The Chicago Cubs are looking for their first World Series win since 1908, so the folks at Wrigley Gum are celebrating the Series return to Wrigley Field by selling chewing gum at 1908 prices. What this cash-in promotion glosses over is the fact that the Wrigley name had nothing to do with the Cubs 108 years ago.
Starting today, Mars says that a small pack of Wrigley gum will cost $0.05 for the duration of the World Series.
“The last time the Chicago Cubs won the World Series it was 1908, when Teddy Roosevelt was in office, radio and TV hadn’t yet been invented and the price of a pack of Wrigley gum was 5-cents,” the company said.
To get the discounted price, customers must download a coupon for $0.30 off a $0.35-cent five-stick pack of any Wrigley’s gum, including Doublemint, Juicy Fruit, Spearmint, Winterfresh, or Big Red.
While Mars and Wrigley gum are no doubt enjoying the Cubs’ return to the World Series, it should be noted that any connection between the gum and the 1908 team is tenuous.
For starters, in 1908 the owner of the Cubs wasn’t anyone named Wrigley, but instead Charles Weeghman. The Cubs also didn’t play anywhere near the current Wrigley location. Instead, they played at West Side Park, located by what is now the University of Illinois at Chicago campus.
As for what we know now as Wrigley Field, it wasn’t even around when the Cubs last won the Series in 1908. The park that would eventually become the Friendly Confines opened in 1914, and was home to Weeghman’s other team, the Chicago Whales of the short-lived Federal League. The Cubs moved to the stadium in 1916, and it was renamed Wrigley Field in 1927.
Additionally, the Wrigley company itself did not actually own the team or stadium. Heir William Wrigley Jr. became a minority owner of the Cubs in 1916 and took a majority ownership in 1921. The family sold the team and stadium in the 1970s to the Tribune Company. Both the team and stadium are now owned by the Ricketts family. The gum, of course, is now owned by candy conglomerate Mars.
by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist
No comments:
Post a Comment