The American Beverage Association recommended that elementary school vending machines contain only bottled water and 100% juices, and that middle school machines stock these products along with unsweetened soft drinks, low-calorie juice drinks, and sports drinks.  However, independent local bottlers are not obliged to follow this guidance.  This article outlines concern for soft drink consumption by school-age youth and explains “pouring rights contracts” used by the soft drink industry.

By the age of six, children can use brand names to identify products they prefer.  Industry has two primary means to increase product sales – increase the number of customers and encourage customers to switch brands.  School district “pouring rights contracts” give exclusive advertising and sales of specific products (brands) to a “captive” young audience.  Three companies (Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Cadbury Schweppes) own the top ten soft drink brands.

Pouring rights contracts are usually of 5-10 years duration with no “opt out” which means the school must reimburse the company for lost sales if the contract is broken. The contract usually specifies an amount of money upfront to the school and the commission rate based on sales (which may include a quota or required minimum sales).  The contract may require that machines be placed in high traffic areas, and the machines usually display sweetened beverages at eye level and at lower cost than water, juice or unsweetened drinks.  The beverage company may retain control of the type and quantity of beverages in the machines, limiting the number of slots for healthier options.  The contract typically indicates container sizes (20-oz. bottles are more profitable) and the commission for each size.  Some contracts prohibit competition, i.e., no other competitors’ products (even if donated) are allowed in the school or at school events. Other features of the contracts include advertising and promotional items.

School boards have the authority to enter or to decline pouring right contracts. Any external control will likely come through state legislatures, not the courts.  In a survey of North Carolina principals, most believed that advertising in schools did not unduly influence their students, and over half would support commercial involvement in their schools even if funds were available to pay for activities currently funded by commercial sales. 

An argument can be made that pouring rights contracts do not bring “new” money into the school; the money comes directly from the families. The per-student/per-year contract may not be as “sweet” as it seems.
Schools have options: limit the hours students can purchase soft drinks, improve the quality of the choices and lower the price of healthier beverages to compete with sweetened drinks, or ban soft drink sales.  School health services staff can educate school officials and parents by reporting the prevalence of overweight among the students and discussing the health effects of overweight.

(Price J, Murnan J, Moore B. Am J Health Educ 2006;37(5):306-314)

Comment:  The source on contracts was from www.californiaprojectlean.org.  --J.O.