The discussion below about diet soft drinks (and yes, I've had Coke Zero. I can't tell the difference between it and diet Coke, although I can tell there is some difference) reminds me of something I blogged about two years ago. Specifically, here's what I said about Coca-Cola's low-calorie soda:

"So it's not that exciting a topic, but I thought I had to blog about it - I had Coke's new half-caloric C2 over the weekend. My sense is that it's going to be a terrible failure. Not because it tastes bad - actually, I was surprised by how good Coke had managed to make it. But I can't imagine there's seriously a market for this that expands Coke's market share. I accept, for example, that C2 might steal some normal coke drinkers, since it is actually very good. But that doesn't help the bottom life. I suppose it might get some Diet Coke drinkers, but I can't imagine that many people would want to add even half the calories of a normal coke to their diets, and in any case that doesn't help the bottom line either. In order to make new money, C2 has to somehow attract the people currently drinking water or sports drinks - and I just don't see it happening. "

C-2 has indeed failed, to the extent that its main competitor, Pepsi Edge, is off the market, and C-2 highly minimized. It wasn't that brave a claim back then (and word is that coke didn't care if it succeeded or not. The idea was a publicity buzz), but still. I was right.

My newest prediction? Starbucks' effort to corner some of the breakfast market will fail utterly. And, as a bonus prediction/observation, someone at Mcdonald's will notice that the following sentence corresponds with precisely no one's reasons for liking Mcdonald's (and I do like Mcdonalds):

'We’re back there cracking eggs and frying bacon,” he said. “There is nothing like hot, freshly cooked food, and our customers appreciate that.”