"I smell sex and candy here…"

by Katie Pizzuto on June 2, 2009

in chocolate,marketing

flingThis one falls into both the “give me a fucking break” and “you can’t possibly be serious” categories, but WordPress doesn’t seem to have those listed as blogging tag options, so I filed it under “insultingly stupid marketing schemes.”

I realize that chocolate has always had a sexual allure to it. Montezuma believed it to be an aphrodisiac, and handing your woman a box of good chocolate will almost assuredly get you laid. But as a general rule, I get nauseous when a new product tries to market itself to me simply because I’m a woman—probably the ONLY thing I share in common with the likes of Paris Hilton, Margaret Thatcher and Joan Rivers (she’s still a woman, right?). I regrettably introduce to you the schmucks trying to do just that, Fling™ Chocolate.

According to their sexually loaded (and yet banal) innuendo, they “broke the rules” when they created this Twix wannabe—chocolate truffle atop a cookie, coated in chocolate—that they say looks as glamorous as the women it speaks to. Who exactly are these women it speaks to, and where can I run them over with a Hummer…twice? Each serving…no, wait, I forgot. It’s not called a serving, it’s called a “finger.” Each “finger” has 85 calories, half of those from fat. And oh, did I mention that they “shimmer”? Yeah, each of the 3 flavors (milk chocolate, dark chocolate and hazelnut) has a different color “shimmer” to it, which of course will make you want to “tear it open and sneak a quickie.”

Apparently, the marketing gurus there are under the impression that the fact that you have a vagina between your legs supposes that you don’t have a brain between your ears. Where exactly was I supposed to stick that finger of chocolatey goodness, anyway? Oh come on, that’s what they want you to giggle about, after all. If nothing else, at least you can rest easy knowing that the fingers are Kosher. It’s a given that this product is the brainchild of Californians, but I thought I’d mention it anyway, in case you’re living in Fargo and wondering why you can’t yet have a Fling™ or two while standing at the checkout line in your supermarket.

{ 35 comments… read them below or add one }

1 justalittlepiece June 2, 2009

It’s in no way superior chocolate I’m sure and I haven’t tried it, but I’m pretty sure it’s meant to be humorous and entertaining marketing not demeaning and sexist…nothing to be taken to seriously at the very least.

justalittlepiece.wordpress.com

Reply

2 Katie Pizzuto June 2, 2009

Oh, I certainly doubt, as you do, that it’s quality chocolate, much less superior! Did you happen to visit their site? I honestly don’t think it’s sexist in a way that it was developed by a man, as it seems to be the handiwork of women…and obviously marketing is NEVER meant to demean, but I think they succeeded in that department whether it was their intention or not 🙂

“nothing to be taken seriously”…you can say that again!

Reply

3 The Wine Commonsewer June 2, 2009

I don’t know any women who’ll sleep with me for a box of chocolates. Do you have phone numbers?

Reply

4 Katie Pizzuto June 2, 2009

I said hand “YOUR woman” a box of chocolates, not a random woman, Mike, but I’m sure there are probably a couple of readers here that might be wooed by a box of good chocolate! LOL!

Reply

5 justalittlepiece June 2, 2009

Come now…you can have plenty of fun with a box of good chocolate…”you never know what you’re gonna get.” LOL

Reply

6 Wine Harlots June 2, 2009

Katie, how do you really feel about it? ;-o)
Getting nookie from getting a box of chocolates, not highly likely, but a bottle of good wine? Now you’re talking!

Reply

7 wrtish June 2, 2009

This reminds me of Chocolate Body Paint that is occasionally found in gourmet stores. Also “Chocolove” bars, which I believe come with a li’t ol’ poem inside the wrapper. Chacun a son gout!

Reply

8 Katie Pizzuto June 2, 2009

@Señora Harlot…did I come across as brutally honest? Didn’t mean to 😉 Seriously, though, depending on exactly what type of chocolate the hubby came home with, nookie would certainly be in my sights!

@Tish…those rank right up there with (in)edible undies.

Reply

9 Rob June 2, 2009

Oh yeah, that was so the rant I wanted to read right now. That cheered me up immensely. Thanks for that.

Reply

10 Linsey June 2, 2009

shimmering chocolate … ok i would buy it once just for the curiousity – but the name gees what a crappy name for a chocolate bar.

I do like the pink frilly bits on the side – but they shouldnt have shown the bar on the packet – what a disappointment!

I am wondering what the whole advertising campaign is like … love to know how they create the advertisement for a chocolate bar called “fling”!

It reminds me of an episode of Brit version of The Apprentice – they had to create a cologne for men and one group came up with “roulette” as a name – it failed because of the connotations of destroyed marriages due to gambling addictions … fling would probably fail here too on the same basis!

Reply

11 justalittlepiece June 2, 2009

I agree–leave the bar off of the wrapper. I mean I think they could have gone a lot further with the wrapper, but I think leaving the bar off would have made it that much more curious and taboo seeming.

Now, just for the sake of argument, what if this wasn’t some cheap chocolate fix? What if this was legit boutique chocolate?

justalittlepiece.wordpress.com

Reply

12 Katie Pizzuto June 2, 2009

THAT is a really interesting question, but I think, in the end, if a boutique chocolate shop was making this, I would assume two things: 1. That it will taste really good and 2. That they are great chocolatiers but terrible marketers. And I’d probably rant even more because it was coming from a respectable artisan! 🙂

Reply

13 bricksofwine June 2, 2009

Blunder though it may be, it can’t match the raspberry starfish confection from another well-known chocolatier. What are marketing people thinking?

Reply

14 mydailywine June 2, 2009

Just the fact that they call it a ‘finger’ is creepy! What?

Reply

15 The Consigliere June 2, 2009

The packaging reminds me of the Playtex tampons box. Wrappers that look like tampon boxes and “fingers” that look like tampons. Definitely doesn’t create any positive associations for me that make me want to buy 🙂 Major fail!

Reply

16 Linsey June 3, 2009

So basically

Terrible name
Boring looking bar
Bad word association
Foil wrapper too close to womens’ tampons
Etc, etc

is the only positive …that I like the idea of shimmering chocolate the only thing going for it?

Reply

17 Katie Pizzuto June 3, 2009

OMG, you’re absolutely right….a tampons wrapper! Dead on! Epic fail!

Reply

18 The Wine Commonsewer June 3, 2009

those rank right up there with (in)edible undies.

Who thinks this stuff up? Worse, who buys it?

We got edible undies as a wedding present from a guy who put a note with it that said:

This is for all the times you said Eat My Shorts when we were in high school.

I actually tried a bite. Sort of like really, really, really bad tasting cherry flavored licorice.

Reply

19 The Wine Commonsewer June 3, 2009

OK, I broke down and went to the Fling website. I expected to see chocolate but all I saw was cheese. Pink cheese at that.

There ain’t no accounting for taste (per HL Mencken) but Jesus Chrysler, I cannot imagine that this company will be in business next year.

Excuse me, I have to wipe the rest of the puke off my lips. Yechhh! That website, the presentation, and the product is wretched.

Try it in public WTF???

Reply

20 Katie Pizzuto June 3, 2009

Agreed on the edible undies, Mike…I got one as a gift too, took a bite and spit it out. As for Fling, I think I’ll check in a year from now and do an update…site is awful, ain’t it? They thought of every cheesy innuendo in the BOOK…”sneak a quickie”…are you KIDDING me?!? LOL!

Reply

21 Linsey June 3, 2009

Few years ago in the uk a chocolate bar came out from Nestle, it was called Secret – it didnt stay around very long unfortunately but was a lovely chocolate bar and pretty good to look at.

it had a length of whipped mousse nougat in the centre and covering it was just thread after thread of chocolate. It was all criss-crossed back and forth and looks such a delicate chocolate bar.

taste-wise it was just ordinary chocolate – but it was fresh from the factory so just melted in your mouth

I really dont know why it didnt last very long because it seemed popular at the time – maybe too expensive to produce – but damn i wish they would bring it back

this picture isnt the best but this is what it looked like – unfortunately the threading doesnt show up very well

http://www.doyouremember.co.uk/assets/raw-1188561644.jpg

Reply

22 Wine Harlots June 3, 2009

Hey Wine Harlots are all about innuendo, but this a creepy ham-handed attempt at clever. I’m throughly grossed out. I also checked the site — there are eight retailers near me selling the “chocolate covered tampons.” Shudder.

Reply

23 justalittlepiece June 3, 2009

I feel like they could have really gone for the gold and focus on a “self-service” pleasure. LOL

This is one of those bridal shower favors.

justalittlepiece.wordpress.com

Reply

24 Katie Pizzuto June 3, 2009

@justalittlepiece…LOL! Now THERE’s a campaign! Melts in your hands, not in your…oy, I could go on all day!

Reply

25 justalittlepiece June 3, 2009

LMAO!!! Okay I really can’t think of a way to respond because that’s just too funny.

Reply

26 Linsey June 3, 2009

my halo just fell off in shock omg lmfao

Reply

27 Bren June 5, 2009

ahahahahhahahah all this *ish was funny!

i can’t even think of how a little finger like that could possibly placate, satiate, pleasure me! cute pink swirly stuff, but that should be left to stationary and web design…

boring.

btw, while i like pink, not all women are so another major fail!

Reply

28 SteamyKitchen June 5, 2009

if only it did laundry and took the trash out.

Reply

29 Katie Pizzuto June 5, 2009

@Steamy…they only invent labor-saving techniques for men like spray-on ArmorAll for your tires that drips off and leaves your rims all shiny…not women 🙂

Reply

30 justalittlepiece June 5, 2009

Now Bren, in the candy bar’s defense–you do get TWO fingers–Come hither?

lol

justalittlepiece.wordpress.com

Reply

31 Jeff June 9, 2009

Hackneyed, silly…and it probably is crappy chocolate, as you said!

Melts in your hands, not in your…LOL!!!

😉

Reply

32 Linsey June 9, 2009

grabs the superglue – omg my halo is having a rough time

Reply

33 1WineDude June 9, 2009

Ouch… some people here owe their livelihoods to that company… not naming any names but maybe some of them work for the IT division…

Reply

34 Katie Pizzuto June 9, 2009

And employing people is great, but that doesn’t mean I don’t get to make fun of them for having a lousy approach to marketing…obviously plenty of other women agree w/me so, if anything, let it be a red flag to rethink brand positioning maybe?!?!

Reply

35 Rob June 9, 2009

On the other hand, it did get 14 people to consider the brand. If I see it I might just buy the product to see what it tastes like. And if I happen to like it I might buy more and bring them out at parties for hilarious conversation starters.

Even bad marketing could be good marketing.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: