SamuelRSmith said:
|
That is fine, and I know some people who'd mind it an awful lot if they were served one instead of the other, but I was refering to this:
American usage of any of the three major terms is because of the soda wars in the states. All restaurants are forced to carry only one brand of soft drinks, and can be fined if they carry rival brands (e.g. Pepsi Co. products and Coke products). The penality is so high that a place would likely rather shut down than handle the fine.
Though I googled it up in the meantime, and it's really just contracts, with restaurants getting machinery and other stuff for free/at a low price if they stick to one brand. But I couldn't find anything about them actually being forced to choose, or forced to sign such exclusivity terms.







