Hubbry Logo
H2NOH2NOMain
Open search
H2NO
Community hub
H2NO
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
H2NO
H2NO
H2NO
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

H2NO was an upselling campaign by The Coca-Cola Company to dissuade consumers from ordering tap water drinks at restaurants, and to instead order more profitable soft drinks, non-carbonated beverages, or bottled water. The campaign's title, H2NO, reflects the program's purpose, which is to have customers say No to H2O, the chemical formula for water.

In July 2001, a link to a story about the program's success at Olive Garden was posted to Cockeyed.com. The link was reposted around the internet, until the story was taken down by Coca-Cola on August 2, 2001, for fears it might be misinterpreted. On August 20, 2001, the story was covered by The New York Times,[1] and subsequently by a number of news providers.

The campaign ran only in the United States.[2]

Discovery and Coca-Cola response

[edit]

The H2NO campaign had been conducted through an Internet memo to distributors and restaurants.[3] In July 2001, Rob Cockerham, a graphic designer in Sacramento, came across the Olive Garden success story following an online search, and posted a link to the story on his website, Cockeyed.com.[4][5] In an interview with The New York Times, Cockerham noted how "I had to assure more than one person that this was not a prank, and that it was a real article from Coca-Cola."[4]

On August 2, 2001, about a week after the success story link was posted to Cockeyed.com, the Coca-Cola portal was closed.[6] Polly Howes, a spokeswoman for Coca-Cola, stated that the story might be misinterpreted by "folks who aren't in a sales-related business" and that the site was due to be dismantled.[4][5]

Following the New York Times article, the story was covered by major news providers, including Sunday Herald Sun,[7] Evening Standard[2] and was featured on The Glass House.[8]

Olive Garden success story

[edit]

H2NO is a crew education kit containing information about beverage suggestive selling techniques (a technique used when a server suggests a profitable beverage in place of water to the customer during the ordering process). It matched perfectly with what Olive Garden had envisioned. Restaurant managers and servers use the kit to emphasize the wide range of beverage selections available, including soft drinks, non-carbonated beverages and alcohol. As a side effect, overall check averages should increase, and remember, increased check averages mean higher profits for the restaurant and more cash in servers' pockets.

- Website of The Coca-Cola Company, as of August 1, 2001[9]

In a success story on Coca-Cola's online public relations portal, entitled "The Olive Targets Tap Water & WINS", Coca-Cola described the purpose, implementation, and success in reducing "tap water incidence".

Coca-Cola stated that customers chose tap water out of habit, and that selling alternative beverages would increase guest satisfaction:[10]

Water. It's necessary to sustain life, but to many Casual Dining restaurant chains it contributes to a dull dining experience for the customer. Many customers choose tap water not because they enjoy it, but because it is what they always have drunk in the past. In response, some restaurant chains are implementing programs to help train crews to sell alternative choices to tap water, like soft drinks and non-carbonated beverages, with the goal of increasing overall guest satisfaction.

Olive Garden's stated goal was "to influence customers to abandon their default choice of tap water and experience other beverage choices to improve their dining experience".[11]

According to reports in the US, the first shots in the war against water were fired in Olive Garden restaurants.

—"Coke says no to H2O", Sunday Herald Sun (2001)[7]

The Olive Garden suffered from a "high water incidence rate" and "wanted their restaurant crews to emphasize the broad array of alternative beverage selections available" so as "to influence customers to abandon their default choice of tap water and experience other beverage choices to improve their dining experience."[10] In response, the Coca-Cola USA-Fountain offered the tap water reduction program H2NO.[10] The H2NO program featured "beverage suggestive selling techniques (a technique used when a server suggests a profitable beverage in place of water to the customer during the ordering process)."[11] Alternative beverages including soft drinks, non-carbonated beverages and alcohol would be offered which would lead to higher "overall check averages" and greater profits.[11] To further improve the effectiveness of the program, the "Olive Garden developed an employee incentive contest linked to H2NO with CCUSA-Fountain called 'Just Say No to H2O.'"[11]

The success story noted how "because of its own successful campaign against water, The Olive Garden has recently sent a powerful message to the entire restaurant industry - less water and more beverage choices mean happier customers"[10] stating how:[11]

When the contest was completed, almost all participating restaurants realized significant increases in beverage sales and reduced levels of tap water incidence - a strong indication that Olive Garden restaurants succeeded in enhancing the customer's dining experience. And perhaps most importantly, Olive Garden expects to see this trend continue as the skills learned become part of the crew's everyday interaction with restaurant customers.

Criticism

[edit]

In this age of branding, even plain old milk needs a big ad campaign and celebrity endorsements. But another popular beverage, tap water, has no such support -- a tactical misstep that has left it vulnerable to aggressive competitors like the Coca-Cola Company.

—"'Just Say No to H2O' (Unless It's Coke's Own Brew)", The New York Times (2001)[5]

The program and Olive Garden success story were widely ridiculed.[12][13]

On August 22, 2001, Peter Gleick, the director of the Pacific Institute, wrote a letter to the editor of The New York Times, criticizing the campaign, noting how "both PepsiCo and Coca-Cola use perfectly potable tap water as the source of their bottled waters, Aquafina and Dasani. I guess tap water is O.K., if we can be made to pay for it."[14]

In a report by Corporate Accountability International, Tapping Congress to Get Off the Bottle, the report criticized the campaign as part of how "bottlers have employed a range of marketing tactics that have overtly disparaged the tap."[15] The Olive Garden success story and the H2NO program have been cited in literature as examples of the bottled water industry's aggressive advertising campaigns which views tap water as an impediment to increased profits.[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

H2NO

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
H₂No® is a proprietary performance standard established by , an outdoor apparel company, to certify the waterproofness, , and durability of fabrics used in its weather-resistant clothing and gear. H2No shells refer to Patagonia's waterproof shell materials meeting this standard, including 2-layer constructions designed to reliably handle heavy snow and rain. The standard requires materials to withstand at least 20,000 of hydrostatic head pressure for waterproofing, retain at least 10,000 after simulated extended wear, and meet specific metrics for moisture vapor transmission and evaporative heat transfer to ensure during activity. Introduced in the with early iterations like H2No fabric based on Toray's Entrant membrane, it has evolved to emphasize long-term field and lab testing, including the "Killer Wash" protocol that mimics 30 years of abrasion, laundering, and exposure. Key features of H₂No® include multi-layer constructions (typically 2.5 or 3 layers) with finishes that promote water beading and windproofing, while prioritizing environmental responsibility by eliminating intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in products since spring 2025. backs the standard with its Ironclad , allowing returns or repairs for failures, though real-world can vary based on like periodic DWR reapplication and avoidance of excessive drying. Independent reviews note H₂No® fabrics perform reliably in moderate to heavy rain for casual and use but may underperform competitors like in absolute water resistance or extreme prolonged exposure without upkeep. The standard's self-imposed testing—conducted primarily in-house—has drawn scrutiny for lacking third-party certification uniformity, yet it aligns with Patagonia's focus on reducing petroleum-based materials and advancing PFC-free alternatives amid regulatory pressures.

Overview

Definition and Objectives

H2NO was an upselling initiative developed by in collaboration with restaurant chains, designed to train waitstaff in techniques that discourage patrons from requesting free and instead promote the purchase of profitable carbonated soft drinks or other beverages. The program's name, a on the for (H₂O) combined with "no," encapsulated its core tactic of subtly redirecting customer preferences away from complimentary water service toward paid alternatives supplied by . The primary objective of H2NO was to increase revenue from beverage sales in full-service restaurants by reducing the incidence of unsolicited or habitual orders, which offered zero marginal profit to operators reliant on for fountain drink supplies. research indicated that proactive service often preempted orders for higher-margin items, prompting the program to equip servers with scripts and behavioral cues—such as delaying delivery or emphasizing drink specials—to elevate average check sizes through beverage upsells. This approach targeted environments like casual dining chains where unlimited refills on soft drinks could yield sustained profits, contrasting with the negligible cost of . Secondary goals included fostering stronger partnerships between and its restaurant clients by demonstrating measurable sales lifts from behavioral training, thereby justifying ongoing exclusive pouring rights and promotional commitments. The initiative reflected a broader corporate of leveraging psychological in point-of-sale interactions to counter defaults toward free options, without altering menu pricing or product formulations.

Economic Rationale

The economic rationale for the H2NO campaign centered on exploiting the stark disparity in profitability between and carbonated soft drinks in restaurant settings. incurs minimal serving costs—primarily labor and glassware—but generates zero direct beverage , effectively representing a lost opportunity for markup. In contrast, fountain soft drinks supplied by offer restaurants exceptionally high gross profit margins, typically ranging from 85% to 90%, due to the low cost of syrup concentrate (often pennies per serving) relative to retail pricing of $1.50 to $3.00 per drink. This structure allows a single soda order to contribute disproportionately to average check sizes and overall margins, with industry analyses confirming soft drinks as among the highest-margin items, far outpacing food categories where costs can exceed 30%. By training waitstaff to redirect requests toward suggestive selling of Coke products, H2NO aimed to systematically convert non-revenue water service into high-margin beverage sales, thereby boosting restaurant profitability without increasing food costs or inventory complexity. For , the program's incentives aligned with maximizing volume sales of fountain , a core revenue driver in the foodservice channel. wholesale to restaurants operates on thin per-unit production costs—primarily bottling and distribution—but scales profitably through high-volume contracts and exclusive pouring rights, enabling to capture upstream margins while restaurants handled downstream retail. The campaign's focus on addressed a causal gap: unchecked orders reduced beverage attach rates, limiting throughput and Coke's against competitors or bottled alternatives. Initial pilots at demonstrated feasibility, with suggestive selling techniques correlating to higher soda incidence, though exact revenue lifts were not publicly quantified beyond qualitative reports. This profit-maximizing approach reflected first-principles : incentivize substitution from zero-margin defaults to high-margin alternatives via behavioral nudges, yielding compounded gains for both supplier and operator in a competitive casual dining sector.

Development and Rollout

Origins within Coca-Cola

The H2NO program emerged from The Company's strategic analysis in the late , which identified complimentary as a barrier to beverage revenue in restaurants. Internal research by determined that servers often provided unsolicited glasses of water, preempting orders for higher-margin soft drinks and thereby reducing average check sizes by an estimated 20-30% in some establishments. This insight stemmed from sales data tracking patterns where water orders correlated inversely with fountain beverage volume, prompting to prioritize interventions that favored suggestive selling over passive service norms. In response, formulated H2NO—short for "H2 No"—as a targeted crew education kit in approximately 1999-2000, equipping restaurant managers with scripted techniques to discourage water requests and promote alternatives like products. The kit included exercises, sales scripts emphasizing beverage pairings with meals, and metrics for tracking upsell success, all calibrated to integrate into existing staff training without overt to avoid customer backlash. This initiative reflected 's broader supply-chain influence as a major beverage provider, leveraging exclusive pouring rights in partner chains to embed profitability-focused behaviors at the point of service. The program's foundational rationale prioritized empirical sales causality over conventions, positing that proactive redirection from zero-revenue to $2-3 per unit soft drinks could yield measurable per-table gains, a validated in preliminary simulations before external rollout. Coca-Cola's development emphasized data-driven persuasion, drawing on consumer behavior studies showing that 70% of diners default to when prompted first, thus framing H2NO as a corrective tool for lost opportunities rather than aggressive .

Initial Testing and Refinement

The H2NO initiative was initially developed and tested in the late 1990s through a partnership between and , owner of the chain. This collaboration served as the primary testing ground, where provided an education kit to train waitstaff in beverage suggestive selling techniques aimed at reducing orders in favor of paid soft drinks and other beverages. The program targeted the high incidence of default water requests, which averaged around 80-90% in casual dining settings, by equipping servers with strategies to promote alternatives without direct confrontation. Early implementation at select locations yielded measurable reductions in incidence, as documented in Coca-Cola's internal success story titled "The Olive Garden Targets Tap Water & WINS," published on their website around 1998. This testing phase linked training to employee incentives, including a contest called " to H2O," which rewarded staff for higher beverage upsell rates and contributed to increased fountain drink sales. Outcomes included not only revenue gains for the restaurant but also reported improvements in perceived guest satisfaction by steering diners toward flavored options. Refinement of the H2NO kit followed these pilots, incorporating feedback from 's operational data to fine-tune suggestive selling scripts and crew education modules for broader applicability. Adjustments emphasized subtle persuasion to avoid customer resistance, transforming the approach into a scalable model that promoted across its restaurant partners. The program's validated efficacy at , with documented declines in orders, informed subsequent iterations focused on maximizing profitability while maintaining service norms.

Operational Strategies

Waitstaff Training Protocols

The H2NO program provided waitstaff with a crew education kit focused on beverage suggestive selling techniques, aimed at reducing orders for complimentary in favor of paid soft drinks and other beverages. Developed collaboratively by and in the late 1990s and rolled out prominently by , the training emphasized proactive server interventions to influence choices at the point of order, positioning alternative drinks as superior for enhancing meal enjoyment and refreshment. Core protocols instructed servers to divert attention from water requests by immediately suggesting branded options like Coca-Cola products, framing them as more flavorful or complementary to Italian cuisine served at Olive Garden. This involved scripted prompts and responses, such as preemptively offering "Would you like a refreshing Coke with your meal?" or redirecting water inquiries with "Our sodas pair perfectly with pasta—can I get you one?" to minimize free water "incidence" rates. Training materials highlighted psychological cues, including the role of servers in shaping perceived dining value, with metrics tracking beverage upsell success per shift. To reinforce adoption, protocols integrated incentive contests like "Just Say No to H2O," where waitstaff competed to achieve targeted reductions in water orders, often linked to sales manager goals for overall beverage revenue growth. Sessions combined classroom-style instruction on suggestive selling efficacy—drawing on data showing paid drinks boosted check averages by 10-15% in test locations—with role-playing exercises to build confidence in handling customer pushback. Evaluation occurred through pre- and post-training audits of order data, ensuring protocols aligned with profit objectives without compromising service speed.

Persuasion Techniques and Scripts

The H2NO program employed beverage suggestive selling techniques as its core persuasion method, waitstaff to proactively recommend profitable soft drinks, iced teas, or other non- options upon initial customer inquiry about beverages. These techniques involved servers presenting an array of alternatives in response to water requests, framing tap water as less desirable while highlighting the refreshment or variety of products like fountain sodas. The approach drew from established sales principles, emphasizing verbal cues to shift customer preferences without direct refusal of water orders. Specific scripts were not publicly detailed in Coca-Cola's materials, but the program's crew education kit instructed servers to use phrases that subtly discourage , such as offering "an onslaught of alternative beverages" when diners asked for H2O, thereby guiding selections toward higher-margin items. An associated employee incentive contest at , titled " to H2O," reinforced these tactics by rewarding staff for measurable reductions in incidence, linking persuasion success to performance metrics. This gamified element motivated consistent application, with training focusing on timing—introducing suggestions early in the ordering process to preempt water defaults. Key techniques included:
  • Preemptive suggestion: Servers initiated beverage recommendations before water was requested, listing options like Coke or lemonade to establish non-water norms.
  • Reframing requests: Upon hearing "water," staff countered with questions like implying enhanced satisfaction from carbonated or flavored alternatives, avoiding outright to maintain service .
  • Bundling incentives: Pairing drink upsells with meal compliments to increase perceived value, supported by data showing higher from beverage variety over plain .
These methods proved effective at Olive Garden, where implementation correlated with decreased tap water orders and elevated beverage sales, as documented in Coca-Cola's internal success narratives.

Implementation at Olive Garden

Adoption Process

The H2NO program was jointly developed by The Coca-Cola Company and Olive Garden, a chain owned by Darden Restaurants, in the late 1990s as a targeted initiative to boost beverage revenue by reducing reliance on free tap water. Coca-Cola provided the educational framework, including scripts and techniques for servers to suggest alternative drinks, while Olive Garden integrated it into its operational training to align with goals of elevating average check sizes through diversified beverage orders. The adoption began with the creation of a "crew education kit" that outlined suggestive selling methods, emphasizing proactive engagement to steer patrons away from default water requests toward sodas or other paid options. Rollout at occurred through structured incorporation into the chain's existing monthly skill-building sessions, where store managers—referred to as sales managers—facilitated training for waitstaff using H2NO materials. These sessions focused on practical application, such as phrasing inquiries like "Would you like something else to drink besides ?" to prompt upsell opportunities without overt of service. The program was positioned internally as a success story, with documenting 's approach in a case study titled "The Olive Garden Targets & WINS," which highlighted early revenue gains from diminished orders and was shared on 's partner-facing until public exposure in mid-2001. Adoption emphasized server empowerment over policy changes, avoiding direct bans on to maintain while prioritizing profitable alternatives. By July , H2NO had been embedded across locations as a standard component of beverage service training, reflecting a data-driven rationale where constituted a significant portion of initial drink orders but yielded no direct profit. The process relied on Coca-Cola's expertise in consumer behavior and 's frontline execution, with metrics tracking shifts in order patterns to refine techniques iteratively during rollout. Public revelation of the program's details via a leaked led to its swift removal from Coca-Cola's site, but implementation at preceded this scrutiny and demonstrated the chain's willingness to experiment with supplier-led strategies for operational efficiency.

Measured Outcomes and Revenue Effects

The H2NO program, implemented at restaurants starting in the late 1990s, achieved a measurable reduction in orders through targeted waitstaff training in suggestive selling techniques, such as offering flavored alternatives like lemonade or when customers requested water. This shift encouraged diners to select paid beverages over free , aligning with Coca-Cola's objective to boost sales of its products and other non-water options. management integrated H2NO into monthly training sessions led by store managers, reporting internal success in altering customer defaults from habitual water selection to more varied and profitable drink choices. Coca-Cola described the Olive Garden rollout as a "success story," noting that decreased water incidence correlated with improved guest satisfaction via expanded beverage variety, though exact metrics such as percentage reductions in water orders or uplift in per-table beverage revenue were not publicly disclosed. The program's emphasis on higher-margin soft drinks and non-alcoholic alternatives directly supported revenue growth in the beverage category, which typically yields higher profits than complimentary water service. Post-implementation assessments by indicated that the approach sent a broader signal to the restaurant sector: prioritizing beverage diversification over default water provision enhances both sales and dining experiences. While quantitative revenue impacts remain undocumented in available reports from the era, the initiative's design—rooted in behavioral nudges to replace zero-revenue water with revenue-generating options—logically drove incremental income per guest, particularly in high-volume casual dining settings like . Following public exposure of the program in , Coca-Cola emphasized its role in sales training rather than explicit anti-water tactics, but continued to view it as an effective tool for operational profitability until the materials were withdrawn from circulation.

Broader Industry Impact

Expansion Attempts and Adoption Rates

Following the reported success at , where the H2NO program was integrated into monthly staff training sessions starting around 1998, positioned it as a replicable model for other casual dining establishments serving the company's fountain beverages. The initiative's promotional materials, including a titled "The Targets Tap Water & WINS," highlighted reduced tap water orders and increased beverage sales as evidence of efficacy, with the intent to encourage emulation across the industry by demonstrating improved through alternative drink suggestions. However, specific instances of formal adoption by other chains remain undocumented in contemporaneous reports, suggesting limited uptake beyond ' properties. Public exposure of the program in August 2001 triggered backlash, prompting to remove the online success story and related content from its corporate site, which curtailed broader dissemination efforts. Industry analysts at the time noted the program's focus on suggestive selling techniques but observed no measurable expansion, as competing priorities like promotion and direct consumer advertising overshadowed restaurant-specific training kits. Adoption rates appeared negligible outside , with no verified data on implementation at chains like or independent operators, reflecting resistance from servers wary of perceived manipulation and from consumers advocating for free access. By the early 2000s, H2NO's influence waned, evolving into generalized upselling guidelines rather than a standalone campaign, as evidenced by its absence from subsequent Coca-Cola restaurant partnership announcements. Later references in beverage industry literature cite it primarily as an Olive Garden case study, underscoring low overall penetration and a pivot toward less controversial tactics amid growing scrutiny of corporate beverage substitution strategies.

Comparative Analysis with Other Chains

Unlike the scripted, water-specific dissuasion tactics central to H2NO, which trained staff to redirect requests for toward products, many competing restaurant chains integrate beverage into broader suggestive selling protocols without explicitly targeting water avoidance. For instance, casual dining operators like and emphasize staff training on pairing beverages with meals, such as recommending sodas or iced teas to complement entrees, often achieving average check increases of 10-20% through non-confrontational prompts. These approaches prioritize customer personalization over prohibition-like redirection, aligning with industry standards where focuses on high-margin add-ons like refills or premium options rather than denying free alternatives. Fast-casual and quick-service chains, such as and , leverage technology-driven for beverages, including drive-thru voice AI that prompts for upsizes or combos, contributing to beverage attachment rates exceeding 80% in some locations. This contrasts with H2NO's manual crew kits, which relied on verbal scripts and yielded notable but unspecified reductions in water orders at , positioning it as a model for manual intervention in the early . PepsiCo-affiliated chains, including those under like , prioritize exclusive contracts and promotional bundling over dedicated anti-water campaigns, focusing instead on flavor innovations and apps to boost soda volumes without documented equivalents to H2NO's explicit tactics.
AspectH2NO at Other Chains (e.g., , )
Core TechniqueScripted redirection from to sodas via staff training kitsSuggestive pairings, digital prompts, and combo offers
Technology IntegrationMinimal; focused on in-person verbal cuesHigh; AI-driven upsell in drive-thrus and apps for 42-100% attachment rates
OutcomesReduced incidence; industry model for beverage shift10-30% average order value increase via structured programs
Controversy LevelHigh due to perceived manipulation of free choiceLow; emphasis on enhancement over denial
H2NO's approach, while effective in elevating Olive Garden's beverage sales through direct confrontation of water requests, faced backlash for ethical overreach, whereas contemporary strategies in rival chains evolve toward seamless integration, such as menu engineering that visually prioritizes beverages, sustaining revenue growth without the same public scrutiny. This shift reflects broader industry adaptation, where efficacy now hinges on data analytics and customer consent signals rather than prescriptive denial scripts.

Criticisms and Debates

Ethical and Manipulation Allegations

The H2NO campaign attracted allegations of manipulation due to its explicit protocols for restaurant servers to steer patrons away from free toward paid beverages. Implemented in collaboration with chains like , the program emphasized "suggestive selling techniques," instructing staff to proactively recommend soft drinks or other fountain beverages upon greeting tables, often preempting water requests to frame as an afterthought or suboptimal . Critics, including online commentators following the program's 2001 exposure, argued this approach psychologically primed customers for higher-margin purchases, potentially exploiting social norms where diners defer to server suggestions without fully considering alternatives. A focal point of contention was Olive Garden's linked employee incentive contest, branded "Just Say No to H2O," which rewarded servers for reducing water orders through targeted , with prizes including trips for top performers. Detractors portrayed this as incentivizing deceptive practices, likening the slogan—evoking the U.S. government's anti-drug "" initiative—to a corporate hijacking of messaging for profit, thereby eroding trust in casual dining interactions. The program's internal documentation, which framed water as a barrier to despite its negligible cost to restaurants, fueled claims of prioritizing over customer , though no evidence emerged of outright falsehoods in server scripts. In response to the backlash, which spread rapidly via early forums after a freelance writer uncovered the materials, Coca-Cola swiftly removed the H2NO content from its website on August 20, 2001, citing risks of consumer misinterpretation. While the company maintained the initiative aimed to enhance dining experiences through beverage variety, the episode underscored broader debates on whether aggressive in food service constitutes ethical or , particularly absent regulatory oversight on server training disclosures. No formal investigations or lawsuits ensued, but the allegations persisted in discussions of corporate sales tactics.

Health Policy Perspectives

Health policy analyses highlight that upselling strategies like H2NO, which prioritize sugary beverages over free water, contribute to higher intake of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and align counter to efforts to mitigate diet-related chronic diseases. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that frequent SSB consumption is associated with , , , heart disease, and , as these drinks provide without promoting fullness, leading to incomplete energy compensation at meals. In restaurant contexts, such tactics may amplify these risks by subtly steering patrons toward options averaging 150-200 calories per serving, often exceeding daily limits recommended at under 10% of total energy intake. Public health frameworks, including those from the (WHO), advocate reducing SSB availability and promotion through fiscal measures like taxes and structural changes such as default water offerings or removal of unhealthy drinks from prominent displays, which studies show can lower purchases without harming sales volumes. In the U.S., menu labeling laws under the require chain restaurants to disclose counts, aiming to counteract persuasive by enabling consumer awareness, though evidence indicates scripts emphasizing taste or refreshment can still influence selections toward SSBs. Health economists estimate that policies curbing SSB promotion, including in dining settings, could yield net savings by averting obesity-related healthcare costs, projected at billions annually. Critics from policy circles argue these practices reflect a broader tension between commercial incentives and causal links between liquid sugar intake and metabolic disorders, where empirical data from cohort studies demonstrate dose-response relationships with increases. However, implementation challenges persist, as voluntary industry pledges for healthier defaults remain uneven, and regulatory approaches like state-level SSB taxes—enacted in over 10 U.S. localities by 2023—have reduced consumption by 10-30% in affected areas but face resistance from beverage lobbies. Proponents of minimal intervention counter that personal agency and overall dietary patterns outweigh isolated effects, emphasizing education over mandates, though longitudinal data underscore SSBs' disproportionate role in youth trends.

Responses from Consumer Groups

Consumer advocacy organizations did not launch targeted campaigns against the H2NO program following its 2001 rollout, despite media reports highlighting its aim to reduce orders through server training at chains like . The initiative, which equipped servers with scripts and incentives to promote paid beverages, drew informal public scrutiny for prioritizing corporate profits over straightforward customer preferences for free water. Broader critiques from food policy experts, such as those documented in Marion Nestle's Soda Politics (2015), framed H2NO as emblematic of beverage industry strategies to boost and sales by undermining reliance on municipal , which is typically safe and cost-free in the U.S. Groups like the Center for Science in the (CSPI), while not addressing H2NO directly, have repeatedly challenged Coca-Cola's for encouraging sugary drink consumption over healthier alternatives, including , through lawsuits alleging deceptive health claims as recently as 2021. Consumer Reports has similarly advocated for tap water use, criticizing bottled water marketers—including Coca-Cola—for exploiting public doubts about municipal supplies to drive sales of products often derived from the same sources, a dynamic H2NO reinforced by discouraging unsolicited tap requests. Such positions underscore ongoing concerns among consumer watchdogs that upselling tactics like H2NO erode informed choice, though empirical data on the program's direct impact on consumer behavior remains anecdotal and tied to self-reported server success rates rather than independent audits.

Coca-Cola Defense and Evolution

Official Rebuttals

Upon public discovery of the H2NO campaign materials in 2001, Coca-Cola initially portrayed the initiative as a successful business strategy that benefited restaurants and diners alike. In an article posted on the company's website, titled "The Olive Garden Targets Tap Water & WINS," Coca-Cola described the program's outcomes at Olive Garden, asserting that reducing tap water orders through staff training led to increased beverage sales and customer satisfaction, with the claim that "less water and more beverage choices mean happier customers." The article faced immediate online ridicule for appearing to prioritize profits over and health preferences, prompting widespread criticism of manipulative tactics. In response, promptly removed the content from its website, with a spokeswoman stating that the company acted out of concern that the material "might be misinterpreted by consumers," while noting the page had been scheduled for dismantling prior to the backlash. No further public statements from directly addressed ethical allegations of discouraging free in favor of paid beverages, nor did the company retract the underlying suggestive selling techniques employed in H2NO. The retraction effectively halted overt promotion of the campaign, shifting focus away from its water-specific elements toward broader beverage practices.

Program Adjustments and Long-Term Status

Following the public exposure of the H2NO campaign in August 2001 through media reports and online discussions, promptly removed the associated promotional content from its internal restaurant portal, including the case study that highlighted the program's sales impacts. This action effectively halted the campaign's broader dissemination, as the portal was taken offline within days of the story gaining traction. Coca-Cola spokesperson Polly Howes responded to inquiries by emphasizing that the initiative was a standard suggestive selling training tool designed to help partner restaurants maximize beverage , rather than a targeted effort against , and suggested that external interpretations might overlook the . No formal modifications to the program's tactics—such as rephrasing training materials or expanding to alternative beverages—were announced or implemented; instead, the company shifted focus away from H2NO amid the ensuing scrutiny. The H2NO campaign did not persist beyond and has not been revived in 's subsequent restaurant partnerships or marketing strategies, with no references in company reports or industry analyses post-backlash. Its discontinuation aligned with a broader pattern of refining approaches to avoid risks, though core suggestive selling techniques remain embedded in foodservice collaborations.

Legacy and Cultural References

Influence on Modern Upselling Practices

H2NO pioneered structured server training to implement beverage suggestive selling, equipping staff with scripts and strategies to preempt requests for free by proposing alternatives, thereby prioritizing high-margin items. Rolled out in approximately 2000, the initiative targeted casual dining chains, with incorporating it into routine employee education and reporting enhanced beverage order volumes as a result. This demonstrated efficacy in redirecting consumer choices influenced wider restaurant sector adoption of analogous protocols, particularly for beverages where zero-cost options compete directly with profitable pours. Modern equivalents persist in standardized , where servers initiate interactions with targeted drink inquiries—such as offering specific brands or pairings—to secure early commitments and inflate per-table , often yielding 10-20% check average uplifts in implemented programs. The program's focus on subtle redirection over outright refusal prefigured contemporary refinements, including menu engineering that positions beverages prominently and performance incentives tied to add-on sales. While H2NO faced backlash for perceived manipulation, its validation of revenue gains from proactive beverage promotion normalized such tactics in full-service operations, evolving into data-driven systems that track upsell rates via point-of-sale for ongoing optimization.

Role in Discussions of Free Market Incentives

The H2NO program exemplifies incentives by incentivizing collaboration between beverage suppliers and restaurant operators to boost revenue from higher-margin products through voluntary sales training. Launched in collaboration with ' chain around , the initiative provided an education kit to train servers in suggestive selling techniques, aiming to reduce unsolicited or default orders that offered no profit potential while steering patrons toward carbonated soft drinks and other beverages with substantial markups. This alignment of interests—where benefits from increased syrup sales royalties and restaurants from elevated per-table revenue—demonstrates how profit motives drive operational efficiencies without regulatory mandates, relying instead on contractual partnerships and internal performance metrics. In economic discussions, H2NO highlights the mechanism of structures within competitive markets, where servers are motivated to upsell via potential tip increases from higher bills or managerial oversight tied to beverage quotas, fostering a cascade of aligned behaviors from employee to enterprise level. The program's reported success in decreasing " incidence" at participating outlets illustrates empirical outcomes of such s, as reduced free water service correlated with expanded beverage choices and documented uplift, underscoring the market's capacity for self-regulating optimization of toward value-creating transactions. Critics, often from interventionist perspectives, contend this borders on manipulation by exploiting service interactions, yet the absence of compulsion—customers retain the option to insist on water—affirms the voluntary exchange central to dynamics, where persuasion competes on efficacy rather than force. Broader analyses of practices reference H2NO as a in how unregulated markets reward in demand stimulation, contrasting with subsidized or controlled sectors where incentives may distort toward non-profit goals; here, the program's focus on "guest satisfaction" through diversified options served as a rationale, with profitability framed as an incidental yet measurable benefit of enhanced choice presentation. This reflects causal realism in enterprise strategy: high-margin items like fountain drinks, priced to cover costs and generate surplus, naturally attract promotional efforts absent artificial barriers, promoting overall sector vitality through competitive emulation rather than uniform regulation. Empirical data from the era, including Olive Garden's implementation, validate that such incentives yield tangible revenue gains, reinforcing arguments for minimal interference in private commercial persuasion.

References

  1. https://www.patagonia.com/product/mens-powder-town-ski-snowboard-jacket/31626.html
  2. https://www.patagonia.com/our-footprint/h2no-performance-standard.html
  3. http://www.outdoorinov8.com/patagoniahistory.html
  4. https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/topics/clothing-mens/best-rain-jacket-men
  5. https://www.outoria.com/outdoor/gore-tex-h2no/
  6. https://edwinvonholy.com/2024/11/22/the-history-of-patagonia-rain-jackets-innovation-in-weather-protection/
  7. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/20/technology/having-customers-say-no-to-tap-water.html
  8. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/02/weekinreview/word-for-word-deep-water-just-say-no-to-h20-unless-it-s-coke-s-own-brew.html
  9. https://cspdailynews.com/beverages/downsizing-supersize
  10. https://blog.mirus.com/menu-engineering-3-tips-to-maximize-profit-margin
  11. http://journalrecord.com/2001/08/21/replacing-water-with-coke063-business-world/
  12. https://nowiknow.com/giving-water-the-works/
  13. https://boingboing.net/2001/08/01/cocacolas-website-is.html
  14. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/20/business/compressed-data-having-customers-say-no-to-tap-water.html
  15. https://digital.library.txst.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/07974291-70b1-479c-a6ed-507585ce4150/content
  16. https://factrepublic.com/facts/13976/
  17. https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/3q1a4k/til_that_cocacola_once_launched_a_campaign_called/
  18. https://spaceescalator.club/h2no-or-the-time-when-coca-cola-went-evil
  19. https://www.restaurant-hospitality.com/restaurant-technology/10-powerful-upsell-techniques
  20. https://tripleseat.com/blog/restaurant-upselling-techniques-ways-to-drive-profits-and-customer-experience/
  21. https://www.soundhound.com/voice-ai-blog/the-power-of-100-upsell-maximizing-revenue-at-every-drive-thru-interaction/
  22. https://www.quora.com/What-tactics-do-Coke-and-Pepsi-use-to-get-restaurants-to-use-their-products-exclusively
  23. https://www.restauranttimes.com/blogs/marketing/upselling-techniques-in-restaurants/
  24. https://business.yelp.com/resources/articles/restaurant-upselling-techniques/?domain=restaurants
  25. https://www.itsacheckmate.com/blog/10-restaurant-upselling-tactics-that-increase-sales-without-being-pushy
  26. https://www.cdc.gov/nutrition/php/data-research/sugar-sweetened-beverages.html
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2862460/
  28. https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-weight-growth/rethink-your-drink/index.html
  29. https://www.who.int/tools/elena/interventions/ssbs-adult-weight
  30. https://www.who.int/tools/elena/bbc/ssbs-childhood-obesity
  31. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10271080/
  32. https://brownschool.washu.edu/2021/10/warning-labels-on-soda-bottles-restaurant-menus-could-reduce-obesity-save-health-care-costs/
  33. https://www.ajmc.com/view/curbing-sugary-beverages-for-health-and-economic-gains
  34. https://nutritionsource.hsph.harvard.edu/healthy-drinks/sugary-drinks/
  35. https://foodpolicylab.stanford.edu/our-research/sugary-drink-taxes-and-pricing-policies
  36. https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/topics/food-justice/sugary-drinks
  37. https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/143/4/e20190282/37217/Public-Policies-to-Reduce-Sugary-Drink-Consumption
  38. https://www.scribd.com/document/291621522/Soda-Politics-Taking-on-Big-Soda-and-Winning
  39. https://www.cspi.org/case/coca-cola-company-and-american-beverage-association
  40. https://www.consumerreports.org/epa/should-we-break-our-bottled-water-habit-a5667672175/
  41. https://pos.toasttab.com/blog/on-the-line/how-train-servers-to-use-suggestive-selling-techniques
  42. https://www.touchbistro.com/blog/suggestive-selling-techniques-for-restaurants/
  43. https://www.7shifts.com/blog/suggestive-selling-for-restaurants/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.