THEY say there is no such thing as bad publicity. It’s a maxim which appears to hold true for AG Barr, the maker of Irn-Bru.
The Scottish firm caused a furore at the start of the year when it announced it had changed the recipe of its famous brand. Barr took the unusual step of altering the formula, whose ingredients have long been a closely-guarded secret, to ensure the drink was not eligible for the forthcoming sugar tax (though the firm has always maintained it is consumers, not regulators, who drive its business). For purists, however, it was a step too far. An online petition was mustered in protest, attracting tens of thousands of signatures. Even Ally McCoist was unhappy.
Barr, however, held firm, and the early signs are the controversy will not cause significant damage to the health of this most Scottish of brands.
Some may continue to argue that Barr has compromised Irn-Bru’s cherished heritage by changing the drink’s secret sauce just to prevent paying what is likely to have been a hefty tax. But it would be wrong to characterise this as a crude, knee-jerk decision.
As Barr chief executive Roger White noted yesterday, the new-look Irn-Bru had been between three and four years in the making, involving the input of considerable resources. And there is clear merit in its claims it has been guided by groups of consumers who have calling for products which contain lower amounts of refined sugar. It now says that up to 99 per cent of its portfolio will contain less than five grammes of total sugars per 100ml by the time the sugar tax comes in, having announced last March than more than 90 per cent of its drinks would be moving to lower or no sugar content. That Barr, which has diversified in recent years by moving into mineral water and fruit juices, is outperforming the market suggests it has rightly called the way consumer demand is heading.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here