Comments on: The real cost of Coke

By: Give Me Christ or Give Me Hiroshima | Spirit/Water/Blood

Give Me Christ or Give Me Hiroshima | Spirit/Water/Blood — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:17:41 +0000

[...] you realize that one gallon of Coke costs $8.50? Three times the cost of gasoline for corn [...]

By: Cathy Richards

Cathy Richards — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:26:59 +0000

Smaller cans = less caffeine = less addictive. They want us drinking the bigger cans so that we become more addicted (or habituated if you prefer that terminology) and will buy more. Hence the premium price on the less addictive portion size.

Bottled water is also more expensive than gasoline. When people complain about gas prices I….well….I won’t say what I think, because Thumper’s mother said “if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all”.

By: That Kind Of Girl

That Kind Of Girl — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:32:24 +0000

The mark-up for the smaller portions, and the reasoning behind it, is obviously ghastly. But a word in defense of the 90-calorie-size cans: it is nice to be able to drink a smaller quantity of soda that is nicely carbonated. The problem with portion controlling carbonated beverages is that once you open a 12-oz. can or a 2-liter bottle, the soda starts to go flat. If you, like many soda drinkers, consider carbonation a vital part of the beverage, then any soda leftover in a 12-oz. can or a large plastic bottle will essentially be wasted, because you cannot enjoy it after the carbonation decreases.

Most 100-calorie packs, however, are ludicrous, because it’s easy and much cheaper to purchase an economy-size pack of something (pretzels, nuts, yogurt, etc.) and portion it out to individual baggies. And the baggies can even be washed and reused, for the sake of the environment!

By: Alyse.org » Linky things February 1st through February 8th

Alyse.org » Linky things February 1st through February 8th — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:54:28 +0000

[...] 4th – The real cost of Coke – Nothing like pointless markup. "They said: “if customers want smaller portions [...]

By: Good news on the smaller portion front

Good news on the smaller portion front — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:27:00 +0000

[...] was always a good joke to point out that Perrier was more expensive than petrol. The joke just got better. Coke in a small 7½ oz. can costs US$8.50 a US gallon and, better yet, 50-140% more per ounce than [...]

By: The Real Cost of Coke « SpeakEasy

The Real Cost of Coke « SpeakEasy — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 23:25:59 +0000

[...] This post originally appeared on Food Politics. [...]

By: manuel

manuel — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:53:35 +0000

if u truly care about ur health,it dosnt matter if they r givin soda away,u wont drink it. put em out of business by not buyin it. its not a treat either, its just plain garbage. we must re-wire our thought processes. we r havin an intellectual give & take on a worthless product that contributes nothing other than empty calories.soda does not deserve the time of day.if we all ignore it, it wil go away !

By: chris

chris — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:32:25 +0000

One of the reasons smaller portions aren’t as cheap is because of the difference between fixed and variable costs. A company has to pay the same price for some things regardless of how much product goes in to each package. Rent on the building for instance, and the salary of the repair guy who fixes the machines when they break. Those kinds of things all have to be paid for however large or small the product is.

You can thank my managerial accounting professor Dr. Robinson for teaching me about this tidbit.

By: Lorraine Ottens

Lorraine Ottens — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:08:36 +0000

I worked for an organic skin care company, our packaging was glass. The small bottles cost on a couple of pennies less than the large ones, and running the production line cost the same. I will bet that the cost of the Coke itself is FAR less than the cost of their packaging. With regard to the environment shouldn’t we reward people for purchasing larger sizes? Everyone does that, that is why we refer to them as “economy” size. Look at Costco. The real issue is the way they present it, as if soda with only 90 calories and no other nutritional benefit is somehow better for you. There are some healthier beverage alternatives (even in the soda world), people just need to look for them.

By: staypuftman

staypuftman — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 23:34:56 +0000

This seems like a harsh criticism of something that could really help some waistlines around america.

There is a big push in the nutrition world to limit portion sizes and this move by coke seems to fit nicely into that paradigm. If soda drinkers moved down from a bottle to this can, that’s like a 70% reduction in soda intake. That’s significant.

Obviously, no one should be drinking this garbage but its going to happen, so this seems like a good move overall.