Search This Site

Friday, July 9, 2010

Post # 127 - Keebler: Where Little Girls' Dreams Go to Die - 6/21/2010

For the record, none of my Girl Scout Cookie Pushers are little brats.  That part was for effect.  Keep the order forms coming!
Dear Keebler,

You should be ashamed of yourselves. What goes on in that tree, needs to stay in that tree! You have set your sights on a non-profit organization whose very goal is preparing girls for a grueling, kick-you-in-the-crotch world, in a loving, nurturing environment.

Girl Scout Cookie knock-offs? Seriously? Just how much padding do Ernie’s pockets need? Those dollars are tainted. Tainted with the precious dreams of little girls, still naïve to the cruel ways of a world run by rich old men with blue pills and mistresses.

At first, many years back, I remember seeing your Grass Hopper cookies. I thought “those look an awful lot like a Thin Mint”. They taste equally remarkable.

Then, I saw that damned Fudge Shoppe at it again. This time, cranking out Peanut Butter Filled Chocolate Cookies. I thought “these taste an awful lot like a Tag-A-Long”. They taste equally remarkable.

Then, recently, I saw the Fudge Shoppe cranking out the Coconut Dreams cookies. I thought “these taste an awful lot like a Samoa, the holy grail of all Girl Scout Cookies”. They taste equally remarkable.

Here’s the deal. I’ve strayed from my local Girl Scout on more than one occasion. I feel just awful when I do. In the past, I “made up” by purchasing boxes and boxes of Samoas. Frankly, the kid’s a little brat. She annoys me. I’d just as soon avoid her until she ages out and the next kid comes along.

This is where you’re guilty. If the Fudge Shoppe elves weren’t packing all of that fudge goodness and disguising it as Girl Scouts Cookies, my annual hankering would outweigh my annoyance threshold for little Frangelica or whatever her name is.

Keebler has made it too easy to stop supporting Girl Scouts. I want to know what you’re going to do about it.

Girl Scouts Cookies generate a certain amount of funds per box. I think Keebler should donate the same.

Keebler has a chance here to do something great, or a chance to look like a big, out-of-touch corporation. Which path will you choose?


Follow-up on July 6th, 2010:
Dear Keebler,

On June 21st, I sent you a note, questioning your ethics. I challenged that by selling Girl Scout Cookie Clones, you're effectively stealing from the Girl Scouts. People who normally buy and freeze, no longer need to do so.

It's July 6th. Yes we had the big 4th of July. It's time to put the sparklers down and get back to work. Answer your mail.

I motion that any company with a conscience would "right" the wrong act by donating proceeds from those products (you've AT LEAST copied Thin Mints, Tag-A-Longs, and now Samoas. Not sure about the Trefoils, Lemonades or Do-Se-Do's. I'm sure your elves are working on those.

If you choose not to respond, I'll know in my heart of hearts, that you care little about the development of young girls into strong women. I'll know that you don't care about the future--just the present. I'll know that Whitney Houston was full of crap when she sang that the "the Children are the future", and that we should "show them all the beauty they possess inside".

Maybe you're upset that girl scouts wear the green better than Ernie. Maybe you're the crotchety old man down the street that shoos the kids off of your lawn when their frisbee lands on it. Whatever it is, you need to get over it. Own up to your mistake.



P.S. - Your website creeps me out--those wind chimes and Ernie waving from the enchanted tree. Very trippy.
No response.
You May Also Enjoy:

Follow me on Twitter: @hermanletters
Follow me on Facebook


  1. You are a moron.
    Little Brown Bakers is the bakery that creates your Girl Scout Cookies. And guess who owns Little Brownie Baker...KEEBLER.
    The reason the Keebler Cookies & the Girl Scout cookies taste remarkably "equal" is because THEY ARE BAKED BY THE SAME FACTORY.

  2. Thanks for the whiz-bang Hardy Boy investigation. I realize Keebler is one of the two licensed bakers. I knew that going in.

    It's Little Brownie Bakers. Not "Little Brown Bakers" as you stated. Call me a moron, you better be accurate with your rebuttal.

    In any case, you missed the point. Completely. Bill Buckner Game 6 Style. The point was a slow rolling grounder, and it rolled right through your legs.

    Regardless of who makes Girl Scout cookies, it's a little crummy to sell a slightly-different-to-circumvent-legal-issues version under the Keebler label. Profit versus non-profit. That was my point.

    Maybe Keebler has an agreement with the Girl Scouts, where they contribute. They never really responded, so I'm left to assume "no".

    I guess I know who to contact when I need wikipedia help. Oh no-wait--you're anonymous.

  3. Great rebuttal Herman Letters! My biggest pet peeve is people who leave mean remarks anonymously.

  4. Thanks Shondira. It's like they have tiny wenises.

  5. I am only 25 years old and I buy Viagra online usually from this online pharmacy that I know called WWW.MEDSHEAVEN. COM , Viagra medication helps me get hard easy, I enjoy it a lot, I can go about 10 times usually on the day that I take Viagra, I like viagra a lot, and I recommend viagra over cialis.

  6. Hello Minerva. When I was crafting this letter, I was hoping someone would post something about viagra on the wall. So thank you!

    A couple of points to consider:

    1) I know people who have ordered through They were extremely dissatisfied with both the service, and the quality of the products. In the words of one: "These were nothing more than blue Chicklets. They didn't even bother erasing the word 'Chicklet'.

    2) Maybe you wouldn't need to use Viagra if you weren't googling Girl Scouts and happening upon my page.

    Enjoy the rest of your tug.


    I've been equally appalled at my recent first sighting of these Keebler products. It was the Simoa that caught my attention first. I too see it as the holy grail of fund-raising beacons for the Girl Scouts.

    I have given it to them hard and square on facebook, please know that I will join you in this "campaign" if you will to support the righter cause and maintain moral will.

  8. Thanks Eric. I'm a former Cub Scout, Webelo, and Eagle Scout. I know how hard those kids work to sell those things, and how important it is to raise funds. To turn around and cut into the "Fill the Chest Freezer" demographic is downright slimy.

    They never responded.

  9. Your next letter should go to the Girl Scout head office, to see if they entered into an agreement with Keebler to rescind the previous exclusive agreement. I'm sure they'd be more responsive to communications than some big cookie manufacturer.

    My guess is that there is some arrangement here that benefits the scouts. The cookies aren't even "changed slightly" as far as I can tell. They're exactly the same, when it would have been easy enough to produce a similar cookie with a different outer design to void potential legal trouble.

    PS. Not to be a troublemaker, but I really don't think you knew Keebler was basically the same company that produces Girl Scout cookies when you wrote this post, as you claim in your response to Anonymous. You made no allusion to it in the post, called these cookies "knockoffs," and said they were "targeting a nonprofit organization". They're knocking off their own product, rather than selling the same product under two different names? They're merely "targeting" some nonprofit, rather than betraying the very nonprofit they had an exclusive agreement with? Come on now.

  10. Dear Equazacion,

    Thanks for reading snd responding. I sincerely appreciate it.

    You are absolutely right--I should also write to the Girl Scouts. I'll do that.

    However, that doesn't alleviate Keebler (and parent company Kellogg) from their responsibility in answering my questions just because they are, as you say, "a big cookie manufacturer."

    You and I may see Keebler's relationship with the Girl Scouts differently. My understanding, and this is speculative because they never responded, is, and was by the way before I contacted them, as that of a contract manufacturer. "Here's the recipe, here are our standards, here is a confidentiality agreement, go bake me some cookies." A mercenary.

    You're speculating on some special arrangement with the Girl Scouts. Again, speculating. As I sit here typing this, eating Thin Mints and also Keebler Grasshoppers, I see no mention of "10% of all proceeds will be donated to the Girl Scouts." All I see is a 10 ounce package that cost $1.98, next to a 9 ounce package that cost $3.50.

    You question the term "Knock-off." Sorry, but the Thin Mint and Grass Hopper are different. Thin Mint has a darker chocolate and a crispier inner. Grasshopper has more chocolate, and is sweeter. The chemicals on the back of each box, and sugar/fat/carb stats back me up on this. Samoas and Coconut Dreams, while I think taste a lot more alike, are also different in terms of ingredients. I stand by my "knock-off" terminolgy.

    At the end of the day, whether or not you think I knew Keebler made Girl Scout cookies, or whether they have a top secret Girl Scout Friendly agreement doesn't matter. People who buy cookies, not just to be nice, and not just to support Girl Scouts, buy them because they love them. If they can get a reasonable facsimile for roughly half the price, year round, then my point stands.

    Thanks for the rousing discussion.

  11. I didn't say anything about Keebler being a big manufacturer and therefore not having a responsibility to respond to you; only that the Girl Scout organization is more likely to fulfill that responsibility. Agreed that Keebler are butt zits for not responding to you. Butt zits merely being an example of something bad and annoying that don't respond when you speak to them.

    Yes, I'm speculating, "...again, speculating..." regarding the arrangement. If you want to use stronger words, I'm outright guessing! I know that 'cause that's actually the word I used originally when I described my thought. Although my guess is based on some logic.

    The similarly speculative confidentiality agreement you refer to would logically have to have included an exclusivity agreement, or else it would have been useless. Non-disclosures always do include those, since the company being contracted would otherwise be tempted to sell the contracted design directly to the public themselves. If the Girl Scouts' agreement had no such clause, that would be a grand anomaly, and the scout office could sue their lawyers for being incompetent ninnies.

    I'll be airtight here since I get the distinct pedant impression from you, jumping on tiny gaps in your opponents' language to win a propagandized rightness -- and say again that even though it might appear a copy is being made, that would make much more sense if the outer design were changed to avoid the obviousness of the breach. It's not impossible that you're correct in your assumption instead, but logically it's unlikely given the circumstances, unless they're just stupid.

    Finally, if there were an agreement at hand -- as I'm guessing, yes guessing, there is -- there wouldn't necessarily be a message on boxes advertising the fact. Girl Scouts primarily want to encourage business experience in the girls, which is why they don't just sell their cookies themselves through stores with such messages already. Putting such a message on Keebler boxes would mean no one would have any reason to buy from the girls, since they're cheaper, easier to find, and still carry the satisfaction of knowing your money is going to the scouts. Sure, you don't get the personal experience, but who wants that anyway? No one, that's who.

    It also might not be a case of a direct donation, but of some other benefit to the Scouts. My guess is that the right to produce their own version was a negotiating point in setting the price Keebler would charge the Scouts for their cookie production during the latest contract renewal...? That's just a guess though, again 'guess,' saying it loud and clear.

    PS. I really enjoyed your response to Viagra guy above. Very funny and a unique approach to dealing with spam comments. All bloggers should follow suit :)

  12. Hey Equazcion, sorry--I didn't see this earlier. I understand where you're coming from. Are you an attorney?

    I did follow up with the Girl Scouts, and I'll post that exchange shortly.

    I'm still laughing about "butt zit." Awesome!