IHOB

[hbelkins]

There are only two ways to cook a burger -- well-done and e coli.

[MNHighwayMan]

There are only two ways to cook a burger -- well-done and e coli.

Burgers can be done other than well-done without risk of food-borne illness. The meat just has to be very carefully cut and ground on clean equipment.

That said, I wouldn't trust any ground beef from a restaurant (one that isn't super fancy, anyway) or supermarket to have been properly prepared.

[jakeroot]

There are only two ways to cook a burger -- well-done and e coli.

[SSOWorld]

There are only two ways to cook a burger -- well-done and e coli.

[jeffandnicole]

There are only two ways to cook a burger -- well-done and e coli.

Burgers can be done other than well-done without risk of food-borne illness. The meat just has to be very carefully cut and ground on clean equipment.

That said, I wouldn't trust any ground beef from a restaurant (one that isn't super fancy, anyway) or supermarket to have been properly prepared.

Read up on health reports from various restaurants. A place charging $20 for a burger can have just as many issues as a place charging $1 for a burger.

[hbelkins]

I've seen a number of places that will not fix a burger in any way other than well-done. Still others have disclaimers that eating a burger cooked less than well-done puts all legal liability for illness on the consumer, not the restaurant.

[US71]

IHOB = FAIL

[abefroman329]

I don't know that I'd order a burger cooked below medium, but I've eaten many burgers cooked to medium and not gotten sick, so.

[US71]

I've seen a number of places that will not fix a burger in any way other than well-done. Still others have disclaimers that eating a burger cooked less than well-done puts all legal liability for illness on the consumer, not the restaurant.

They say the same thing about undercooked eggs.

[jeffandnicole]

IHOB = FAIL

This info is based on Foursquare, the app that no one uses anymore.  "Foursquare's foot traffic data shows that it didn't deliver an actual boost in foot traffic. This is the data all marketers should all be paying attention to," Sarah Spagnolo, director of communications and editor at large at Foursquare, told Adweek."

There are numerous, real sources that can gage sales at a restaurant - namely, the restaurant and their financial statements.

[abefroman329]

I'm still laughing at a post from the IHOB parody account on Facebook that read "If you don't like the fact that we changed our name then the B is for Balls and you can suck ours."

[Henry]

Why mess with a good thing?

[US71]

Why mess with a good thing?

Marketing

[cjk374]

Why mess with a good thing?

Marketing

Coca-Cola did a marvelous marketing job back in the late 80s. 

[US71]

Why mess with a good thing?

Marketing

Coca-Cola did a marvelous marketing job back in the late 80s. 

Like 7Up Gold

[PHLBOS]

Why mess with a good thing?

Marketing

Coca-Cola did a marvelous marketing job back in the late 80s. 

If you're referring to the New Coke debacle; such occurred right smack in the middle of the 1980s... 1985.

[US71]

Why mess with a good thing?

Marketing

Coca-Cola did a marvelous marketing job back in the late 80s. 

If you're referring to the New Coke debacle; such occurred right smack in the middle of the 1980s... 1985.

Close enough

[roadman]

Why mess with a good thing?

Marketing

Coca-Cola did a marvelous marketing job back in the late 80s. 

Yes they did.  Despite what the deniers (including Snopes) out there will tell you, New Coke was deliberately set up to fail.  It was a clever ploy to distract people from the fact they changed the Coke formula (now Coca Cola Classic) from mostly sugar/partially HFCS to mostly HCFS/partially sugar.  Management knew they couldn't just make the switch blindly without upsetting their customer base, so they developed the truly awful New Coke formula KNOWING people would object to it, then quickly "re-introduced" Coke Classic with the revised formula.

In the mid-1980s, I was an avid cola drinker.  Had no preference for any particular brand (although I considered New Coke to be one of the most vile brews ever created), but I could distinguish between cola brands just by taste.  And Coca Cola Classic is NOT the same as the pre-New Coke formula.

[PHLBOS]

In the mid-1980s, I was an avid cola drinker.  Had no preference for any particular brand (although I considered New Coke to be one of the most vile brews ever created), but I could distinguish between cola brands just by taste.  And Coca Cola Classic is NOT the same as the pre-New Coke formula.

FWIW, there are some stores (Stop-and-Shop in your area) that sells Coke (& other Coca-Cola based products) in glass bottles that are brought in from Mexico.  Those list sugar instead of HFCS in the ingredients.  That's probably as close as one can get to the taste of the pre-new Coke formula in the U.S.

[roadman]

In the mid-1980s, I was an avid cola drinker.  Had no preference for any particular brand (although I considered New Coke to be one of the most vile brews ever created), but I could distinguish between cola brands just by taste.  And Coca Cola Classic is NOT the same as the pre-New Coke formula.

FWIW, there are some stores (Stop-and-Shop in your area) that sells Coke (& other Coca-Cola based products) in glass bottles that are brought in from Mexico.  Those list sugar instead of HFCS in the ingredients.  That's probably as close as one can get to the taste of the pre-new Coke formula in the U.S.

Thanks.  I am aware of the imported glass bottles for Coke, which have been sold for several years in the Boston area.  However, since my kidney failure in 2012, I have had to abstain from any "dark" sodas such as Coke and Pepsi (and/or their "diet" variants).  The issue is not so much with the sugar/HFCS, but rather with the colorings and preservatives (high potassium and phosphorous).

[PHLBOS]

In the mid-1980s, I was an avid cola drinker.  Had no preference for any particular brand (although I considered New Coke to be one of the most vile brews ever created), but I could distinguish between cola brands just by taste.  And Coca Cola Classic is NOT the same as the pre-New Coke formula.

FWIW, there are some stores (Stop-and-Shop in your area) that sells Coke (& other Coca-Cola based products) in glass bottles that are brought in from Mexico.  Those list sugar instead of HFCS in the ingredients.  That's probably as close as one can get to the taste of the pre-new Coke formula in the U.S.

Thanks.  I am aware of the imported glass bottles for Coke, which have been sold for several years in the Boston area.  However, since my kidney failure in 2012, I have had to abstain from any "dark" sodas such as Coke and Pepsi (and/or their "diet" variants).  The issue is not so much with the sugar/HFCS, but rather with the colorings and preservatives (high potassium and phosphorous).

I'm sorry to hear that.  However & not to sound like a health-nut, you're probably better off not drinking soda of any type in the long run... kidney failure or no kidney failure.

[roadman]

In the mid-1980s, I was an avid cola drinker.  Had no preference for any particular brand (although I considered New Coke to be one of the most vile brews ever created), but I could distinguish between cola brands just by taste.  And Coca Cola Classic is NOT the same as the pre-New Coke formula.

FWIW, there are some stores (Stop-and-Shop in your area) that sells Coke (& other Coca-Cola based products) in glass bottles that are brought in from Mexico.  Those list sugar instead of HFCS in the ingredients.  That's probably as close as one can get to the taste of the pre-new Coke formula in the U.S.

Thanks.  I am aware of the imported glass bottles for Coke, which have been sold for several years in the Boston area.  However, since my kidney failure in 2012, I have had to abstain from any "dark" sodas such as Coke and Pepsi (and/or their "diet" variants).  The issue is not so much with the sugar/HFCS, but rather with the colorings and preservatives (high potassium and phosphorous).

I'm sorry to hear that.  However & not to sound like a health-nut, you're probably better off not drinking soda of any type in the long run... kidney failure or no kidney failure.

You are correct in that regard.  Well before the kidney failure, I had already cut back on my soda intake big time.  And the renal diet I'm currently on isn't too bad once I got used to it.

[abefroman329]

Despite what the deniers (including Snopes) out there will tell you, New Coke was deliberately set up to fail.

Even if it was (and I believe the company representatives who insist it wasn't), that was a huge gamble for them to take.  They could have lost a ton of business if they'd pissed off their loyal fans so much, they refused to buy Coca-Cola again, New or Classic.  The most plausible theory to me is that they were losing market share to Pepsi, so they changed their formula to make it taste more like Pepsi.

[spooky]

And Coca Cola Classic is NOT the same as the pre-New Coke formula.

I was always sure of this.

[SP Cook]

Coca-Cola. 

There are three theories about the 1985 launch of "new Coke".  There is no real evidence to prove any and most of the players have since died.

- The "they were geniuses" theory.  Coke had been losing market share to Pepsi for years.  Under this theory, new Coke (which tasted like iodine) was "set up to fail".  It was all a big publicity stunt to get people talking about "real Coke", which the company returned to making after only 78 days.

- The "they were idiots" theory.  Diet Coke (which tastes like iodine) was launched in 1982.  Unlike all previous diet whatevers, Diet Coke was not an attempt to just replace the sugar with whatever artificial sweetener was in vogue at the time, but had a purposefully different flavor than Coke.  Coke then taste tested what was just the Diet Coke formula with sugar, and, because most people will, when given a tiny sip, pick the sweeter whatever, this formula beat real Coke (same reason Pepsi always won the "Pepsi Challenge" )  Diet Coke with sugar became New Coke.  Management forgot that in the real world people do not drink tiny sips, and in real world useage the vile taste of New Coke was rejected.  (Diet Coke is and always has been a sugar free version of New Coke.  Coke finally launched Coca-Cola Zero in 2005, which is actually a sugar free version of real Coke.)

- The "it was all the lawyers" theory.  Coke was obligated,under a settlement coming from the wide swings in the price of sugar following WWI, to sell Coke syrup to its bottlers at a price determined by the price of sugar.  This was all well and good for many years, as sugar was by far the largest ingredient in Coke syrup, but by the 80s, inflation had pushed the cost of the other products to the point that Coke was approaching losing money.  The other Coke products, including Diet Coke, were not subject to this long ago agreement and were sold to the bottlers at a much higher profit.  KO's plan was to claim that "new Coke" was the "Coca-Cola" covered in the 1920 court documents and it would be glad to sell this at the loss.  Of course, it tasted like iodine and nobody wanted any.  Then "Coca-Cola Classic" was a "new" product and KO would sell that at a higher price.  Federal judge called BS, KO and its bottlers                                                                   settled and all was well.  I like this theory.

HFCS/sugar:

Coke, or any other sugared soda, can be made with either sugar or HFCS.  This varies according to price.  In the USA (understand the importance of Iowa in both parties' election process) HFCS, which is made from Iowa corn, gets a tax break. 

There is all sorts of junk science about the supposed bad effects of HFCS.  It is all loonie toons stuff.  HFCS is totally safe.  There are also lots of people who claim they can taste the difference, but no double blind taste test has ever produced anyone who actually can.