<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Branding of Diet Coke</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bevreview.com/2005/08/14/branding-of-diet-coke/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bevreview.com/2005/08/14/branding-of-diet-coke/</link>
	<description>Beverage reviews cooked up with ChefTalk.com</description>
	<pubDate>Wed,  7 Jan 2009 04:39:37 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Coke Zero and Diet Coke ... - ChefTalk Cooking Forums</title>
		<link>http://www.bevreview.com/2005/08/14/branding-of-diet-coke/comment-page-1/#comment-2370</link>
		<dc:creator>Coke Zero and Diet Coke ... - ChefTalk Cooking Forums</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:42:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bevreview.com/?p=199#comment-2370</guid>
		<description>[...] typically assume is Coke.  I wrote a little about the contrast via these posts on BevReview.com:  Branding of Diet Coke Review: Coca-Cola Zero Packaging Change: Coca-Cola Zero  Incidentally, Diet Coke Plus also uses [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] typically assume is Coke.  I wrote a little about the contrast via these posts on BevReview.com:  Branding of Diet Coke Review: Coca-Cola Zero Packaging Change: Coca-Cola Zero  Incidentally, Diet Coke Plus also uses [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BevReview.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Review: Diet Coke Plus</title>
		<link>http://www.bevreview.com/2005/08/14/branding-of-diet-coke/comment-page-1/#comment-154</link>
		<dc:creator>BevReview.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Review: Diet Coke Plus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:10:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bevreview.com/?p=199#comment-154</guid>
		<description>[...] we really need another iteration of Diet Coke? Apparently, we do. In December 2006, Coke announced Diet Coke Plus (and eventually, the retro [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] we really need another iteration of Diet Coke? Apparently, we do. In December 2006, Coke announced Diet Coke Plus (and eventually, the retro [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BevReview.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Review: Coca-Cola Cherry Zero</title>
		<link>http://www.bevreview.com/2005/08/14/branding-of-diet-coke/comment-page-1/#comment-146</link>
		<dc:creator>BevReview.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Review: Coca-Cola Cherry Zero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2007 03:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bevreview.com/?p=199#comment-146</guid>
		<description>[...] Here&#8217;s a name that is really confusing as far as format. Recently, we&#8217;ve seen Coke move to the following two templates regarding their product naming: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Here's a name that is really confusing as far as format. Recently, we've seen Coke move to the following two templates regarding their product naming: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BevReview.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Review: Coca-Cola Cherry</title>
		<link>http://www.bevreview.com/2005/08/14/branding-of-diet-coke/comment-page-1/#comment-143</link>
		<dc:creator>BevReview.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Review: Coca-Cola Cherry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2007 03:10:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bevreview.com/?p=199#comment-143</guid>
		<description>[...] Back in August 2005, I wrote about how Coke was rebranding many of their flavored beverages behind stronger brands. Here&#8217;s an excerpt: &#8230;it&#8217;s no surprise that Coke seems to be rebranding many of their beverages to take advantage of the strong &#8220;Diet Coke&#8221; brand. Part of this effort is moving products from a weaker brand to now sit below the strong Diet Coke brand. This is happening to both Diet Cherry Coke and Diet Vanilla Coke, which now become Diet Coke Cherry and Diet Coke Vanilla. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Back in August 2005, I wrote about how Coke was rebranding many of their flavored beverages behind stronger brands. Here's an excerpt: &#8230;it's no surprise that Coke seems to be rebranding many of their beverages to take advantage of the strong "Diet Coke" brand. Part of this effort is moving products from a weaker brand to now sit below the strong Diet Coke brand. This is happening to both Diet Cherry Coke and Diet Vanilla Coke, which now become Diet Coke Cherry and Diet Coke Vanilla. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BevReview.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Review: Review: Kosher for Passover Coke</title>
		<link>http://www.bevreview.com/2005/08/14/branding-of-diet-coke/comment-page-1/#comment-94</link>
		<dc:creator>BevReview.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Review: Review: Kosher for Passover Coke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:02:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bevreview.com/?p=199#comment-94</guid>
		<description>[...] the issue here? Well, since 1985, after the New Coke disaster, Coke did a sneaky little thing. Prior to this date, regular Coke was sweetened with sugar. Then [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the issue here? Well, since 1985, after the New Coke disaster, Coke did a sneaky little thing. Prior to this date, regular Coke was sweetened with sugar. Then [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
