So my roommate and I picked up both new Jones soda holiday packs tonight and drank the worst Thanksgiving Day meal ever! We only took a tiny taste of each flavor, but with an extensive collection of 9 flavors that still equals a whole lot of disgusting soda... and a half an hour later I still feel sick.
If anyone cares to pick up these drinks, here's our ranking (from "best" to worst):
1. Cranberry Soda
2. Turkey Soda
3. Pumpkin Pie Soda
4. Pecan Pie Soda
5. Corn on the Cob Soda
6. Salmon Soda
7. Brocolli Casserole Soda
8. Wild Herb Stuffing Soda
9. Brussell Sprout Soda
My advice: Drink them on an empty stomach. If you make it all the way to #9 it will make you gag. And you'll also need a strong, sugary chaser to accompany your "meal," like Mt. Dew.
I've heard about this and I just don't understand it. Does anyone actually drink that crap and think it tastes good? Turkey soda?
nobody should drink something this disgusting ...
Oh wait, he did.
Wow, what a consumer blitz that must have been for that product!
Do you think their key market demographic is for people like nobody who are curious as to the idea, and then punish themselves for this curiousity?
I sometimes really don't understand the crazy things people make in order to try and create their own section of an already established market.
I find that it's a mistake to buy any of the Jones assorted packs, even of the regular flavours. Their root beer and cream soda are amazing, but once everybody drinks those, you're left with a box of blue bubblegum and green apple that nobody wants.
I agree that Jones is aiming squarely at people's curiosity with this holiday pack. Of course, lots of companies experiment with weird, or at least different, flavours, particularly the big soft drink makers. Make a limited amount, and you're guaranteed to sell enough for everyone to try at least once. Once people decide they don't like it, it's gone, and so is their money. If you happen to hit on something they do like, so much the better.
It sounds gross, but I have to admit, turkey soda interests me more than vanilla Coke.
Post Edited (11-19-05 08:00)
AndyC wrote:
> I find that it's a mistake to buy any of the Jones assorted
> packs, even of the regular flavours. Their root beer and cream
> soda are amazing, but once everybody drinks those, you're left
> with a box of blue bubblegum and green apple that nobody
> wants.
>
> I agree that Jones is aiming squarely at people's curiosity
> with this holiday pack. Of course, lots of companies experiment
> with weird, or at least different, flavours, particularly the
> big soft drink makers. Make a limited amount, and you're
> guaranteed to sell enough for everyone to try at least once.
> Once people decide they don't like it, it's gone, and so is
> their money. If you happen to hit on something they do like, so
> much the better.
>
> It sounds gross, but I have to admit, turkey soda interests me
> more than vanilla Coke.
>
My thoughts exactly (well, except the turkey soda part), but the basic mindset is, if you make it someone will try it... which generally holds true. Now, if it was somebody out selling "broccoli soda" at a lemonade stand, they'd have to deal with people face-to-face (where they'd face a lot of criticism), but since its a faceless corporation, they can foist whatever they want on the public (cranberry sauce soda, anyone?), and just sit back and rake in the profits. We're nice and placid that way... it's the same reason our government dicks us over all the time and we just shrug our shoulders and say, "Eh, no big deal. A lot of countries have it worse than us... we shouldn't complain. Bill O'Reilly was right, we should shut up and let others do the thinking for us..."
...and that's what soda and politics have in common... New Iraqi Coke, anyone?
It was totally curiosity that made us buy the drinks. And once we were finished tasting them all, and nursing our upset stomachs, we said to ourselves, "well... what did we expect?" We both knew we were throwing our money away on a dumb purchase.
It's no doubt the Jones soda company is making these drinks just for the free publicity it generates. They're hoping people will see their other (real) sodas and give them a spin, too. I sort of want to try their "depeach mode" flavored soda, now (just because I think the name is funny)- so the stunt worked.
We plan on passing the unfinished holiday sodas to family and friends today... poor bastards.
Just Plain Horse wrote:
> just
> sit back and rake in the profits.
What profits? These stupid flovors probably took many man-years and big $$ to develop. It's not like they just grind up some turkey, add carbonation, bottle and sell. They invested probably a rather large chunk of money into this idea.
They probably lose money on the product itself. It's called a "loss leader." To me, as a SMALL business owner, I think the idea is dumb. But, if you are part of a BIG company, some think it a sound investment strategy. The publicity they get off this is worth far more than the revenues generated by actual sales.
As they say, there's no such thing as bad publicity.
I'm in favour of anything that promotes Jones Cola. I'm a big fan. And it gives me an additional alternative, since I've learned a few disturbing thigns about Coke. (The company, not the product.)
Shadowphile wrote:
> I'm in favour of anything that promotes Jones Cola. I'm a big
> fan. And it gives me an additional alternative, since I've
> learned a few disturbing thigns about Coke. (The company, not
> the product.)
Care to share these things? I love Coke, don't get me wrong, but the buggers have quite the history don't they?
Never tried the stuff, nor do I intend to. The closest I ever came to drinking something like that was when I tried a Bloody Mary without celery. Yech.
Nobody wrote:
"It's no doubt the Jones soda company is making these drinks just for the free publicity it generates. They're hoping people will see their other (real) sodas and give them a spin, too. I sort of want to try their "depeach mode" flavored soda, now (just because I think the name is funny)- so the stunt worked."
>
>
>
I think Depeach Mode soda is funny as well. I wonder if they are in cahoots with the band Depeche Mode to use their name. There's a coffee shop back home that would sell coffee drinks with flavoring and name them 'Travelling Willberry,' and 'A Clockwork Orange,' and other flavorful names. I wonder how far pop culture (if you excuse the soda pun) will take cross marketing into the corporate sector. With bands like U2, Rolling Stones, and Aerosmith selling their image to cell phone companies and car companies, it's just a matter of time before local band Scuzzy And The Aquatic Trio go on TV for local car dealerships and grocery stores.
As for Coca Cola, I avoid soft drinks for the most part. Pepsi, Coke, Dr. Pepper, etc, etc...
Post Edited (11-20-05 14:29)
Where to start on that topic......
My personal boycott started after I read an article in a local 'free press' newspaper. It seems Coke had an exclusive agreement with the local university. As part of a thesis, one student began looking into the terms of the agreement and decide to invesitigate Coke as well.
He discovered something like 179 cases of human rights violations in South America, including possible connections to a number of DEATHS.
He discovered that Coke was pulling 500 000 litres of ground water PER DAY out of a drought stricken region in India. They were also giving local farmers a processing byproduct sludge as 'free fertilizer'. A sample of the sludge analyzed by an English University lab was declared to have no useful value as a fertilzier. In addition, it was toxic.
That isn't even considering all of their North American human rights violations and discriminatory hiring practices.
There is more detail available if you are interested. I kept the article.....
Needless to say, I switched to Pepsi. It's been difficult, since all my favourite soft drinks are Coke products.
I want to try the single bottles of the Jones Soda. I don't wanna buy the multipack, which is all I can find.
-Ed
ulthar wrote:
> Just Plain Horse wrote:
>
> > just
> > sit back and rake in the profits.
>
> What profits? These stupid flovors probably took many
> man-years and big $$ to develop. It's not like they just grind
> up some turkey, add carbonation, bottle and sell. They
> invested probably a rather large chunk of money into this idea.
>
> They probably lose money on the product itself. It's called a
> "loss leader." To me, as a SMALL business owner, I think the
> idea is dumb. But, if you are part of a BIG company, some
> think it a sound investment strategy. The publicity they get
> off this is worth far more than the revenues generated by
> actual sales.
>
> As they say, there's no such thing as bad publicity.
>
And there in is why it was worth it... and if even one of these oddities takes off, it will make them millions. Your attitude was what I was reffering to in my post, the sheer stupification and anger at something so incredulous would chase a vendor off the streets, but a company just has some guy in a truck ship it around. Thusly, if our world leaders had to walk by our houses on a daily basis they'd tread a lot more quietly and with less pomp... ask yourself how many vacations our current president has taken since he took office. It may sound absurd to some, but my odd cross reference still stands. Government is a business... and all businesses are only looking to make a bigger profit... even off turkey flavored soda.
Just Plain Horse wrote:
>
> And there in is why it was worth it... and if even one of these
> oddities takes off, it will make them millions.
You missed the point of my post it seems. They won't take off, the company leaders know they won't take off, and they were never put on the market to generate profit. They were placed on the market to generate publicity. If they don't sell one can of the stuff, it does not matter. The EXISTENCE is the "product" in this case.
After all, we ARE talking about that company, are we not?
> ask yourself how many vacations our current president
> has taken since he took office.
Good or bad, right or wrong, agree or disagree, what does this have to do with the price of tea in China? Or, more to the point, what does this have to do with the existence (and/or acceptance) of turkey flavored soda?
> Government is a
> business... and all businesses are only looking to make a
> bigger profit... even off turkey flavored soda.
>
Government is not a business; governments, local, state, federal, etc, all over the world generally operate at a LOSS. Have you ever heard of our National Debt? Have you ever heard of deficit spending?
Also, your comments suggest an aversion to businesses making profits. What is wrong with that? Those businesses are comprised of the people therein employed, and profits means
(1) higher salaries/wages
(2) more employees get hired
(3) increased economic activity (as that business buys more raw materials, for example), thereby 'spreading the wealth' to other businesses.
There is no business in existence, I would wager, that makes money and hordes it. It is true that the business goal is profit, but it really the goal to SPEND that profit (on employees, growth of the business, etc).
How is that goal ANY different from an individual's personal goals?
In response to the statement that governments are businesses, I'd venture to say that those people who are in the business of government have a higher salary than the average American right now. And, that those who are in the business of government are going to go on an continue to have a higher salary once they leave government.
Therefore, I venture to say that governments are infact businesses whose shareholders are its citizens who dump money into their money pool yearly and daily through taxes, and whose employees are among the highest paid civil servants in this country. Governments are businesses, because they have benefactors and dependents, invest back into themselves to maintain public happiness (schools, roads, welfare, etc...) and whose employees turn an endless profit because money will never run out so long as people pay their taxes.
Civil disobedience means to stop paying taxes among other things, and that's one reason I don't pay taxes. I don't owe our government s**t for protecting me. To my defense, I'd say they are threatening my safety and security with their foreign policies that bring anti-American sentiment to people I have no quarrel with, yet who hate me simply because I am American. Which will become a short lived title.
Government is a business, and a very corrupt one at that.
Sorry for the rant. No more politics from me, I swear.
Well politics is a business, but like most things, this point is seemingly magnified when viewed from American politics.
Sure, many of our politicians probably earn more than the average Australian, even after/before the leave government, but that isn't so much an issue here. Essentially you can still come up from nothing and become the Prime Minister, something, which whilst possible, seems so much more unlikely in the US.
I guess it just depends on your view of businesses: politics is definitley like a business, yet it is somehow a bit different because it is no mere company, but something a bit greater in the scheme of things.
The idea that big business [not government mind you] is going to spend all their profits back into the company is a little silly however. How many times do you hear about a company who gives off a 'golden handshake' of millions of dollars to people leaving the company etc. Well this was a bit of an issue here recently, and I have to say, the way the heads of some companies are percieved is one that is less than favourable...
As for the whole soda thing, unfortunately they are going to keep making stupid flavours if we keep buying them and talking about them. They obviously put them in a variety pack so we'd spend more money on the stupid cans, since it seems that if you were able to buy just the one can, you would certainly hesitate to buy a second.
Ah well, it doesn't really affect me, since we don't have such wacky flavours here yet, with the most recent odd addition to common 'soda' [we don't call it that] is the Tropical flavoured Pepsi Samba, which I find hard to believe as a flavour which would last, especially since the much simpler Coke with Lime failed miserably.
Check your local corner stores, Ed. In my area there are half a dozen that carry individual bottles. Also, if the appear near you, check places like the Bulk Barn.
These odd flavours are intended to spark conversation, since word of mouth is both cheap and effective as advertising. And, if nobody tried a new untested product on the market, we'd still be living in caves without benefit of furry underwear or fires.....
On a completely seperate note, sparked by the odd thought train which usually accompnaies my ramplings, I give you this thought, stolen from some stand up comedian who's name escapes me at the moment.
'Man invented civilization to impress his girlfriend.'
Scottie wrote:
>
> Therefore, I venture to say that governments are infact
> businesses whose shareholders are its citizens who dump money
> into their money pool yearly and daily through taxes, and whose
> employees are among the highest paid civil servants in this
> country.
Bzzzzt, wrong. First of all, MOST government employees are NOT that well paid. Go down to your county building and see what the average clerk makes. Some would argue it's hardly a livable wage. I personally knew some HIGH UP politicians in local government that made a pitiful salary.
It's not much different at the federal level. You see the ones who make big bucks on the news, but they comprise a VERY small number of the total number of government employees.
Secondly, there is a very, very big difference between the shareholders of a publically traded corporation and the taxed citizens of a nation. I can sell my shares and have nothing to do with a corporation if I choose, but I deny to pay my taxes under threat of force. The analogy of business to government is fundamentally flawed for this reason:
In EVERY way, you CHOOSE to interact with a business. Whether it is as a customer, an employee, a supplier or a shareholder. You don't choose jack squat about your government, short of voting (and not everyone gets what they want when they vote).
>
> Government is a business, and a very corrupt one at that.
>
See above. Government might have SOME similarities with business, but the two are distinctly different. Nor should they be run the same (and they are not run the same). I won't deny governments are/can be corrupt.
In response to your comments, Ulthar, I find myself quite amused...
Government is a business because it pays employees for services and earns money through taxes (and "contributions" from groups of whom you and I are probably better off not knowing about, in the eyes of the employees, much less mentioning here).
You are correct that many government employees don't get paid very well IN SALARY. Ever hear the term "kickbacks"? Ever consider the position of power one has occupying say, a seat in the Senate or the Supreme Court? Perhaps you never had the desire to make the rules that govern others... unfortunately, not everybody is so open-minded.
But let's take a step back from the whole "government is bad" attitude and take a look at the basic behaviours of businesses over the years. Businesses in oil, for instance- like Haliburten... or businesses in telecommunications, like Worldcom. Say, does anybody remember a little business by the name of Enron?