Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rtp47.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw From: throopw@rtp47.UUCP (Wayne Throop) Newsgroups: net.misc.coke Subject: Taste Test Message-ID: <94@rtp47.UUCP> Date: Fri, 19-Jul-85 17:24:06 EDT Article-I.D.: rtp47.94 Posted: Fri Jul 19 17:24:06 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 21-Jul-85 21:36:15 EDT Organization: Data General, RTP, NC Lines: 33 The theories of "why Coke (the company) did it" are getting wilder and wilder. I will suggest a simpler reason. Coke (the company) very likely ran blindfold-style taste tests, and found that a significant majority liked the "new" formula better than the "old" formula. Coke said to it's corporate self "Aha! We really got something here, let's change the formula!" When they switched, they found that people don't care how the crud tastes, since they are emotionally committed to liking the old stuff. (The new stuff isn't Coke, and I like Coke, so I must not like the new stuff, by Finagle!) Coke (the corporation) was probably quite surprised to find that the same (statistically speaking) people who loved "new coke" in taste tests rejected it when they actually made the change. I would bet that, in blindfold taste-tests most of you folks clamoring for the "good old coke" would be unable to tell the difference. For a more concrete example, given a lineup of unlabeled Pepsi, Classic Coke, New Coke, RC, Shasta Cola (and maybe a few more for yucks), I suspect that (far) fewer than half of you could pick out the Classic Coke by taste alone. (I make this claim because I recall an newspaper article a few years back reporting the results of just such a test, which found that most people simply can't distinguish reliably among Cola brands by taste alone.) As far as looking for motivations for things in general, you must remember "never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity". -- Wayne Throop at Data General, RTP, NC !mcnc!rti-sel!rtp47!throopw