Yes, This Is The New Normal

Amid the Covid-19 crisis, we've become accustomed terms we rarely used before, such as, novel coronavirus, social distancing and intubated. Those words are now a part of our everyday lexicon. I guess you could say it's our new normal.

Many companies may also be experiencing new normals, except, they may not know it yet. Having their teams work from home is one example. A lot of employers had rejected the remote work idea, mostly out of ignorance, I'd imagine. They don't want to lose control. They think that if they don't have an employee locked in an office 8 hours a day, the work will never get done. They think if their employees weren't within eye sight of their manager, they'd be slacking off. If the manager couldn't just stroll through the office and pop in here or there to check on things, then, the company would just collapse.

Of course, there are many industries where working remotely just won't work. Be it hotels, restaurants, grocery stores, gas stations, etc... they have to be there if the place is going to operate. However, out of necessity, we're seeing growing lists of companies allow their employees to work from home during this pandemic.

Photo property of Getty Images courtesy
of cnbc.com

There has been a lot of talk about remote work in the last 2-4 years and it was already gaining in popularity. We have the technology to conduct our business at home, including staff meetings, submitting proposals to customers, project collaborations, interviewing and even hiring and training, all via teleconference. In October 2019, Dragomir Simovic wrote for SmallBizGenius.net that in the US, 4.3 million people work from home at least half the time. He says;

• 40% of people feel the greatest benefit of remote work is the flexible schedule
• 16% of companies exclusively hire remote workers
• Companies allowing remote work have 25% lower turnover than those that don’t
• 76% of workers would be more willing to stay with their current employer if they could work flexible hours
• People who work remotely at least once a month are 24% more likely to be happy and productive
• The number of people who work from home has increased by 140% since 2005

So, if this was just seven months ago, how do you think employers and employees feel now, after having tried this for the last four weeks? Well, this basically amounts to a free trial period.

Now, more than ever, employers are getting a chance to experiment with remote working. Especially when it comes to small companies since they're usually much more nimble and usually have fewer employees. But, even large companies of 1,000 or more employees are seeing how beneficial this can be. My neighbor, who works in IT for FedEx, used to travel to his regional corporate office every day. Luckily, for him, the trip is only about 25 minutes one way. But, with many companies practicing social distancing, he and his team were asked to work from home (I mean, it's IT, come on!). He told me his manager was hesitant at first, however, he said his boss has really come around to the idea. 

Working form home, you not only remain productive, but, productivity actually goes up because there are less distractions. You don't have Bob on his way to the copy machine to stop by and ask whether the company will hand out more than two drink tickets at the summer picnic. Lack of distraction is the number one reason remote workers say they prefer working from home. It's so easy to understand why it's more productive.

So, back to this idea of new normal. I think it's inevitable more companies will transition a portion of their teams to remote work... at least a day or two a week, for starters. It's safer, for one thing, because it's corporate social distancing at it's finest. Another thing is the cost of running a fully staffed office versus having most of your people work from home. There are many ways a company can save money... you wouldn't need as large a space, you wouldn't consume as many utilities, you wouldn't spend as much on office supplies (because people will use less if they're buying the coffee, printer ink and paper). On top of all that, remember, the employee will be more productive. You will get more from them working remotely than you would eight hours in an office.

Whatever happens, whatever our new normal is, it's going to take some time for many to get used to it. But, as with everything, we'll look back and laugh at how we used to huddle twelve people into a tiny office to have a conference call. 

Are You As Smart As A Hiring Manager? Don't Take It Personal If You're Not

Cognitive Computing

Have you applied for a position online and received this confirmation; "Congratulations, your application has been reviewed and you've been identified as a potential candidate to move to the next step in the process"? Then, you receive an email with a link to an assessment, which tells the hiring manager (presumably) about your Predictive Index, or, PI, as it's known. Sound familiar? There are several companies that administer tests that gauge character and cognitive traits, but, PI is one of the more common ones, so, I mention them.

https://www.predictiveindex.com/cognitive

Math is pretty important for most jobs I've had and if I'm hiring someone, I'd like to know they have some complex Math skills and an ability to think on the fly. Fair enough.

Well, PI has a timed assessment where you have to answer some 50 random questions about patterns, shapes, words and numbers, all in 12 minutes (see examples)! Now, they do tell you on the real test, most people do not complete all 50 questions and that answering all questions correctly is not expected, but, if you're like me, just knowing there are 50 questions and only 12 minutes messes with my brain before I even start (that's probably the intent by the PI folks).

https://www.predictiveindex.com/cognitive

For the record, I took the sample test on their website which consited of 20 questions in 5 minutes (self-timed) and scored 17/20 (sadly, it marked me wrong for choosing "ambiguous" when asked what the opposite of "conclusive" is. My other three choices were "positive", "finite" and "unusual". So, I technically scored a 90% as opposed to the 85% because they had a wrong answer (go figure). You can take the sample PI test here.

So, what do the results mean? Well, if you actually were able to read the results form a real PI assessment, you'd have an idea. But, since you're not going to see how you scored, you have no clue because the employer is not going to share those results with you. Besides, the score that the test spits out will only be used against a matrix in which the employer created the acceptable range. So, while I scored an 85% (read 90%), if the range is 92 or higher as being a perfect fit for the job, the hiring manager may pass me over since I didn't land in the pre-set range.

And, that's my point here. The acceptable range is whatever the employer sets as a benchmark for a specific role. And, then, they're relying on PI's science to tell them what the results mean. PI claims "when used correctly, the PI Learning Indicator is a powerful and legally defensible assessment for guiding high quality talent decision-making." Obviously, they feel pretty confident their system is up to the task, when used correctly.

Long are the days of filling out a paper applications and face-to-face interviews. Now, almost the entire process is web based. I hear of people who never even see another human for the entire process (excpet for Skype) until they start their new job. But, hey, it's 2018, and, if you can get a Ph.D online, shouldn't you be expected to find a job the same way?

A Bridge Too Far... How to React to Being Laid-Off

There's downsizing going on across many industries right now (ahem, Coca-Cola). If you've been affected, it's important to keep your eye on the prize... namely, your good name. It's easy to get down because you feel slighted, especially if you performed at a higher level than those employees that were retained. Just let it go. Companies are always going to restructure and for those staying and those who are let go, there's never really a good time for a re-org. You have to accept it as it comes. You hear it all through your career... "just don't burn any bridges". But, it never really resonated with me, until now.

It does no good to get disgruntled because your reputation is on the line. And, if you're like many, you've probably been in the same industry for the majority of your career, and, odds are, you're looking to stay in the same industry, perhaps go to a competitor you once thought of as the enemy (it's amazing what one phone call can do to your psyche). My point is, there are probably people you know who have preceded you to another company and they still know people at your old company and they talk, and, well, you get it. Stories and rumors travel faster than the truth and if you make a grand exit, everyone is sure to hear about it. Probably even your next possible employer.

I was recently impacted and it really hurt. I had about a month heads-up that there were going to be some roles eliminated and others would be changed. It was probably the longest, hardest 30 days of my adult working life knowing this could alter the trajectory of my family. I told my wife very early on about the impending changes. We'd been through periods like this before, so, it wasn't exactly foreign to us. But, this time felt different. I was at a different stage in my life and my career and I felt more vulnerable than before. I never really let on to her about how serious I thought the outcome could be because I didn't want her to worry at home while taking care of two kids while I'm traveling. It's already hard enough being married to someone who travels frequently. As fate would have it, I was out of town when I got the expected news... in the exact same city... in the exact same hotel as the last time I got the exact same news. It was a sad day for me and for many of my colleagues with whom I built great relationships while we built great brands. I will miss them.

My story is no different than countless others. This happens daily, and you know what? I'm pretty sure most people end up with a better job. So, why am I telling you all this? Because, this time for me, I received so much support from my customers that it really lifted me up. Many told me they had no clue my job was being cut because I pretty much stayed connected with them right up until my last day. Some were shocked as to how gracious I was in departing. On my last day, I attended a customer meeting and personally introduced many of my customers to their contact who would be taking over for me. I acted that way for several reasons. One, because I'm more mature than if this had happened twenty-five years ago. But, mainly, it was the right thing to do. It serves no one, not your customers, not your soon-to-be fellow employees, not your reputation, to act in any manner other than professional.

I did this because, down the road, I don't want to be remembered for how I exited, but, for how I performed while I was there. It sounds cliche, but, don't burn any bridges. And, that's a lesson worth passing down to your children.

Don't Pump the Brakes On Your Brand

Congrats, you've created a beverage brand! You've put in all the hard work behind ideas, development, trial, error, packaging, production, selling cases up and down the street, resetting coolers, stealing space, placing racks, hanging POS and hopefully getting re-orders. Now, the time comes where you've proven your concept beyond a dream and into a reality and it's time to find a distributor.

What is the best process for supporting your brand? You've grown it beyond what you and a few sales folks can handle. You're starting to spread beyond just your region. So, you've built a marketing team, a key account team and hired a director of sales. Landing with a national distributor is hard to do. Instead, you may have to use a patchwork or web of various distributor models to get your brand to retailers.

Has your key account team had success in gaining authorizations, and, more importantly, getting into the POGs of retailers. Let's face it, being authorized is one thing, but, getting into the POG is EVERYTHING. This is the first, and certainly not the last question prospective distributors will ask. It all hinges on this. Why on earth would a distributor want to take up space on their warehouse floor and on their trucks for a brand that THEIR sales teams have to sell in at a local level? They've already got enough brands to sell without having to take on another unproven one.

Let's face it, distributor sales teams are going to focus on the brands that sell best. This is where their volume comes from, so, it makes sense. Even if your brand delivers a substantially higher GP and revenue per case for the distributor compared to their other brands, it's all about volume. However, there is a time and place for your brand and even if velocity is slower, you have to be able to sell the distributor on the revenue and profitability benefits. To increase your brand's value, you have to show the distributor you've got skin in the game. You have to be willing to support them with key account programming at the local level. You can't just piggy-back off the distributor's own key account relationships in hopes of landing authorizations or POG space. For one, it does nothing to build your own reputation among the buyers of the world. Second, the next hot item that comes down the pike for the distributor in a few months, the buyer is going to say, "sure, I'll give you space... just put it in the place of one of your other brands". And, since your key account team has no real relationship with the buyer or distributor key account team, you're now outside the POG looking in. Because you haven't invested locally with the distributor, your sales are now suffering.

You need a team to call on the regional or market unit level of your distributors. You need people who deal everyday with sales center managers, area sales managers, district managers and even the up and down the street sales reps. When you have those relationships, that's where your brand begins to flourish and grow. You have somebody every week in a distributor sales meeting reminding the sales teams to remember that you have a hot retail coming up next week with their biggest retailer. You present monthly and quarterly reviews to the sales leadership teams. You spend time with district managers who are visiting stores in a given market. You actually spend a few days a week riding with local sales reps on their routes helping them to sell your product. You invest time with them showing them you care. You take them to lunch, give them a polo shirt, run incentives and track, rank and publish their progress. You create a competitive culture within their organization and pit one sales team against another for bragging rights... or even better, a free trip to the Caribbean or a nice cash prize.

The moment you stop doing all of this is the moment when your distributor stops caring. Sure, they'll be more educated on the category, they'll definitely know more about the brand itself and they really like you. But, you know what they say; "out of sight, out of mind". When no one is there to harass them every week about voids, out of stocks or lack of displays when in a hot ad, they forget about you and your brand really quick. If your brand's volume was skyrocketing versus the category, then, maybe you don't need to do all those things. But, when your brand represents less than one percent of the distributor's volume and you're number ten on a list of ten different monthly priorities that the sales reps have in a given account, all of a sudden, your nice GP and revenue don't mean that much.

It's all about relationship building, from the very beginning, all the way through to when your brand finally hits the big time. You wouldn't have made it this far if you relied on yearly distributor visits and occasional email reminders about your brand. No, you put in all the hard work required. You supported the distributor with front-line folks of your own and showed them you're willing to invest in their success. You've seen huge volume growth year over year. Why would you decide to change it all now? You're not the big baller, yet. You're a small fish in a very big ocean. You still need the inflatable floaters on your arms to keep your head above the water. Mess with this before it's time and you'll sink.

This blog is the opinion of the author. No individuals or companies mentioned have any affiliation with this blog. Gregg W Shore is a 29 year beverage veteran who writes his blog @DrinkPro, A View of the Beverage Industry, from the Inside Out. Connect on LinkedIn and follow on Twitter @DrinkPro

13 Beverages That Changed The Beverage Industry

Why thirteen? I'm not sure, it sounded good at the time, so,  I decided to list the ones I feel have impacted the beverage industry the most. My list is based on several factors. To make my list, a product had to qualify under one or more of the following:

• Drastically change the growth trajectory of the category
• Create an entirely NEW category (in the US market) or
• Transcend and/or disrupt the beverage market

Of course, this is my list, so, I'll rely on personal and professional experiences to draw my conclusions, got it? Here we go!

New Coke - 1985
I mean, this IS the brand that started the whole sparkling category, before it was even called sparkling. Well, I figured there aren't too many people who do NOT know about Coca-Cola's impact on the beverage industry, so, I felt there is no need to include it here. So, instead, I start with New Coke. This drink made a lot of people angry, plain and simple, and six months later, Coke dumped the idea and brought back it's old version under the name Coca-Cola Classic. But, it wasn't entirely the same. The Classic formula used high fructose corn syrup, whereas, the older, original formula contained cane sugar. None the less, conspiracy theorists have had a field day with this ever since by saying it was a marketing gimmick by Coca-Cola to boost declining sales to rival Pepsi-Cola, on the heels of The Pepsi Challenge campaign.
That's quite the stretch, and risk, to think a company would offer an inferior, unpopular product in the hopes that nostalgic loyalists would create a grassroots movement that would shake the beverage company at it's very foundation until it reversed course and brought back to the old formula. The Coke drinker versus the global corporate giant was a real life David vs, Goliath story. No matter the reason, New Coke led to Classic Coke and that minor course correction helped reinvigorate Coca-Cola's sales and solidified it's lead in global market share throughout the '90s and even through to today.

Miller Lite - 1973

Originally called “Lite Beer from Miller”, this was an early attempt by a brewery to try to tap into (pun intended) a new, growing concern for consumers; their health. Lighter versions of beer had been around since the '60s, but never got out of their regional hold. Lite Beer from Miller did just that and became the first mainstream light beer.
It's television campaigns used the "Tastes great!" "Less Filling!" tag line, made famous by sports stars such as New York Yankee's manager Billy Martin and ornery owner George Steinbrenner. The two were known for their tumultuous, on-again, off-again relationship in which Steinbrenner fired and then re-hired Martin several times. In 1977, due to Lite Beer from Miller's growth, Miller Brewing moved into 2nd place behind Anheuser-Busch in market share. AB was slow to react. It wasn't until five years later, in 1982, that AB finally saw the potential of a light beer and introduced Bud Light. In a reaction, Lite Beer from Miller would change it's name to simply Miller Lite. By 1992, for the first time ever, light beer sales overtook regular domestic beer sales in the U.S. and Miller Lite would be the #1 beer in the light beer category until 1994, when Bud Light surpassed it, and hasn't looked back since. However, Bud Light has seen it's coat tails get nipped in recent years by Coors Light.  

Crystal Pepsi - 1992

File this one under "bust" due to it's short lifespan. Pepsi actually called this caffeine-free concoction a "Clear Alternative" to regular colas, in reference to it's transparent club soda look. Funny, since it was a robust #2 in the "regular cola" category. Perhaps they learned nothing from Coke's own cannibalization just seven years earlier. But, it was more of the way it was launched rather than the product itself. In January 1993, Crystal Pepsi was introduced nationally in a commercial featuring Van Halen's hugely popular hit Right Now during Super Bowl XXVII. Not to be outdone, Coca Cola introduced TaB Clear. Unfortunately, for Pepsi and Coke, right now meant exactly that. Both brands were dead by Summer. But, not all was lost. This really took Madison Avenue to a whole new level of Super Bowl marketing which changed the advertising world, especially the Cola War landscape to this day. Pepsi would go on to continue to purchase prime :30 commercial spots during the Super Bowl every year, and usually attack Coca-Cola in the process.

Red Bull - 1997 (U.S. entry)

This is another beverage that can be credited with creating an entirely new category. For years, Red Bull was in the tonic drinks category in Japan. When it entered the U.S. market in 1997, it was marketed solely as an energy drink. There were already a few energy drinks scattered about, but it was Red Bull which took themselves by the horns and launched what is now over a $12 billion dollar a year category. It also spawned the entirely new category of energy shots which hosts a bevy of entrants in small 2 oz single serve bottles. Even as Monster Energy has grabbed almost 40% of the market, Red Bull enjoys a slight 4 point advantage. One more aspect of Red Bull's impact to the market is the emergence of extreme sports associated with energy drink sponsors. By being the energy category catalyst, Red Bull garners space on this list. However, it may be Monster who gets the last laugh as they've continued their upward trajectory, all at the expense of Red Bull's market share.

Diet Rite- 1958
Could it be? Diet Rite? Diet Rite makes the list as the first sugar-free soda. Introduced by Royal Crown Cola in 1958, Diet Rite was originally sweetened with cyclamate until that sweetener was banned by the FDA in 1969. After that, it used saccharin to sweeten its taste. Then, the FDA attempted to ban saccharin due to studies released that claimed the substance caused cancer in lab rats. Man, can't a diet cola catch a break? The ban never happened, but, the effect of the FDA inquiry forced the industry to agree to labeling guidelines which required a disclaimer about the presence of the sweetener as well as it's effects on rats. In 1987, the brand ended its use of saccharin and began using NutraSweet's aspartame instead. A year later, Diet Rite eliminated sodium from it's ingredients as Americans began to become increasingly knowledgeable about nutrition. So, Diet Rite was really ahead of the curve in its realization that people care about what they consume and actually marketed a product to fit a very specific need... a healthier lifestyle. It also blazed the trail for other brands such as Diet Pepsi, TaB and Diet Coke. Then, the sugar-free category expanded from just colas to include other soda flavors. The sugar-free preference expanded even further, and now, pretty much every beverage category has a sugar-free entry.

Diet Coke 1982
Coca-Cola refused to introduce any other product utilizing the name Coke for fear of cannibalizing it's iconic global brand. Besides, the company already had a sugar-free cola in the form of TaB. However, TaB sales started to decline due to Pepsi-Cola's own sugar-free offering, Diet Pepsi. It was time for Coke to act, and in 1982, Diet Coke was born. It overtook TaB in sales really fast. Contrary to popular belief, Diet Coke is not just a sugar-free version of Coca-Cola. In addition to not having sugar (it is sweetened with NutraSweet), Diet Coke has it's own unique formula. Since then, it has enjoyed a meteoric rise, and in 2011, it overtook Pepsi-Cola for the #2 spot in market share of soda. Now, Coca-Cola and Diet Coke occupy the top 2 soda brands.

Miller Genuine Draft (MGD) - 1985
It wasn't really a bad tasting beer, but, I was never a huge fan, mainly because I worked for a local beer distributor of brands that competed against MGD. I wont spend a whole lot of time on this brand, but, I will give credit to its impact on a category in the beer industry. MGD was introduced as a cold-filtered beer that tastes like real draught beer. They said it wasn't pasteurized, rather, it was cold-filtered instead, which led to the draught taste claim. Who knows, but, one thing is for sure... that cold-filtered process started a frenzy resulting in many competitive beers using the same process. It seems they all had names that included the words Draft, Ice and/or Dry. Many of these beers had ABVs higher than the average, which is what led to their popularity. However, the gimmick of Draft, Ice and Dry beers faded away along with the 1990s... thank goodness.

Samuel Adams - 1985
The aforementioned beer distributor I worked for was also one of the first distributors to carry micro-brew Samuel Adams in the state of Florida. This was around 1992, or, thereabouts and I won a trip by Sam Adams to their brewery in Boston. Actually, I didn't really win, I was kind of gifted the trip by my boss who didn't want to go (you know, that whole NY-Boston rivalry thing, probably). Anyway, while there on the brewery tour, I got to meet founder, Jim Koch (as it turned out, he was as genuine then as he appears to be in his commercials today). At the time of their rise in the early '90s, micro-brews (now called craft beers) were all the rage. Sam Adams was no different and really took the micro-brew market by storm. Its parent company, Boston Beer, became one of the first small independent breweries to really catch mainstream appeal with its brands. One of the things that always impressed me was the fact that Samuel Adams was the first ever American-produced beer to be sold in Germany under the German Purity Act. That's pretty impressive and the brand spurred on a new era of independent brewers all over this country looking to replicate their success. And for that, I thank them!

Gatorade - 1965
Being a Florida Gator fan, I am obliged to include Gatorade on this list. Well, that's not the real
reason, entirely. Gatorade forever changed the way athletes prepare and recover from activity. Originally created as a thirst-quencher by researchers at the University of Florida, it was first to be called Gator-Aid, but, the ever-intrusive FDA told them they would need to show proof of it's isotonic restorative properties. So, instead, they opted to name it Gatorade to get around that pesky federal regulation. Shortly after gaining notoriety for use by the Florida Gator football team, the drink was sold to innovative canned-food manufacturer Stokely-Van Camp, of baked bean fame. In the early 1980s, there was an NBA basketball player by the name of Michael Jordan, you may have heard of him, who became the pitchman for Gatorade. Shortly thereafter, every kid wanted to  Be like Mike. It became the new Wheaties in the way it used popular athletes in its advertising. And this led to other brands from various consumer product industries to look at athletes as a source of revenue, such as Nike, with its athletic shoes. Gatorade is the official sports drink of over a dozen professional sports leagues as well as hundreds of teams world wide. Truly a trendsetter, Gatorade still enjoys a large share of the isotonic market 40 years later.

Perrier - 1976

I used to hear it all the time... "who would pay money for a bottle of water when you can get it for free from your faucet?" Well, obviously, somebody is buying it! Perrier, bottled at the source in a spring in le Midi, also known as Southern France, Perrier water is naturally carbonated and it's trademark green glass bottles resemble a stubby bowling pin. Purchased by Nestlé in 1992, the former rivals merged and would soon rise to be one of the largest beverage manufacturers in the world. Bottled water isn't just for fancy country club elitists. Perrier sparkling water broke into mainstream refreshment in the late 1970s and found itself in almost every grocery store. To this day, Perrier is the third largest sparkling brand in dollar sales. But, sparkling water isn't as huge as the other water segment it helped create. Whether you're talking about spring water or plain old purified water,  still water is the largest part of the bottled water business. And, Nestle is more than double in dollar sales than its closest competitors, Dasani and Aquafina, combined. The most common size is 500 ml PET bottles in a 24 ct case and are carried in millions of school lunch boxes and sold in millions of value meals. They are in just about every supermarket shelf and beverage cooler set, as well. Bottled water volume now exceeds 12 billion US gallons annually and the average person consumes 36 gallons a year. The bottled water industry ushered in many changes, including the way bottles are made. Recyclable PET bottles are now made with 55% less material than they were 15 years ago. And Coca-Cola has developed the Plant Bottle, made from 100% plant material. Through all the innovation and advancements, they can all thank Perrier for making fancy mainstream. 

Frappuccino - 1995
It's a mix of two words, frappe and cappuccino... Frappuccino. This drink was already very popular at Starbucks coffee shop outlets when the company decided it wanted to sell it's drinks in conventional retail outlets such as supermarkets. It's not unheard of for a restaurant chain to try to increase profits by making their product available outside of their normal business footprint. Take Olive Garden, for example. You can buy their famous croutons and salad dressing at almost every supermarket. Many BBQ places bottle their own sauce that you can buy in supermarkets. In reality, Starbucks wasn't exactly taking a huge leap when they decided to go retail. But, it did have two slight obstacles to overcome; manufacturing and distribution. Companies who have mastered a market are reluctant to turn over licensing of their brand and image to a co-packer simply in order to create another revenue stream, and, likewise, a manufacturer isn't really interested in making and marketing a product it knows nothing about. As a result, the North American Coffee Partnership was signed with PepsiCo. This was a 50/50 joint venture which allowed Starbucks' coffee knowledge to mix with Pepsi's beverage aisle knowledge and in one fell swoop, Starbucks solved both problems. With Pepsi's extensive distribution reach into many channels and their R & D capabilities, they worked with Starbucks baristas to create Frappuccino, the most popular RTD coffee that would grow-up to own a 90% share in a short time. The category remained stagnant in innovation for almost 15 years with several companies coming and going, but, none ever really posing a real threat to Frappuccino's share. Then, the category started to expand to include iced coffees and continues to innovate with brands such as illy Issimo, Califia Farms, Caribou, Nitro Cold-Brew and even a hot coffee shot in a can called HOTSHOT, which is displayed in a heated counter-top unit in convenience stores. It is said that Starbuck's CEO Howard Shultz wrote in his book, Pour Your Heart Out, that they were so confident in Frappuccino, they didn't even bother to test-market the idea. Can't say that was a bad idea considering they still own 70% of a category they created over 20 years ago.

Snapple - 1987
Peach Snapple. The first time I remember hearing of Snapple was in Florida when Rush Limbaugh would constantly mention how he really liked the product while on the air of his nationally syndicated radio talk show. Little did I understand at the time, but, Limbaugh was being paid by Snapple to say that. Created in Long Island, NY, Snapple was a strong regional player in the bottled RTD tea category. After a few years of growth in the late '80s and early '90s,

Snapple was purchased in 1994 by Quaker Oats, the same one-time owner who purchased another beverage on this list, Gatorade, just 11 years earlier. As it would turn out, Snapple started a revolution in the non-carbonated soft-drink set where many would come to compete for a dollar, although, the product contained more sugar and carbs than a traditional carbonated soft drink that it tried to compete against as a healthier option. There have been hundreds of brands, some still around today, that followed Snapple's lead in using a web of distributors across the country to sell and deliver its brands. And, by not having any manufacturing facilities to keep up, it saved costs by using co-packers. The brand has been sold a few more times and is now owned by Dr Pepper Snapple Group, a spin-off from an earlier sale to London-based Cadbury-Schweppes. Although their ingredients, and sometimes their "facts" printed underneath their bottle caps, are called into question, one thing you can't say is that they didn't impact the category.

Honest Tea - 1998
In the spirit of full transparency, I worked for Honest Tea and now work for VEB, which manages Honest Tea, along with some other brands, and is a business unit of the Coca-Cola Company. With that being said, I know Honest Tea co-founder Seth Goldman. I have an autographed copy of his book, Mission In a Bottle, which details, in comic book fashion, the birth and rise of Honest Tea. So, I speak to this brand as more of an authority than any of the other beverages I've mentioned, although, I must admit, I've probably drank more Samuel Adams than I have Honest Tea, just sayin'. Anyway, Seth was tired of drinking sugary drinks after his runs in Central Park, so, from the beginning, his goal was to create a less-sweet beverage using only organic ingredients. He teamed up with a former professor of his from the Yale School of Management, co-founder Barry Nalebuff. Together, they created a brand that has grown to see over $150 million dollars in sales a year. Honest Tea entered the organic category and brought an organic beverage mainstream. But, in order to make this list, remember, it had to drastically change the growth trajectory or transcend/disrupt the category. Honest Tea accomplished both of those things. In the process, Honest Tea became the #1 RTD bottled organic tea and dramatically changed the way the American consumer looks at organic beverages. However, many early adapters of Honest Tea were upset at the sale of the company in 2011 to Coca-Cola. Goldman challenged the criticism by explaining it was an opportunity to "democratize organics". Today, Honest Tea has helped shed light on GMO labeling and has several lines of organic beverages which are sold in over 100,000 retail outlets. In addition, Honest Tea went from using just under 800,000 pounds of organic ingredients in 2007 to nearly 7 million pounds in 2015, impacting the lives of organic farmers and their communities a half a world away through Fair Trade payments. The brand even captured national attention when a newly elected President Obama was photographed signing a bill with a bottle of Honest Tea on the historic Resolute Desk in the Oval Office. No word on whether Donald Trump drinks Honest Tea, but, I know he'd like their success story.

So It Is Written, So It Shall Be Done...

Photo from http://www.breitbart.com

Unless you are New York City Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, where, in his case, it was written and then UNDONE. Today, in an eleventh hour ruling, New York State Supreme Court judge Milton Tingling, slapped the fizz right out of Mayor Bloomberg's drinks ban. The proposed ban, in an effort to curb obesity, sought to limit the size of sugary drinks to 16 oz, while ignoring the more problematic causes of obesity. The ban was to go into effect tomorrow. Bloomberg says the ruling is "clearly an error" and says the city plans to appeal.

Judge Tingling wrote the ban was "arbitrary and capricious', which is exactly what was discussed here on this blog. He went on to say the ban would pose uneven burdens across different business owners, even on the same block. The judge added "the loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the stated purpose of this rule", a point argued by yours truly last year; 

"The short-sided, narrow-minded 'ruling' of the appointed NYC Board of Health does nothing to address the obesity epidemic but certainly means I can still drink a 200 calorie soda with my meal. Like most other intrusive, far-reaching over-regulation, this resolution is born from the liberal mindset of government can cure all ills, including obesity." - from @DrinkPro, 9/18/2012

Do I feel vindicated? Not really. I was one of many voices of reason who argued for the pro-choice side about the ill-advised attempt by Bloomberg to dictate personal behavior. I was called names and my blog was inundated with hate email. I expect the very same thing again, but I don't mind. As long as you remain civil in discourse, you can win any argument. Just stick to the facts, remain professional and don't get personal, as I demonstrated here;

"Mayor Bloomberg has adamantly laid out his case citing his desire to curb the obesity rate, with clear goals laid out over the next 10-20 years. But, merely being passionate about obesity isn't enough [reason] to slap a ban on those who aren't obese or for those who exercise restraint when it comes to sugary drinks." - from @DrinkPro, 6/20/2012

Professional and courteous is how I argued and the so many others who felt the Bloomberg ban was far-intrusive into the personal choices of free people. At the front and center of the debate was the American Beverage Association, a trade association that represents the non-alcoholic beverage industry. They helped the beverage companies speak with one voice and one message. Also, New Yorkers for Beverage Choices led a massive grassroots effort to bring attention to the ban. They formed a coalition of over 3,700 businesses, individuals and community organizations along with over a half-million supporters who signed up online (me included). Oftentimes, the unorganized side to a debate will most certainly lose the PR fight against a well-spoken machine. This PR fight is where this battle was won and lost. As misguided as the proposed ban was, I feel it was the city of New York and the appointed, not elected, Board of Health who was ill-prepared for the fight. It's as if they assumed New Yorkers were just going to lay down and take it just like the trans fat ban, the salt ban and the smoking ban. Well, I guess they were wrong. New Yorkers... people... Americans... are tired of being told what to do by their government. After recent legislation both locally and nationally that has gone against the will of the majority, Americans are tired and fed up with their voices not being heard by their elected officials. This time, it happened to be sugary drinks. Next time, it will be something else, but the message has been sent, loud and clear; the government can't push people around and not expect a fight.

In closing, I am not trying to toot my own horn because of my accurate, dead on predictions of the judge's ruling. Ok, yes I am... I pretty much nailed his decision! But, I'll leave the prediction business to Nostradamus. Instead, I prefer to simply educate through fact-based convincing.  A novel approach nowadays. However, I will leave you with a quote... one that, once you see who wrote it, you wont be surprised it rings as true today as it did back then;

"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree."

-James Madison, a Founding Father in a speech at the Constitutional Convention, July 11, 1787

This blog is the opinion of the author. None of the individuals or companies mentioned have any affiliation with this blog, nor do they endorse its contents...but they should. Gregg W Shore is a 27 year beverage veteran who writes his blog @DrinkPro, A View of the Beverage Industry, from the Inside Out. Connect on LinkedIn and follow on Twitter @DrinkPro

Nine-tenths Of An Ounce Stands Between Me and My Tea

One sip. That's all. Just one sip. But, how can one sip less mean more? Last week, NYC Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, got a big win in his "fight" against obesity. That win came in the form of a resolution (read it here) passed by his Board of Health. A board which he appointed and a board which yields an unprecedented amount of autonomous regulatory authority. Their own Charter states their ambiguous power grab: 

Section 556 of the Charter provides the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene 
(“Department”) with jurisdiction to regulate all matters affecting health in the City of New York.

• Section 556(c)(2) empowers the Department to supervise the control of chronic disease;
• Section 556(c)(9) empowers the Department to supervise and regulate the food supply.
• Section 558(b) and (c) of the Charter empower the Board of Health to amend the Health Code and to include in it all matters to which the Department’s authority extends.
• Section 1043 of the Charter grants the Department rulemaking (sic) powers. 

Photo appeared online @  http://blogs.tribune.com.pk 

Allow me to explain how ridiculous the misguided NYC BOH resolution is; Simply stated, I can no longer enjoy my favorite tea which contains only 70 calories, because it comes in a 16.9 oz bottle, but, I can still purchase my favorite soda which contains 200 calories because it comes in a 16 oz bottle... one sip less. 

The short-sided, narrow-minded "ruling" of the appointed NYC Board of Health does nothing to address the obesity epidemic but certainly means I can still drink a 200 calorie soda with my meal. Like most other intrusive, far-reaching over-regulation, this resolution is born from the liberal mindset of government can cure all ills, including obesity. If this was gold, we'd be talking nearly $1700 worth, but it's tea, something apparently far more valuable in the time and money spent by the city to fight.

Do you think Bloomberg's BOH did the Math on my caloric intake if I opt for the full-calorie soda? That choice will result in a net increase of 130 calories. That equation does not appear to result in helping many people curb obesity. I believe we call that fuzzy Math.

Mayor Bloomberg and his BOH feel they are doing the public's work for the good of all, because they think they know better than you. When public officials feel they know better than us, they will stop at nothing to complete their mission. To them, the ends justify the means. Except, in this case, the "end" may very well be the opposite of what they intended.