25 years since Coca-Cola’s big blunder
coke’s big blunder. right. i’ve never believed that, and i think only spoon-fed monkeys would assert it. this “blunder” was one of the largest free-press handouts in history, led consumers into thinking they were seated directly at coke board meetings, and provided a handy excuse for a company to anoint its newly-HFCS‘d prime product “classic” — the product return “you” demanded.
yeah, stupid move.
attempted refutations of the possibility are soft, centering on the tactic of the horrible snopes.com — bastard cousin of the wikipedia scam and “mythbusters”-idjit types.
July 19th, 2010 at 18:51
Interesting. After you present your baseless assertion, you dismiss another which at least presents facts.
Do yourself a favor: buy some Coke made with sugar and also some of the stuff made with HFCS.
Have a friend prepare you a taste test and bingo!, discover you’re an asshole.
But at least you will have done some homework like the productive idjit types did.
July 19th, 2010 at 19:15
entertaining, though not so much as when you quote me asserting (anywhere) that sugar’d product is superior to HFCS‘d (whether in taste, health, whatever). it’ll be fun!
July 20th, 2010 at 16:01
So people to investigate and present facts are “idjit types”?
Before saying all that trouble and risk they went through was worth the effort, to sneak HFCS into coke, at least try both versions, lest you work less than the idjits.
July 21st, 2010 at 13:27
Are you slow or something?
Try both first. Then tell me whether a Dr. Evil style plan would be worth it.
July 23rd, 2010 at 13:25
dumbfuck, my opinion on the superior/inferiority of sugar/HFCS is irrelevant to my post, and a good reason i didn’t offer it and haven’t (a detail you obviously missed in your anti-anti-HFCS fetishistic bumbling). your straw man overreaction, however, is highly relevant to your bullshit argument, and points to something it appears you’re pretending doesn’t exist or isn’t material — hostility and aversion to HFCS. you’re also missing that i’ve asserted no definite action re the post’s core subject; not surprising, for stupid people always miss that barely subtle characteristic of truth. there’s no good reason for you to continue wanking off on this. you fucked up and won’t retreat.
July 26th, 2010 at 20:29
Homeboy,
You’re saying this “blunder” was fabricated to introduce HFCS Coke. Who the hell would sneak in a superior product instead of announcing it from the rooftops.
Therefore, logician: YOU ARE IMPLYING HFCS IS INFERIOR.
It’s a premise of your assumption that the whole show was a hoax.
But NOOOOO, using moron logic it’s irrelevant and immaterial to your post.
Pure dishonest garbage: “i’ve asserted no definite action re the post’s core sub…” blah blah blah
July 27th, 2010 at 14:45
NB: this post is unchanged since 26 april 2010.
i neither said it nor say it. i wouldn’t assert such a thing unless i knew it to be true. since i know almost as little as you do about it, asserting it did or didn’t happen would be stupid. doesn’t stop you, however. noteworthy.
as a logician, i tend not to assert seriously fallacious lunacy while invoking logic. this is the last i’ll say to you on the subject, since you’re in transmit-only mode, so listen carefully if you can: my opinion on the superior/inferiority of sugar compared to HFCS is irrelevant to my post. what’s relevant is market reaction to replacing sugar with HFCS, and even that reaction is primarily irrelevant to objective testing regarding sugar’s superiority/inferiority. that you emerge here in a huff with your fantastic assumption that i’ve expressed an opinion on sugar superiority indicates the very market reaction the significance of which you appear to be pretending away. of course, everything i just said in this paragraph was already said to you, transmit-only hayseed. the funniest part is that you’re lambasting someone who’s more in agreement with your blind-testing criterion than not. in your fetishy haze, you couldn’t give a shit less.
interesting that your ignoring of the crucial element of this post now becomes a virtue. in that respect you’ve brothers and sisters numbering in the billions. feels cozy?
August 13th, 2010 at 16:45
This post is about 3 things:
1. “this ‘blunder’ was one of the largest free-press handouts in history”
2.”this ‘blunder’ … led consumers into thinking they were seated directly at coke board meetings”
3. “this ‘blunder’ … provided a handy excuse for a company to anoint its newly-HFCS‘d prime product”
I didn’t bother with number 1 and 2.
I discussed number 3.
Now you say “i neither said it nor say it”? Really?????
Forget you!
August 13th, 2010 at 21:02
shocking.