Cristiano Ronaldo's gesture costs Coca Cola four billion dollars
By - SpiritualHawk420
It may have cost them that in stock but it won’t matter long term. It’s a temporary PR hit.
They'll make sure to have Dasani in front of him next media availability.
First thing I thought of, Coke owns a product in just about every beverage category I can think of
They own Topo Chico which dropped a hard seltzer this year so... kinda?
Not to my knowledge but they do have Topo Chico Hard Setlzer
I was also going to ask if they had any alcoholic beverage products! If not, was also wondering if the fact that varying alcoholic beverages are regulated by different government bureaucracies (FAA vs FDA) could play a financial role that keeps them from trying
>(FAA vs FDA)
Probably meant Alcohol Tobacco Firearms or Federal Trade Commission over
Federal Aviation Administration, Sorry to be a pedant but it struck me funny.
It also stands for Federal Alcohol Administration!
Wow TIL. The myriad of federal alphabet soup agencies seems to be unlimited.
In your defense, when I googled FAA I was suggested your acronym ! Lol must be more commonly used for sure
Exactly what I said! That and Powerade! Like wtf were they thinking?!
Water is technically not a beverage, but Desani is. Coca-cola puts Epsom Salt (magnesium sulfate) into their "water" for "flavor".
Meaningless distinction. Water is absolutely a beverage in marketing terms. Even absolutely pure de-ionized water is sold and is categorized as a beverage.
You missed the core point of what I was saying.
Coca-Cola puts a drying agent in their product so that you'll feel more thirsty after drinking it.
U forgot to do a chemistry
This got me 😂
Looks like you forgot to do an English
But it actually was you who missed the fire point of what this even said to begin with.
Unless you are drinking distilled water all water has some salts content added back for taste. Pure H2O won't taste the way you expect, this is also why tap water in different cities will taste different, because of different mineral content
Dasani is soft water, for weak minds.
On the other hand, I wonder if Nestle saw any temporary PR bump. But seriously, I'm glad he used a bottle with no label.
It's also worth noting that a 4 billion dollar drop for a company as big as Coca Cola is something like 2% of their market cap
Plus the entire market was down, I find it unlikely moving a couple of bottle off a podium was the real reason for the drop.
Unfortunately the media won’t spread headline on every page when the price rebounds in a few days.
Is a sudden resurge even possible?
Over the long haul Coke is a decent investment. I would argue it will probably not out perform the market short term, however I would bet if you put money in Coke you will make money long term.
Easy cash for traders
Not more than any other minor price movement. Some will have made buys the day before and will temporarily "lose" money. Or permanently, if they foolishly sell into a drop (which some will do). Some will have sold shares and might be able to buy it back at slightly less. Betting on daily ups and downs is exactly that: betting, which is a zero sum process, with wins being offset by losses. For every day trader who wins, somebody loses.
Most shares in major companies are owned by investors, including pension and mutual funds which invest in long term gains and dividends. For them, this kind of drop means nothing.
I mean when Ronaldo did that if bought shorts then nice
Just completely normal fluctuation.
[Link to Actual Video](https://youtu.be/x2ZLS1V3iMw)
Good on him. Must feel like such a don knowing he’s way too big for there to be even the slightest bit of comeback.
By all accounts hes a fitness fanatic. Trains everyday, eats healthy, doesmt drink or smoke and definitely no drugs.
So makes sense. The guy treats soda like its sugared poison.
Because it is sugared poison. This is an important gesture that could have a lasting impact. Kids look up to him as a role model and if they know he doesn’t dig on that stuff then there is a chance they won’t either. This is coming from an American who has zero interest in soccer and most sports for that matter.
Indeed, it's odd to see a drink like this being accepted as a sponser by the UEFA at all. Pro football (not soccer) players rarely even drink soft drinks since they are allways on a strict diet.
>it's odd to see a drink like this being accepted as a sponser by the UEFA
I mean, coke and mcdonald's are two of the biggest olympics sponsors historically.
Which sounds so twisted haha
Generally don't drink sodas because of the sugar, something like 9-10 teaspoons in a 12 ounce can. In iced tea that volume I use 1 or a fraction more. It's a ridiculous amount of sugar.
The only way to stay in the sport, and at the level he's at, is to be a fitness fanatic.
On top of that, he has his own kids to teach not to eat and drink garbage. So it annoys him fairly directly when he sees people doing this stuff to their bodies, and companies like Coca Cola pushing more empty calorie sugar drinks.
He makes a point of showing the cameras for people at home that we should be drinking water, not garbage. He doesn't have to care, he just does.
it is. when available I opt for the in between- ginger beer that is full flavored but has like 15 calories because they don't over saturate the sweetness.
sadly their ginger ale sucks.
If there was a button in front of that man that said "Obliterate Coca-Cola" he'd do a set of High Knees on top of it
I read that when he was transfered to a new team in England, his new colleagues (which are also top soccer players) were amazed by the intensity of his daily training routine.
That team was Manchester United, which you can't not know, and also it's called football, not soccer, you dumb american shit.
What’s got you all insecure today?
I'm perfectly secure. What are you talking about?
Soccer man same thing
Soccer was actually used in Britain not all that long ago. They switched to football to be less American after North Americans began to use soccer. Also, North American English is closer to how middle English was actually pronounced, as they didn't bastardize it by dropping the rhotic final sounds on various words… long ago, a Brit would've pronounced it water and not wate… you stupid ignorant shit.
Suck my dick inbred degenerate.
As far large amounts of inbreeding England takes the win. Looking at you royal family
Pretty hard to do when your dad is slobbering on it all day…
Good on him for taking such a. Stance
the absolute disgust on his face when he sees soda near him 🤣
good on him. that shit's poison. and look at his skin. that is a well hydrated man right there.
Fun fact : that’s a [myth!](https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/expert-answers/hydrated-skin/faq-20058067)
> Although proper hydration is important for your overall health, it’s not clear whether drinking extra water affects skin hydration in healthy people.
>Skin is made up of three layers — the outer layer (epidermis), the underlying skin (dermis) and the subcutaneous tissue. If the outermost layer of the epidermis doesn’t contain enough water, skin will lose elasticity and feel rough. Despite this connection, however, there’s a lack of research showing that drinking extra water has any impact on skin hydration or appearance.
Lack of research doesn't necessarily mean that it's not true, just that it hasn't been studied in a scientific environment.
There’s not lack of research on the subject, just lack of research that *supports* that extra water affects the skin.
I’m just wondering, not going either way on this but curious if you can help me with the logic. I’m reading “it’s not clear extra water affects skin” and “lack of research showing any impact”.
How does that equate to “there is a lack of research that supports” and not “hasn’t been studied” ?
Just on what I’m reading here I’m not seeing that there is a conclusion that research exists and there’s no supporting evidence. My take from the wording is more of we have no idea because we don’t have the data.
Again, just what I’m getting from that link and these comments.
I feel like if the research is there, and it doesn’t support that drinking extra water helps, why wouldn’t it be phrased just “no evidence” or something, and not “lack of research”
I still don't see where there's any research that supports that it's not true.
Yall are seriously arguing that a lack of evidence is evidence, and I'm the one labeled stupid. What a time we live in.
Please tell me how you would prove a negative then.
Imagine arguing on reddit.
Imagine conforming by commenting the same comment that thousands have said before you, not an original thought in sight. It's all just fake internet points my dude. I'm just here to stay awake at an overnight shift at work. What's your reason for replying?
Says the guy not involved on the conversation literally instigating an argument
You do know that Mayo Clinic is one of the top hospital and health system networks in the nation, yeah? I’m going to trust their info over…well, pretty much anyone.
But it doesn't actually say that drinking water does not affect skin hydration, it literally just says "it's not clear" which literally means that they don't know. I don't see how this is hard for you to understand.
And then it says there’s no research supporting that it does. I don’t see why *that’s* so hard for you to understand.
We’ll probably have to agree to disagree here.
He's putting the house on stupid.
If you didn't prove a positive, you can still suppose the negative to be true even if you haven't directly *proven* it. "I drink lots and lots of water and my skin is still screwed up. Therefor, drinking lots of water doesn't hydrate my epidermis" would by a valid hypothesis.
This just isn't true. There are no assumptions in science. People assumed the world was flat for hundreds of years because there was no evidence supporting a round earth.
How was there no evidence for a round earth when the earth is round. I was actually kind of understanding you until this comment. You freaking lost me at this idiotic comment. What you should have said is 5hey confused the evidence 5hey did have. The misinterpreted the evidence, not there was no evidence.
Because, since you apparently don't remember history class, back before Galileo came around, everyone was pushed the idea that the earth was flat by the church. Galileo himself was imprisoned for doing experiments proving that the earth was round and not flat.
I'm not trying to be right or wrong in yall's silly little argument. I'm trying to illuminate you to the published facts.
For tens of thousands of years only stupid and/or ignorant people thought the Earth was flat; learned or observant people (like the ancient Egyptians and the Greeks) could easily prove the Earth is round.
Not only stupid or ignorant people, everybody and every civilization at one point. The Egyptians and Greeks were already gone. The church, which basically controlled the known world, pushed onto everyone that the earth was flat and they imprisoned people like Galileo for saying otherwise.
actually there is. a recent study conducted at the Universities of Lisbon and Madrid shows that drinking water improves the state of superficial and deep skin hydration. but people here on reddit believe at mayo clinic which didn't do any study on it...
Wow they even downvoted you.
you've eliminated *most* of america. 🤣
edit; it's true. people don't drink enough water. you're supposed to drink a lot of water.
> you're supposed to drink a lot of water.
Do you still believe that "eight glasses of water" thing? 'cause [I have some news for you.](https://www.med.umich.edu/1libr/Gyn/ObgynClinic/8GlassesWaterMyth.pdf)
not really, i never tried to abide by that. i admittedly always assumed i should be drinking more than i do but your source tells me to go by what i go by; feeling and urine. and i'm 200 lbs so i do actually drink quite a bit of water to make that right.
i'd add as of october 2020, the mayo clinic recommends 15.5 cups for men, 11.5 for women, ~20% coming from food. so it's not like university of michigan has some kind of final say on the matter. and the mayo clinics sort of a big deal as far as medical opinions. unless you want to show me that's a myth too? 😂
Just the first source I found. There's also [University of Alabama](https://www.uab.edu/news/youcanuse/item/11421-busting-the-8-cups-of-water-myth), a more specific (kidney-focused) study [from the AMA](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2680548), [a doctor from Indiana University](https://www.sciencealert.com/there-s-no-evidence-we-need-to-drink-eight-glasses-of-water-a-day-researcher-advises) (indirect citation due to paywall), and [the American Physiological Society](https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/ajpregu.00365.2002).
It's not just *one* source I'm finding here, so maybe can the asshole routine at the end there.
if acknowledging your source and it's contents and then stating it's not completely agreed on subject matter makes me an asshole, then i don't feel like you're a very agreeable person. i thought we were just having a conversation. 🤷♀️
> unless you want to show me that's a myth too? 😂
it was this bit specifically. The rest of it was fine, this was unnecessary.
i legitimately thought you might! lol
No being you is what makes you an asshole, this other stuff is funny tho
the person i was talking to was fine, they just took issue with me saying "unless you want to show me that's a myth too?" because they thought i was being a smartass. which wasn't the case. i'm just super open to the possibility i'm wrong, always. 😂
a recent study conducted at the Universities of Lisbon and Madrid shows that drinking water improves the state of superficial and deep skin hydration.
The amount of cookies the linked site wants me to agree to or not before reading the article made me "nope" right out.
He moved two coke bottles out from in front of him and put them out if the cameras view. He then held up his water bottle and said to drink water.
Thanks for the explanation.
Yes don't drink icky bad corp soda, drink disposable bottled water with the brand removed because they wouldn't pay to advertise
I mean... Yea that's pretty much what he said?
I mean we're talking about coke because that's the company that was in the room, but if it was Pepsi instead we'd still be having the exact same conversation.
And people seemed to miss my point that disposable bottled water is terrible for the environment and he should be drinking from a reusable bottle. Sodas not healthy but I don't know anyone who would argue it is. In my opinion it is like someone shaming forced labor clothes while preaching for some sweatshop made swill that the workers are paid next to nothing for
Right and I agree with you bottled water comes with its own wicked host of environmental and humanitarian problems. at the same time though I imagine the environment in which he gave this gesture was probably not configured to support going to a tap and refilling a thermos every half hour or however much this dude drinks water.
Coke and particularly nestlé are fucking evil, but trying to tackle the societal, the health, the economic, the environmental, and the humanitarian problems these companies cause all at once is a massive undertaking and you're bound to get lost in the reeds.
It's okay to want to laser focus your efforts on one facet, in this case health, at a time like he's doing.
What he did isn't incoherent. His focus is restricted to personal health, not environment or corporations
You know who else probably doesn't like cookies?
You should check out brave browser. https://brave.com/
I use it already on tower, laptop, tablet, and phone. Always use the app for reddit on my phone at the moment, though.
lol yeah and (not that they were trying to be) but this isn't remotely GDPR compliant. If you just close the cookie window that's supposed to be taken as "no" but then it won't let you see the rest of the site.
Complete nonsense click bait.
People need to learn the difference between stock price and value and income. This stunt happened to coincide with a TEMPORARY drop in stock price. This means nothing to the longer term value of the company, and even if it was a permanent loss in stock value, it is not a 'cost' to the company. If anything, it would "cost" the owners of the stock if EVERY SINGLE SHARE was sold at the lower price
That’s nonsense. If stock prices meant nothing and wealth was equal to monopoly game “wealth” companies wouldn’t care about it.
Companies use their stock price as a leverage to take up business loans, open new branches off the back of newly gained wealth, attract more investments etc. They also pay bigger dividends to stockholders based on the rise and fall of their stock. So Coca Cola will bleed and investors will lose money.
“Temporary”? It’s a stock, it fluctuates based upon real-world events and based on how the public perceives the company in question is doing. If the public conversation deems that a product by this company is bad then this publicly listed company’s stock will dip as a direct result of something bad one of the world’s best known athletes says about their product. It’s simple as that. Good public image = stable stock price, bad public image = volatile stock price.
If Coca Cola manages to reverse the tide of negative outlook people get of it by throwing money on PR and is able to shift the public perception somehow, then, yes, I see them recovering from this but it remains to be seen how this public reaction unfolds and whether the critical mass will force the policy makers to step in and try to regulate Cola Cola’s products to minimise its health risks. Coca Cola has gone through something like this, they’ve beaten attempts of regulatory encroachment plenty of times in the past so let’s see.
Dude, you just simultaneously restated his point, and then fell victim to what he's pointing out.
Yeah, stock price matters. But Coke losing half a percent for one day is just stock market. Their price matters between 400 a share vs 20 a share, but 390 to 400 is just how the dice roll in the stock market.
And OP talked about how they lost billions, but it was all imaginary market money. That was his main point. It's also far more likely than not that prices will be back when everyone's short memory forgets this next week. This is all a bunch of nothing for Coke.
No, he dismissively talked about how their stock price falling means nothing when they lost billions. It may be speculative, abstract wealth but it’s still wealth.
For a company that made 33 billions in profit losing close to 4 billion in a day is not just “one percent”.
Coca Cola may well get over this bump but you can never be too sure how things will play out. You talking with such an assured confidence about a hypothetical is funny. It’s a start of a negative trend for Coca Cola and you can’t know how it will all end. You sound just like those “experts” on tv who talk out of their asses and always fail to acknowledge the wider context and other factors.
You’re reading way too into this to try to validate your own dumb logic. Just accept that you were wrong and move on.
You’re really here trying to spin a 4B market price loss as nothing and yet I’m the one who’s dumb?!
What do you got for brains? Sponge cake?
I’m really starting to question your mental capabilities since you’re looking at this from the wrong perspective and refuse to shift it.
If Coca-Cola goes down $4 billion in profit from last year to this year, that’s a big deal.
Coca-cola revenues are actually up this year, so this $4 billion is not coming out of the money they actually earn. This $4billion is simply a drop in their valuation, which is, in the grand scheme of things, only a less than 2% drop based around a blip on the radar publicity stunt. Meanwhile, they’re still up in valuation since last year and have been steadily rising despite the occasional dip. So yes, it is a whole bunch of nothing. $4 billion is a lot to you, but it is nothing to a company worth hundreds of billions. You’re not thinking in relative terms and I’m sorry if that’s because you’re not capable of abstract thinking.
That’s all swell and I acknowledged most of it in my other comments. The original comment was arguing how market value means nothing, as if having a market value 1B or 240B has zero effects on a company so I argued the opposite. There are plenty of ways how companies increase their profits and market stranglehold on the back of its abstract market value.
Further, you can’t know how this will play out so right now, today, a 4B loss is HUGE and would be huge for any company. There are just too many factors at play and it’s all more or less fickle so depending on developments in the next few days this dip could prove to be more than a one-off or, yes, just a blip. But that’s all in the domain of ifs and hypotheticals and probably better to just leave it at that.
It's not a loss. You ignored that part. A loss would only occur if stock were sold, and that loss only affects shareholders who sell.
A change in valuation is not meaningless, but it's not a loss.
Coca Cola market cap is arround 240B usd. You should not compare profit because this is not a loss in Coke Sales or an increase in costs.
So in fact 4/240=1.6%. Which can be assumed to be negligent intraday/week volatility for a publicly traded company.
Coca Cola has an invested capital arround 80b. So 30% of their market capitalization. Then lets say they invest that percentage of the 4B they lost today: they invest 1.2 billion. Their annual return on investment is arround 20% so they get in a year 0.24B. This is in sales not in cost but lets assume they maintain their margins, so a profit of 25% on that: so 60 million dollars.
60 million/33billion=0.18% increase in profits.
That would be a pretty rough estimate of the opportunity cost of what happened today.
Still thinking this is a bump?
That’s a big single-day loss, regardless of how big a company is, especially if it snowballs tomorrow. It’s early days still but if in the coming days they rally back then I can concede that it was just a blip.
Isn't Coca Cola literally the largest manufacturer of bottled water under countless names to hide the fact that it's a coca cola product?
Short answer…yes…and no…less than Nestle by an order of magnitude
World’s biggest polluter loses pocket change due to millionaire’s unsolicited opinion.
Drinking water is a necessity, not an opinion.
Drinking bottled drinks isn't though.
Coke sells DASANI, bottled water. Little difference between water sold by the soda giants.
Except... Bottled water doesn't cause the myriad of health problems Coke does.
Here in Mexico we are the #1 consumers of Coke in the world. We're also #1 in obesity. Notice a pattern?
But the point is that COKE DOESN'T CARE. Drink the namesake product, drink Minute made Juice, drink Dasani. Or any of 500 other products they sell. They make slightly MORE money (on a per l basis) on water than on the highly processed soft drinks. So in the end, it was stupid of anyone to think such a stunt hurts Coke .
Mexico is also #1 in yellowness in movies, notice a pattern?
Mexico is not #1 in obesity. Not even close. It is a out #29.
The idea that obesity is caused by soda is one of those Big Lies.
Fun fact - people who drink diet soda have been found to be fatter than those who drink regular in a number of studies.
The reality is that it is lifestyle. Eat too much and exercise too little and you end up fat.
It looks like you're putting the carT* before the horse. I'm guessing fat people drink diet soda because they are fat already, not that diet sodas cause fat people.
“Car before the horse” ?
I wasn't saying diet soda makes you fat. I was saying the idea that soda makes you fat is flawed.
The problem isn't soda, it is lifestyle.
Yeah and high calorie, sugary drinks make it much easier to get fatter. A high sugar intake is also associated with a diminished insulin response.
High caloric intake in general is associated with diminished insulin response. The issue is not sugar specifically, it's eating too much.
Soda is just one potential source of calories. Drinking soda periodically is fine, it's when you drink large quantities every day that it becomes an issue. But that is true in general.
Obesity is linked to over eating and lack of exercise. It's the most basic math. If you consume more calories than you burn you get fat. Simple. As. That.
i think he meant another kind of 'coke' :D
They’d all be skinny as hell then
The kind that tastes like sweet, sweet Columbian Coke.
Bottled water is terrible on the environment, exploitive, and generally a bad idea except when tap water is unavailable or unhealthy.
Coke is bottled water + additives.
I meant problems caused directly to humans by consumption. Not the environmental effects which are entirely another beast.
>Coke is bottled water + additives.
Under that logic, bleach is bottled water + additives.
It's not soda, carbs or sugar. It's calories in vs calories out. Nothing else.
Technically yes, but with a lot of confounding factors.
Sugar is terrible for calories, and has no needed value in your diet. It makes you want to eat more, so its use as an additive causes the brain to have something like and addiction going on. Many people report cravings when they first start to cut sugar.
Soda is sugary and is just a liquid. It's really easy to consume a lot of calories very quickly and not be satiated. Then you go for more.
Isn’t sugar, when not consumed to excess, necessary for muscle glycogen for athletes and people who work out a good amount?
They need simple sugars from naturally occurring sources in their diet, yes. They need to munch on those berries and fruits.
Added sugars in processed foods, no.
Ah gotcha, thank you.
Thanks but I was aware. :)
Then why are you wasting our time with the " it's just calories in vs calories out" crap if you know soda does affect habits and intake? You literally know what you said is a gross oversimplification that isn't helpful.
Because I can and because the gross oversimplification does what it needs to, state clearly what it needs to.
You know, this reminds me of a story. There was a gentleman I used to work with. Tall, dark, and a bit weird. Not like kill you weird, but what-was-that weird. You know, like someone obsessed with furries who isn't even a furry himself.
Anyway, he was a big proponent of doing things himself, even at the detriment of the job at hand. Sometimes, he'd wind up going down a rabbit hole and asking for several people to help him. In the end, it often turned out he wasnt even headed in the right direction. He literally pulled resources for a wild goose chase.
But the owner loved him. No one knew why, but he was probably his favorite employee. Some of us suggested there was a love affair, but it was probably just two weirdos who got each other. You see, the owner was prone to changing his mind a lot. This whole story is bullshit and I wrote it because I can, just like how you wasted our time. I'm going to keep writing so you can't skim the last paragraph for an end. How the company was successful was beyond us, but it was. But as long as we got a paycheck, we didn't care.
Life is really like that sometimes. If they waste your time on their time and dime, it's fine. They just can't waste your time for work that's useless if it affects your home life. That's just rude and annoying, right? Companies should respect your work/home life division and not suck up your home time.
Reminds me of the joke where an employer of 10 years found out his employee was married. The guy remarked that his wife was surprised to find out he worked. He always kept his work and home life totally separate.
No. It’s all pretty much the same as my tap water at home, which comes from a well. I cannot imagine why anyone in a home anywhere in the world with potable water would ever pay a fucking cent for water. Bottled water is corporate alchemy.
edit- fix typo and add a word for emphasis
Dasani is full of salt.
I use vacuum water bottles and reverse osmosis filtering of city water. Purer and cheaper in the long run tham bottled water. Also RO ice. Paid for itself in about a year.
How about a cent for water plus a temporary resealable container?
People that buy a lot of bottles of water may as well drink soda. Fuck them.
I drink ten cans of La Croix a day. That shit is way more refreshing than water and I like burping.
Coca-Cola sells bottled water. And it's more profitable for them.
4 billion is kinda nothing for them.
33 billion in profits in 2020
Right but the article doesn't mean that like he went in and just burnt 4 billion of Cokes dollars. The company's market cap went down by 4 billion dollars, which as of the articles dates is about $250 billion.
However Coke down a little under 2%, is not remotely as eye catching a headline as down 4 billion
Profits =/= market cap
It’s okay that he doesn’t drink/like Coke, but his multimillion dollar salary is propped up by sponsors like Coke.
He’s rich and doesn’t care but a crap ton of other athletes depend on sponsorships.
Someone doesn’t know the difference between a financial loss and a drop in stock price
Man moves soda bottle for water bottle.
*This* is newsworthy?
However trivial this episode might seem it caused so much reaction it ended up hurting Coca Cola’s bottom line to the tune of billions of $.
You just have to come to terms with the fact that celebrities are the make or break of every brand. Behind every stupid fad and product there’s a corporation that paid millions of dollars to celebs to promote it. At least here Ronaldo isn’t promoting a rival product and didn’t get a penny for sticking it to Coca Cola. Sure, they might recover from this stock price dip but at least for the time being the bad effects of their product is now a public conversation thanks to Ronaldo and millions of people will become more conscious about their cola consumption as a direct result of Ronaldo’s antic.
I get your point.
Big popular soccer player and big soda company.
But this is such a trivial non-event to me.
I mean when the soda is owned by one of the biggest companies in the world, yeah I thinks it’s newsworthy
I think you missed the point.
This is like 'old man yells at cloud' (actually more exciting).
Even if the cloud was owned by Amazon I still wouldn't give a shit.
Ok well that’s you. But not everyone thinks like you
Kim K can do the reverse I bet
Trashy is as trashy does.
Correlation doesn’t equal causation
I don’t drink that shit either, the bottled water as well.
Perhaps he prefers water. Also a drop in the bucket for coke.
Good. Ok what's next.
Couldn't read the article. What did it say?
Ronaldo’s gimmick caused so much public reaction and bad publicity for Coca Cola that their stock price dipped to the tune of 4 billion dollars.
So which was the product placement here? Ronaldo or Coca Cola?
I mean as a high performance, competitive athlete, this is just the right thing to do.
Honestly, this is a non-story. Coca Cola is not going anywhere. Ronaldo has the right attitude and people are not going to stop drinking soda pop at all. Shoot, I'm going to go drink one right now, followed by the same amount or more of water.
"I'm just drinking water so I don't get diabetes."
If Messi moves 2 bottles of Pepsi, we can measure Pepsi Co's reduction and finally we can finally end the GOAT debate.
Admirable! Wish most celebrities would stand up for what's right rather than just sway for the money.
Well coke wanted it's employees to be less white, so isn't it good that a white guy obliged :D
Next, time they are gonna leave him a plate of shit. He's gonna move it off to the side and say "NO, lentils" and pull out a bowl and start eating it. Then the shit stock will plummet billions.
(sometimes my brain says very strange, nonsensical, and inappropriate things when Im sick, forgive me))
I will drink even more Coke now
This is HUGE. This is the lowest that Coca Cola has ever been valued ^((since June 1st 2021)).
Good on him for not succumbing to pressure and sticking true to his beliefs
I seriously, love him even more now!
How do we get him to go to a GameStop?
I've heard Ronaldo would get a ticket from the UEFA, but Coca Cola loses 4 billion instead? How does that work?
"Show Me The Money!"
Yeah yeah whatever. If any of you guys actually read the article the value of stock dropped from 56 to 55 lmao, it’s basically nothing not to mention the fact that the stock is gonna bounce back in a week.
Yeah, that may be, but my contacts expire *this* Friday.
I wish I could sip a fucking water and it be worth enough money for my whole bloodline to never work again.