Coke won the cola wars because great taste takes more than a single sip.
Photo illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker/Slate. Photos by Getty Images, Reuters.
This is part of a special series about great
rivalries: between tech titans, sports franchises, and even dinosaur
hunters. Read about the series here.
The inspired Pepsi Challenge marketing campaign of the 1980s
was my childhood introduction to one of the fundamentals of scientific
inquiry: the double-blind experiment. In a world beset with soft drink
advertising, how could you really know which soda you liked
best? Clearly what made sense was to put prejudice and branding aside,
don a blindfold, and focus on pure flavor.
It was one of the greatest marketing coups of all time. In the late
1970s and early 1980s, Pepsi steadily gained on Coke in terms of market
share. Characters in the ads always picked Pepsi, of course, but so did
most people who tried it in real life—the sweeter taste was more
appealing. By 1983, Pepsi was outselling Coke in supermarkets,
leaving Coke dependent on its larger infrastructure of soda machines
and fast food tie-ins to preserve its lead. That was a success in its
own right. But even better, Pepsi forced Coke into an infamous business
blunder. Faced with eroding market share, Coke began a series of its own
internal taste tests aimed at developing a superior product. Thus was born the dread New Coke, a sweeter cola reformulated to best both Pepsi and the classic formulation of Coke in blind taste tests.
The backlash was fast and furious, with over 400,000 letters of complaint
pouring in to the company. Despite declining market share, Coke was
still by far the market leader over Pepsi—and the company’s millions of
loyal customers weren’t looking for a new flavor. Pepsi recorded the fastest year-on-year sales growth
in the company’s history during New Coke’s first month, while a
consortium of Coca-Cola bottlers decided to sue the company for changing
the product.
But then Coca-Cola’s senior leadership did something tough: They
admitted that they were wrong. And they executed a strategic pivot
that’s kept them on top of the rivalry ever since. They reintroduced the
original formula under the name “Coca-Cola Classic” and sold it in
parallel with New Coke for a while. Over time, the “new” Coke was phased
out, and Coca-Cola Classic became just, well, Coke once again—a product
so culturally iconic that across a significant swath of the United States it serves as a generic term for what decent people call “soda” and Midwesterners call “pop.”
For the past 25 years, Coke advertising has focused on the brand
first and foremost. The soda is a shared experience that’s supposed to
remind you of friendship, family, adorable bears, and other fuzzy associations. And it’s worked great. According to industry statistics compiled by Beverage Digest, Coke owns 17 percent of the American market
for carbonated soft drinks. The next most popular choice is Diet Coke
with 9.4 percent. Pepsi languishes in third place at 8.9 percent. Though
it’s the flagship brand of a diverse beverage and snack company with over $65 billion in revenue, Pepsi is a definite loser in the popularity sweepstakes.
Pepsi is a quintessential example of a “challenger brand”
that’s seeking an edge against a dominant, iconic firm. Marketing has
often emphasized the idea of Pepsi as newer or more youthful—“the choice
of a new generation”—as a way of turning its second-place status into
an advantage. But Pepsi works as such a great example of a challenge
because despite decades of efforts, none of its different slogans or logos or celebrity endorsements has ever put it in first place.
It’s a frustrating place for the company to be, because the Pepsi
Challenge wasn’t just an ad gimmick. It really is true that blind taste
tests suggest that people like it better than Coke. Yet people keep
buying more Coke. One theory of this “Pepsi Paradox,” described by Lone Frank in Scientific American,
is that we should take the Pepsi Challenge at face value. Coke’s
victory is a triumph of branding over flavor, and a clear sign that
consumer companies should invest lots of money in advertising.
Researchers intrigued by the paradox have suggested that Coke’s ads
actually rewire the human brain.
When Read Montague of Baylor College Medicine performed a version of
the Pepsi Challenge with subjects hooked up to an fMRI machine, he found
something interesting. In blind taste tests, most people preferred
Pepsi, and Pepsi was associated with a higher level of activity in an
area of the brain known as the ventral putamen, which helps us evaluate
different flavors. By contrast, in a nonblind test, Coke was more popular
and was also associated with increased activity in the medial
prefrontal cortex. Montague’s interpretation: This prefrontal activity
represented the higher-thinking functions of the brain associating the
soda with ad campaigns and, in effect, overriding the taste buds.
But perhaps this is wrong. Felix Salmon notes that in blind taste tests of wine, people almost invariably prefer sweeter varieties. This hardly means sweeter wines are always better—and Pepsi is sweeter than Coke. On this view it’s actually Pepsi that
scored the marketing triumph, by convincing people that a blind taste
test represents the true mark of soda flavor. Likewise, the idea that
Coke triumphs because of ads rather than flavor has trouble explaining
the failure of New Coke. New Coke had the same ads behind it as old
Coke, but was specifically engineered to beat Pepsi in taste tests.
But taste tests consist of relatively modest sips, and Americans
don’t drink tiny sips of soda. We drink whole cans of soda. We drink
20-ounce bottles. We drink Big Gulps at 7-Eleven. We drink sodas so
large that Michael Bloomberg wants to make them illegal. Serious soda
drinkers consume multiple servings per day, every day of the week. And
while we want something sweet, we don’t necessarily want that kind of
long-term relationship with something too sweet.
That’s why New Coke could succeed in a lab but fail in the
marketplace. The Pepsi Challenge is a great marketing gimmick but not a
viable path to displacing the leading brand. Some rivalries come down to
the fundamentals. Coke just has a flavor that most people like better,
and decades of brand-on-brand combat can’t change that.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire