Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

bootcamp.uxdesign.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 278 posts

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#81

Post by fy20 »

woodruffw wrote: post #51
ameister14 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Given that most liquid orange just is just reconstituted concentrate anyways, buying the liquid form means paying for the shipping and space cost of the water. You're incorrect. The "fresh" non-concentrated market is a lot bigger than the concentrate market in the US, at least. Has been since the 80's. It's more than a 10:1 ratio, actually.

Do you have a source for that? Not that I don't believe you; it's just surprising. My understanding was that orange juice ships poorly, even among fruit juices, which is why the concentrate market was still large. Edit: I found a survey from 2009[1] where non-reconstituted orange juice was over 50% of the market. So I'm completely wrong about this! [1]: https://crec.ifas.ufl.edu/media/crecifasufledu/extension/ext...

"Not from concentrate" juice is still pasteurised and stored in tanks for months or years before being packaged into the final supermarket packaging, with vitamins, minerals and flavourings added to revive it. It's not any healthier than concentrate, but it is more expensive to store and transport as the water isn't removed.

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#82

Post by lotsofpulp »

shotta wrote: post #20
woodruffw wrote: post #16

This is a little bit of a tangent, but I've always thought that it was funny that orange juice is overwhelmingly sold in liquid form, not as frozen concentrate. You can buy concentrate here in the US, but it's much less common (and, IME, fewer and fewer grocery stores stock it.) Given that most liquid orange just is just reconstituted concentrate anyways, buying the liquid form means paying for the shipping and space…

I got into the mango orange juice, and it got really hard to find.. which led me to frozen and there’s no going back! There are so many more options, and a lot more options without added sugars and corn syrup being added to the mix.

In case you were avoiding added sugars and corn syrup due to nutritional concerns, I have heard doctors for over a decade come to the conclusion that fruit juice is as bad as soda due to the total sugar content. You would not eat 10 oranges, but you can easily drink 10 oranges worth of sugar in a few gulps.

One of the questions pediatricians ask nowadays is do you keep fruit juice in the house, and I believe they ask so that they can advise you to get rid of it or prevent the kids from drinking it.

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#83

Post by fknorangesite »

userbinator wrote: post #46

IMHO the biggest visible difference to me (besides the "straw orange" trademark) is the original one has the brand Tropicana very clearly in the middle, while the redesign puts it in much-less-readable-at-a-glance vertical text on the side. To someone quickly scanning the shelves, the former stands out and immediately tells you it's Tropicana, while the latter would probably tell you only "100% orange" --- fine, it's…

> IMHO the biggest visible difference to me (besides the "straw orange" trademark) is the original one has the brand Tropicana very clearly in the middle, while the redesign puts it in much-less-readable-at-a-glance vertical text on the side.

Yes, that was also the Humble Opinion of the eye-tracking visualization included in the article.

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#84

Post by nkozyra »

irrational wrote: post #77
userbinator wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect the "why" is most simply explained by "because designers had to justify their salaries."

I worked on a website that was completely redesigned every few years. We, the developers, didn’t understand why until one of the business people, who was leaving for a new job, admitted to us that they (the business management team) mainly did it because it was fun, because it let them expense meetings/travel/food doing “research” and meeting with design consultants, because it gave them something to do other than th…

Preface: I think a lot of us - particularly developers - have a tendency to mock/devalue what people in design and UI/UX do.

I think there's incredible value in what they do and part of that is keeping sites from going stale. I believe that in general people get fatigue from seeing the same design day-in, day-out. There's a cost to not changing. Or at least a trade-off.

The risk is when redesign is carte blanche for the design team to do things that they think are pretty without the requisite user testing and data to back up decisions.

Major design changes should come with a nice set of data to support them.

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#85

Post by cawlin »

userbinator wrote: post #40
makecheck wrote: post #35

What seems to be lost in these “redesigns” is the why : why are you doing it? If there isn’t a list of benefits long enough to justify the cost and possible risk, well, that’s a problem. There’s also a tendency for companies to be super proud of what they’ve done so they neglect methods like A/B testing and instead just bet the farm on their great new design. After all, it cost a lot of money and looks cool to the de…

I suspect the "why" is most simply explained by "because designers had to justify their salaries."

As the rebrand was outsourced (like most rebrands) the "why" is absolutely not so designers can justify their salaries.

Design as a department is very often under resourced and I'd take a strong wager that the designers who actually work for Tropicana were dreading all the unnecessary work this rebrand was surely going to generate for them.

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#86

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

makecheck wrote: post #35

What seems to be lost in these “redesigns” is the why : why are you doing it? If there isn’t a list of benefits long enough to justify the cost and possible risk, well, that’s a problem. There’s also a tendency for companies to be super proud of what they’ve done so they neglect methods like A/B testing and instead just bet the farm on their great new design. After all, it cost a lot of money and looks cool to the de…

The "why" was pretty clearly explained in TFA:

> One of the main reasons for rebranding/redesigning is for brands to reconnect with existing consumers and reach out to new ones.

The notable point here IMO is not "why did they do it?" but "how/why did it fail so badly?"

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#87

Post by creakingstairs »

toss1 wrote: post #76
makecheck wrote: post #35

What seems to be lost in these “redesigns” is the why : why are you doing it? If there isn’t a list of benefits long enough to justify the cost and possible risk, well, that’s a problem. There’s also a tendency for companies to be super proud of what they’ve done so they neglect methods like A/B testing and instead just bet the farm on their great new design. After all, it cost a lot of money and looks cool to the de…

Yup. The "Why?" question gets lost among the impulse to be 'clean and modern'. >>Tropicana’s original packaging had rich colours and a strong visual hierarchy. On the other hand, the new packaging failed to impress the consumers, with clean lines, a lack of visuals, transforming the once indistinguishable orange juice into a “generic store brand” product. This same thing happens in everything else too, such as automo…

> The damn "designers" are so infatuated with their "principles" of design and aesthetics

I agree with your main point, but I have a small objection to this phrase. I don't think principles of design tells you to not care about usability/function. In fact, a good design is aesthetics AND function, as argued in "The Design of Everyday Things"[1].

So in this case, the designers are simply not doing their job. They've been infatuated with their principles of aesthetics, that they didn't follow the actual principles of design. Which happens when designers blindly copy the latest trend.

The reason I'm bringing this up is that one might interpret the phrase to mean that design is not about function, which isn't fair to many great designers out there.

[1]: https://www.amazon.co.jp/-/en/Don-Norman/dp/0465050654

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#88

Post by woodruffw »

fy20 wrote: post #81
woodruffw wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source for that? Not that I don't believe you; it's just surprising. My understanding was that orange juice ships poorly, even among fruit juices, which is why the concentrate market was still large. Edit: I found a survey from 2009[1] where non-reconstituted orange juice was over 50% of the market. So I'm completely wrong about this! [1]: https://crec.ifas.ufl.edu/media/crecifasufledu/extension/ext...

"Not from concentrate" juice is still pasteurised and stored in tanks for months or years before being packaged into the final supermarket packaging, with vitamins, minerals and flavourings added to revive it. It's not any healthier than concentrate, but it is more expensive to store and transport as the water isn't removed.

I guess that explains how they get around the spoliation. Thanks for the explanation.

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#89

Post by _carbyau_ »

brohoolio wrote: post #75

At least for me it’s about pattern recognition of something that I know delivers value. As in I’ve had this juice before and it’s good and I don’t know the name but I recognize what the bottle looks like. At least that’s how parents with young kids operate.

Iconography.

I honestly don't care to read the packaging every time I shop. Once I find something I like, I buy the "same" damn one at a glance.

Re: How did Tropicana lose $30M in a packaging redesign?

#90

Post by quickthrower2 »

bee_rider wrote: post #33
tomcam wrote: post #2

It is my theory, backed up by nothing but instinct and my own very fallible personal experience, that many customers simply did not “see“ the new design. That is, they would have preferred to buy Tropicana but assumed it had disappeared from the shelves.

Yeah. The article has all this stuff about emotional attachment, blah blah blah. Really, orange juice is kinda hit and miss, so I prefer to stick with a particular brand (Tropicana). The redesign is 1) totally unrecognizable 2) pretty generic looking It is literally just hard to spot next to the other juices.

Yeah the problem is simply loyal customers not being able to find the product. Supermarket shopping is a continuous game of Where's Wally, especially if you shop in a different one to your regular. Don't make that game harder.
Post reply on HN