How Snapple Got Its Juice Back ( discussion questions)
1. The One Thing. The Snapple brand has had its ups and downs. In your opinion, what is the one thing about its history that allowed it to come back from the mid-1990s death spiral it found itself in? 2. Risk-averse Strategies. Both Quaker Oats and Triarc Beverages pursued brand management strategies for Snapple that were explicitly risk-averse, and yet Triarc succeeded while Quaker failed. Why? 3. Fancy Pants Analysis. In the end, the author suggests that “Quaker’s corporate temperament was perfectly attuned to the achievement-oriented message of Gatorade,” whereas Triarc knew that Snapple’s brand vitality “responded better to play than to planning.” Do you buy this? Is it too simplistic to say that Quaker just made some dumb decisions when it came to managing the Snapple brand? 4. Your Favorite Brand. The author says that brands develop as a result of a “consensus between what the marketers want and what the consumer has use for,” meaning a brand is a story that is told by a marketer and accepted whole by consumers. What’s your favorite brand and, more importantly, in your opinion what story does it tell? 5. Your BEAR Topic. Have you settled on a topic for your BEAR report? If so, tell us about it and why you chose it. If not, tell us about the brands you’re considering.
_____________________
In my opinion, the one thing that allowed Snapple to come back from the mid-1990s death spiral was the brand’s return to its roots. Snapple’s success was built on its unique personality and quirky, fun image, which resonated with consumers. However, in the 1990s, the brand lost its way by attempting to become more mainstream and losing touch with its core identity. When Triarc Beverages took over, they recognized the importance of returning to Snapple’s roots and reinvigorating the brand’s personality, which helped to revive its fortunes.
Triarc succeeded where Quaker Oats failed because they understood the importance of maintaining Snapple’s unique identity and brand personality. Quaker attempted to change Snapple’s marketing strategy by making it more mainstream and emphasizing its health benefits, which alienated Snapple’s core customer base. Triarc, on the other hand, recognized that Snapple’s success was built on its quirky, fun image and focused on returning the brand to its roots.
While it may be too simplistic to say that Quaker just made some dumb decisions when it came to managing the Snapple brand, I do think that their risk-averse strategies ultimately hurt the brand. Quaker was focused on maintaining the status quo and avoiding any major changes, which prevented them from recognizing the need to return to Snapple’s core identity. Triarc, on the other hand, was willing to take risks and make changes to revive the brand.
My favorite brand is Nike. Nike’s story is all about inspiring and empowering athletes to push their limits and achieve their goals. The brand’s “Just Do It” slogan and iconic logo have become synonymous with athletic achievement and excellence, and the company’s innovative products have helped athletes around the world perform at their best.
