand why it was such a monumental flop. I was just a young lad in 1991 when Crystal Pepsi was released, so my recollections of it are foggy. I believe that the formula differed from regular opaque Pepsi, but the flavor was definitely cola. As I have alluded to, this is a problem. Ever since the invention of cola, it has been dark brown in color, while citrus-based drinks have been clear. The psychological dissonance resulting from seeing a clear beverage and tasting cola is so powerful that no one could have truly enjoyed the experience of imbibing it. It’s like having sex with a Real Doll; the physical sensation is identical, but the reality is both terrifying and sad.
2. Pepsi Blue
As demonstrated by the above entry, Pepsi has not had great success in monkeying with their formula. Unlike Mountain Dew, whose brand can undergo innumerable permutations as long as it remains kidney-puckeringly sugary and vaguely citrus inspired, Pepsi’s identity is fixed. There are some allowable variations: cherry, of course, and vanilla is tolerated in some markets, but overall, when consumers purchase Pepsi, they expect a caramel-colored cola. With this information in mind, it is truly beyond comprehension that PepsiCo would release this blue beverage under the Pepsi brand rather than the more flexible Mountain Dew banner; conspiracy is the only logical conclusion. Aside from the senseless branding, Pepsi Blue also faced another, arguably insurmountable obstacle: its deep blue hue was identical to that of Windex. If you had responsible parents, you were likely taught that the cleaning products under the kitchen sink were not food, and would, in fact, act as deadly poison if ingested. This early-life programming is so ingrained in human consciousness that it takes tremendous effort to overcome. But why would you battle both your subconscious and your basic mammalian instincts (for nothing edible is this color in nature) if the reward is something as mediocre as Pepsi Blue’s vaguely chemical taste? The color betrays the drink’s origins as a totally artificial suspension created in the same laboratory as AIDS. Of course, as an impressionable teenager at the time of Pepsi Blue’s 2002 release, I played right into the conspirators’ hands. I purchased a few bottles in an attempt to convince myself it was good. You see, my family was nominally Baptist, but in truth we were fundamentalist Pepsians. To this day, my father drinks between 3 and 5 Pepsi colas per day. I felt it was my ecclesiastical duty to try to like Pepsi Blue, but no matter how valiant my effort, I ultimately had to admit that it’s flavor and appearance were an affront to both God and Man.
3. C2
In moving away from PepsiCo to their primary competitor, most would assume I would discuss New Coke, Coca-Cola’s disastrous replacement for their flagship beverage, about which there is already a well-known conspiracy theory. However, I won’t be talking about New Coke. For one thing, there has already been a great deal written about it, and two, I was far too young during New Coke’s rollout to understand it’s cultural and gustatory ramifications. Instead, I’d like to turn my attention to C2, Coca-Cola’s utterly bizarre diet-ish drink released in 2004. C2 was designed to piggy-back on the success of the Adkins diet, which you have to admit was a good business move; hitching your wagon to a diet fad seems like an excellent recipe for long-term success. C2 occupied the strange and unexplored “no man’s land” between regular Coke and Diet Coke. It boasted half of the calories, sugar, and carbohydrates of regular Coke, which paradoxically meant that it had 50% more of those things than Diet Coke. Ultimately, my problem with C2 is the target demographic; namely, what is it? For whom was this product designed? When it comes to cola, most people have already made their decision. If you want full flavor, you drink Coke; if you want to control your calorie intake, you drink diet Coke. What are the circumstances under which one would choose C2? It wouldn’t make sense for someone who drinks Diet Coke to switch to a drink with more calories. Is it for regular Coke drinkers who want two cans of soda, but want to maintain the same calorie consumption? Consumers that are physiologically addicted to Coke and are trying to quit, and C2 acts as methadone? These are senseless questions, but that is because there are no reasonable answers. This was a product designed to increase sales for a quarter or two, then quietly disappear into American folklore, like Paul Bunyan.
Conclusion:
As this tour of soda failures demonstrates, there is clearly a conspiracy at work at the highest levels of commerce. Each product represents an insane idea that could never be successful over time, but that offer enough novelty that people will buy them for a short time. The early quasi-success may be enough to cover the costs of research and development, or they may not; it doesn’t matter. Given that the failures of these products are preordained, and that they may actually represent a net lost for the company, the question is, “why are they doing this?” The answer is simple: the ongoing cold war between PepsiCo and Coca-Cola. Just as Ronald Christ Reagan single-handedly defeated the Soviet Union by forcing them to spend all of their money on military escalation, Pepsi and Coke are locked in arms war with each side desperately hoping the other will run out of funds and dissolve. Pepsi Blue and C2 are carbonated beverage versions of Reagan’s Star Wars defense system: unfeasible and expensive pipe dreams constructed to strike terror into the hearts of adversaries. Many academics state that the legendary Cola Wars of the 1980’s are long over, but this article demonstrates the falsity of such claims. The Cola Wars are still raging on, in our supermarkets, in our schools, and in our homes, and they are still claiming lives. Unfortunately, we huddled masses must live with this reality, just as when we cowered impotently under the specter of nuclear annihilation. All we can do is envision a finer world in which all colas exist harmoniously in a more perfect Dew-mocracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment