Well of course a soda loses its subtly distinctive flavor if you hide the can! Those tests really didn't make a good point. :)
That's like drinking an unknown wine from a cheap plastic cup alone in an alley after a much too large breakfast, without any bottle label, price tag, companionship or comfortable context for proper tasting calibration!
Our senses really do cross over. Associations and history incontrovertibly shape our subjective experiences. Coke and Pepsi, in their naturally prominent can-habitats, taste very different.
My guess is those test ads were more interesting as stunts than as behavior changers.
You're not wrong, but what's interesting to me and the author of this article is that many products are completely interchangeable, yet their creators enjoy market dominance anyway.
As an aside, I don't think wine is necessarily the best comparison: the most recognizable brands of wine are often the least revered by connoisseurs . It's the experience of drinking wine from a glass bottle with a real cork out of a high quality wine glass in a classy setting that adds a lot to the flavor of wine. But which brand is relatively unimportant. That's not true for Coke where people's associations for "quality" are with the brand alone.
True. Perhaps not the best comparison.
There is a fundamental difference in branding dynamics between markets that value novelty vs. predictability, and exclusivity vs. availability.
With the wine market varying across both those axes.
Then there is the consumption vs. collection aspect. Winos of all persuasions have individually varying degrees of immediate satisfaction, delayed-reward, and hoarding/treasuring instincts.
Not really a cola soda branding type market at all!