View Full Version : 2.5 stars for Jazz. What a surprise.
07-25-2006, 07:17 PM
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I know the other one got 3 stars, but can the reviewers be any more predictable?
What do you think the theoretical maximum number of stars a Coke or Pepsi product could get? I think 3 is the theoretical maximum. Therefore, translating appropriately, I'm guessing the 3 star Jazz beverage must be kick ass.
So, here's the mathematical formula: Multiply Bevnet's review for a Coke/Pepsi product by 1 and 2/3 and you get the "real" review. That is, if x = the "real" number of stars and y = Bevnet's number of stars, then x = 1.6666666666y.
So, 3 x 1.666666666666666 = 5. Yum!
07-25-2006, 07:25 PM
Meanwhile, if Virgil's made a soda entitled "Bottled Carbonated Urine with REAL cane sugar" it would undoubtedly get a minimum of 4.5 stars, as long as it had a cool label.
07-25-2006, 08:18 PM
Well... it does have REAL cane sugar!
07-25-2006, 08:45 PM
pepsi rocks i gues :D
07-26-2006, 02:16 AM
BevNet is just utterly predictable...If its an Indie company than they automatically get 2 stars for free it seems, then a star for not being Pepsi or Coke, and then a good review to boot. If it has anything to do with Coke or Pepsi, then the max stars their product receives is 3. If the product is Grandma Backwoods Cherry flavored Goat Urine with Cane Sugar or something like the previous poster said, then its the best soda to hit the market in years. BevNet has always done it this way, I think its in their employee training manual for editors. Pepsi and Coke Bad, Indie Flavors good. Repeat a thousand times then write your review. Amazing itsn't it, from a website that is supposed to be about beverage news from the whole industry and reviews, they seem to have a strong favoritism towards anything but Coke or Pepsi.
I see the rating system as total of all the resources a company has to produce a product.
If Joe Blow comes out with a drink that he developed in his MOMS kitchen and has good flavor, quality ingredients, good packaging, good marketing, good pricing, etc. with his limited and humble resources then has done a good job.
On the other hand, a company such as Coke and Pepsi have a tremendous amount of R& D, Marketing(sampling, focus groups) and of course capitol then they pretty damn sure better come off with a good product.
It's kind of like having a homerun derby between Barry Bonds and some kid in high School. We all expect Barry to woop ass, but if the kid holds his own then he deserves some major kudos!
07-26-2006, 06:28 PM
I think the problem is that, if there wasn't a star-rating, you'd think that Jazz was a very good drink based on what's actually written in the review.
"...actually blends reasonably well with the Pepsi flavor, which is especially impressive given that this is a diet product.
...a pretty pleasant drinking experience.
...one of the best tasting diet cola flavor extensions to come out of Pepsi.
Pepsi has done a pretty good job of making this product have a natural sweetness
...t's one of the better diet extensions to Pepsi's cola lineup.
It's like watching an Ebert & Roeper movie review where they say stuff like "This movie is very fun. Quality acting job, it always kept us on the edge of our seats. The best movie that *actor's name* has been involved with in a long time. Two thumbs down."
07-26-2006, 07:27 PM
Good point. There are several reviews with very high marks as far was wording but the stars are low.
Lots of wishy washy reviews.
Its funny you never really hear a peep from BevNet on this issue.
07-26-2006, 09:59 PM
Originally posted by shadowlp06:
Its funny you never really hear a peep from BevNet on this issue. That's not true. BevNET pipes in all the time about this. Do you think this is the first thread with this subject?
It's BevNET's stance that the more mainstream products are popular thanks to marketing and not taste. To me, this would imply that I enjoy things like Vault or Dr Pepper because I'm told to, not because I really do.
But remember, BevNET's reviews are meant for people in the business, not for consumers. But still, store-owners would have much better sales stocking popular products, not the newest batch from some Iowa City microbrewery.
For more information on this subject, consult the "Seems Unfair!" thread on the Complaints and Rants board.
07-27-2006, 03:20 AM
But consumers are the one's who buy the drinks, and just because I don't own some C-Store or Beverage Depot, does not mean I'm not going to look up information on products I'd like to purchase. It still does not explain why some products get higher ratings because they are Indie. If Pepsi has a crap product then give them a crap rating, don't hype the beverage throughout the review and then give it poor marks for your final star count like was with the Jazz review. If some Indie company makes a crap beverage, don't rate them high just because they are an Indie company "struggling in the beverage world". I know I'm not a beverage owner, but there are numerous products I have tried and liked, and I have got my information from BevNet, although sometimes their ratings are clearly biased. I vote with my "pocketbook" as they say. Pepsi, Coke, or some backyard brew, it doesn't matter, they all should have level playing fields.
07-27-2006, 09:13 AM
You are obviously missing the part where they talk about the brand and the bottle. Jazz can be the best tasting soda on the planet, but if nobody knows what it means, how much are you really going to sell?
Marketing can make or break a brand. I think their concerns warrant a two-star reduction in the rating. They are evaluating the brands as a whole, not just on taste.
07-27-2006, 01:29 PM
i vaguely remember their review of coke zero and, even though they thought it tasted good and would probably be a hit, they deducted points because the packaging was boring.
now, i kind of agree about the packaging. but... on the other hand, if you're the most famous brand in the world... wouldn't you WANT to have your classic logo all over the place?
it may not be creative, but zero is a hit.
07-27-2006, 03:42 PM
Originally posted by Acheron:
I think the problem is that, if there wasn't a star-rating, you'd think that Jazz was a very good drink based on what's actually written in the review.Yeah, I guess that's what bugs me when it comes to BevNet's reviews of mainstream products - sometimes they'll only give a product 2.5 or 3 stars, yet have nothing bad to say about it in the review. And I've rarely if ever seen a Coke or Pepsi product get more than 3.5 stars. Sounds to me like they're easier on non-mainstream products.