Mormon Church and Coca-Cola
dt king
I'm pretty sure that Coca-Cola is a publicly traded company -- owned by
lots of people. Twenty-some years ago, there was a bit of a fuss,
because the church may have owned some Coke stock. The church officials
claimed it was part of an investment package and they weren't aware of
Coke connection. They sold the stock.
dtk
Mark D. Hatch wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am interested in debunking the rumor that the Mormon Church owns the
> Coca-Cola company. If anyone has any information as to the origins of
> this rumor, who the actual owners of the Coca-Cola company are, and
> anything else related to this rumor please respond. Please remember
> that a business that is owned by a Mormon is a business owned by that
> individual, and not by the Mormon Church. Thanks for any help you may
> provide.
>
> Mark Hatch
James McNabb
ha...@nosc.mil (Mark D. Hatch) wrote:
>Hi,
>I am interested in debunking the rumor that the Mormon Church owns the
>Coca-Cola company. If anyone has any information as to the origins of
>this rumor, who the actual owners of the Coca-Cola company are, and
>anything else related to this rumor please respond. Please remember
>that a business that is owned by a Mormon is a business owned by that
>individual, and not by the Mormon Church. Thanks for any help you may
>provide.
> Mark Hatch
According to latest 13F filings with the SEC, the largest holders of
Coca-Cola are:
Berkshire Hathaway 8.07%
Suntrust Banks 6.05%
Barclay's Bank 2.64%
Fayez Sarofim 2.46%
Wachovia Asset Mgt 1.64%
Bankers Trust 1.64%
State Street 1.12%
TIAA CREF .94%
Mellon Bank ..89%
Regents of U of Calif. .84%
Lincoln Capital Mgt .66%
Northern Trust .65%
Nationsbank .55%
CALPERS .52%
Fidelity .51%
There's nothing about this list that suggests any shadowy involvement
by toothy evangelists. Unless Warren Buffet is a Mormon, or the whole
University of California system is a Mormon front.
Barry Traylor
Mark D. Hatch <ha...@nosc.mil> wrote in article
<3364fd05...@newshub.nosc.mil>...
> Hi,
>
> I am interested in debunking the rumor that the Mormon Church owns the
> Coca-Cola company.
Gee, I thought the rumor was that the Mormon Church owned _Pepsi_.
AFAIK, _that_ rumor is False.
Barry "just trying to keep my vectors coordinated" @ Tredyffrin
gskimin
Mark D. Hatch wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am interested in debunking the rumor that the Mormon Church owns the
> this rumor, who the actual owners of the Coca-Cola company are, and
> anything else related to this rumor please respond. Please remember
> that a business that is owned by a Mormon is a business owned by that
> individual, and not by the Mormon Church. Thanks for any help you may
> provide.
>
> Mark Hatch
Been discussed to death before. Check DejaNews. Conclusion was that the
Mormons may be stock holders but do not have a controlling interest in
the Co.
James McNabb
aaro...@news.uidaho.edu (Aaron Schab) wrote:
>Mark D. Hatch (ha...@nosc.mil) wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I am interested in debunking the rumor that the Mormon Church owns the
>> Coca-Cola company. If anyone has any information as to the origins of
>> this rumor, who the actual owners of the Coca-Cola company are, and
>> anything else related to this rumor please respond. Please remember
>> that a business that is owned by a Mormon is a business owned by that
>> individual, and not by the Mormon Church. Thanks for any help you may
>> provide.
> Actually, the Mormon Church owns Pepsi (or at least a significant
>amount of stock). They also own Marriott.
I assume this last is a troll, but for the benefit of those who might
actually think that the Mormons own Pepsi:
a Bloomberg search on largest instutional holders turns up these
names:
Barclays Bank 2.69%
State Street 2.44%
Fayez Sarofim 2.16%
Bankers Trust 1.83%
Fidelity 1.72%
Capital Res and Mgt 1.33%
TIAA CREF 1.28%
Alliance Capital 1.28%
(based on 12/96 13F SEC filings)
It may be that the Mormons are exempt from SEC filings, but failing
that, I think it's a dead issue. Next!
I tried Marriott, but Bloomberg wouldn't give me holders. Searched on
Marriott Corp., which I assume is the holding co.
Mark D. Hatch
aaro...@news.uidaho.edu (Aaron Schab) wrote:
>Mark D. Hatch (ha...@nosc.mil) wrote:
>> Hi,
>
>> I am interested in debunking the rumor that the Mormon Church owns the
>> Coca-Cola company. If anyone has any information as to the origins of
>> this rumor, who the actual owners of the Coca-Cola company are, and
>> anything else related to this rumor please respond. Please remember
>> that a business that is owned by a Mormon is a business owned by that
>> individual, and not by the Mormon Church. Thanks for any help you may
>> provide.
>
> Actually, the Mormon Church owns Pepsi (or at least a significant
>amount of stock). They also own Marriott.
While I know nothing about who owns Pepsi, the Mormon Church DOES NOT
own Marriott. The Marriott family owns Marriott. Yes, they are
Mormon, but saying the Mormon Church owns Marriott is like saying the
Catholic Church owns every business owned by a Catholic, etc.
By the way, thanks to everyone who responded with information to my
message. I plead guilty of not doing anymore research than surfing
the net, but I was not asking for anyone else to do any research
either. I was hoping that someone out there already had knowledge of
who owns Coke and where the rumor started. Thanks again.
Mark Hatch
James Linn
Aaron Schab <aaro...@news.uidaho.edu> wrote in article
<5k86i0$pne$1...@newshound.csrv.uidaho.edu>...
> Mark D. Hatch (ha...@nosc.mil) wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> > I am interested in debunking the rumor that the Mormon Church owns the
> > Coca-Cola company. If anyone has any information as to the origins of
> > this rumor, who the actual owners of the Coca-Cola company are, and
> > anything else related to this rumor please respond. Please remember
> > that a business that is owned by a Mormon is a business owned by that
> > individual, and not by the Mormon Church. Thanks for any help you may
> > provide.
>
> Actually, the Mormon Church owns Pepsi (or at least a significant
> amount of stock). They also own Marriott.
Prove it.
I'll give you a case of Pepsi, and a night at the local Marriott if you can
prove that the Mormon Church (the church itself, not its pension fund, nor
individual Mormons) owns more than say 1% of either organization.
Pension funds don't count because they are managed by outsiders, and buying
decisions aren't made by the beneficiaries.
I'm fairly confidant you can't prove it, even though such investment would
be available in the public record somewhere.
Its a rumour, just like the Coke rumour. Live with it.
James Linn
My opinions are MINE,MINE,MINE!!!
Clive D.W. Feather
In article <5k5g9d$hff$1...@broadway.interport.net>, James McNabb
<jam...@deletethis.interport.net> writes
>There's nothing about this list that suggests any shadowy involvement
>by toothy evangelists. Unless Warren Buffet is a Mormon, or the whole
>University of California system is a Mormon front.
Hmm, could that explain BSD ?
Clive "prefers version 7" Feather
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Director of Software Development | Home email:
Tel: +44 181 371 1138 | Demon Internet Ltd. | <cl...@davros.org>
Fax: +44 181 371 1037 | <cl...@demon.net> | Abuse:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address | <cl...@bofh.org>
Stern, just Stern
>I'm pretty sure that Coca-Cola is a publicly traded company -- owned by
>lots of people. Twenty-some years ago, there was a bit of a fuss,
>because the church may have owned some Coke stock. The church officials
>claimed it was part of an investment package and they weren't aware of
>Coke connection. They sold the stock.
For the record:
(1) Coca Cola is a publicly traded company.
(2) The largest institutional holder is Berkshire Hathaway, which
has 200,000,000 shares, or about 8% of the company.
(3) Berkshire Hathaway is run (and largely owned by) Warren
Buffet, who is not, to the best of my knowledge, a Mormon.
Years ago, I did hear that the Mormons had taken a large stake
in either Pepsi or Coke and had declared that the faithful had
to drink that cola. When, for some reason, they reinvested in
the other cola, they declared that God had selected a new cola
and the faithful should follow suit.
I have no reason to believe that this story is true.
/stern
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We'll add creationism to science
textbooks just as soon as you add http://www.panix.com/~stern/
Darwin to the Bible. stern@[spambuster]wheels.org
Aaron Schab
> own Marriott. The Marriott family owns Marriott. Yes, they are
> Mormon, but saying the Mormon Church owns Marriott is like saying the
Thus, the Mormon Church gets ten percent of Marriott's profits, at
least if the Marriott family are practicing Mormons. They may not own it, but
they profit from it. Substantially.
acs
Ray Depew
Aaron Schab (aaro...@news.uidaho.edu) wrote:
Not even close. The Mormon Church gets ten percent of the income of
the INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS of the Marriott FAMILY, IF they choose to donate
that much. That's substantially (ooh! good word!) less than Marriott
Corporation's profits. Your conclusions/observations/assertions are in
error.
(And no, the Church doesn't track members' incomes and send them a bill.)
Regards
Ray
Justin D. Bukowski
In article <5kdagn$jge$1...@newshound.csrv.uidaho.edu>,
Aaron Schab <aaro...@news.uidaho.edu> wrote:
>Mark D. Hatch (ha...@nosc.mil) wrote:
>> While I know nothing about who owns Pepsi, the Mormon Church DOES NOT
>> own Marriott. The Marriott family owns Marriott. Yes, they are
>> Mormon, but saying the Mormon Church owns Marriott is like saying the
>
> Thus, the Mormon Church gets ten percent of Marriott's profits, at
>least if the Marriott family are practicing Mormons. They may not own it, but
>they profit from it. Substantially.
So does the US Federal Government.
Justin "do you have a point?" Bukowski
Tom
st...@panix.com (Stern, just Stern) wrote:
>Years ago, I did hear that the Mormons had taken a large stake
>in either Pepsi or Coke and had declared that the faithful had
>to drink that cola. When, for some reason, they reinvested in
>the other cola, they declared that God had selected a new cola
>and the faithful should follow suit.
>I have no reason to believe that this story is true.
>/stern
>--
Actually, I thought Mormons weren't allowed to drink cola drinks
because of the caffeine (drug) content?
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
"Jewels and binoculars hang from the head of the mule."
---Bob Dylan
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Yeechang Lee
Tom <user...@cybercom.net> wrote:
> Actually, I thought Mormons weren't allowed to drink cola drinks
> because of the caffeine (drug) content?
As has been established in many previous iterations of this thread,
the LDS dietary code (or 'Word of Wisdom') forbids alcohol, tobacco,
and "hot drinks" (which has been interpreted to mean coffee and tea).
No mention of caffeine. The above, plus illegal drugs, are verboten
to Latter-day Saints. Colas are not. Individual LDS may or may not
choose to drink colas--many do, many don't.
Yeechang, an occasional cola drinker
--
<URL:http://www.columbia.edu/~ylee/>
Helge Moulding
jo...@visi.com wrote:
> Tom <user...@cybercom.net> appears to have written:
> : Actually, I thought Mormons weren't allowed to drink cola drinks
> : because of the caffeine (drug) content?
Is it going to be a problem if I point out that this is not correct?
Or at least that I have never read or heard that the Mormon church
has now taken an official stand on the matter, and that I'd sure
like to have a cite on that from Mr Robinson?
Lessee, Mormons and coffee/alky/tobacco. Hindus and beef(meat).
Muslims and pork. Jews and treif. What other religious/cultural
groups have dietary restrictions or taboos? Are Mormons unique in
that some observant Mormons have extended a fairly specific dietary
restriction to include more modern inventions, based on a supposed
(and demonstrably wrong) reason for the original restriction? Are
there Hindus who won't eat gelatin desserts, for instance, or Muslims
who won't touch a "pigskin" (which is actually made of cowhide)?
I know that some orthodox Jews do worry about ritual cleanliness a
lot, so in their case this type of extension probably happens all
the time.
--
Helge "Will USAns extend their horsemeat taboo
to cover dogfood?" Moulding
mailto:h...@slc.unisys.com Just another guy
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/1401 with a weird name
John Konopak
Yeechang Lee wrote:
>
> Tom <user...@cybercom.net> wrote:
> > Actually, I thought Mormons weren't allowed to drink cola drinks
> > because of the caffeine (drug) content?
>
> the LDS dietary code (or 'Word of Wisdom') forbids alcohol, tobacco,
> and "hot drinks" (which has been interpreted to mean coffee and tea).
> No mention of caffeine. The above, plus illegal drugs, are verboten
> to Latter-day Saints. Colas are not. Individual LDS may or may not
> choose to drink colas--many do, many don't.
>
> Yeechang, an occasional cola drinker
> --
> <URL:http://www.columbia.edu/~ylee/>
FWIW:
I heard a "joke" in Provo one time that the way BYU guys get "close" to
BYU coeds was to tell them they had Coke and Twinkies in their rooms. The
humor hung, I believe, on a sugar prohibition. Could that signify?
JPK
Irene Hunting
Ngener wrote:
> I have noticed that the Marriott hotels I stay in quite often have copies
> of the Book of Mormon (in Vail, CO., and San Antonio, for instance),
> while a Best Western franchise I stay in while working in Utah does not.
The founder of Marriott was a Mormon, hence the Book of Mormon is
usually found in his hotels.
Ngener
In article <5k8ame$ll8$1...@broadway.interport.net>,
jam...@deletethis.interport.net (James McNabb) writes:
>It may be that the Mormons are exempt from SEC filings, but failing
>that, I think it's a dead issue. Next!
>I tried Marriott, but Bloomberg wouldn't give me holders. Searched on
>Marriott Corp., which I assume is the holding co.
I have noticed that the Marriott hotels I stay in quite often have copies
of the Book of Mormon (in Vail, CO., and San Antonio, for instance),
while a Best Western franchise I stay in while working in Utah does not.
"Who do you want to talk to? All those morons who are living across the world
somewhere? You don't even want to talk to them at home"
Ray Bradbury, on Internet chatting
Drew Lawson
In article <33725C...@ou.edu>, John Konopak <jkon...@ou.edu> wrote:
> Yeechang Lee wrote:
> > Individual LDS may or may not
> > choose to drink colas--many do, many don't.
> FWIW:
> I heard a "joke" in Provo one time that the way BYU guys get "close" to
> BYU coeds was to tell them they had Coke and Twinkies in their rooms. The
> humor hung, I believe, on a sugar prohibition. Could that signify?
Words fail me as to how absurd this sounds to someone who attended BYU.
A prohibition on *sugar*?!?!?
This is the place which considers baking cookies to be a default
activity for dateless females on weekends. And even without that,
the campus bookstore sold some of the best fudge I have ever tasted.
And anyway, people of the opposite gender are not allowed in dorm
rooms.
Drew "perhaps you meant sugar requirement" Lawson
--
Drew Lawson | Savage bed foot-warmer
dla...@aimnet.com | of purest feline ancestry
| Look out little furry folk
www.aimnet.com/~dlawson | it's the all-night working cat
3dham
>
>For the record:
>
>(1) Coca Cola is a publicly traded company.
>(2) The largest institutional holder is Berkshire Hathaway, which
> has 200,000,000 shares, or about 8% of the company.
>(3) Berkshire Hathaway is run (and largely owned by) Warren
> Buffet, who is not, to the best of my knowledge, a Mormon.
>
>Years ago, I did hear that the Mormons had taken a large stake
>in either Pepsi or Coke and had declared that the faithful had
>to drink that cola. When, for some reason, they reinvested in
>the other cola, they declared that God had selected a new cola
>and the faithful should follow suit.
>
>I have no reason to believe that this story is true.
I would go a step further by pointing out that Mormans are not
supposed to consume caffeine and though non caffenated versions are
availble, the main product is high in caffeine.
Great Old One
Brigham Young university in Hawaii has a policy of not allowing any
caffeine-containing beverages to be distributed or consumed on campus.
BYU is a Mormon University. They said it was because the Mormon religion
does not allow mind-altering substances, which caffeine is.
jo...@visi.com wrote:
: Helge Moulding <h...@slc.unisys.com> appears to have written:
: : Is it going to be a problem if I point out that this is not correct?
: : Or at least that I have never read or heard that the Mormon church
: : has now taken an official stand on the matter, and that I'd sure
: : like to have a cite on that from Mr Robinson?
: Sorry, my only cite would be "the classmate in high school who wanted a
: cola but couldn't have one." Didn't realize it was a family choice; he
: pointed to his religion as the reason. Mea culpa!
: --
: John Robinson
: jo...@visi.com
: "E=mc^2 (+/- 3dB)"
Bob Hiebert
Brandon Burt wrote:
> On a more thread-related note, this UL about the Mormon church and
> Coca-Cola Inc. is very prevalent here in Utah, where people look for any
> excuse to find hypocrisy in the church's leadership. I will attempt to
> verify/falsify it. (Lexis/Nexis, anyone?)
This has been proven false at least 6 times in the last two months alone
with tools much less powerful than Lexis/Nexis. You can try Deja-News
for a replay, or go to any financial website where the appropriate SEC
forms are summarized. You can get a list of all shareholders of record
with greater than 5% ownership, as well as institutional ownership.
While you are there you can do the same with Pepsi, Marriott, or anybody
else that might be this week's rumor.
Just a general comment to everyone that keeps jumping in or resurrecting
this thread. Lots of people say the government should just get out
there and "DO SOMETHING" about all these big companies (including some
regular non-capitalist participants of this group). Guess what, folks.
Most governments have already done something. There is an amazing amount
of information in the public domain that was put there because of legal
requirements. There is nothing easier than debunking claims about big
companies, especially publicly held companies. With the advent of the
Web, it doesn't even cost you any money like it used to.
Bob "Do Wafers go better with Coke?" Hiebert
--
E-mail address is munged. Correct to reply.
For the full story on Urban Legends, don't miss
http://www.urbanlegends.com/