- 1
- 2
- next
- | single page
The scramble to claim the top spot in the $2.1 billion hot dog market has landed Ball Park franks and Oscar Mayer wieners in court. (Charlie Neibergall, AP)
In a city that idolizes its hot dogs, the nation's top two wiener makers battled in federal court Monday over dueling false advertising claims that have already underscored at least one frankfurter truism: marketing sausage can be a lot like watching it being made.
Messy.
The trial stems from a 2009 lawsuit by Sara Lee Corp. over ads by Kraft Foods Inc. that claimed its hot dogs had won a national taste test and were "100 percent pure beef."
Kraft quickly filed its own countersuit, accusing Sara Lee of similar marketing no-no's, including boasting about its own "all beef" hot dog and misrepresenting a culinary award in touting its wieners as "America's Best."
At stake in the legal battle is a $1.76 billion hot dog market dominated by Kraft's Oscar Mayer wieners and Sara Lee's Ball Park franks and whether either company's boasts crossed a line. The sales total doesn't include revenue from Walmart and its club stores.
As the trial opened Monday in federal court in Chicago, lawyers for both Chicago area-based food behemoths argued over such frank-marketing minutiae as the difference between meat and beef and whether a taste test could even be considered valid without such vital condiments as mustard.
Common ground seemed to lie only in puns, which proved irresistible to many in the courtroom.
Amid the heated hot dog talk, approximations became "ball park" figures. An alleged disclosure was presented as a "frank" admission. And arguments naturally turned into "beefs."
"I'm trying to save one pun for the end of this," said Kraft attorney Stephen O'Neil, drawing a smile from U.S. Magistrate Judge Morton Denlow and chuckles from other lawyers.
But despite the occasional moments of levity, the openings statements by both sides brimmed with vitriol as only disputes between two fierce competitors can. "Not in the entire history of American hot dogs Â… was a campaign of this scope launched," Sara Lee attorney Richard Leighton said of Kraft's allegedly misleading advertising.
The filing of this lawsuit "was an act of utter hypocrisy," O'Neil volleyed back, alleging that Sara Lee's hot dogs had also been presented as "all beef" when they, too, contained preservatives.
Although it's unusual for an advertising battle to result in a lawsuit, much less go to trial, the repercussions can be serious when a company is forced to revise or dismantle a marketing campaign that's already been aired in mass media or added to product packaging.
In 2004, Chicago provided the backdrop for an advertising debacle involving claims by Frito-Lay that Chicagoans preferred its potato chips to those of rival Jay's. The company was ultimately forced to cease the claims after a federal judge held that Lay's manipulated taste tests by labelings its chips as "classic" and Jays as "unflavored."
When companies go to court to resolve issues, it often comes down to raw emotion or desire for press attention, said Michael McSunas, an advertising lawyer with Chattanooga-based Chambliss Bahner & Stophel.
"For whoever wins, it's not really going to affect sales," said McSunas, noting that most consumers were probably unaware of the short-lived hot dog ads. "(It) really speaks to how angry they are or how much publicity they want to get out of it."
Sara Lee's Ballpark has 22.5 percent of the national market, just ahead of Oscar Mayer's 20 percent, according to Chicago-based Symphony IRI, a market research firm.
The wiener war began after Northfield-based Kraft allegedly ran ads claiming "Oscar Mayer Jumbo Beef Franks beat Ball Park and Hebrew National in a national taste test."
Downers Grove-based Sara Lee said the ad and similar promotions that ran in magazines, stores, and on the "Wienermobile" were misleading and based on an allegedly flawed taste test that didn't include condiment or bun choices, possibly affecting flavor.
Kraft denied the allegations and filed its own lawsuit against Sara Lee, alleging that the company was misusing an out-of-date ChefsBest award to promote its hot dogs as "America's Best Franks."
Messy.
Kraft quickly filed its own countersuit, accusing Sara Lee of similar marketing no-no's, including boasting about its own "all beef" hot dog and misrepresenting a culinary award in touting its wieners as "America's Best."
At stake in the legal battle is a $1.76 billion hot dog market dominated by Kraft's Oscar Mayer wieners and Sara Lee's Ball Park franks and whether either company's boasts crossed a line. The sales total doesn't include revenue from Walmart and its club stores.
As the trial opened Monday in federal court in Chicago, lawyers for both Chicago area-based food behemoths argued over such frank-marketing minutiae as the difference between meat and beef and whether a taste test could even be considered valid without such vital condiments as mustard.
Common ground seemed to lie only in puns, which proved irresistible to many in the courtroom.
Amid the heated hot dog talk, approximations became "ball park" figures. An alleged disclosure was presented as a "frank" admission. And arguments naturally turned into "beefs."
"I'm trying to save one pun for the end of this," said Kraft attorney Stephen O'Neil, drawing a smile from U.S. Magistrate Judge Morton Denlow and chuckles from other lawyers.
But despite the occasional moments of levity, the openings statements by both sides brimmed with vitriol as only disputes between two fierce competitors can. "Not in the entire history of American hot dogs Â… was a campaign of this scope launched," Sara Lee attorney Richard Leighton said of Kraft's allegedly misleading advertising.
The filing of this lawsuit "was an act of utter hypocrisy," O'Neil volleyed back, alleging that Sara Lee's hot dogs had also been presented as "all beef" when they, too, contained preservatives.
Although it's unusual for an advertising battle to result in a lawsuit, much less go to trial, the repercussions can be serious when a company is forced to revise or dismantle a marketing campaign that's already been aired in mass media or added to product packaging.
In 2004, Chicago provided the backdrop for an advertising debacle involving claims by Frito-Lay that Chicagoans preferred its potato chips to those of rival Jay's. The company was ultimately forced to cease the claims after a federal judge held that Lay's manipulated taste tests by labelings its chips as "classic" and Jays as "unflavored."
When companies go to court to resolve issues, it often comes down to raw emotion or desire for press attention, said Michael McSunas, an advertising lawyer with Chattanooga-based Chambliss Bahner & Stophel.
"For whoever wins, it's not really going to affect sales," said McSunas, noting that most consumers were probably unaware of the short-lived hot dog ads. "(It) really speaks to how angry they are or how much publicity they want to get out of it."
Sara Lee's Ballpark has 22.5 percent of the national market, just ahead of Oscar Mayer's 20 percent, according to Chicago-based Symphony IRI, a market research firm.
The wiener war began after Northfield-based Kraft allegedly ran ads claiming "Oscar Mayer Jumbo Beef Franks beat Ball Park and Hebrew National in a national taste test."
Downers Grove-based Sara Lee said the ad and similar promotions that ran in magazines, stores, and on the "Wienermobile" were misleading and based on an allegedly flawed taste test that didn't include condiment or bun choices, possibly affecting flavor.
Kraft denied the allegations and filed its own lawsuit against Sara Lee, alleging that the company was misusing an out-of-date ChefsBest award to promote its hot dogs as "America's Best Franks."