Talk:Zest (brand)

message: "This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject."
A description of a product that once existed, and that shares its brand name (trademark) with an ever-changing cast of new products, hardly seems like an adequate treatment of the trademark, or the business and economic reality of the trademark.  That the real identity of "Zest" is a trademark, not a product, is attested to by the following:
The Proctor and Gamble website currently uses the term "Zest line" to describe the Zest-branded products.
A customer service inquiry I made to Proctor and Gamble about how to recognize the old no-film variant was answered by a statement that the product no longer exists!  (Not that the product has been reformulated, updated, modernized, or any other term which would suggest that Proctor and Gamble views Zest as a product.)
The Proctor and Gamble page setting forth the terms and conditions for using the website states that Proctor and Gamble exists entirely within the state of Ohio.
The label on a recently purchased bottle of Zest Bodywash states that it was made in Mexico and "distributed" by Proctor and Gamble.
Although many of us (myself, for example) believe that the historical Zest bar is/was an important product, that product no longer exists.  Any discussion of that product should be framed entirely in the past tense.
That Business leaders (the most powerful individual Economic agents in the modern world) are, increasingly, viewing the companies they run as mere collections of trademarks and goodwill is an important trend.  An article which emphasizes the change, with time, in the practical economic definition of a trade name will both help to illuminate this trend and provide useful information about what to expect from a trade item labeled "Zest."  Much more information than a mere description, in the present tense, of what once was.
History is being made.  Important history.  Let us not ignore or obfuscate this fact.
128.84.182.57 10:08, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an articulate, astute clarion call for deeper examination of an incredibly important business phenomenon. Unfortunately, clarion calls are not encyclopedic and have no place in Wikipedia. 68.0.119.139 (talk) 06:51, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is Zest, Really? 

message: "By the mid-1960s, the bar no longer had a marbled appearance." I wasn't even born until the mid-1970's, and every Zest bar I've ever used has had a marbled appearance.76.226.222.203 (talk) 19:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I first became aware of Zest between 1955 and 1970.  Every Zest bar I can remember did not have a marbled appearance.  Thank you, 76.226.222.20, for putting your original research on the talk page (where it belongs), and not in the article. 128.84.182.57 (talk) 04:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is flat out wrong 

message: Zest's original formula was particularly useful when the only water available is hard.  Is there a reasonable substitute for old Zest?
See Soap scum DHR (talk) 20:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  another source of non-soap soap? 

message: I don't remember this and couldn't find it on YouTube.  Does anyone have a source? --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 16:02, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Bus Stop commercial