Keurig 2.0
On a whim, shopping at Kohl’s , I purchased the Keurig 2.0 350k. Our old Keurig could brew our own coffee as well as the coffee K-cup packs and other non-branded k-cups that flood the market. Excited, I purchased the coffee filter that reads, “Solofill Filter Cup for Keurig 2.0,” in order to brew our own specialty coffee. When I returned home, I tried it out, but, the Solofill filter did not work. Consumers assume a new version of the old product is the same with improvements and when it is not the same the product, it is not a good buy and therefore, consumers lose trust and the company loses business.
The Keurig 2.0 350k added a water filter and in addition, to making coffee by the cup, it also made coffee by the pot. These are excellent additions that appeal to the Keurig consumers and thoughtful marketing came into action from Green Mountain, the makers of the Keurig 2.0. Except, what they took away from the famous coffee maker disabled trust in the Keurig product, not only for the consumers, but also companies that produce other k-cup compatible coffees. …show more content…
Oak Brook-based TreeHouse Foods, Inc., and two wholly owned subsidiaries, Bay Valley Foods, LLC, and Sturm Foods, Inc., have reluctantly filed suit against Green Mountain for violating antitrust laws and unfair competition statutes in the states of New York, Wisconsin and Illinois. These companies sell k-cups that work with the Keurig coffee makers at a less expensive price. TreeHouse Foods explains why they are suing Keurig, “We are seeking free and open competition on the merits to bring our customers high quality and innovative products at better prices. A favorable ruling for TreeHouse and our subsidiary businesses will prove beneficial to the entire spectrum of consumers, retailers and suppliers” (Watrous,