It’s Not You, It’s Me: Food Conglomerates Break Up

22 Tuesday Sep 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 05: Analyzing the Marketing Environment, Chapter 16: Supply Chain Management

Cola and coffee have some notable parallels: They both tend to be used for a caffeine jolt. They’re similar in color, and they appear as regular staples in the pantries or refrigerators of a vast majority of households. They also constitute the backbone of the beverage industry. Yet the ways that the dominant actors in these two beverage markets tend to develop, test, market, and sell their products differ vastly, due to the distinctive characteristics and demographics that define each offering’s most enthusiastic consumers.

Such distinctions arguably represent the rationale for the decision by Keurig Dr Pepper to split up its corporate organization into separate divisions, each of which will take responsibility for different subsidiary brands. At the same time as it is reorganizing its existing structure, the corporation is expanding, such as through its acquisition of JDE Peet’s. That company maintains multiple coffee-related brands, the most famous of which is the store franchise Peet’s Coffee. Accordingly, JDE will merge with Keurig’s existing coffee-oriented business division, which currently centers mainly around at-home brewing tools. Meanwhile, the Dr Pepper side will retain all soft drink subsidiaries, including 7UP, Sunkist, and Snapple. It anticipates being the source for most of the parent company’s growth in the near future.

But strategically targeting coffee versus cola drinkers separately cannot justify another, similar corporate breakup happening around the same time. That is, shortly after the first reports about Keurig Dr Pepper’s plans were made public, Kraft Heinz announced its own plans to divvy up its operations, in a direct reversal of the merger of these two food and beverage companies—some of the largest in the world—that occurred back in 2015. Originally conceived of to boost the overall value of one unified company, which would gain unparalleled, combined market share, the merger seemingly has not quite worked out as planned.

Instead, for many of the brands within the combined Kraft Heinz portfolio, market share and revenues have declined, a trend that some industry experts blame on the conglomerate’s spending cuts. To stem such effects, the company’s current leadership has chosen to reverse course, split up the divisions, and, ideally, ensure that both companies can retain more value for the future.

Here again, the organizational restructuring into separate divisions is not the only strategic move being made. But unlike Keurig Dr Pepper’s acquisitional approach, Kraft Heinz has been selling off some of its food divisions to competitors. In so doing, it demonstrates its strategic decision to prioritize its condiment business, relying on the continued success it achieves through sales of Heinz ketchup and Grey Poupon, current bestsellers in their respective markets.

Discussion Questions

Compare the strategic restructurings of these two global conglomerates. What approach is each company taking, and which seems more likely to succeed?
What are the implications of changes at the corporate level for consumers’ experiences with these products? Are they likely to alter the quality or price of the items people buy, for example?

Sources: Lauren Hirsch and Julie Creswell, “Keurig Dr Pepper to Acquire Peet’s in $18 Billion Deal,” The New York Times, August 25, 2025; Lauren Hirsch and Julie Creswell, “Kraft Heinz to Break Up Its Food Businesses,” The New York Times, September 2, 2025; Sarah Zimmerman, “The Biggest Food and Beverage M&A Deals in 2025,” Food Dive, December 23, 2025

The Happiest Place on Earth, and Perhaps the Most Expensive Too

15 Tuesday Sep 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 14: Pricing Concepts for Establishing Value

≈ Leave a comment

Across multiple decades and multiple parks—including the original outpost in Anaheim, Calif. (opened in 1955), the sprawling complex in Orlando, Fla. (1971), and international locations in Tokyo (1983), Paris (1992), Hong Kong (2005), and Shanghai (2016)—Disney has long worked to establish its compelling appeal as “the happiest place on Earth.” In attempting to give families places where they can experience magic, Disney staked a claim as distinctive and unlike anywhere else but also inherently accessible. It targeted families of all socioeconomic backgrounds, such that historically, the theme parks sought to eliminate hidden costs or status markers. Every visitor (or guest, in Disney’s carefully crafted lingo) could gain the exact same access to rides, shows, and food.

But more recently, Disney has introduced premium add-ons to its base package price. For lucky children, whose parents agree to pay the fees, it is possible to enjoy an intimate character meet-and-greet over lunch or undergo a princess makeover, complete with cosmetics, hair styling, and costumes. In addition to booking these sorts of special encounters, Disney allows guests to pay extra to reserve ride times, such that consumers willing to spend more can spend less time waiting. They also have a dedicated line, marking them as special and differentiated from regular guests who continue to wait in longer, “regular” lines.

Another pricing shift reflects a dynamic approach, such that visitors can expect to pay more if they attend at certain times of the year, including major school holidays (e.g., spring break season), over Thanksgiving week, during the end-of-year holidays, and on New Year’s Eve. To some extent, these higher prices reflect expanded offerings. During December for example, guests get to experience added decorations and holiday-themed entertainment. But for the most part, the higher prices stem from the increased consumer demand that the parks experience during these times.

The rationale for such changes seemingly reflects a basic pricing rule: Disney can charge more and still attract sufficient purchases, so it should do so. The revisions also stem from a recent and relatively novel input though. With its vastly expanded data-gathering capabilities, attained through the digital channels that most guests use to book park tickets, hotels, and other offerings, Disney has learned far more about what visitors really value and prefer for their trips. Once visitors could manage their bookings virtually, they readily and willingly shared information about which features appealed most to them. Whether they responded to hotel promotions that promised them they could gain early entry to the park if they stayed on-site, or they searched for suggestions of how to ride the most rides in a single day, they provided Disney with valuable insights into what guests truly wanted.

Notably, along with the various ways that Disney strategically seeks to earn more revenues through higher prices, it also promotes discounted rates for certain segments of consumers. For example, local residents of California, Florida, and the international locations can purchase annual passes for lower rates, as well as discounted single-day tickets for specific dates when the parks are likely to be relatively less busy. In this sense, its dynamic pricing approach can provide benefits too, as long as guests are nearby and willing to commit to visit on dates that might be less convenient in general.

Even with such promotions though, the average price for a park ticket rose 5 percent each year in the decade between 2014 and 2024, such that in that period, prices rose 56 percent overall. As a result, park attendance has decreased. But even with fewer guests, Disney is able to earn higher revenues, from the higher prices those remaining visitors pay.

Discussion Questions

Is Disney right to adjust its pricing in the ways described herein? What benefits does it obtain, and what risks does it create with this approach?
Can other theme parks adopt similar dynamic pricing strategies, or does such a tactic require the unique strength associated with Disney’s well-known brand?

Sources: Daniel Currell, “Disney Is the Happiest Place on Earth, if You Can Afford It,” The New York Times, August 28, 2025; Morgan Flaherty, “Walt Disney World Ticket Prices 2026: A Complete Guide,” WDW Magazine, January 16, 2026; “Disney Raises Admission Prices for Its Theme Parks During Key Holidays,” Reuters, October 8, 2025; Devan Burris, “Why a Disney Vacation May Have Gotten Too Pricey for the Average American Family,” CNBC, September 10, 2024; Jaime Biesiada, “Attendance Dips at Disney’s U.S. Theme Parks,” Travel Weekly, May 6, 2026.

Going Belly Up? How Beli Is Challenging Yelp

08 Tuesday Sep 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 09: Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning, Chapter 13: Services: The Intangible Product

≈ Leave a comment

When the social media site Beli first hit screens, it was designed to give frequent restaurant-goers a centralized platform, where they could to review and share meals. It represented a food-centric version of conventional travel or hospitality review sites like Yelp. To differentiate this offering from existing, established review platforms, the company’s founders promised that users could leverage its site to conduct more narrow, focused searches, because it would prompt reviewers to provide extremely detailed information, primarily about the quality of the food. Ambiance and service take on less importance but still inform the reviews.

It quickly attracted a unique community. The vast majority of its visitors and users are younger than 35 years of age, and Gen Z consumers represent the largest segment of consumers who have downloaded the app. To appeal to these users, the app explicitly is designed to encourage community and connections among people who share the deeply personal experience of enjoying food. Beli accounts provide the option of limiting views to friends, which means that reviewers tend to express more open and vulnerable opinions when leaving their comments.

As these communal elements increasingly became inherent to interactions on the Beli platform, some users began exploiting it as a sort of digital journal, in which they willingly share intimate, daily features of their lives. In parallel, other niche reviewing sites seem to be experiencing greater popularity, as in the examples of Letterboxd for movies, StoryGraph for books, or Strava for running. To participate in these dedicated, digital platforms, people need to engage in a specific activity of shared interest, whether by dining out on a meal, watching a movie, reading a book, or running a particular route.

Many such platforms have experienced astronomical growth, but Beli represents a particularly successful case. In less than five years, it has accumulated 75 million ratings—outpacing Yelp, with its 52 million restaurant reviews after more than two decades in existence.

Discussion Questions

Perform a SWOT analysis of the Beli review platform’s strategic decision to target a specific, niche segment of users.
What other niche activities or hobbies might benefit from a focused review platform?

Sources: Luke Fortney, “How Beli Ate Yelp,” The New York Times, September 15, 2025; Gia Orsino, Emily Schario, “These Apps Might Fix Your Brain Rot,” Boston.com, November 11, 2025, https://www.boston.com/community/the-b-side/these-apps-might-fix-your-brain-rot-strava-beli/; Kat Schuster, “Young Bay Area Diners Are Trading Yelp for This New Foodie App: Report,” Patch, August 5, 2025, https://patch.com/california/san-francisco/young-bay-area-diners-are-trading-yelp-new-foodie-app-report.

Here Comes the Sun: Chinese Solar Companies Expand Energy Access in Africa

01 Tuesday Sep 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 08: Global Marketing

≈ Leave a comment

Power outages can be frustrating for anyone, and they can occur in even the most well-established infrastructures, such as due to storms or damage to power lines. But when the infrastructure is less developed, and users need electricity to ensure their safety, income, and sanitation, outages can literally be deadly.

In South Africa for example, provision of power to remote locations has continued to be somewhat erratic, inconsistent, and worrisome, due to gaps in the infrastructure needed to support reliable electricity grids. Even in metropolises like Cape Town, residents cannot always count on the power staying on, as noted by a dentist who reported the difficulties created by being unable to fill cavities or perform root canals each time the lights went out.

For these consumers, the promise and appeal of solar technology are incalculable. Today’s solar panels can provide electricity across widespread and remote areas. Unlike the small, single panels of the past, which could power individual lanterns or light single rooms, current products have the capacity to electrify entire buildings, apartment complexes, and shopping malls.

China is at the forefront of such recent developments in solar technologies and capabilities, and it accounts for a sizeable majority of global production. Seeking to move beyond domestic markets for panels and batteries, Chinese manufacturers have actively sought out customers in global markets. When shifting tariff policies made it difficult to sell their products in the United States and Europe, these producers strategically turned their attention to expanding opportunities in South Africa, where within the past five years, 10 percent of residents already have adopted solar technology. Beyond just South Africa, more than half a billion people living throughout the African continent currently lack reliable electricity access, such that the potential for a vastly expanded market is clear. Solar use seems likely to spread quickly; Chinese solar exports already have risen exponentially.

Currently, only Nigeria rivals South Africa in its demand for solar, but Algeria is close behind. In countries with smaller populations, like Chad and Sierra Leone, active government efforts have expanded solar access to substantial percentages of their residents. For example, nearly half of Chad’s population has adopted solar technology, and more than 50 percent of Sierra Leoneans use solar power. In addition to encouraging consumer adoption, governments have expressed interest in building plants to manufacture solar equipment, whether those plants are run by domestic firms or rely on partnerships with Chinese providers.

In response, traditional energy companies in various countries are chasing solar opportunities, shifting resources away from coal production and toward more renewable sources. In South Africa for example, an energy company called Eskom has begun outfitting its mining sites with solar panels. It also announced a goal of shifting its overall focus to provide mainly green energy options within in the next 15 years.

This rapid expansion arguably cannot come fast enough. The poorest regions of Africa still lack sufficient resources and access to solar. Manufacturers need loans to finance new factories to produce solar materials; consumers need support to be able to purchase and install panels that can increase their access to steady electricity. As China expands and strengthens its partnerships across the continent though, the chances of such positive outcomes look more and more sunny.

Discussion Questions

What are some long-term implications of China’s dominance in providing solar materials throughout Africa?
What are some incentives that African governments might can use to expand both production and consumer purchases of solar capabilities?

Sources: Somini Sengupta, “China Finds Buyers for Surplus Solar: Africa’s Energy-Hungry Countries,” The New York Times, August 26, 2025; Edith Mutethya, “China Earns Expert Praise for Support in Africa’s Energy Shift,” China Daily, February 15, 2026; Somini Sengupta, “Cheap Solar Is Transforming Lives and Economies Across Africa,” The New York Times, December 30, 2025.

The Pizza Index? Exploring Unconventional Recession Indicators

25 Tuesday Aug 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 06: Consumer Behavior

≈ Leave a comment

During times of uncertainty, economists note that consumers exhibit some predictable behaviors to deal with the situation. For example, even if people cannot afford to change out their entire wardrobe each season, they might achieve a pleasurable sense of novelty by buying a new lipstick. The concept of the lipstick index suggests that when markets enter a downturn, shoppers purchase fewer hedonic, unnecessary items, like new clothes, but as the downturn continues, they grow tired of being frugal all the time and turn to relatively inexpensive luxuries to boost their morale.

Although the concept of the lipstick index is well-established and widely accepted, recent economic disruptions (including tariff inconsistencies, prominent inflation rates, poor job growth, and rising consumer prices) have not prompted these predicted trends, to many economists’ surprise. For example, consumers actually made fewer impulse purchases of small luxuries, including self-care products like cosmetics, which instead exhibited declining overall sales. Faced with such a discrepancy, some economists suggest the need for a different kind of index, pinned to a different type of product that is more universally popular.

Thus, consider the pizza index.

In reporting on a novel analysis of changing purchase behaviors that they conducted in collaboration with a popular, independently owned pizza shop, researchers noted that pizza sales remained steady, but consumers had stopped adding on their usual accompaniments, like chicken wings or drinks. Because the consumers keep coming though, the restaurant needed to stay open, even as its own operating costs continued to rise. For example, the cost of bulk pepperoni had been $110 for a 25-pound package just a short time ago, but today, that same amount of product costs the restaurant $140.

Even large franchises are feeling this strain. Domino’s appears determined to keep its locations afloat by slashing prices and aggressively marketing its affordability. Papa John’s stores have reported a steady trend toward purchases of smaller, less expensive orders, though the company also can point to increasing valuation of its corporate shares.

Pizza Hut took a different tact, revising its pricing to allow its largest pizza to cost around $30, a price that would have been unheard of just a few years ago. This response appears to have been misguided though. Pizza Hut suffered two years of declining sales, leading its parent company, Yum! Brands, to begin exploring options to sell the struggling chain. In the meantime, Pizza Hut has shuttered almost one-fifth of its stores, with plans to close another 250 restaurants by the middle of 2026. Despite these bleak indicators, the CEO of Yum! Brands suggested that Pizza Hut had an opportunity to take over leadership of the pizza market, through a restructuring or sale.

Beyond the pizza index, but with a similar foundation, other restaurant companies signal the relevance of what might be called an appetizer economy: Pressed by economic insecurity, diners avoid not only expensive add-ons like dessert but also full entrees. They instead turn to relatively less expensive appetizers, which offer a lower cost per plate. For people who enjoy the experience of eating out, buying appetizers instead of a full meal represents a responsible budgetary choice, especially if they can find restaurants that offer price deals on certain items, at particular times (e.g., happy hours), or on specific days (e.g., buy one, get one on Mondays).

Each of these indicators has emerged because, at some point, economists identified correlations between purchasing trends and the shifts in the economy at large. Still, the key term to recall is correlation, which is not the same as causation. Consumer habits are important to notice and report, but purchasing behaviors surrounding any one product at any particular time cannot fully capture the state of larger, more complex systems. At best, it’s a tool, and like any other, it must be used in the right ways and trusted in the right amounts to be effective.

Discussion Questions

How would you gauge the validity of each of the indexes described in this abstract? Which one seems most accurate to you, and why?
Does the decline in lipstick purchases during today’s challenging economic times mean that the logic for this index no longer applies? Or could there be other economic forces at play that affect this particular product?

Sources: Julie Creswell, “Pizza Hut’s Parent Says Struggling Chain May Go Up for Sale,” The New York Times, November 4, 2025; Julie Creswell, “People Are Ordering Smaller Pizzas and Fewer Toppings. What Does That Tell Us?,” The New York Times, December 1, 2025; Sam Klebanov, “Appetizers Boom in Worrying Sign for the Economy,” Morning Brew, December 13, 2025; Naheed Rajwani-Dharsi, Tasha Tsiaperas, “Pizza Hut in a Rut,” Axios, November 6, 2025; “Yum! Brands to Close 250 Pizza Hut Locations Across US in 2026,” WDRB, February 4, 2026.

Brownie Points: Brazilian Chocolate Is Saving the Rainforest

18 Tuesday Aug 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 11: Product Branding and Packaging Decisions

≈ Leave a comment

The global popularity of chocolate means that producers sell it to customers in every corner of the world. But when it comes to production locations, one region of the world arguably reigns supreme: the Amazon Rainforest. It is where cacao pods were first discovered, and for marketers determined to confirm its importance, the best quality chocolate comes only from this part of the world. Brazilian chocolate also is distinguished by its generous use of cocoa and distinctive flavor profiles.

Some global firms agree, such that familiar brands like Amazon produce chocolate with ingredients from the region. But the real branding appeal comes from local Brazilian confectioners that use only regional ingredients, such as native fruits and nuts, to create a chocolate profile that can be achieved nowhere else. These independent chocolatiers, though focused mainly on producing high-quality, craft products, embrace a localized production process that also creates viable job opportunities for local workers, including both indigenous tribes and regional farmers.

In their branding efforts, brands like Filha do Combu and Dengo Chocolates carefully integrate such a regional identity, emphasizing the Brazilian ingredients used and the small-batch manufacturing processes they adopt. They also highlight their sustainable farming practices, as a parallel brand promise, and verify such claims by working with conservation groups that in turn amplify the activities of the dedicated chocolatiers. Their ongoing efforts have been so meaningful that the UN Climate Change Conference decided to hold its 30th session in Brazil.

During the conference, Filha do Combu’s sales output doubled, and other independent shops far outsold their predicted demand. Dengo Chocolates has experienced such rapid and continued success that the company moved to open a concept store in Sao Paulo. It represents the first structure in modern Brazil to be built completely from wood, and its design purposefully aims to reflect the chocolatier’s symbiotic relationship with nature, including its dedication to protect local cacao crops and farmland for generations to come.

Discussion Questions

Are these sustainable farming efforts an example of greenwashing? Why or why not?
Are independent chocolatiers in the area at risk for global corporations taking over the local market, or is the product such that only a true local would be able to make it? Does the answer matter to a customer from abroad?

Sources: Somini Sengupta, “Chocolate Grows Up in the Land of Its Birth: The Amazon,” The New York Times, November 21, 2025; Dengo Chocolates, “A World with More Dengo,” https://dengo.com; Jessie Dowd, “Dengo Chocolates,” Retail TouchPoints, June 11, 2021.

“JUST&T Married!” How Can and Should Firms Leverage a Star-Studded Wedding Event?

11 Tuesday Aug 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 19: Advertising, Public Relations and Sales Promotions

≈ Leave a comment

Event-based marketing is a well-established means to garner attention, engagement, and excitement. Usually, it means linking a brand to a regularly scheduled sporting or cultural event, like the Olympics or Oscars. But one of the biggest events of 2026 was not regular in any way, and though it was carefully scheduled, few people knew what that schedule looked like. We’re talking about the wedding of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce of course—an extravaganza that took over New York’s Madison Square Garden arena, as well as the attention of millions of fans.

To build a connection to this closely followed event, marketers thus had to get creative. Predictions that the wedding would take place at Madison Square Garden in Manhattan over the July 4 weekend leaked in the days leading up to it, but there were no official announcements. Instead, marketers had to move fast, once confirmation came.

The Knot, an online wedding service provider, took an early, and ultimately successful, gamble. It deployed mobile billboard trucks to drive in the vicinity of the arena, posting congratulatory messages while also displaying its logo prominently. For Swifties surrounding the Garden, it provided timely, relevant advertising that might lead those fans to associate their aspiration to celebrate with Taylor and Travis with The Knot, and thereafter think of the company first when imagining their own nuptials or celebrations.

Not every company could achieve such locational relevance though. Instead, Sephora hopped onto Instagram to raise a question that would resonate with any Swifties, and with its own products, namely, “But is she wearing a red lip to the wedding?” From its location in Brooklyn, the Barclays Center also took to Instagram, to propose itself as an alternative venue for weddings and private events.

Less well-known firms also took advantage of AI-enabled tools to adjust the congratulatory message that appeared on the screens outside the Garden once the wedding ceremony finished. Others created satirical videos, implying that their products or services had been selected to furnish the wedding or reception.

Finally, there were a few brands that could plan in advance and make a viable claim to a connection with the event. For example, the Dior luxury fashion house made sure that media outlets knew that both the bride and groom had worn clothing designed by the firm’s creative director. Being known as the company to dress Taylor and Travis establishes a priceless brand connection.

The event marketing strategies adopted in each of these examples thus vary, depending on the extent of connection they could create. Whether they had a metaphorical front-row view or seats in the nosebleed section though, savvy marketers refused to let such an opportunity go to waste.

Discussion Questions

When firms without any actual connection to an event suggest such a link, is it simply and exaggeration, or is it an ethical misstep?
How can brands design advertising strategies that enable them to respond rapidly to such a massive but secretive event?

Sources: Donna Kim and Sarah Lyon, “Taylor Swift’s Wedding Became a Marketing Moment for Brands, Big and Small,” The New York Times, July 5, 2026; Srividya Kalyanaraman, “The Swift-Kelce Wedding Is What the Luxury Market Needs to Revive,” Yahoo! Finance, July 7, 2026.

Menu Experiments at McDonald’s: A New Frontline in Fast-Food Fights for Market Share

06 Thursday Aug 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 05: Analyzing the Marketing Environment

≈ Leave a comment

Competition is never static. Even if a firm might explicitly embrace a customer orientation, it also must account for competitive moves and strategies, to avoid losing some of its revenue or market share to another firm that releases a new offering or tactic. When it comes to the highly contested market for fast food customers, that demand is especially intense.

McDonald’s might account for an enviable share of the overall market, but it still needs to keep track of what other restaurants are doing, then respond appropriately. For example, Popeye’s—whose fried chicken sandwich introduction back in the early 2020s effectively redefined the fast food competitive landscape and initiated the “chicken wars”—recently made moves in two notable directions. First, it altered the available flavors, by introducing truffle-flavored menu items. Second, it shifted the form in which consumers could get their chicken, by releasing a line of chicken wraps.

Accordingly, McDonald’s announced two innovations of its own, seemingly reflecting the expanded flavor and forms being pushed by its competitor. First, it brought the toasted, caramelized flavor of brown butter to its breakfast menu. Two new breakfast sandwiches, one with bacon and egg and the other featuring chicken, carry the flavor in a honey-based sauce. Second, it created a variation on its existing formats by creating a Caesar-infused line of chicken strips, wraps, and sandwiches.

Notably, all these introductions reflect culinary trends that traditionally have been more associated with fine dining (e.g., brown butter, Caesar salads and dressing) than fast food. One argument suggests that, as prices rise across the board, fast food offerings need to give consumers a little more incentive to accept their higher prices. In exchange for paying more for their sandwiches, people expect to receive a small sense of luxury, even if they are just grabbing breakfast at the drive-through.

Discussion Questions

What factors in the marketing environment are evident drivers of McDonald’s new menu introductions? Would you describe its strategy as customer-oriented, price-oriented, competition-oriented, or something else?
Why is Popeye’s seemingly so often the source of new innovations that spark responses from larger competitors, such as McDonald’s? How would you explain this role?

Sources: Annie Campbell, “McDonald’s Just Quietly Released 2 New, First-of-Their-Kind Sandwiches,” Allrecipes, July 15, 2026; Tom Parfitt, “McDonald’s Adds 4 New Menu Items for a Limited Time,” Yahoo! Finance, July 22, 2026

A Voyage to Sales? How Publishers Are Leveraging Hype Around The Odyssey Movie to Sell Their Versions of a Classic Work of Literature

04 Tuesday Aug 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 01: Overview of Marketing, Chapter 12: Developing New Products

≈ Leave a comment

Usually, when we talk about marketing familiar products, we might be referring to things that have been around for a while and have changed little, like soap or Corn Flakes. But what happens when the product being marketed is truly, legitimately ancient? Homer’s famous verse narrative of how Odysseus made his way home from the Trojan War likely was composed in the 7th century BCE, according to scholars, meaning that it’s been around for nearly 3000 years, during which time it has been read by millions of students, scholars, and poetry lovers. How can a marketer create excitement about a product that old and familiar?

Fortunately for publishers that maintain book versions of the epic poem, innovation arises even for ancient texts. Multiple translators have undertaken their own attempts to bring the ancient Greek text into modern languages, to make it accessible to today’s audiences. Because translation is inherently subjective, the different translations provide somewhat different approaches and versions of the text. For example,

In the 17th century, George Chapman crafted a deeply poetic, rhyming version that featured iambic pentameter.

Robert Fitzgerald published a version in 1961 that is widely familiar to students who have been assigned to read The Odyssey in their high school classes over the past half-century or so.

Emily Wilson’s 2017 translation has been described as “provocatively blunt” and modern in its approach. It also features iambic pentameter, and it gives far more voice to the female characters than previous translations have done.

When Daniel Mendelsohn released his translation in 2025, he “deliberately replicated Homer’s long lines and attended carefully to the poem’s metaphors, tone, level of diction and word choice,” seemingly in an attempt to make the experience of reading the text similar to what audiences in ancient Greece would have experienced.

All of these editions and releases prompted some attention and discussion, especially among scholars and lovers of Homeric poetry. But that was nothing compared with the hype surrounding the 2026 release of a film version of The Odyssey.

Directed by a well-reputed and well-known director (Christopher Nolan), starring some of the biggest names in film (e.g., Matt Damon, Lupita Nyong’o, Zendaya, Robert Pattinson, Anne Hathaway), and produced in a novel way (i.e., the first feature filmed with an IMAX 70 mm camera), the movie seemed destined to be a blockbuster. Recognizing this potential, the distribution company, Universal Pictures, began hyping and marketing the film more than a year before its actual release in theaters.

As anticipation among audiences grew, many of them realized that their familiarity with the famous story was weak or nonexistent. To prepare to watch, enjoy, critique, and discuss the film—all of which tend to be key to experiencing a cultural blockbuster—many consumers sought out book versions.

To cater to their needs, different book publishers have actively pushed and promoted their editions, using distinctive and creative tactics. For example, Picador delayed the release of an updated edition (which it previously had planned for 2025), featuring a new cover, forward, and afterward, waiting until just before the movie opened in theaters to install it on shelves. Penguin also reissued its version with a brightly colored new cover, depicting several of the monsters and characters made famous in the poem.

Beyond the packaging, publishers have purposefully highlighted and reinforced the distinctiveness of the different translations. W.W. Norton, which owns the rights to Wilson’s translation, noted the controversies surrounding her approach and encouraged buyers to host read-alongs and book clubs to not just read this version but also discuss why it might spark wider debate. Mendelsohn has been visible in the popular press, writing articles about the poem and the movie, which implicitly directs readers to buy his version, published by the University of Chicago.

Homer’s epic creates excitement on its own, which is part of why it persists as a classic story, told over millennia. But to convince consumers that a specific version of the poem is the best choice to purchase, marketers have to develop their own, specific type of excitement.

Discussion Questions

List the marketing strategies adopted by the different publishers of various editions of The Odyssey to get readers to purchase their version, rather than competing versions. Which seems most effective to you?
How have marketers seeking to sell different products (e.g., toy manufacturers, video game publishers) leveraged the popularity of other blockbuster films to garner excitement about their related offerings?
What kind of innovation are new translations of an ancient poem: radical, incremental, or something else?

Sources: MJ Franklin, “To Sell Homer’s ‘Odyssey,’ Publishers, Like Its Hero, Get Crafty,” The New York Times, July 20, 2026; A.O. Scott, “Which Version of the ‘Odyssey’ Is Right for You?” The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/video/books/100000010971102/which-version-of-the-odyssey-should-you-read.html?smid=url-share; Daniel Mendelsohn, “The Immortal Appeal of ‘The Odyssey’,” The Free Press, July 10, 2026.

Melt Down: Jerry Leaves Ben & Jerry’s

28 Tuesday Jul 2026

Posted by Grewal Levy Marketing in Chapter 04: Conscious Marketing, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Ethics

≈ Leave a comment

There is a reason that Ben & Jerry’s can charge something like $8 for a pint of ice cream—or perhaps more precisely, there are several reasons. For one thing, the quality is good, offering inventive, unique flavor combinations, made of high-quality ingredients. The brand story, of two old friends who make ice cream together, is deeply appealing too. When many products seem faceless or bland, the likeable vision of Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield goofing around in their ubiquitous tie-dyed shirts to build a massively successful company creates a notable and appealing distinction. But perhaps the strongest motivation driving Ben & Jerry’s loyal consumer base is its insistent, persistent, overriding commitment to fair trade, environmentally friendly practices, and social activism.

From the moment they founded the company, Ben and Jerry have insisted that their business would advocate for such ethical purposes, and they have held firm to that ideal even as the brand has grown and changed its structure. In particular, when Unilever acquired Ben & Jerry’s in 2000, they agreed to the takeover only if the international conglomerate agreed that they retained the “independence to pursue [the founders’] values.” It was guaranteed in their contracts, which also permitted the subbrand to elect a board that functioned independently of its parent company. The founders retained control of public messaging and social activism.

The agreement held for several decades. But in 2024, the two founders initiated legal action against Unilever, alleging that it had adopted policy measures designed to circumvent its independent board. Then in 2025, they alleged that the Ben & Jerry’s CEO had been fired for his political speech.

But when Unilever decided to reorganize and consolidate all its ice cream holdings under a new subsidiary, Magnum Ice Cream, the ongoing tensions evidently grew too great to bear for Jerry Greenfield, who announced his decision to resign in protest. In a statement, Greenfield addressed the rumors head on and issued the clear assertion that “Ben & Jerry’s has been silenced, sidelined for fear of upsetting those in power.” Ben Cohen shared the resignation statement on social media, backing his partner’s stance, but thus far, he has decided to stay on at the company, from which position he continues to voice his social values. He also recently called on Unilever to allow the Ben & Jerry’s to regain their independence, by having the conglomerate divest.

Discussion Questions

Why might Cohen and Greenfield have chosen different paths in reaction to Unilever’s actions, despite their continued support of one another?
Weighing the current negative press that this issue has generated, especially amongst Ben & Jerry’s core customer base, against the overall profitability of the brand, does it make sense for Unilever to allow the company to divest? What external factors might further tip the decision in one direction or the other?

Sources: Yan Zhuang, “Jerry of Ben & Jerry’s Resigns, Saying Company Has Been ‘Silenced’,” The New York Times, September 17, 2025; Rabia Iclal Turan, “Ben & Jerry’s Co-Founder Jerry Greenfield Resigns, Citing Unilever’s ‘Silencing’ of Brand’s Activism,” Anadolu Agency, September 17, 2025; WCAX News Team, Amanda Alvarado, “Jerry Quits Ben and Jerry’s Ice Cream Over His Political Views,” WOWT, September 17, 2025.