Content deleted Content added
Sphilbrick (talk | contribs) Reverted good faith edits by 194.170.238.161 (talk): Copyvio of http://www.hugeinc.com/case-study/pepsi-refresh. (TW) |
m →Rules: success of PRP |
||
Line 11:
In September 2010, the Pepsi Refresh Project was criticized for allowing a coalition of progressive, nonprofit organizations called the 'Progressive Slate' to participate in the project, accusing the company of violating its own terms. <ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/01/business/01pepsi.html "Pepsi Refresh Contestant Claims Rules Were Broken"]</ref>
If we only talk about the social contribution, Pepsi Refresh Project is a great success. It sponsored 100+ programs, which will be beneficial to the development of communities in various regions.
In terms of social media engagement, Pepsi Refresh Project is also a great success. It generates huge buzz in the social media world and let the participants better know the Pepsi brand. The entire goal of the campaign was to build awareness about the brand and cultivate a long-term relationship with consumers.
However, if we talk about the ROI and increase in the sales the Pepsi Refresh project failed and the reason it failed was because it wasn't linked to the brand or the product. The whole exercise could have come from anyone. 'Refresh Everything' is meaningless and doesn't express anything unique about Pepsi against the rest of the category.
===Power votes===
| |||