Coca Cola and Conclusion

¶ … PRODUCT FAILURES: WHY "NEW COKE" NEVER GOT OFF THE GROUND Perhaps one of the most infamous examples of a past product failure was "New Cok, e" introduced by Coca-Cola in 1985 with much fanfare but little responsiveness from a market that had grown accustomed to "Old Coke." To determine the facts, this paper reviews the relevant literature concerning this iconic marketing fiasco to identify what was wrong and inferior about New Coke, and why it was not embraced by the marketplace.

Finally, a summary of the research and important findings about the New Coke marketing initiative are presented in the conclusion. According to columnist Dave Barry, the thought processes that contributed to the introduction of New Coke in 1985 were firmly based on the need for "new and improved" everything, including even well established brands such as Coke.

In their efforts to develop a superior beverage, though, the marketers are Coca-Cola ignored what the marketplace wanted in favor of their own warped version of what was constituted an improvement over their tried-and-true formula. In this regard, Barry writes, "For many years, [the folks at Coca- Cola] were content just to sit back and make the same old carbonated beverage.

It was a good beverage, no question about it; generations of people had grown up drinking it." Nevertheless, the "new and improved" mandate resulted in a carbonated abomination that was clearly not an improvement at all. According to Barry, "The folks at Coca-Cola..

improved Coke by letting it sit out in vats in the hot sun and adding six or eight thousand tons of sugar, the exact amount being a trade secret." While this may have been a slight exaggeration for comedic effect, there was nothing humorous about the dismal market response to New Coke. The possibility exists, of course, that in some alternate universe, where Coke was never invented by Atlanta pharmacist Dr. John S.

Pemberton in 1886, consumers might have fully embraced New Coke as superior to Pepsi or the other available alternatives at the time, but the fact remains that the marketing executives at Coca-Cola failed to realize the powerful attachment the marketplace had to the traditional version of this ubiquitous beverage and tried to foist something that might have been new but certainly was not improved on its consumers. As Chaman points out, "After 99 years of successfully selling its popular soda, it changed the recipe - and the taste.

It did all the market research before the launch, and spent millions of dollars to promote its 'improved' soft drink. The company was very excited about it. But when 'New Coke' was launched, consumers rejected it" (49).

Notwithstanding this seemingly exhaustive market research, Barry points out that, "Unfortunately, the general public, having failed to read the market surveys proving that the new Coke was better, refused to drink it." So obsessed were they with their new product that it took 77 days and a flood of negative consumer reactions before the marketing executives at Coca-Cola finally realized their failure and withdrew New Coke from the marketplace, replacing it with the traditional Classic Coke recipe which still managed to outperform Pepsi that year (Chaman). Conclusion The research showed.