Latest news with #NewCoke
Forbes
02-06-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Tweaking Big Brands And Pleasing Consumers
As times and tastes change, many companies are rolling the dice and taking a chance on reformulation ... More of their classic products. From the Colosseum to Coca-Cola, Mona Lisa to Mondelez's billion-dollar brands, classics are classics, right? They're timeless things that, precisely because they don't change, are reliable and reassuring. Consumers love the safe harbor of something that they have loved for years. But can tweaking turn a big seller into a bigger one, even if it's done with some risk? It can backfire, per the effort to introduce the 'New Coke,' but it can also inject new life. At least in F&B lately, as times and tastes change, many companies are doing what they can to reinvigorate and remake classics, changing everything from size to packaging to that third rail of formula. And, surprise, surprise, sometimes it actually works as they remake and extend brands. Classics tend to have big sales, not necessarily big growth, which makes growing a household name very different from growing a startup. Still, the potential can be irresistible. Chips Ahoy!, for instance, might be a classic case of a classic experiencing change. Mondelez International said the cookie — which dates back to 1963 and is the second biggest seller behind Oreos (also their brand) — was known by 95% of consumers but only in about 30% of homes. The company saw that disparity as an opportunity. Rather than rest on its laurels, Mondelez rolled the dice and bet some of its chips on the classic cookie, adding chocolate chips with higher cacao and Madagascar vanilla extract, according to Food Dive, which called this 'the biggest update for the $1 billion brand in nearly a decade.' Others point to AI and technology in general, making it more attractive to reformulate even classic products with a 2.0 to keep up with changing tastes. In a blog about F&B, Siemens said, "Frequent product reformulation is necessary to meet evolving consumer preferences and regulatory changes.' Still, the stakes are higher when the brand and sales are bigger. While reinvigorating a household brand can sometimes call for reformulation, it may also mean ... More extension into new products, flavors, or offering health-conscious options. According to Siemens, maintaining a centralized database of ingredient specifications and past formulations lets R&D teams 'speed up reformulation' while ensuring compliance and consistency. However, messing with the recipe is only one thing on the menu of change at big brands. Mondelez, for instance, didn't just change ingredients but sought to extend the Chips Ahoy! brand into cakes and pastries, launching Baked Bites in addition to muffins. Along with minis, it rolled out bigger cookies, gluten-free cookies, and new flavors, such as chocolate caramel, red velvet, Reese's, and s'mores. Mondelez has also modified its marketing, shifting from TV to social media to win over Gen Z consumers. Chips Ahoy! ads have been showing up on TikTok, Twitch, and YouTube, as well as online gaming, the NCAA, and the Boys & Girls Club. As Food Dive puts it, 'extensions provide additional choices for consumers' who are finding the classic snack in less classic media. But isn't it risky to play with the marketing formula as well as the formula to make the product? Sure, it is, but with risk can come reward. So, what are the wages of change? For the half year leading up to March 29, 2025, Chips Ahoy! sales edged up 2.3%, while the biscuit category dropped 0.3%, according to Food Dive. The brand added 2 million homes, a sign that, sometimes, classics and change combine well. Coca-Cola has been trying new things, even if changing the flavor of Coca-Cola in 1985 for what it dubbed the 'New Coke,' designed to battle back against Pepsi's popularity, backfired. Instead of a 'New Coke' wave, it led to an uproar and battle to bring back the old Coke. After three months, Coca-Cola retreated to its old formula, with the byproduct of an even bigger love after a brief loss. 'If that is what the consumer wants, that is what we will give him,' Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of New York Chairman Charles Millard said at the time. Not all change is good — quickly after its release, Coca-Cola pulled "New Coke" from shelves after ... More consumer uproar. What do consumers want now? Well, that depends on the consumer, first of all. But companies keep chasing the consumer. Coca-Cola more recently rolled out Coca-Cola Spiced, which it discontinued after a little more than half a year, proof that change (or expansion and extension) doesn't always please consumers. Coca-Cola tweaked Coke Zero, adding Stevia, a sweetener from plants, after making changes in 2021 and in 2017, 'reformulating' it to taste more like traditional Coca-Cola. If Coca-Cola has been embracing change by including new products, PepsiCo has also been doing more than steady as it goes. Kadence International, a global market research firm, noted that classic brands are taking new tacks to hold prices down, touting smaller portions as healthier. Success tends to breed the status quo, while adversity is the mother of invention — and intervention. PepsiCo's fourth quarter 2024 net revenue, for instance, slipped 0.2%, according to Kadence, which said its Frito-Lay brand dipped 3%, Quaker Foods tumbled 6%, and its beverage segment fell by 3% as some soft drinks fell on harder times. According to Kadence, PepsiCo is 'pushing portion control and value packs — smaller products positioned as both health-friendly and cost-effective.' PepsiCo also spent $1.2 billion to buy Siete Foods with its grain-free, gluten-free snacks. 'PepsiCo markets its smaller snack packs as portion control options, framing them as a wellness move rather than a cost-cutting tactic,' according to Kadence. Smaller snack packs are on the rise as consumers shift their focus to health-friendly options that ... More provide portion control. Kadence also said Coca-Cola's mini-cans follow the less-is-more playbook, offering lower prices and smaller portions for health-conscious consumers. PepsiCo, with Frito-Lay, Quaker Foods, and beverages, is betting on single-serve and multipack options as healthier and budget-friendly, Kadence said. 'By rolling out smaller Lay's chip bags, Gatorade bottles, and Quaker oat packs, PepsiCo hopes to keep customers loyal while adjusting to changing eating habits,' according to Kadence. Meanwhile, Kadence said Nestlé is 'betting big on plant-based proteins and dairy alternatives," and McDonald's reformulated its menu to better suit the 'health-conscious" consumer. It's tougher to turn a big boat, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't at least adjust course now and then. While older consumers may remain loyal, big brands sometimes make changes to attract or even chase younger consumers. Practices, not products, can be the key to some young consumers' hearts and wallets. Gen Z consumers born between 1997 and 2012 and Gen Alpha born from 2010 to 2025, for instance, are 'heavily weighing corporate accountability,' according to Inc. magazine. Packaging will continue to play a pivotal role in what attracts and retains customers, whether it's ... More the design, manufacturing transparency, or environmental impact. Packaging is also a key component, according to a Menu Matters survey, which found that 32% of consumers are turned off by packaging that feels 'weird,' and 31% dislike a lack of information on a product's background or story. Coca-Cola has reportedly been rolling out shorter, lighter bottles to have less environmental impact and win over more consumers. Could there be a backlash from those who love the old bottles? It's tough on or toward the top of the pyramid, but that's still, really, a pretty good place to be.
Fast Company
16-05-2025
- Business
- Fast Company
The case for cooperation
The Ford Pinto. New Coke. Google Glass. History is littered with products whose fatal flaw— whether failures of safety, privacy, performance, or plain old desirability—repelled consumers and inflicted reputational damage to the companies bringing them to market. It's easy to imagine the difference if these problems had been detected early on. And too often, businesses neglect the chance to work with nonprofits, social enterprises, and other public interest groups to make product improvements after they enter the marketplace or, more ideally, 'upstream,' before their products have entered the crucible of the customer. For companies and consumer groups alike, this is a major missed opportunity. In an increasingly competitive marketplace, partnering with public interest groups to bake an authentic pro-consumer perspective into elements like design, safety, sustainability, and functionality can provide a coveted advantage. It gives a product the chance to stand out from the crowd, already destined for glowing reviews because problems were nipped in the bud thanks to guidance and data from those focused on consumers' interests. And for the nonprofits, working proactively with businesses to help ensure that products reflect consumers' values from the outset means a better, safer marketplace for everyone. Zoom, in a nutshell We've already seen the difference working together can make, especially if it's early in a product's introduction to consumers. Just look at Zoom. The videoconferencing platform, while launched as a tool for businesses, had not been introduced to a wide consumer audience before the COVID-19 pandemic made its services a global necessity. In early 2020—as Zoom was poised to explode from 10 million monthly users to more than 300 million by April—Consumer Reports' (CR) testing experts went under the hood in our digital lab to assess it from a consumer well-being perspective. CR uncovered serious flaws. These included a protocol allowing the company to collect users' videos, call transcripts, and chats and use them for targeted advertising, as well as features that allowed hosts to record meetings in secret and alert them when a participant clicked away from the screen. At the precipice of a moment when elementary school classrooms to therapy sessions would be conducted over Zoom, there's no telling what the fallout might have been—for the company or its customers—had these problems persisted. But CR reached out to the business—and the business reached back. Within days, Zoom had worked with CR to solve a wide array of problems, helping strengthen its case as a lifeline for users all over the world. Partnerships require new ways of thinking Now imagine what could be possible if such a partnership began even earlier in the process. This is the relationship CR has worked to build with businesses, providing companies our testing expertise and data about consumers' needs and desires. Our advisory services have led to us providing feedback on prototypes, and with feedback implemented earlier in the product development lifecycle, we've seen immediate impact for consumers: improved comfort of leg support in vehicles; privacy policy changes for electronics; reduced fees for a basic checking account; an improved washing machine drying algorithm for one brand; improved safety of active driver assistance systems; and strengthened digital payments app scam warnings before users finalize transactions. These partnerships have proven productive, but they remain the exception to the rule. Building more of those cooperative, upstream relationships will require new thinking on both sides. Advocacy organizations must adopt an entrepreneurial spirit, leveraging their insights and expertise as a collaborator to companies they're more accustomed to critiquing. Businesses must embrace these relationships as a central part of their research and development process, understanding that embedding pro-consumer values gives them a real edge in today's hyper-social marketplace. This cooperation is especially important in the modern digital era, when many consumers are making choices that reflect their principles and where products and services are growing increasingly complex. As the rise of AI-fueled products brings a new wave of threats and vulnerabilities in its wake, it is critical that businesses and public interest groups make an effort to forge strong relationships. By coming together early and often around their common interest—the consumer—they can improve products, craft strong industry standards, burnish the reputation of companies that act responsibly, and help maintain the health and integrity of the marketplace.
Forbes
14-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Forbes
HBO Max Is Back: When Brands Retreat To Their Original Names
HBO Max is reverting to its original branding after two years as "Max" Warner Bros. Discovery just announced what at least a few branding experts saw coming: the streaming service known as Max is reverting to its previous name, HBO Max. This is the fifth name change for the company's streaming service, having cycled through HBO Go (2008), HBO Now (2015), HBO Max (2020), Max (2023), and now HBO Max again (2025). The company's reasoning for the original change from HBO Max to just "Max" seemed logical enough at the time. In 2023, executives worried that the HBO brand – long associated with premium adult content – might not be the right anchor for a general entertainment streaming service that included reality shows from Discovery's portfolio. They feared these shows might "water down" the prestigious HBO brand. According to the New York Times, the reality was simpler than marketing theory. Subscribers paying $17 monthly for Max were primarily watching HBO content like The White Lotus and The Last of Us, along with new movies and documentaries – not the Discovery reality show catalog. "It really is a reaction to being in the marketplace for two years, evaluating what's working and really leaning into that," Casey Bloys, HBO content chairman, explained. In other words, the HBO brand continued to be the real draw for subscribers. The 2023 rebrand to "Max" had mainly caused confusion among both industry insiders and consumers. People wondered if HBO was being phased out or diminished, the opposite of what the company intended. This reversal highlights a crucial lesson many brands learn the hard way: sometimes your established brand equity is more valuable than you realize. Warner Bros. Discovery isn't the first major company to retreat to a previous brand identity after a failed rebrand. In fact, they're joining a distinguished club of brand "boomerangs" – companies that tried new names only to return to their roots: Coca-Cola (1985): In what's often called the biggest marketing blunder of the 20th century, Coca-Cola abandoned its classic formula and branding for "New Coke." After just 79 days of consumer protests and backlash, the company brought back the original as "Coca-Cola Classic." The lesson? Don't mess with a brand that's deeply embedded in consumer hearts and memories. Tribune Publishing → tronc → Tribune Publishing (2016-2018): The venerable newspaper company bizarrely rebranded itself as "tronc" (with a lowercase 't', short for "Tribune Online Content") in 2016. The rebrand became an immediate laughingstock, described by critics as out-of-touch corporate jargon. After two painful years, the company dropped the silly name and restored its respected Tribune Publishing identity. SurveyMonkey → Momentive → SurveyMonkey (2021-2023): The online survey provider rebranded as "Momentive" in 2021 to appear more enterprise-ready and shed its playful image. After two years, they discovered their brand recognition was too strong to abandon. The Momentive name only caused confusion, and the company reverted to SurveyMonkey in 2023, admitting the original name had more customer recognition and trust. Warner Bros. Discovery's struggle to find the right identity for its streaming service reflects a larger challenge many traditional companies face: how to transition cherished legacy brands into the modern era without losing what made them special. The HBO brand has exceptional value – it stands for quality, prestige, and innovation. Removing it from the service name diluted that value rather than expanding the service's appeal. What Warner Bros. Discovery now seems to understand is that HBO isn't just a content provider within their streaming service. Rather, it's the primary reason people subscribe. What can marketing leaders learn from this latest brand reversal? Bloys summed up the challenge well, noting that the transition to streaming has been tricky for many cable companies. HBO "and a bunch of other companies are trying to navigate that," he said, before adding hopefully, "That said, I do hope this is the last time we have a conversation about the naming of the service." Don't we all.
USA Today
06-05-2025
- Sport
- USA Today
The live 2025 NHL Draft Lottery was an absolutely confusing disaster
The live 2025 NHL Draft Lottery was an absolutely confusing disaster The 2025 NHL Draft Lottery flopped like a dead catfish on the Nashville ice on Monday night, as a previously typical lottery process turned into 30 minutes of bad Game Show Network reject nonsense. As ping pong balls fluttered about in an air machine, NHL fans across the globe looked on in utter confusion as the fate of their team's draft status depended on an unnecessarily complicated process. 2025 NHL Draft Order: Where each team will pick in the first round. Apparently, the sequence of balls drawn somehow sent the New York Islanders to the top of the NHL Draft and the Utah Hockey Club to the fourth pick. We're sure fans of those teams are thrilled, but the rest of the world had to watch this bewildering hodgepodge of airballs decide the order of the 2025 NHL Draft. Like... what is this?!?! Look, if this is really how top draft picks are decided, this just makes the process look all that much worse. Draft lotteries are inherently evil, but this process just made it all the more confounding. Plus, it was just bad television. 2025 NHL Draft: 5 top prospects in this year's class, including Matthew Schaefer. It was just too hard to understand how the live draft lottery worked in the moment, zapping any of the intrigue out of the process. You were left scrambling to figure out what each result meant, and the Islanders winning the first pick just made the whole ordeal that much more bizarre. The NFL does a lot wrong, but its draft process is at least simple to understand and doesn't rely on floating ping pong balls pumping out the serial number from the Lost hatch. What are we doing? Lots of fans really didn't like this, and it's hard to blame them. This was a confusing disaster for ESPN and the NHL, and it's really hard to see this coming back next year. This is the New Coke of draft lottery television; NHL commissioner Gary Bettman needs to make an executive decision to rework this for the future... or just get rid of the lottery system, for goodness' sake. They even lost a guy who loves math. A literal math nerd! Please, for the love of all that is good in hockey, just go back to the big cards next year. This stunk.
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
The live 2025 NHL Draft Lottery was an absolutely confusing disaster
The 2025 NHL Draft Lottery flopped like a dead catfish on the Nashville ice on Monday night, as a previously typical lottery process turned into 30 minutes of bad Game Show Network reject nonsense. As ping pong balls fluttered about in an air machine, NHL fans across the globe looked on in utter confusion as the fate of their team's draft status depended on an unnecessarily complicated process. . Apparently, the sequence of balls drawn somehow sent the New York Islanders to the top of the NHL Draft and the Utah Hockey Club to the fourth pick. We're sure fans of those teams are thrilled, but the rest of the world had to watch this bewildering hodgepodge of airballs decide the order of the 2025 NHL Draft. Like... what is this?!?! New York Islanders have won the 2025 NHL Draft lottery. They had the 10th-best odds of winning at 3.5%. — Charlie Roumeliotis (@CRoumeliotis) May 5, 2025 Look, if this is really how top draft picks are decided, this just makes the process look all that much worse. Draft lotteries are inherently evil, but this process just made it all the more confounding. Plus, it was just bad television. 2025 NHL Draft: 5 top prospects in this year's class, including Matthew Schaefer. It was just too hard to understand how the live draft lottery worked in the moment, zapping any of the intrigue out of the process. You were left scrambling to figure out what each result meant, and the Islanders winning the first pick just made the whole ordeal that much more bizarre. The NFL does a lot wrong, but its draft process is at least simple to understand and doesn't rely on floating ping pong balls pumping out the serial number from the Lost hatch. What are we doing? Lots of fans really didn't like this, and it's hard to blame them. This was a confusing disaster for ESPN and the NHL, and it's really hard to see this coming back next year. This is the New Coke of draft lottery television; NHL commissioner Gary Bettman needs to make an executive decision to rework this for the future... or just get rid of the lottery system, for goodness' sake. That NHL Draft lottery was one of the most confusing things I've seen — Cameron Peters (@CamDawg1988) May 5, 2025 'Gary, the fans think the draft is rigged. They'd like more transparency.'Gary: 'Ok. How about the most convoluted draft lottery ever, but we do it live.''Uhhhhhh….' #NHLDraftLottery — Ryan Turner (@rturner17) May 5, 2025 The #NHLDraftLottery is the perfect example of how bad the @NHL is at marketing and content. Convoluted system. Cutting to a commercial mid draw. Team branding removed from the balls so they can't go viral after. Just incredibly bad all around. — Fentoozler (@forevermusing) May 5, 2025 We don't get it 🤷♂️ — Michigan Hockey (@umichhockey) May 5, 2025 What the hell is this NHL draft lottery??Anyone else just totally lost? — Jacob Pacheco (@JacobPacheco6) May 5, 2025 Trying to understand the NHL Draft lottery — Odds Shark (@OddsShark) May 5, 2025 me tryna figure out how this nhl draft lottery works — Evan Marinofsky (@EvanMarinofsky) May 5, 2025 The NHL Draft lottery is literally the most confusing thing in the world — jacob (@jacobnyr) May 5, 2025 Everyone watching this NHL Draft Lottery right now and trying to figure it out — Dan Colucci (@coluccid2) May 5, 2025 Trying to figure out this NHL Draft Lottery: — theScore Bet (@theScoreBet) May 5, 2025 THIS MAKES NO SENSE!!Weirdest draft lottery in all of professional it up to the NHL to confuse its fan base even more. #NHLDraft — Jacob Pacheco (@JacobPacheco6) May 5, 2025 The NHL Draft lottery should have stayed behind closed doors. This is awful television. — Sam Ali (@SamAliSports) May 5, 2025 Me: trying to understand this NHL lottery format... — SHAAAAAAAAAARKS (@shaaaaaaaaaarks) May 5, 2025 Trying to figure out how the NHL draft lottery works — 105.9 The X (@1059thex) May 5, 2025 Turned on the NHL draft lottery and have no idea what's going on. — OBVIOUS SHIRTS® (@obvious_shirts) May 5, 2025 The NHL Draft Lottery: — Jake (@313Hockey) May 5, 2025 This is the WORST draft lottery format I have ever seen. I have watched & watched and have not learned a single flipping thing on how it works. @NHL what the damn hell is this 😭 — 𝕃𝔼𝔸𝔽𝕊 𝔽𝕆ℝ𝔼𝕍𝔼ℝ (@BlueBuds34) May 5, 2025 I'm not sure I've ever watched a dumber, more convoluted, over-dramatized production than the 10 minutes of the NHL draft lottery I just hey, the @NYIslanders won the top pick, so … — Ralph Vacchiano (@RalphVacchiano) May 5, 2025 NHL draft lottery is the dumbest, most complicated way to decide a draft order I've ever seen. — Rob Gallik (@CoachGallik) May 5, 2025 Me watching this NHL draft lottery: — Joseph Zita (@josephdzita) May 5, 2025 Me watching the #NHLDraftLottery — courtney⸆⸉ (@nyrswift) May 5, 2025 Me trying to understand the rules for the #NHLDraftLottery — MT-Yes (@emptyess512) May 5, 2025 This is painstakingly bad television. Do we really need to see 14 ping pong balls being dropped into the machine? #Isles #NHLDraftLottery — Gil Martin (@IceWarsNYRvsNYI) May 5, 2025 The NHL Draft Lottery is absurd. Get rid of it. #NHLDraft — Arthur J. Regner (@ArthurJRegner) May 5, 2025 They even lost a guy who loves math. A literal math nerd! As a math nerd, the #NHLDraftLottery was cool until they cut away from the last ball. Now I'm just skeptical of it all over again — Nick Gratton (@thenickgratton) May 5, 2025 Please, for the love of all that is good in hockey, just go back to the big cards next year. This . This article originally appeared on For The Win: The live 2025 NHL Draft Lottery was an absolutely confusing disaster
