I found out last week, from an article in the San Francisco Chronicle, that colleges around the country are signing contracts for "pouring rights." These contracts grant a monopoly for selling soft drinks on campus.
We now know that such beverages pose a very significant health danger, but this has not, apparently, been a problem for the schools. They typically set up a competition, to see which one of the companies that make these sugar-stocked beverages will get the monopoly right to peddle these drinks to students and to undermine their health.
Why would any self-respecting educational institution make itself an accomplice to the companies that are peddling these dangerous drinks?
Money.
According to consultants who specialize in "pouring rights" contacts, there is a "significant" amount of money to be made!
Money isn't all powerful, though. It's nice to see that.
Since the article referenced above was published on November 13th, public outcry in San Francisco (an outcry that was at least partially stimulated by the article, I am sure) has resulted in the abandonment of an effort by San Francisco State University to enter into a "pouring rights" contract.
Money isn't all powerful, though. It's nice to see that.
Since the article referenced above was published on November 13th, public outcry in San Francisco (an outcry that was at least partially stimulated by the article, I am sure) has resulted in the abandonment of an effort by San Francisco State University to enter into a "pouring rights" contract.
One piece of recent good news!
http://winthropintelligence.com/2013/06/04/analysis-of-the-market-for-pouring-rights-agreements-in-division-i/
Alcohol is another example of a dangerous drink. We don't allow alcohol sales on campus, do we? Granted, soda is less dangerous, but it raises an interesting question of the role of the university in keeping students safe from vices.
ReplyDelete