Complaints against 11 Dragon Soop products were not upheld by the alcohol industry’s Independent Complaints Panel (ICP). A copy of the full decisions are available here and here. The company explained that at the time the complaint was made, Dragon Soop had 13 flavours, not 12 as stated by the complainant in the first paragraph under the header “Appeal to under 18s.” The company stated that at the time of its formal submission to the complaint, Dragon Soop now had 14 flavours. And a drink must not suggest any link with therapeutic qualities, mood altering or enhanced mental or physical capabilities – 3.2(j).

The company stated that NIADA could not claim to have knowledge of what ‘most young people’ did, as its day-to-day work and research was conducted with a very specific group of young people, all of whom had serious alcohol or substance abuse issues. The company explained that this research group could not in any way be seen to be representative of the population as a whole. The company argued that any extrapolations about the behaviour and attitudes of the wider population based on research carried out solely with this group would be skewed, misleading and far from impartial. The Panel considered Dragon Soop Rhubarb and Custard and noted that the flavour was based on a traditional sweet and that the colour scheme of the pastel pink and yellow closely resembled these sweets. The Panel considered that there was a risk that this could have an appeal to under-18s. The Panel discussed a previous complaint case about Mr Gladstone’s Curious Emporium Range from 2017 which had a rhubarb and custard flavour. The Panel noted that the decision reflected that rhubarb and custard had a wide appeal and was not particularly appealing to under-18s. The Panel also noted that the decision noted a difference between using a sweet name as a flavour and marketing a drink in the context of sweets which Dragon Soop did not do. When considering the Dragon Soop Rhubarb and Custard flavour, the Panel concluded that the flavour had wide appeal and did not have a particular appeal to under-18s.Red Bull Energy Drink is appreciated worldwide by top athletes, students, and in highly demanding professions as well as during long drives. The company then examined the second paragraph under the heading entitled ‘strength’ which stated that “the high caffeine intake along with the high alcohol intake masks the effect of drunkenness”, which the company stated NIADA had not provided proof of. The company stated that the formulation did not break any of the Portman Group’s rules and that the Portman Group must agree with this because according to an SHS Drinks’ press statement, the Advisory Service had been consulted by the company prior to the launch of WKD X, which was a drink that closely mirrored Dragon Soop, and was destined for major grocery outlets in May 2022. Firstly, the company highlighted that NIADA had stated that it wished to submit “a complaint about caffeinated alcoholic drinks”, but that the organisation had only singled out Dragon Soop from a group of other caffeinated alcoholic drinks. The company stated that the organisation had done this based on the unscientific basis that Dragon Soop is what NIADA called “the more popular drink of choice.” The communication of the products’ alcoholic strength had been conveyed in a factual and proportionate way and there was nothing on the cans that placed undue emphasis on the products’ higher alcoholic strength or intoxicating effect(3.2(a) – emphasis of higher alcoholic strength). Caffeine: Caffeine was already known by ancient civilisations. They consumed it from natural sources like tea, coffee, cacao beans and cola nuts and appreciated its stimulating effects on the human body.

It may be necessary to inform consumers that a product contains certain ingredients, for example high caffeine content, but this must be done in a factual and ‘non emotive’ way.” The Panel then considered Dragon Soop Red Kola further under rule 3.2(h). The Panel noted that the name Red Kola sounded similar to the retro sweet ‘Cola Cubes’. However, the Panel considered that any reference to the sweet name was purely incidental, but that even if there was a link, the Panel concluded that ‘cola cubes’ as a flavour had a wide appeal and did not appeal particularly to under-18s. In conclusion for this section of the producer’s formal response, the company explained that NIADA had incorrectly stated that Dragon Soop ‘breaches numerous codes of conduct.’ The company stated that this was unfounded and noted that no evidence or detail was presented by NIADA to support this misleading statement.

Heavy - Active for much of the day, walking non-stop and carrying objects. Typical jobs: hospital/ward nurse, waitressing in a busy restaurant, cleaner, porter, labourer/construction worker, gardener, farm worker. Leisure Activity Level NIADA is the alliance which facilitates co-operation among voluntary and community sector organisations supporting those affected by alcohol and drug use, and their families. We as a collective membership group wish to submit a complaint about caffeinated alcoholic drinks.

The company explained that in 2015, Dragon Soop was fully investigated by the Independent Complaints Panel (Panel) under Code rules 3.2(f) and 3.2(h) which it found to not be in breach. The company highlighted that it had received a letter from the Chair of the Panel that there had not been any breach of the Code and that the decision was final.With regard to the research submitted by NIADA in support of its complaint, the company noted from previous Panel rulings the stringent standards that the Panel required when research was accepted. The company stated that it was confident that the Panel would agree that NIADA’s research did not meet these standards.

Red Bull Energy Drink's special formula contains ingredients of high quality: Caffeine, Taurine, B-Group Vitamins, Sugars, Alpine Water. The Panel then considered specific flavour variants that it believed warranted further discussion, as the Panel considered that some flavour variants carried additional connotations that had not been captured in the Strawberry and Lime 2015 precedent or discussion so far. The company stated that it recognised that while each element of the marketing and design of Dragon Soop was important, the overall impression was the most important element to avoid direct or indirect particular appeal to under-18s. A factual statement that a product contains a particular ingredient, for example high caffeine content, is unlikely in itself to be problematic under the Code.” Light - Have a job that involves long periods of sitting (office-based / driving) or are home-based and sitting for much of the day. Typical jobs: office worker, sales rep, bus/taxi/lorry driver.A drink should not suggest any association with bravado, violent, aggressive, dangerous, anti-social or illegal behaviour – 3.2(b); The use of a dragon on all product artwork, along with the claw marks did not look aggressive and did not create an association with aggressive behaviour (3.2(b) – aggressive behaviour)