Jump to content

Home

Pepsi Sinks to a New Low


The Doctor
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My panties are always in a twist. It's merely a matter of how twisted they can get. :xp:

 

I think the key question itself is: "Why are you wearing panties?"

 

Perhaps the better question itself is: "Why would you admit to wearing panties?"

 

Whatever makes you happy, but I wouldn't be announcing that stuff online and everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many reasons.

 

Also, links in lieu of images:

 

The New Pepsi Logo: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3003/2969469986_58df961085.jpg?v=0

 

What it's blatantly trying to emulate: http://skaroff.com/blog/img/ObamaLogo.jpg

Good for them.

 

If spending some money to change their logo some to appear like a popular symbol around the world makes them money, then it was an intelligent decision to make.

 

Its about exploiting the people's interest. So, to be fair, you shouldn't be mad at Pepsi at all.

 

You should be mad at the consumers in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm..... I think Coke and Pepsi taste exactly the same.... But I like Pepsi better- its always at my grandparent's house.

 

I bet if we did a taste test no one would get it right, we did that at school as an experiment. Only one person was able to tell the Coca Cola from the Pepsi and the Diet Coke.... Out of 60 people tested.

 

Sure not a big testing range, but still.

 

>___>

 

As for the new logo... Uhm, why are we so upset? It doesn't bother me... Its just the logo on a can you're going to *recycle* anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw that the first time I saw the new logo...

 

Smart move on Pepsi's part since it's similar enough to get some more people drawn towards, but it's also different enough that it isn't readily apparent... much.... to a blindman...

 

Okay, it was a blatant ripoff, but it still a smart move on Pepsi's part, like TA said. So, my question, why the big problem with it Doc? Is it because it is like the symbol for your favorite politico?

 

If so, why is that a huge problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, it was a blatant ripoff, but it still a smart move on Pepsi's part, like TA said. So, my question, why the big problem with it Doc? Is it because it is like the symbol for your favorite politico?

 

If so, why is that a huge problem?

 

You may not have a problem with corporations praying on the ignorance of the general population, but I sure do. I believe in a little something called corporate ethics, even if such a believe is unfounded in today's marketing world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest you crack a good U.S. history book. FDR and his policies were what extended the depression. Which is why the depression of the late 1920's to early 1930's is known only in the U.S. as the "Great" Depression. It took WWII to actually life the U.S. out of its' depression.
i suggest you crack a good... matter of opinion book.

 

 

 

god that was a terrible comeback but my point still stands

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe in a little something called corporate ethics, even if such a believe is unfounded in today's marketing world.

Corporate ethics?

 

What is Pepsi? A mom & pop corner shop?

 

How about all the places they've bought out? All the marketing and product placement in all corners of the world? How about what the Auto industry did to the Tucker, electric car, etc?

 

The fast food corporations that have reached far and wide to falsely advertise their food?

 

A logo? How about the fact that can contains high fructose corn syrup, sugar, colorings, phosphoric acid, caffeine, citric acid, etc? All the sugar in each can that just helps along obesity and diabetes? The teeth rot associated with sugar intake?

 

Oh, here is a good one. How about the fact that Pepsi and Coke in India have huge levels of pesticides and other chemicals that have led to cancers, birth defects, and break down of the immune system found by the CSE.

 

How about PepsiCo's business partner, Thein Tun, a noted business partner of the ruling Burmese military junta, which has been alleged to be responsible for some of the worst human rights violations in the current world.

 

I know this is not news to you, but seriously? A logo?

 

You may not have a problem with corporations praying on the ignorance of the general population, but I sure do.

Supply and Demand. Basic economics.

 

In a Market Economy, the consumer more often then not dictates what the corporation will sell based on Want. People buy Pepsi. This country loves Obama, and merchandise for him has been flying off the shelf. If people are, quite frankly, dumb enough to buy more Pepsi because it looks a -little- bit more like Obama's symbol, then let them spend their money.

 

Its not like it could hurt the economy any worse. They are spending 100 million to get the logo's changed, and if more people buy it than that is just more money back into the economy.

 

Pepsi%20Logo.JPG

Obama08_ThumbLogo200.gif

2969469986_58df961085.jpg?v=0

 

How about I play devils advocate and claim that Obama stole Pepsi's color scheme and contrast effect to further his campaign by making his symbol look familiar to a product that American's enjoy?

 

White, Blue, and Red.

 

How about this:

american-flag.gif

 

Huh, the colors look oddly familiar. Solid Blue and Red with white stripes...

 

Almost like they both took the color scheme to appeal to an American audience... hmm...

 

Or this:

south-korea-flag.gif

 

Wow, Pepsi's older logo looked surprisingly like a South Korean Flag. Curious. Almost as if they separated the two halves just a little to make it look original enough to print.

 

yin_yang.gif

Jeez, now its like they ripped off eastern Asian to appeal to a select market there as well.

 

2969469986_58df961085.jpg?v=0

 

Unfounded? Its been out the door since Capitalism took over much of the World's markets.

 

The corporations are big enough to do this because the consumer buys their products. They accept their advertising. They allow them into their country and onto their shelves, and they sell enough to warrant more sales.

 

Corporations, in order to grow bigger than a single corner shop at the edge of town, have to compete with others in order to grow bigger, make more money, etc. They create commercials, advertisements, logos, slogans, etc to appeal to people in order to get those sales.

 

Pepsi has copied other logos in the past to gain sales. Companies use symbolism to get into the consumers head to make their logo that much more effective, and their product that much more enticing.

 

If you don't compete, you get left behind. If you don't try to get into the head of the consumer, your product sells poorly. You get stuck in the corner shop with your family, selling enough to get by and keep the shop running.

 

Again, blame the ignorant consumers for letting the corporation get big enough to exploit them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and RC > Coke >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pepsi. ;)
Yeah, buddy. RC PWNS! You got good taste. Pun intended. ;)

 

Good for them.

 

If spending some money to change their logo some to appear like a popular symbol around the world makes them money, then it was an intelligent decision to make.

 

Its about exploiting the people's interest. So, to be fair, you shouldn't be mad at Pepsi at all.

 

You should be mad at the consumers in general.

 

While I dislike Pepsi, and even disagree with the tactics themselves and their results, however ill gotten...all ethical standpoints and feelings aside...one has to admire the effectiveness of their business strategy.

 

Yes, the consumers in general are idiots. Since I'm all about letting the people decide...well, I'm afraid I am finally seeing the downside of that. It's still not my place to tell anyone just what to: do, say, think, or how to vote. Though in the most latter case I will try to help people make informed decisions, regardless my feelings on the matter. So if they're all *stupid* sheeple...I thorw up my arms and say they got what they deserved--maybe they should have done their homework. --hay, 'least I didn't walk along with them when I saw trouble coming.

 

You may not have a problem with corporations praying on the ignorance of the general population, but I sure do. I believe in a little something called corporate ethics, even if such a believe is unfounded in today's marketing world.

 

So do I, doc. Unfortunately, being the honest guy who isn't all glamorized isn't "good business sense". While the person who told me that is a bold faced piece of $#&^ IMO...they have a point from a business tactics point of view...if you don't do the tasteless screwing over of the masses, someone else somewhere will. Furthermore they may also end up screwing *you* on their way up.

 

While I believe with sneaky rotten and low tactics you ultimately sew the seeds of your destruction--so shall you reap in time; I'm afraid that bad guys often win in reality. I hate it. I really do. All you can honestly hope for is that when the dung hits the fan and things get destabilized with so much corruption that it implodes...that you are safely out of the way of it.

 

Corporate ethics?

 

What is Pepsi? A mom & pop corner shop?

 

No, but just as business is business; rotten lies are still rotten lies. Not that I am necessarily accusing Pepsi of lying.

 

<snip>How about what the Auto industry did to the Tucker, electric car, etc?
Now *that* is a blood boiler--especially as far back as Nikola Tesla's era.

 

If distasteful logo plagiarizing to make extra money is all the worse they did, then they are saints when compared to squashing out other businesses and monopolizing done in the auto industry.

 

However dishonest is still dishonest, whatever its degree along a continuum.

 

How about PepsiCo's business partner, Thein Tun, a noted business partner of the ruling Burmese military junta, which has been alleged to be responsible for some of the worst human rights violations in the current world.
EESH!

 

OR how about that their owner has been seen attending a Bilderberg convention??? Bilderberg is an organization for only the elite whose agendas are commonly unknown. Elite being only the most wealthy, powerful, and influential entities in America, Canada, and Mexico primarily, but also around the world too.

I take this "source" END GAME with a grain of salt since Alex Jones is a bold faced hyperbolizing alarmist using facts in a fallacious way, but his documentary shows the owner of Pepsi walking into the meeting place at which Bilderberg held their convention in 2007...Somewhere in its 2:20 of time. I do wonder if this is a CIA deception seed (at the very least it's a money grab, so watch it free wherever you can), but it does use a bit of interesting factual evidence generally.

 

Supply and Demand. Basic economics.

 

In a Market Economy, the consumer more often then not dictates what the corporation will sell based on Want. People buy Pepsi. This country loves Obama, and merchandise for him has been flying off the shelf. If people are, quite frankly, dumb enough to buy more Pepsi because it looks a -little- bit more like Obama's symbol, then let them spend their money.

 

Being a big fan of capitalism, I'm also a big critic of it. Are you implying supply manipulation doesn't happen? I'm no conspiracy theorist, but in some cases, it would make perfect sense.

 

Unfounded? Its been out the door since Capitalism took over much of the World's markets.

 

I suppose you have a point, just look at how China is turning up a new leaf. A pen-pal of mine over there can't stop beaming about how great business is over there, she wishes I could visit her...of course they are still attatched to us enough that when we suffer, so do they.

 

Again, blame the ignorant consumers for letting the corporation get big enough to exploit them.

 

Okay, while I did just hint that people often get what they get because they are so lazy as to not be informed and thus become the sheep running off the edge of the cliff...at what point does this line no longer hold water? While it is the fault of the people who buy it, that they are idiotic (undeniably), you cannot wholly and totally lay the fault on them.

 

If companies lie outright, and falsely advertise, that is not the people's fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, Avery, that was one impressive rant justification. I see why you are the Kavar's moderator.

 

Seriously though, making morally questionable business descions has been a valid business tactics from decades. For example, in the 1920's, there were bottles of irradiated water that were sold to people crazy enough to buy it.

 

Yes, they gave out real life Nuka-Cola.

 

Because the company made morally questionable descions, and whatnot, someone died, and ruined their business. However, before the guy died, they made a metric s**tload of money off of it.

Just because something is morally questionable, doesn't mean it can't and won't be done.

 

Pepsi < Coca-Cola

 

:carms:

 

Fix't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, Avery, that was one impressive rant justification. I see why you are the Kavar's moderator.

Thanks, I think.

 

And I'm not the Kavar's mod. I'm the SWTOR mod. As of this week, I'm not going to touch Kavars again for a long time, thus why I banned myself from it.

 

It is dead as far as I'm concerned.

 

No, but just as business is business; rotten lies are still rotten lies. Not that I am necessarily accusing Pepsi of lying.

Oh, yes they are indeed rotten lies. I wont deny that.

 

I'm merely pointing out that there are far more rotten lies than changing a logo. If anything, its probably the tail end of things to be ticked at them about.

 

And a logo isn't entirely a lie either. Its just a clever advertising tool that they are using to take advantage of the general public's obsession with Obama, if that is the case. But, as I pointed out, they seemed to be using other symbolism in their last logo as well.

 

If distasteful logo plagiarizing to make extra money is all the worse they did, then they are saints when compared to squashing out other businesses and monopolizing done in the auto industry.

 

However dishonest is still dishonest, whatever its degree along a continuum.

Agreed.

 

However, I'm still in the fog for why exactly this is dishonest. Company's have been stealing symbols for a long time and using them to catch our attention. It works, so how is this particular one any worse?

 

Being a big fan of capitalism, I'm also a big critic of it. Are you implying supply manipulation doesn't happen? I'm no conspiracy theorist, but in some cases, it would make perfect sense.

Supply manipulating?

 

I'm lost. Isn't this implying that Pepsi is artificially boosting the price to gain more money?

 

Maybe they are or are not. But I am not entirely with you on how this concerns using the Public's like to sell more by doing something as simple as using a different logo.

 

Okay, while I did just hint that people often get what they get because they are so lazy as to not be informed and thus become the sheep running off the edge of the cliff...at what point does this line no longer hold water? While it is the fault of the people who buy it, that they are idiotic (undeniably), you cannot wholly and totally lay the fault on them.

Not all the time, no.

 

It is not the Indian people's fault that Pepsi basically poison's their Soda Supply. They bought it without this knowledge.

 

If companies lie outright, and falsely advertise, that is not the people's fault.

I agree, and those lies are, at least in the US, looked after with at least one eye.

 

But, again, how is Pepsi falsely advertising? Being dishonest? Ethically wrong?

 

The topic of this thread is bashing them for using a new logo that slighty resembles the Obama logo, but also resembles many other symbols.

 

They are obviously doing this to try and boost sales, as they are being affected by this recession as well. If it is successful, they can make a better profit, money goes back into the economy, etc.

 

All for the price of 100 million and a slightly switched up logo.

 

Now, if they placed under the Logo "cures cancer", then I think the government would have a few things to say about that. I'm sure the people would too.

 

I'm sure if our Pepsi contained pesticides like it does in India, they'd get shut the down.

 

But currently all they are doing is cleverly using an opportune time to push out a new logo to appeal to the American people in order to make money. Personally, I'd be doing the same thing in this current economy and I'm sure you would to in their shoes.

 

Its all about the money. Ignorant people have money, and harmless ploys to get their money is hardly the most questionable thing the market has done.

 

Is it tasteless? Maybe, but its hardly a blatant rip-off of Obama. Like I said, you could trace it to a number of sources and even claim in this situation that Obama copied the flag, yin/yang, pepsi, korean flag, and any number of other logos and symbols that are two colors hitting each other in a circle.

 

Again, blame the ignorant consumers for letting the corporation get big enough to exploit them with something as simple as a logo. They shouldn't use this power to poison the people under false advertising, but I say play ball to making one half of your logo rounder to slightly look like another logo, which might pull in more sales.

 

Also, how do we even know they are ripping Obama off? Do we have any sources for this? Because, honestly, I've been noticing a lot of company's recently changing their logo to look fresh again. Mountain Dew, for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An awful lot of panties in a twist over the new Pepsi logo...

 

 

CokeLogo.jpg

 

...here, look upon a much nicer logo :p

 

 

 

But seriously... it's a circular shape, it has red and blue and white... it's simplistic in its design... of course it's going to remind people of anything else that's remotely similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...