Are you starting to panic? Heed the advice of the Oracle of Omaha.
Warren Buffett has never been shy about packing lessons for successful investing into his annual letter to shareholders. That letter is a treasure-trove of insight, presented in a folksy manner that is not only easy to read but incredibly entertaining.
With the market tumbling we’re all likely in need of a few doses of Warren’s unpretentious advice, so I dug through his past shareholder letters to find some gems that may help us navigate the current market drop and build a bigger nest egg for retirement.
1. “It’s better to have a partial interest in the Hope diamond than to own all of a rhinestone,” wrote Buffett in 2013.
Buffett is always hunting for great companies that he can buy for Berkshire Hathaway shareholders, but if he can’t buy the whole company, he’s OK with owning a smaller piece of it instead. Applying this advice to our own investments means spending less time considering how many shares of a company we can buy and more time figuring out where we believe the company will be in ten years. Doing that will help us avoid the pitfall of foregoing investments in great companies like Amazon AMAZON.COM INC. AMZN 2.9783% ) or Priceline THE PRICELINE GROUP INC. PCLN 2.7106% when they’re on sale to buy lower quality companies with smaller share prices.
2. “A ‘normal year,’ of course, is not something that either Charlie Munger, Vice Chairman of Berkshire and my partner, or I can define with anything like precision,” wrote Buffet in 2010.
Sure, the average annual return for the S&P 500 has been 8.14% over the past decade, but assuming that will be our return this year, next year, or any year is folly. Returns are volatile and will continue to be volatile, so we should focus less on the returns for any one period of time and instead focus on buying great companies and socking them away. Consider this point: While the S&P 500 has experienced plenty of fits-and-starts over the past 10 years, those who have owned it all along are up 103%.
3. “Long ago, Charlie laid out his strongest ambition: ‘All I want to know is where I’m going to die, so I’ll never go there,'” wrote Buffett in 2009.
Buffett avoids businesses whose future he can’t evaluate. Instead, he focuses on finding businesses that offer a predictable profit for decades to come. Taking the long-haul approach to finding great companies goes far beyond identifying the next big thing — after all, during the Internet boom there were plenty of Internet companies that soared on expectations rather than profit, and many of those companies have since gone bankrupt. Instead, we should be investing in companies we can understand that are likely to remain winners.
4. “We will never become dependent on the kindness of strangers. Too-big-to-fail is not a fallback,” wrote Buffett in 2009.
Warren’s cash stockpile is a thing of legend, and while that cash hoard holds back his returns in periods of growth, it also protects him when markets turn sour. Importantly, it also gives him the financial flexibility to take action and buy when prices are right. That plan-ahead mentality is something every investor can embrace by making sure there’s always some dry-powder around to deploy during the market’s inevitable declines.
5. “We would rather suffer the visible costs of a few bad decisions than incur the many invisible costs that come from decisions made too slowly — or not at all — because of a stifling bureaucracy,” wrote Buffett in 2009.
Buffett doesn’t hesitant when he’s presented with an idea that hits the mark. He recognizes that he won’t be right every time, but he also believes that taking action is critical to realizing the potential of an opportunity. As investors, we can emulate Buffett’s approach by making sure that once we’ve done our due diligence and picked our favorite investments we take action and buy, regardless of the market’s short-term machinations.
6. “Unlike many business buyers, Berkshire has no ‘exit strategy.’ We buy to keep. We do, though, have an entrance strategy, looking for businesses in this country or abroad…available at a price that will produce a reasonable return. If you have a business that fits, give me a call. Like a hopeful teenage girl, I’ll be waiting by the phone,” wrote Buffett in 2005.
Buffett keeps strictly to his investment discipline, but he also keeps an open mind to great ideas that fit into his strategy. Those ideas can come from various places. His acquisition of Clayton Homes, for example, was sparked by an autobiography of Clayton’s founder Jim Clayton which had been given to him as a gift by some University of Tennessee students. Keeping open to opportunities, regardless of their origin, may help us find worthwhile investments for the long term, too.
7. “Investors should remember that excitement and expenses are their enemies. And if they insist on trying to time their participation in equities, they should try to be fearful when others are greedy and greedy only when others are fearful,” wrote Buffett in 2004.
Buffett knows that emotion is a dangerous weapon that, if used incorrectly, can result in significant loss — and, if used correctly, can result in significant gain. Emotional reactions to surging or descending markets can make people buy when they should sell and sell when they should buy. Buffett often compares taking advantage of market slides to shopping for groceries. Last week on CNBC he summed it up by saying, “If you’re buying groceries, you like it when prices go down next week. And you like it if they go down further the next week.” Just as we like getting a good deal on the items at the grocery store we would be buying anyway, we should also be fans of getting a good deal on our favorite companies.
Following in Buffett’s footsteps
Buffett has no idea whether he’ll outperform the S&P 500 over the next year, but he does know that Berkshire Hathaway’s book value has grown a compounded annual 19.7% over the past 49 years. Similarly, we don’t know if our investments will outperform the market daily, weekly, or yearly, either. What we can feel pretty good about is the knowledge that investing in great companies like Coca Cola THE COCA COLA CO. KO -6.0291% and Wells Fargo WELLS FARGO & CO. WFC 2.5824% — two companies that are long-standing Buffett holdings — may help put us on a path to a less-worrisome retirement.
Civil rights and soda might not seem like a classic combination. But yesterday, as major soda brands announced their goal to reduce beverage calories in the American diet, it seemed to make sense to Wendy Clark, president of sparkling brands and strategic marketing for Coca-Cola North America.
“‘The time is always right to do the right thing’ – MLK” she tweeted. “So proud of our industry.”
That time will come in 2025, the year by which every American will drink 20% fewer soda calories than they do today. In the press release about the announcement, which was made at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting in New York, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Dr. Pepper Snapple vowed to make these reductions in part by making containers smaller, as well as focusing marketing efforts and innovation into lower-calorie drinks, no-calorie drinks and water. In the release, President Bill Clinton called the pledge a “critical step in our ongoing fight against obesity.”
But are such premature congratulations merited? Is developing more low- and no-calorie bottled beverages really the way to fight obesity?
Soda consumption has dropped, with sales lower than they have been since 1995. And while we might like to think sippers are swapping soda for water or unsweetened herbal tisane, research shows they’re not. A Pediatrics study published earlier this year that showed while kids aren’t drinking as much soda as they once were, they’re guzzling more energy drinks and coffee beverages—both caffeinated sweetened products with a nutritional profile similar to most sodas. Sales for ready-to-drink tea—most of which is sweetened—are also up by double digits in the Coca-Cola portfolio, reports Forbes.
That’s concerning if we want to seriously address obesity. The jury is out on no-calorie and low-calorie sweeteners, but mounting recent evidence showings sugar substitutes may contribute the very obesity they’re meant to combat. That’s because they appear to fuel sugar cravings and alter the composition of gut microbes, leading to a rise in blood glucose levels. Several studies have found a link between sugar alternatives and weight gain, and research just published in the journal Appetite found that drinking artificially sweetened beverages make you think about food more, choose high-calorie foods more often, and feel less satisfied after eating things sweetened with actual sugar.
“On face value you’re getting a nice sweet taste without calories, but my research shows it might lead to cognitive shifts that might promote overconsumption later,” Sarah Hill, the study author and a psychologist at Texas Christian University, tells TIME.
This all suggests that even if soda slashes calories by 2025 as promised, the replacement ingredients could come with unforeseen consequences.
The idea of tasting something sweet without getting any energy from it is an evolutionarily very novel thing for our bodies to handle, Hill says. “When you have that unnatural pairing of sweetness and no energy increase, it leads the body to perceive an energy crisis,” Hill says. “It triggers thoughts and behaviors consistent with a scarcity mode.”
“I think that the real way to get change is drinking water,” Hill says. Plain, unadulterated, straight-from-the-tap H2O included.
Coke dials up the 1990s nostalgia+ READ ARTICLE
Coca-Cola’s 1990s SURGE citrus drink is back by popular demand.
The Mountain-Dew inspired soda, which debuted in 1996 but was discontinued in the early 2000s, has been the subject of a nostalgia-fueled online campaign to lobby the company to bring back the drink.
A Facebook group devoted to SURGE has over 129,000 likes, and Coca-Cola said in a statement that they’ve decided to re-issue the drink thanks to “a passionate and persistent community of brand loyalists who have been lobbying The Coca-Cola Company to bring back their favorite drink over the last few years.”
SURGE will be sold on Amazon.com, which represents the first time a Coca-Cola product has been sold exclusively through an online retailer. SURGE’s relaunch will also be an experiment in social media marketing for the brand, since they said they will not invest in any traditional marketing for this product.
The start of the football season is close and fantasy football drafts have begun. Here's why thinking like a long-term investor can ruin your season.
Last November, one National Football League running back had a particularly good day.
Strong, agile, and quick, this player absolutely tore apart the Atlanta Falcons defense on Nov. 17 to the tune of 163 rushing yards and three touchdowns. Fantasy football owners fortunate to have him on their rosters were awarded almost 35 points from his performance alone—more than a third of the total usually needed to win a whole game.
So who was this guy? Future Hall of Famer Adrian Peterson? The Philadelphia Eagles buoyant halfback LeSean McCoy? Jim Brown? No, no, and of course not. He was an undrafted second-year player out of Western Kentucky named Bobby Rainey. Who, you ask? Exactly. On that same day Peterson himself, perhaps the greatest running back since Jim Brown, ran for 100 fewer yards than Rainey and never touched the end zone en route to a pedestrian 8.5 fantasy points.
It’s hard not to look for a lesson in this episode. And for someone like me, immersed in the investing world, the inclination is to draw a parallel to value investing, the discipline made famous by Warren Buffett. Value investing involves looking for companies that the market does not fully appreciate in hopes that, over time, they will outperform expectations and send the stocks soaring.
But as the fantasy football season gets under way, with millions of fans around the country drafting players over the next few weeks, I’m here to tell you that a Buffett-like approach to fantasy football probably won’t lead to glory.
Why not? Well, to start, value-focused buy-and-hold investing is all about ignoring short-term market fluctuations and sticking with your investment philosophy over the long-haul. Coca-Cola THE COCA COLA CO. KO -6.0291% has a bad quarter? Johnson & Johnson JOHNSON & JOHNSON JNJ 1.1694% delivered poor earnings-per-share growth? No matter. Value investors often see these rough patches as buying opportunities. And one of the foundational principles of value investing is that no investor can consistently predict exactly when to buy this stock or trade that one. When investors do engage in this perilous behavior, they generally end up losing money.
That ethos, however, falls flat when it comes to fantasy football. For one thing, there is no long-term in fantasy football. The season only lasts 17 weeks, which means you have only 17 chances to maximize your total scoring output. While one or two days of poor returns won’t hurt your portfolio, one or two weeks of fantasy football failure could ruin your season. Most leagues have around 10 teams, and, in order to make the playoffs, you’ll usually need seven wins. So if one of your players isn’t performing well, or hasn’t reached his full potential, you don’t have the time to wait.
In other words, don’t be scared to grab onto a hot player until he cools off. For instance, take another look at Peterson and Rainey. Going into the 2013 season, ESPN ranked Peterson the top fantasy football player to draft. Bobby Rainey is not Adrian Peterson. For his career, Rainey only has 566 rushing yards. Peterson has 10,115.
Nevertheless, Rainey was the superior running back over the last seven weeks of the 2013 NFL season. Using the NFL.com scoring system, Rainey earned 79.3 points from week 11 to 17, while Peterson (due in part to injury) only scored 54.8. Even if you take out Rainey’s career day against the Falcons, the two running backs scored pretty much the same number of points.
This isn’t an isolated example, either. Two weeks earlier, Nick Foles, who began the season as the Philadelphia Eagles second-string quarterback, threw for seven touchdowns and garnered 45.2 points for his fantasy owners. Foles would go on to accumulate a total of almost 260 points for the season (more than superstars Tom Brady, Ben Rothlisberger, and Matt Ryan) despite starting in only 11 of 16 games.
In fact, last season, 15 different players scored the most points in a given week (Peyton Manning and Drew Brees each did it twice). Of those 15 players, not one was listed in the top five on ESPN’s pre-season best fantasy football players list. Brady never scored the most points in any one week, for example, but Bears back-up quarterback Josh McCown did, in week 14.
In short, buying the football equivalent of Coca-Cola shares (one of Buffett’s most beloved and long-held stocks) and hanging on through thick and thin can be a losing game.
I learned this lesson the hard way, having drafted Buffalo Bill running back C.J. Spiller with my first pick last season. Ranked the 7th best player by ESPN going into last season, Spiller scored 3.5, 11.7, 3, and 7.7 over the first four weeks. Unwilling to give up on such a high pick, however, I kept him in my starting lineup for most of the season. I ended up in the bottom of my league and learned a valuable lesson in sunk cost theory.
Of course finding seven weeks of Rainey, or spotting the next Foles off the waiver wire, is difficult. Some up-and-comers are just flashes in the pan and will deliver worse returns than your first-round pick. But when this season’s Foles takes off, don’t be surprised. If you play fantasy football you must learn to embrace the shooting star—and if that star burns out, find another.
America is just not the clean-shaven, gun-buying, soda-drinking, Chef Boyardee-eating place it used to be
For a variety of reasons—including but not limited to increased health consciousness, the harried pace of modern-day life, and plain old shifting consumer preferences,—Americans have scaled back on purchases of many items, sometimes drastically so. Here’s a top 10 list of things we’re not buying anymore, at least not anywhere near as frequently as we used to.
In one recent four-week period, cereal sales were down 7%, and cereal giant Kellogg’s sales decreased 10%. The reasons for cereal’s declining dominance at the breakfast table are many. As the Wall Street Journal reported, consumers are more apt nowadays to turn to yogurt or fast food in the morning, and they’re less likely to have time to eat breakfast at home at all—not even if it’s a simple bowl of cereal.
Consumers also want their breakfast to pack more punch, protein-wise. “We are competing with quick-serve restaurants more, but the bigger driver is that people want more protein,” Kellogg CEO John Bryant told the Journal. It’s no coincidence that milk sales have been falling alongside cereal, with cow’s milk struggling especially due to the rise of alternatives like soy and almond milk. (Sales of yet another breakfast-at-home staple, orange juice, have plummeted 40% since the late 1990s.)
To try to put cereal back on the spoon of more breakfast eaters, food makers have been resorting to all manner of gimmicks, including the promoting of new higher-protein cereals, as well as the idea that cereal is a great late-night snack rather than just a breakfast-time basic.
The crash of soda—diet soda in particular—has been years in the making, with consumers increasingly turning to energy drinks, flavored water, and other beverages instead of the old carbonated caffeine drink of choice. The latest Wall Street report from Coca-Cola showed that the soda giant missed estimates, partly because sales of Diet Coke in North America fell in the “mid-single digits.”
While a lot of soda’s slump can be attributed to shifting consumer preferences—more organic, less sugar—the broader war on soda involving taxes and big-beverage bans must factor in too. And if First Lady Michelle Obama has any say in things, the decline of soda is a trend that’ll continue: Her ongoing “Drink Up” campaign encourages kids to consume more water—and, consequently, less soda.
Likely due to heightened competition from mints and candies, chewing gum sales have dipped 11% over the past four years, the Associated Press reported. The editorial board of the News Tribune of Washington state, for one, weighed in that it is wonderful that gum sales are down in the gutter, sniffing, “Gum-chewing doesn’t do us any favors, making us look like cows chewing our cud. For humans, that’s not a good look.”
Gun sales have been booming in recent years, with sales periodically juiced when perceived anti-gun politicians enter office or a high-profile mass shooting takes place, prompting consumers to seek guns for protection—or just out of fear they won’t be able to buy them in the future because tougher gun regulations might be passed.
Lately, however, gun sales have fallen, sometimes sharply. The big reasons why this is so seem to be that there’s little in the way of likely gun control for gun enthusiasts to motivate new purchases, and also that everyone who has wanted to buy a gun in the past couple of years has already bought one (or seven). In the first quarter of 2014, the guns-and-ammo-focused Sportsman’s Warehouse retail chain saw comparable stores sales drop 18%, while gun sales at Cabela’s fell 22%.
But a little perspective is necessary. While guns sales and background checks are down compared to the past couple of years, they remain far above the levels of the early ’00s. As gun industry experts have put it, the decline probably just represents a “returning to normal” for gun sales—which aren’t as strong as they once were, but are still very strong nonetheless.
Well, it looks like many of us at least have stopped buying the pricey “gourmet” variety of cupcakes. That’s the conclusion to be drawn with the collapse of Crumbs, the 65-store chain that shut down abruptly in early July. The news was widely interpreted as a sign that the gourmet cupcake trend is officially dead.
ConAgra recently issued a warning to Wall Street that its consumer food volume experienced a 7% decline, and that it faced “continued profit challenges” due to some of its flagging, tired products—in particular, Chef Boyardee, the 86-year-old canned pasta brand.
It’s not surprising that going hand in hand with fewer people playing golf, there are also fewer golf purchases being rung up at sporting goods store registers. The most notable eye-opener occurred this past spring, when Dick’s Sporting Goods announced that its golf equipment sales were down around 10%, at the same time the average driver was selling at a price of 16% less.
Beard-loving hipsters were blamed for the decline in razor sales last summer, and in 2014, razor giants like Procter and Gamble (owner of Gillette) has continued to blame poor sales on the trendiness of beards. Everything from the shaggy beards worn by the World Series champion Boston Red Sox, to month-long no-shave “challenges” like Movember and Decembeard have been cited as reasons why guys have scaled back on razor purchases. In response, marketers have introduced even more varieties of new high-tech razors, while also pushing the concept of “manscaping,” with special razors designed just for the task. The hope is that even if men aren’t shaving their faces, they might still shave one or several other parts of their bodies.
According to one survey, 56% of American shoppers said they are cutting back on white bread. White bread was surpassed in sales by wheat bread sometime around 2006, but in recent years the gluten-free trend has hurt sales of all breads. Sales are even down in European countries like baguette-loving France, where consumption is down 10%. In American restaurants, meanwhile, there’s an epidemic of free bread disappearing from tables, as fewer owners want to bear the expense of putting out free rolls and other breads that no one is going to eat.
The fun-loving, wind-in-your-hair thrill of driving in a convertible just hasn’t been enough to keep consumers buying the classic ragtop in strong numbers. Businessweek noted that convertible sales have fallen 44% since 2004, and automakers have been significantly scaling back the number of models that are even offered in convertible form. Apparently, too many consumers see convertibles as impractical, and/or not worth the $5,000 or so premium one must pay compared to the regular model.
Data recently released from Experian Automotive indicates that the convertible is largely now a toy purchased by the rich. Nearly 1 in 5 convertible buyers have household incomes of at least $175,000 (compared to 11% of buyers of all cars), and 12% of convertible buyers own homes valued over $1 million (compared to 4% of buyers of other cars). For what it’s worth, convertible drivers are also better educated than the average car owner (50% of convertible buyers have at least a bachelor’s degree, versus 38% overall), and nearly one-quarter of all convertibles are now purchased in three sunny states with ample coastlines: California, Florida, and Texas.
It's a juicy case
The Supreme Court unanimously voted Thursday in favor of advancing POM Wonderful’s false advertising lawsuit against Coca-Cola.
POM’s suit asserts that Coke misled consumers when advertising a Minute Maid beverage as a “Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored Blend of 5 Juices.” Coke’s pomegranate-blueberry blend violated the Lanham Trademark Act — which prohibits false advertising statements on products — because the drink contains only 0.5% of the two juices, POM argues.
Eight Supreme Court judges (Justice Stephen Breyer recused himself from the case) unanimously overturned two lower courts rulings that the FDA’s approval of the drink should stand.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court, arguing that the FDA’s decision did not preclude all other trademark laws because the governmental agency “does not have the same perspective or expertise in assessing market dynamics that day-to-day competitors possess.”
POM’s lawsuit also alleged that Coke’s drink, which is 99 percent apple and grape juices, hurt sales of its own 100 percent pomegranate juice. The Court’s green light to the case means more details of the juicy argument will unfold in the coming months.
Brominated vegetable oil, which has been linked to a flame retardant, had already been dropped by PepsiCo from its Gatorade products following public scrutiny and a Change.org petition. The ingredient is not approved for use in the European Union or Japan
Coca-Cola will no longer use a controversial ingredient in its Powerade sports drink, the company confirmed Sunday.
A spokesperson for the company said its Powerade drinks were now free of brominated vegetable oil, an ingredient that has been linked to a flame retardant, reports the Associated Press. Coca-Cola has said before that the ingredient helps “improve stability and prevent certain ingredients from separating.”
Brominated vegetable oil has been the target of a Change.org petition from Mississippi teenager Sarah Kavanagh, who points out that the ingredient is not approved for use in the European Union or Japan.
Although Coca-Cola said the beverage was now “BVO-free,” the Powerade website and some bottles still list the ingredient, suggesting the change may still be coming into effect.
Last year PepsiCo said it would stop using the oil in its Gatorade products. Kavanagh’s Gatorade petition had more than 200,000 online signatures, while her Powerade one had more than 59,000.
The world’s largest beverage-maker sold more drinks overall worldwide but that didn’t make up for a drop in its vital North American market
Coca-Cola’s profits dropped by almost 8% in the first quarter this year, as the world’s largest beverage manufacturer sold less soda and grappled with a stronger U.S. dollar.
Profits fell for the Atlanta-based company despite an overall increase in sales of non-carbonated beverages around the world and a 2% increase in global sales volume, the Associated Press reports.
Soda sales in North America fell 1% as the company raised prices. Adding to challenges for Coca-Cola—and for its competitors, like PepsiCo, which is expected to report a similarly poor performance when it posts profits Thursday—is the fact that Americans are simply drinking less soda.
“Look, we have Coca-Cola, and we have another 500 brands,” said CEO Muhtar Kent in an interview on CNBC. “The key is to offer a wide variety of choices.”
Are you tempted to taste Hell? In the mood for a Hooker? Or perhaps it’s time to try Zevia? The latter may sound like a mood-enhancing drug, but it’s not. Neither are the others—not exactly, anyway. They’re all unfamiliar beverage brands, a few of the many increasingly showing up on the menus of casinos, airlines, and pro baseball stadiums.
Craft beers and indie soft drink brands have been mainstays at local restaurants, bars, and markets for years. Heck, craft beer is so mainstream that even Costco and Walmart are now known to stock a few interesting selections. Lately, unfamiliar labels are more likely to be seen even in mass-market hubs and attractions that traditionally have been dominated by the world’s biggest brands, often thanks to exclusive partnerships.
In February, Minnesota-based Sun Country Airlines announced it was getting Surly. Beers from Minnesota neighbor Surly Brewing Company with names like Hell, Furious, and Bender are now being sold in 16-ounce cans on Sun Country flights.
As NBC beer blogger Jim Galligan and, more recently, the Associated Press, have reported, Sun Country is one of several airlines to offer passengers beer options beyond the usual Miller and Budweiser products (which, it should be noted, Sun Country still sells). Shortly before Sun Country’s craft beer infusion, Southwest Airlines introduced a partnership with New Belgium Brewing, the Colorado-based brewer known for Fat Tire Amber Ale, among many other beers. Like all alcoholic beverages on Southwest, a can of Fat Tire—airlines almost always stick with cans, or plastic bottles, to avoid broken glass on the plane—will run an airline customer $5.
Samuel Adams, the largest of all craft brewers, has been available on JetBlue since last summer, Frontier Airlines launched a big craft beer initiative in 2012, and Virgin America brought beers from 21st Amendment Brewery on board in 2009, and welcomed Anchor Steam beer a few years later. Best of all, Horizon and Alaska Airlines recently expanded their craft beer options to include brands such as Alaska’s own Silver Gulch, and, in almost unheard-of fashion nowadays, the carriers offer beer and other alcoholic beverages on a complimentary basis on longer flights.
Casinos and Cruise Ships
Realizing that an impressive and unusual selection of beer and wine is not only good for business but practically necessary for the fine dining crowd today, casinos and bars along the Vegas strip have been ushering in craft beer brands in a hurry. In Connecticut, the Mohegan Sun resort and casino just introduced the Hooker Brewing Test Kitchen, which is pretty much what it sounds like: a spot for Bloomfield-based Hooker Brewing to make and sell experimental small-batch brews.
Cruise companies are increasingly playing up their craft beer selections as amenities as well: Celebrity Cruises, for instance, notes “up to 50 international craft beers” offered one ship’s club. There are also beer-themed cruises focused on small and unusual local brews from operators such as Crystal Cruises and Un-Cruise Adventures.
Craft brews are nothing new at pro and minor league ballparks. Petco Park, home of the San Diego Padres, boasts perhaps the best beer selection in baseball, with no fewer than 14 local craft brews sold during games. But there are a few caveats of note: These craft brews are seriously pricey (over $15 a pop in some cases), and sometimes these craft beers aren’t truly craft brews. For instance, last year, there was some uproar in the craft beer community regarding Yankee Stadium’s “Craft Beer Destination” concession stand. All of the brews sold there just so happened to be MillerCoors products, though they featured indie-sounding “crafty” names such as Blue Moon and Batch 19.
If fans find it strange to see less Miller and Bud sold at the ballpark, then it might be downright surreal for soft drink giants such as Pepsi and Coke to be replaced, even to a small degree. Yet this season at the Oakland Coliseum, the old official soft drink sponsor of the A’s (Pepsi) is out and a new one is being ushered in: Zevia, a naturally-sweetened, zero-calorie soda sold in flavors like cola, ginger ale, and black cherry. Zevia will be sold in bottles at all concessions stands in the stadium, and while Pepsi drinks will still be available for purchase, they’ll only be offered as fountain soda (not in bottles).
One branding consultant told USA Today that the ball club may have a hard time convincing fans that Zevia is the soft drink for them. “It sounds like a car made behind the Iron Curtain 50 years ago,” he said.