A Chocolate Outrage!

Andy q said:

said...

Quoted message said:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:38:53 -0400, Kate Connally <[email hidden]>
wrote:

PS: I lost the Coke challenge. I chose Pepsi, thinking it was Coke.

Coke uses natural orange flavoring.
Pepsi uses natural lime flavoring.

Andy

i don't know what it is, but i've known two women who liked diet coke
more than i like beer. and that's saying something.

your pal,
blake

Dave Smith said:

sf said:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:38:53 -0400, Kate Connally <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

It's infinitely
better than Pepsi (spawn of the evil empire).

LOL! I like Pepsi, but I like Dr. Pepper better than both.
PS: I lost the Coke challenge. I chose Pepsi, thinking it was Coke.

For most people it is a matter of image. Don't forget the New Coke fiasco
<?>. Coca Cola was trying to improve its market share by improving its
product, a novel concept. It did a some blind taste tests and determined
that most people preferred Pepsi over Coke. They tinkered with their
formula to make a product that tasted more like Pepsi, and when they
conducted taste tests they found that people preferred the New Coke to both
the old Coke and Pepsi.

Public reaction to the New Coke was a rude surprise to the company. People
went nuts and rejected the new product. New Coke was a flop. However, they
were able to turn the whole think around. The public reaction generated a
lot of free press. Coke went back to the old formula and renamed it Coke
Classic and sales increased.

seriously. everyone should be lucky enough to 'blunder' in such a
fashion.

your pal,
george

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:18:56 GMT, blake murphy <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:53:04 -0500, "kilikini"

Quoted message said:

Around here though,
almost every buffet has it as a "crab" salad with celery, mayo and onion and
I put it on my plate only because it's not deep fried or cooked to death
like everything else is down here. :~)

kili

refresh my memory, kili - whereat is down here?

Florida

--
See return address to reply by email

blake murphy said:

Quoted message said:

Public reaction to the New Coke was a rude surprise to the company. People
went nuts and rejected the new product. New Coke was a flop. However, they
were able to turn the whole think around. The public reaction generated a
lot of free press. Coke went back to the old formula and renamed it Coke
Classic and sales increased.

seriously. everyone should be lucky enough to 'blunder' in such a
fashion.

No kidding, eh. They came up with a formula that its customers preferred.
The public, consisting of a lot of very foolish people, rebelled and
demanded the return of their old favourite, even though they did not like
it as much. They declared their brand loyalty and flocked to the old
formula, now affectionately called Coke Classic. A marketing disaster
turned into an outstanding success.

Dave Smith said:

Coke went back to the old formula and renamed it Coke
Classic and sales increased.

Except that they didn't go back to the old formula.
The old version was based on sucrose. All of the
new versions made in the U.S. (including Coke Classic)
are based on high-fructose corn syrup. I haven't
compared them, but some people say there's a noticable
difference between the two.

You can get sucrose-based Coke at many Mexican food
stores, who import it from Mexico. According to
the label on those bottles, it can be made from
either sucrose or HFCS, but I doubt it would make
any sense to use HFCS in Coke made in Mexico.
Mexico is a major producer of cane sugar, and does
not have the powerful sugar lobby that keeps prices
high in the U.S.

Mark Thorson said:

You can get sucrose-based Coke at many Mexican food
stores, who import it from Mexico. According to
the label on those bottles, it can be made from
either sucrose or HFCS, but I doubt it would make
any sense to use HFCS in Coke made in Mexico.

If you want to be sure, find some Coke that is
labeled "Kosher for Passover." They can't have
any corn derived products in that, so it has pure
can sugar.

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

Mark Thorson said:

Except that they didn't go back to the old formula.
The old version was based on sucrose. All of the
new versions made in the U.S. (including Coke Classic)
are based on high-fructose corn syrup. I haven't

I'm pretty sure they were using HFCS before the New Coke
debacle. Not everywhere, but in some parts of the country.

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

sf said:

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:18:56 GMT, blake murphy <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:53:04 -0500, "kilikini"

Quoted message said:

Around here though,
almost every buffet has it as a "crab" salad with celery, mayo and onion and
I put it on my plate only because it's not deep fried or cooked to death
like everything else is down here. :~)

kili

refresh my memory, kili - whereat is down here?

Florida

okey-dokey. maryland, home of the blue crab, here.

your pal,
blake

Quoted message said:

I agree that it was a sin to change from sugar to
corn syrup, nevertheless, Coke is still the best cola
out there and I won't dring anything else. It's infinitely
better than Pepsi (spawn of the evil empire).

Are there really only two options for most of the country? I don't
drink soda, but my husband prefers RC cola.

--Charlene

--
I have found out that there ain't no surer way to find out whether you
like people or hate them than to travel with them. -- Mark Twain

email perronnellec at earthlink . net

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <[email hidden]>,

Terry Pulliam Burd said:

The LA Times today had an article on the front page called "The
Courage of Their Confections" which tells of the Grocery Manufactuers
of America, a trade group, campaign to let chocolate makers replace
cocoa butter with vegetable oils and milk (for milk chocolate) with
"milk protein concentrates." This is just *wrong*, IMHO. Sees and
Guittard Chocolate Co., two of California's oldest chocolatiers, are
having fits about this. The trade group, which says it has the support
of the Chocolate Manufacturers of America says it's "just thinking
outside the old chocolate box." It wouldn't prevent Sees and Guittard
from using cocoa butter and milk, of course, but there ought to be a
label on the vegetable oil and "milk protein concentrates" candy that
precludes the word "chocolate" or "milk chocolate," much as those
chemistry experiments at the fast food joints don't call their
products "milk shakes."

Class is open for discussion.

This is the perfect example of an issue where the marketplace can decide
just fine. As long as this is clearly labeled, I have no problem with
using vegetable oils and milk instead of real cocoa butter because, if
enough people dislike the product, they will simply not buy it and opt
for more expensive premium chocolate.

Stan Horwitz said:

This is the perfect example of an issue where the marketplace can decide
just fine. As long as this is clearly labeled, I have no problem with
using vegetable oils and milk instead of real cocoa butter because, if
enough people dislike the product, they will simply not buy it and opt
for more expensive premium chocolate.

Don't you think it is reasonable to have a few shortcuts so
that some popular products are succinctly labled? For example
"milk" means cow's milk not elephant milk, even when you don't
read the fine print.

Steve

Terry Pulliam Burd said:

of America, a trade group, campaign to let chocolate makers replace
cocoa butter with vegetable oils and milk (for milk chocolate) with
"milk protein concentrates." This is just *wrong*, IMHO. Sees and

I'm somewhat curious as to how "milk protein concentrates" differs
from "milk solids" which are currently used. The milk in milk chocolate
has been powdered milk of some sort for 100 years or more. I'm not
a big fan of the vegetable oils in chocolates, because they generally
have to hydrogenate them to keep them solid at room temperatures.

On the other hand, Hershey convinced the FDA a few years ago to let
them call white chocolate, white chocolate. Before that anything
that did not have a certain percentage of cocoa solids in it wasn't
allowed to be called "chocolate" even if it used pure cocoa butter.

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Steve Pope) said:

Stan Horwitz said:

This is the perfect example of an issue where the marketplace can decide
just fine. As long as this is clearly labeled, I have no problem with
using vegetable oils and milk instead of real cocoa butter because, if
enough people dislike the product, they will simply not buy it and opt
for more expensive premium chocolate.

Don't you think it is reasonable to have a few shortcuts so
that some popular products are succinctly labled? For example
"milk" means cow's milk not elephant milk, even when you don't
read the fine print.

No. If a product that is heavily based on a particular ingredient, such
as milk in a bar of chocolate, is non-standard, the difference should be
clearly labeled.

sf said:

what happened to Coke. It *tastes* better in Hawaii, because it *is*
better.

Does Hawaii have some state law that prohibits use of HFCS or just the
availability of cane sugar v. shipping in HFCS v. shipping in syrup from the
mainland ??

Mexico and some other places that use cane v. HFCS I pretty sure have
regulations that prohibit its use. Much like adding caffeine to certain drinks
in Canada..ie: Mountain Dew

----
Support your LOCAL scanner frequency site and groups!
http://www.wpascanner.com http://www.tampascanner.info
http://www.trunker.info - Trunker support
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/800_MHz_Rebanding_scanners/ - Rebanding for SCANNERS ONLY!
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gulfcoastdish.net

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDem

George said:

Its the "Walmart syndrome", where the only thing that can ever matter is
how cheaply something can be purchased.

While your "WS" may be a contributing factor.... WM sells under the Sams Choice
label some damn fine chocolate... made in belgium, and its quite good.

WM is not the only store trying to squeeze its suppliers, they just don't try to
hide it like others, and yes they are pretty ruthless about it as well.

As for this franken chocolate... I vote NO! !

It needs to be clearly labeled as something OTHER THAN CHOCALTE.

----
Support your LOCAL scanner frequency site and groups!
http://www.wpascanner.com http://www.tampascanner.info
http://www.trunker.info - Trunker support
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/800_MHz_Rebanding_scanners/ - Rebanding for SCANNERS ONLY!
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gulfcoastdish.net

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDem

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 12:41:01 -0500, in rec.food.cooking, Charlene Charette

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I agree that it was a sin to change from sugar to
corn syrup, nevertheless, Coke is still the best cola
out there and I won't dring anything else. It's infinitely
better than Pepsi (spawn of the evil empire).

Are there really only two options for most of the country? I don't
drink soda, but my husband prefers RC cola.

So do I, but I'm in the UK and we don't have it here.
But what we do have in Europe that the US doesn't have is Pepsi Max, a
diet version of Pepsi (not Diet Pepsi) that tastes like regular Pepsi.

When I'm visiting family in Indiana I drink RC.

Doug
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/