Share a Coke with...Amtrak

[Qapla]

When in a captive environment ... people tend to use/buy what is available - just like many Coke drinkers have been doing with Pepsi currently being sold and what Pepsi drinkers will do when Coke starts being sold.

 

[TinCan782]

I hope they continue serving Lipton Pure Leaf Unsweetened Ice Tea. I do not drink soda or tea with sugar or artificial sweetener added. I think the best thing I can say for flex dining is that I can have as many ice teas as I want (and I had 2 the last trip on the Meteor).

I discovered that on the Lake Shore Limited and Crescent last week! Pure Leaf is my favorite!

 

[MikefromCrete]

C'mon Sprite Zero!!

That's hard to find in a full service restaurant, let alone on a train where supplies will be limited.

 

[MikefromCrete]

Since the mandate is to raise profits ... perhaps they should have changed to RC Cola products ... or even a generic brand instead of exchanging one "name brand" for another.

I think the big guys like Coke and Pepsi can cut a better deal for a national contract rather than supplier firms like RC. A generic brand will turn off purchasers.

 

[RSG]

Might that reduce sales if people avoid drinking generic sodas?

I think the big guys like Coke and Pepsi can cut a better deal for a national contract rather than supplier firms like RC. A generic brand will turn off purchasers.

This is precisely what would happen. There's no one who's going to care if Canada Dry has replaced Schweppes or if Sprite or Sierra Mist replaces 7-Up (except perhaps me).

But cola drinkers are notoriously finicky (as evidenced by the very existence of this thread), and though a non-cola drinker myself, I personally know people who will not. Drink. Pepsi [or Coca-Cola]. And they certainly won't drink a generic cola.

Then there's the perception that Amtrak is a third-rate operation by not going with a major brand. This is the same reason that airlines and restaurants stumble over themselves to "proudly serve Starbucks", even though most of their brewed coffee customers would probably prefer Dunkin' Donuts or another brand.

As for reducing costs by featuring allegedly cheaper brands, this usually doesn't work in foodservice, since the cost of the product is built into the selling price. Amtrak wouldn't make any more 'profit' by selling RC Cola at $2.25 than Coke or Pepsi. (And as mentioned, would likely lose money due to reduced sales.)

 

[PVD]

Many of the second and third tier brands do not have national distribution reach with their own distribution networks. Also, at that scale, the cost differences are not a great as one might think, there is an element of marketing and advertising in this type of deal, part of it is to enhance peoples' likelihood of purchasing that family of products in the more profitable avenues, ie: fountain syrup used at fast food restaurants.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

How come the vote choices don't include...

• 7up/Dr Pepper (includes A&W, Canada Dry, Crush, Snapple,YooHoo, etc)
• Don't really care, I can make due with Coke or Pepsi for a single meal
• Don't like any soft drinks

 

[Dakota 400]

How come the vote choices don't include...

• 7up/Dr Pepper (includes A&W, Canada Dry, Crush, Snapple,YooHoo, etc)
• Don't really care, I can make due with Coke or Pepsi for a single meal
• Don't like any soft drinks

I do prefer 7-Up over Sprite or Sierra Mist. I prefer Canada Dry for my ginger ale and A&W for my root beer. If I could find Hires Root Beer, I'd buy that over A&W.

Growing up and visiting my grand-parents, my Grand-Father enjoyed Royal Crown Cola and I got to drink that which I like. I don't really recall what cola we drank at home.

 

[Qapla]

There have been quite a number of posts in this thread that seem to include "I don't drink soda" or "I don't like soda" and the like ... so, for those who don't drink it, what difference does it make what brand Amtrak serves?

And, for those of us who have a preference, will the change really stop you from having one? I know that, even though I prefer Pepsi, when I am eating out (and I would consider being on Amtrak as "out"), if I want to drink soda, I drink the brand they serve and make the best of it.

I really don't think the change of soda brands is going to have an impact on ticket sales near as much, if at all, as the change in the food!

 

[pennyk]

There have been quite a number of posts in this thread that seem to include "I don't drink soda" or "I don't like soda" and the like ... so, for those who don't drink it, what difference does it make what brand Amtrak serves?

Although some of us do not drink soda, some drink ice tea or orange juice. Thus, the change may make a difference to non-soda drinkers.

I am guessing that, based on the complaints I have heard over the years, more passengers will be happier with Coke products overall than with Pepsi products, but it may be close.

 

[RSG]

And, for those of us who have a preference, will the change really stop you from having one? I know that, even though I prefer Pepsi, when I am eating out (and I would consider being on Amtrak as "out"), if I want to drink soda, I drink the brand they serve and make the best of it.

As mentioned earlier, most cola drinkers are very brand aware; not unlike beer drinkers. Some, like yourself, are not; but that's a minority. That's why it's a big deal for those who do have a preference.

One of the most memorable episodes of All In The Family for me was the one where Mike Stivic assured Archie & Gloria that he could tell the difference between the three major brands of cola. After Archie belittled him for his dumb assertion, Gloria & Edith setup a blind taste test and he correctly identified Coke-Pepsi-Royal Crown Cola. Though a fictional portrayal, it demonstrated how cola preferences were a thing even 40 years ago---enough to get written into a television show.



[Edited to correct typographical error.]

 

[Anderson]

At least speaking personally, I'll generally pass on Pepsi. On Amtrak, I'm sort-of stuck because my backup option (sweet tea) isn't available, either, so I've often stuck to milk.

 

[Qapla]

I never said I could not tell the difference. I never said or indicated that I am not "brand aware". I prefer Pepsi! I think I did say that ... however, I do not "refuse" to drink other brands.

Penny has a good point since both brands offer non-soda beverages.

I still do not think the beverage brand change will have the same impact the meal change is having.

 

[AmtrakBlue]

At least speaking personally, I'll generally pass on Pepsi. On Amtrak, I'm sort-of stuck because my backup option (sweet tea) isn't available, either, so I've often stuck to milk.

Milk is good My preference for dinners is milk. I prefer Coke because it's not as sweet as Pepsi, but I won't turn it down at restaurants.

 

[Dakota 400]

As mentioned earlier, most cola drinkers are very brand aware; not unlike beer drinkers. Some, like yourself, are not; but that's a minority. That's why it's a big deal for those who do have a preference.

When I owned Anheuser-Busch shares prior to the acquisition of the company by the Belgium company, I purchased ONLY AB brand products for two reasons: I enjoyed Michelob and Budweiser more than I did other domestic beers and I was supporting MY company.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

If I could find Hires Root Beer, I'd buy that over A&W.

Just to note that 7up/DrPepper markets their root beer under both the A&W and the Hires brand names, as well as the Stewart's and IBC brand names too.

 

[neroden]

Then there's the perception that Amtrak is a third-rate operation

Well... it is.

I don't think serving "Coke products" or "Pepsi products" is going to help with that perception when everything else is so third-rate.

Hopefully unsweetened iced tea will remain available.

As for reducing costs by featuring allegedly cheaper brands, this usually doesn't work in foodservice

This is true. Can someone tell that to whichever joker at Amtrak made up the inedible sugar breakfast menu for the Eastern trains?

While I understand wanting to fire unionized staff (I don't agree with it but I understand it), cutting food quality just cuts revenue, it doesn't cut costs meaningfully.

 

[juanee]

Might that reduce sales if people avoid drinking generic sodas?

Interesting question, perhaps. I guess the important question would be "is Amtrak currently selling Pepsi products at a loss?"

 

[Anderson]

Interesting question, perhaps. I guess the important question would be "is Amtrak currently selling Pepsi products at a loss?"

Versus direct acquisition costs? I kind-of doubt it (I'd be hard-pressed to see the sodas cost them more than $1.00 each even under unfavorable circumstances). After you load them with all the overhead Amtrak can throw at them? That's the Mica-burger problem.

 

[RSG]

Versus direct acquisition costs? I kind-of doubt it (I'd be hard-pressed to see the sodas cost them more than $1.00 each even under unfavorable circumstances). After you load them with all the overhead Amtrak can throw at them? That's the Mica-burger problem.

The general rule for food & beverage pricing is to sell at triple the cost of product. Thus, an item which costs 33 cents would retail at a dollar (or $0.99 for marketing purposes) and an entree that costs $5.00 would retail at $15.00.

That's just a rule of thumb, and there are menu items in various establishments that are sold below that cost recovery point and others that are sold above it. (The best example of the latter is fountain drinks which have an obscene profit margin.) Amtrak, with its sole source provider of commissary items, operates a bit differently.

The general going rate for restaurant carbonated beverages is around $2.30-$2.80. (More for exclusive places like bars and nightclubs as well as locales with a higher cost-of-living.) Many establishments have a 'bottomless glass' policy featuring free refills. These places serve fountain drinks, which are extremely cheap as a cost factor. That sets a price expectation in the minds of customers. Amtrak serves only prepackaged beverages which have a fixed cost, but which many would claim is a higher quality. I would guess they probably split the difference and chose $2.25 as a retail price which customers would expect to pay while realizing that it's a single item price, much as any other menu item.

As to profit, that's a little like the claim that Amtrak's overall operations in certain sectors are profitable "above the rails". It all depends on how one looks at the accounting. I would think a better way to look at it is in terms of cost recovery. Do they recover the amount in product cost and basic overhead? I would say they probably do. That's not to say that every item they sell makes them money, but when everything is factored in, the sales of items from a specific company, be it PepsiCo or Coca-Cola probably net a return on the "investment" in the product.

 

[Anderson]

The general rule for food & beverage pricing is to sell at triple the cost of product. Thus, an item which costs 33 cents would retail at a dollar (or $0.99 for marketing purposes) and an entree that costs $5.00 would retail at $15.00.

That's just a rule of thumb, and there are menu items in various establishments that are sold below that cost recovery point and others that are sold above it. (The best example of the latter is fountain drinks which have an obscene profit margin.) Amtrak, with its sole source provider of commissary items, operates a bit differently.

The general going rate for restaurant carbonated beverages is around $2.30-$2.80. (More for exclusive places like bars and nightclubs as well as locales with a higher cost-of-living.) Many establishments have a 'bottomless glass' policy featuring free refills. These places serve fountain drinks, which are extremely cheap as a cost factor. That sets a price expectation in the minds of customers. Amtrak serves only prepackaged beverages which have a fixed cost, but which many would claim is a higher quality. I would guess they probably split the difference and chose $2.25 as a retail price which customers would expect to pay while realizing that it's a single item price, much as any other menu item.

As to profit, that's a little like the claim that Amtrak's overall operations in certain sectors are profitable "above the rails". It all depends on how one looks at the accounting. I would think a better way to look at it is in terms of cost recovery. Do they recover the amount in product cost and basic overhead? I would say they probably do. That's not to say that every item they sell makes them money, but when everything is factored in, the sales of items from a specific company, be it PepsiCo or Coca-Cola probably net a return on the "investment" in the product.

Well, and Pepsi probably has a lower shrinkage rate than, say, salads...so that should help the item in question. But it sounds like as long as Amtrak is sourcing their sodas for $0.75, they should be doing just fine...and given prices at places like Sam's, they should be able to manage that.

 

[dlagrua]

I'd like to see some healthy drink options added like those made by Naked Juice. This way you can enjoy a sweet drink without all that added sugar. The whole contemporary dining menu is very unhealthy. Its loaded with fats, sugar and chemical additives. It is so bad that last trip we brought our own food aboard. Now trying figuring out a way to reheat it in the room. Maybe some heat tape applied around the box would work.

 

[RSG]

Well, and Pepsi probably has a lower shrinkage rate than, say, salads...so that should help the item in question. But it sounds like as long as Amtrak is sourcing their sodas for $0.75, they should be doing just fine...and given prices at places like Sam's, they should be able to manage that.

Absolutely...I wasn't even thinking of shrink, which is huge in the foodservice and grocery biz. There will be an occasional leaky can or broken bottle, but that should be rare.

The warehouse pricing model is probably a pretty good indicator of cost of item. The profit on soda sold at Sam's Club/Costco/BJs is most likely very thin so that's about as close to cost-of-product that an outsider can observe. (Unlike supermarkets, where promotional pricing and advertising reimbursement obscure the true cost of packaged beverages.)

 

[jiml]

Just to note that 7up/DrPepper markets their root beer under both the A&W and the Hires brand names, as well as the Stewart's and IBC brand names too.

This is an interesting observation with regional variations. For example, in Canada A&W is still owned by A&W restaurants - not Dr. Pepper as in the US, and it has always been bottled for them by Coca-Cola. Hires was until recently bottled by Pepsi for Keurig Dr. Pepper, but they sold it to Canada Dry, which in turn is bottled by - you guessed it - Coke.

VIA Rail used to serve Pepsi, but has been Coke for the last several years. Amtrak has flipped twice that I know of.

 

[JRR]

Just to note that 7up/DrPepper markets their root beer under both the A&W and the Hires brand names, as well as the Stewart's and IBC brand names too.

I like Barq’s Root Beer!