You Did What__ Mad Plans and Great Historical Disasters - Bill Fawcett [104]
Coca-Cola expected some protest, but what surprised them was the vehemence and total sense of alienation the marketing move produced. Everything led them to believe the majority of Coke fans would be bothered to some degree by the change but most would come around.
News of Classic Coca-Cola, as it was dubbed, was important enough for ABC to interrupt afternoon soap operas on July 11 with the announcement. Senator David Pryor of Arkansas called Coke’s announcement “a very meaningful moment in the history of America. It shows that some national institutions cannot be changed.” Within forty-eight hours of the announcement, the consumer hotline registered 31,600 calls, almost all praising the decision.
By 1986, Classic Coke regained the soft drink crown, defying all marketing expectations at corporate headquarters. New Coke, already renamed Coke II in 1990, was clearly a costly flop, never gaining more than 3 percent of the American market. Interestingly, the company’s stock never dipped during the hullabaloo and actually rose after Classic Coke reentered the market. In some ways, the media frenzy helped the company more than a new flavor ever could have. As a result, since the company never really lost any money, the top management team remained in place, whereas in other companies they would have all been replaced in order to save face with Wall Street analysts.
Critics claimed Coke staged the whole thing to mask the introduction of the corn syrup or did it to boost market share. Some went so far as to speculate Coca-Cola was mass-producing Classic Coke all along so they could rush it onto the shelves when New Coke failed. None of these claims have been proven true.
Donald Keough said at the time, “Some critics will say Coca-Cola made a marketing mistake. Some cynics will say that we planned the whole thing. The truth is we are not that dumb, and we are not that smart.”
Enrico managed to get his digs in by writing The Other Guy Blinked. Using his own hindsight, he wrote, “I think, by the end of their Coca-Cola nightmare, they figured out who they really are. Caretakers. They can’t change the taste of their flagship brand. They can’t change its imagery. All they can do is defend the heritage they nearly abandoned in 1985.”
Coca-Cola is smart enough not to avoid the issue of New Coke. Their Web site has a detailed corporate history, including this questionable chapter. They even have a section where people shared their memories of the change.
On the tenth anniversary of New Coke, an event no one would think was worth remembering, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Roberto Goizueta used the opportunity to defend “taking intelligent risks.” He wanted his staff to feel that taking such risks was necessary. He said, “We set out to change the dynamics of sugar colas in the United States, and we did exactly that — albeit not in the way we had planned…the most significant result of ‘new Coke’ — by far, was that it sent an incredibly powerful signal…a signal that we really were ready to do whatever was necessary to build value for the owners of our business.”
The speech to employees seemed to avoid the other lesson about messing around with cultural touchstones.
Coke II is still manufactured and sold in selected places around the country but receives no marketing or promotion from Coca-Cola.
Searchable Terms
Aboriginals
Abulafia, Abraham (Raziel)
Achilles
Adams, John
Africa, inefficiencies and blunders in
African Nations Cup
Agamemnon
Alaric I, King of the Visigoths
Albert, Prince Consort of Queen Victoria
Alexander I, Tsar of Russia
Allder-Wright, C. R.
American Medical Association
American Revolution
Amin, Idi
Anne of Cleves
Antietam, McClellan’s fatal caution at
Arnold, Benedict
aspirin, heroin seen as superior to
Atilla the Hun
Atlee, Clement