Richard:
>Well, to use the example you've brought up here, I would argue that it's
*only* the packaging that allows a consumer to tell the difference between
Coke & Pepsi.<
From the distance, because when people who drink Coke or Pepsi with some
frequency taste it, they know which they're taking. And they may refuse
Pepsi for Coke, or the opposite ( or like both or like neither ).
> I certainly wouldn't be able to tell the difference otherwise. I would
also argue that somebody packaging the Coke beverage in a champagne bottle
would be dangerously close to marketing in a misleading fashion -
particularly if everybody started calling it champagne anyway, making the
assumption that that's what it was because that's what the distributor told
them it was.<
I see, but that's again a matter of common sense ( which is not the same as
good judgment ): most people think you're an opera singer if you sing
operatic repertoire and the music industry has no reason to spend its time
and money establishing the difference, although that's brought up very often
by journalists and critics (at least here in Brazil ).
Best wishes,
Caio
|
|  |
