Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-30-2011, 11:16 AM
 
3,308 posts, read 5,732,570 times
Reputation: 5042

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
the issue is contract violation--
the Dublin plant and the family that own it have persistantly gone outside the contract it has with the parent company to make MORE bottles (not in Dublin either) and sell in wider area than the contract allows

they are not the OWNER of the Dr. Pepper they bottle--they are a franchise in a limited location which has experienced a big surge of marketing/sales and started making a lot of money--
money they likely are not reporting as sales to the parent company since they gain a lot of it outside the contract provisions
so basically the Dublin plant/family owners are violating a contract--plain and simple

in order to get the contract/license they had to agree to terms with the parent company--
I am sure they knew if they did not they would lose the contract and would have to stop bottling the product and lose their business
tough luck--
the Dublin company is the one violating the law--
even big companies have rights
Dear loves2read, first off I want to thank you for all your devoted time and effort in setting forth detailed and researched facts in most of the threads posted here and especially mine. It must take a big chunk of time out of your life to do so and therefore please be aware how much it is appreciated. In most cases however and especially this one, I believe most people are aware of how contracts work.

the Dublin plant and the family that own it have persistantly gone outside the contract it has with the parent company Really now? Curious as to where you DO get your facts. BTW, it's persistently. LOL Some of us do manage to get a semi-education in spite of some teachers!

The Dublin plant/family is NOT violating contract terms of selling outside it's distribution areas when outsiders buy the products WITHIN it defined area. What they (purchasers) do with the products they buy are no longer the concern of the original seller (Dublin plant). To make this more simple for you to understand, if you buy a JD tractor from a dealership (they also have boundaries they are allowed to sell within) and turn around and sell the tractor to someone OUTSIDE the boundary lines of the original dealership you bought it from, it has no reflection whatsoever on the JD dealership that the tractor was originally purchased from. Once the tractor leaves their lot, so ends their relationship with it except for service agreements.

Most contracts in such cases are complex and tricky and there are usually loopholes. But perhaps you have access to this particular contract agreement?

I don't know why you feel the need to emphasize the fact that the Dublin bottling plant is a franchise NOT THE OWNER OF DR. PEPPER ~ LOL, I'm sure EVERYONE knows that!

As to this remark you made .... money they likely are not reporting as sales to the parent company since they gain a lot of it outside the contract provisions, that's rather bold, isn't it? But since you appear to be much more knowledgeable regarding this situation than anyone else, we'll just have to take your word for it.

the Dublin company is the one violating the law-- WOW! Dr. Pepper could only be so lucky as to have YOU for the judge presiding the case! As to even big companies have rights .... of course everyone has rights. LOL is someone trying to take away a big company's rights for crying out loud? I do believe that's going to keep me awake at nights worrying about it! Is little Dublin intentionally trying to take away a big company's rights? Seriously?

Regardless, THL is right, PR disaster in most people's minds!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-30-2011, 11:39 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,618 posts, read 86,577,260 times
Reputation: 36637
Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
the Dublin company is the one violating the law--
No, they might be violating the terms of the contract, but that's not the same thing as violating the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 12:38 PM
 
15,913 posts, read 20,115,959 times
Reputation: 7693
They violate their contract, they get slapped with a lawsuit....

Standard American business practice, why people see something evil in this is beyond me........

Quote:
far beyond the 44-mile radius of Dublin as per the terms of its franchise agreement
So now it's OK to sign an agreement and then disregard it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 02:13 PM
 
611 posts, read 2,225,702 times
Reputation: 2028
I have already called the DP corporate office to register my displeasure and called the Dublin group to offer my support

Not surprisingly the corporate call was handled by "Kevin" (I believe he was in India)........the Dublin group I talked to a guy that seemed to know pretty much exactly what was going on said thanks for the support, but they are holding tight right now to see what comes of it and just trying to make DP the way it was meant to be and that there would be more info in the future probably

I said well for now regular DP is OUT for me and I will only drink the Dublins when I can find them until this is resolved and if it does not go well for Dublin then I may just drink only the Dublins in the future when I come across them
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Underneath the Pecan Tree
15,982 posts, read 35,037,981 times
Reputation: 7427
What's tacky??? There was a breach of contract and in that right; DP has every right to sue. However, if DP was smart; they would take the Dublin brand and take it global. Many people obviously see it as the superior choice of the two.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 06:21 PM
 
37,315 posts, read 59,487,504 times
Reputation: 25330
It is just very ironic to me that when the little guy is getting mistreated by "the man" and has been abused by the system there is gnashing of teeth and righteous indignation--
but when the big company is the one getting trashed then it is ok--

If the Dublin company contracts to make more Dr. Pepper in its particular way than IT can make in its own plant--and more than it can legitimately SELL in its own marketing area--then it certainly knows and abets the people it is selling that excess to and knowingly breaks the contract with its parent company--
just because it is a small, locally-owned company does not mean that it is David vs Goliath
or that it is the one being sinned against--
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 06:25 PM
 
Location: Cedar Hill "The Chill", Texas
277 posts, read 574,966 times
Reputation: 192
Why don't they just bottle both? Pepsi has been doing both for a couple of years, so they must not be losing money doing it. For taste I like sugar, but the HFCS doesn't upset my stomach like cane sugar does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 06:31 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,768,566 times
Reputation: 7752
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnPaul View Post
People still drink Dr Pepper?
Dr Pepper is my favorite soda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 11:25 PM
 
Location: TX
4,051 posts, read 5,611,103 times
Reputation: 4739
The Dr Pepper Snapple company is not the original company that used to make Dr. Pepper long ago. That company no longer exists. DPS is a spin-off from the Cadbury Co. of the UK (which had rights to the Dr Pepper brand name in the U.S. for quite a while) and DPS only exists as a separate company from the year 2008. The idea of suggesting it is the "parent company" of a bottlling company that's been in business in Texas for 120 years when that so-called parent company has only existed for a few years is ludicrous! Dublin Dr Pepper makes the original formula of Dr Pepper, which DPS has no interest in...they just don't want any competition, no matter how very small the Dublin Dr Pepper sales might be. The legal agreement under which this bottling company puts out this product in the Dublin Texas area dates back a very long time, to when the original old Dr. Pepper company was first acquired by another company. Long very complicated story! Anyway, the Dublin plant has my unqualified support in this. When it comes to Dr Pepper, I drink ONLY Dublin Dr Pepper, which tastes exactly like the original Dr. Pepper of my youth. That other stuff put out by that other company tastes downright NASTY! EW! Really, if I drank even a sip of the DPS stuff it would take me a week to get that horrible taste out of my mouth again! If they take my Dublin away, I guess I'll have to drink only Mexican cokes and pepsis...which I also drink now, along with Dublin Dr Pepper. But really, I don't think that DPS can win this one!
http://www.dublindrpepper.com/history.aspx?odrd=true&setuser (broken link)=
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2011, 09:54 PM
 
37,315 posts, read 59,487,504 times
Reputation: 25330
it does not matter when the company in Dublin started bottling its brand of Dr. Pepper--
the fact is that it does not own the rights to market under the Dr. Pepper name--in any formula

it had to buy the right to do that from the company that owns the marketing rights to the name/product OR it would have not been able to continue making/selling the cane-sugar formula
and apparently it has overstepped the limits of that contract by how it makes/markets its own particular logo with the product...

Dr Pepper Snapple takes Dublin bottler to court | Business | Dallas Business, Texas Busi...

you can drink what you want--you can even drink products that are basically "black market" soft drinks--
but just because you like it does not mean the makers are following the law by producing/selling it outside their marketing agreement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top