| Found the sneaky wretch! (I think....) |
|
|
Anonymous |
#6041
7:16 am
18th July So, John Dodds was at 'Innocent's' AGM...
http://makemarketinghistory.blogspot.com/2008/06/does-this-water-dilute-innocent.html
This Water was until recently a part of Innocent. They then decided that it wasn't consistent with their core business and sold it to the employees who had been running it. Everything was very amicable.
But I wonder if it was too amicable because this ad makes me think that it's still part of Innocent and I'm not sure that's a good thing. Given that customers at their recent AGM voiced real possessiveness towards Innocent's packaging, I have to wonder if it would have been too harsh to have insisted that they move away from the Innocent tone of voice?
posted by john dodds @ 3:33 PM |
|
Anonymous |
#6042
7:18 am
18th July http://makemarketinghistory.blogspot.com/2008/04/innocent-agm.html
On Saturday, I attended Innocent's first AGM. One of their founders told me that the key to success is making a good product. I, of course, agree that it's that simple (and that difficult). They also have insightful labelling.
It was nine years ago today that they sold their first smoothie. Today they sell more than 100 million. No wonder everybody talks about them. |
|
Unregistered |
#6126
10:43 am
19th July I'm not sure Dodds is our guy. He seems to be a fairly well-respected Marketing fag and the '8' is too factoidy for any particular significance. That said, Googling him and scientology comes up with a crop of blog comments where someone else in the conversation mentions Scientology disparagingly - he certainly doesn't rise to countering those comments, though I wonder if they occur in the first place because he is being deliberately baited.
I'd say it wasn't a safe assumption without a smoking gun. |
|
|
|
Anonymous |
#6148
7:01 pm
19th July I'm pretty sure he's being currently swung at us as bait. We need more dox before continuing. |
|
