Several of you have asked why I haven't yet hammered ace douchenozzle Peter Arnell for his Tropicana fuck up as reported in this mornings New York Times... And yes, I have called him out several times in the past for being an uber-poseur who should have been taken behind the woodshed years ago and shot with a shit-gun (it's like a paint gun, but with better ammunition!) His retarded quote “I’m incredibly surprised by the reaction, but I’m glad Tropicana is getting this kind of attention.” Will live in fucking infamy. The NYT columnist, Stuart Elliot blathers on in his usual painful style about comparable shit in the past, like the launch of "New Pepsi' which pissed so many people off, barely mentioning that this was not a packaging change, but more importantly, a product formulation change. Still, that's what you get when ad columns are written by people who've never worked in advertising. Kinda like Matt over at AgencySpy... Sorry Matt, couldn't stop myself. Anyway, the important question is, if you have a successful product, why the fuck change the packaging? Maybe that had something to do with it's fucking success. But then again, I'm not a fucking MBA, thank Christ.
Listen up Peter!!!