AMERICAN FORK, Utah — Minivans circled the shop like wagons in a Western epic. Employees passed giant cups through a drive-through window. And inside, a woman named Taylor Warner reveled in her bit role in the battle that has overtaken Utah: the soda war of 2015.
“It gets wildly heated,” said Warner, 21, an assistant manager at Sodalicious, a soft drink shop where a team of mixologists tossed shots of coconut syrup into schooners of Dr Pepper and sent them out the door.
So-called dirty soda shops have woven themselves into this state’s fabric in recent years, offering concoctions spiked not with liquor but with flavor shots — a winning business model in a deeply Mormon state where alcohol and coffee are largely off limits and where sugar is the vice of choice. At Sodalicious, best-sellers include the Extra Dirty Second Wife (Mountain Dew, fruit syrups, a shot of half-and-half), while down the road at a drive-through called Swig, customers like the Missionary (Sprite, tiger’s blood syrup, coconut cream). Doctors, needless to say, are not thrilled by the trend.
As the shops have proliferated, a fight has broken out between Sodalicious and Swig, two of the larger chains, over the use of the word “dirty.” Nicole and Todd Tanner, who started Swig in 2010, say they own the right to use the word to refer to flavor-infused drinks — they trademarked the idea in 2013 — and they are suing Sodalicious for taking their idea.
“We started seeing some of the knockoffs or whatever you want to call them — ‘competitors,’” Nicole Tanner, 44, said in an interview. “We’re just trying to protect our brand.”
Sodalicious, which opened three years after Swig, responded to the lawsuit by saying that “dirty” had been used to refer to flavor-added drinks long before Swig employed it, and that the trademark should be canceled. Lawyers pointed to the dirty martini as evidence that Swig did not own the idea.
Kevin Auernig, 38, one of five people who own Sodalicious, called the lawsuit an attack on one of the few arenas where Mormons get to be a little naughty. “When they call us a knockoff, I don’t care,” he said.
As to whether Sodalicious’ use of the word “dirty” is illegal, “that’s for a judge has to answer,” he added. “But ‘dirty’ has been around forever.”
As with other food phenomena — the frozen yogurt craze, the Cronut-Doissant showdown and the stubborn persistence of the Pumpkin Spice Latte — the soda war has provoked an impassioned debate, with people who identify themselves as Swiggers defending the lawsuit and Sodalicious fans criticizing it.
“Only in UT would a soda shop think they own ‘dirty’ says every mixologist across the nation,” Rhea Perry wrote on Twitter. “Real Genius @SwigStop #TeamSodalicious.”
“Just found out my roommate is #teamswig,” another person said on Twitter, “so ... I’m looking for new housing if you know of any.”
Both soda chains have expanded in recent years, attracting mothers seeking an afternoon sugar buzz and high school students searching for a hangout. Swig’s 10 locations look like pool patios, with candy-colored tables and giant umbrellas. The eight Sodalicious locations are more sedate, featuring the concrete and chrome décor of an urban coffee shop.
Customers can walk in or drive through at both chains, and both encourage frequent visits with punch cards that guarantee a free drink after multiple purchases. At both chains, a 44-ounce soda costs about $2, and add-ins are extra.
“I go there on my way to work and on my way home from work,” said Britni Perry, 33, a Swig fan who works at a prison not far from her preferred soda stop. She orders a Dirty Dr Pepper (soda, coconut syrup) in the morning and a Mountain Dew Fruit Loop (soda and strawberry, peach and watermelon syrups) in the evening.
“They know me, they know my drinks, and they get excited when I walk in,” she added. “It makes me feel good.”
Swig’s lawsuit accuses Sodalicious of not only stealing the term “dirty” but going so far as to use the same soda bubbles in its logo and to serve its cookies the same way — semifrozen with room-temperature pink frosting.
“Defendant is nothing more than a copy of Swig’s exact business model,” the document states. It adds that the “defendant’s actions demonstrate an intentional, willful and malicious intent to infringe Swig’s federally registered Dirty mark to Swig’s great and irreparable injury.”
At the Sodalicious here in American Fork, Warner, the assistant manager, said she had recently served a wave of Swig defectors who brought giant Swig cups they filled with Sodalicious product.
“It’s turning people against Swig,” she said of the lawsuit. “Which is a shame, honestly, because they’re trying to do business, and I’m sure they’re very nice people.”
But five minutes down the road, at a Swig shop surrounded by its own circle of minivans, a shift leader, Bronwyn Varner, 18, insisted that her customers were as loyal as ever — and that Swig would win the legal battle.
“We call it the Mormon Starbucks,” she said. “We had someone come by today and get one of the biggest orders I’ve ever seen. I was like, ‘Oh, my gosh.’ They ordered six energy drinks, they ordered at least 10 or 12 44-ounce drinks, and then all these cookies, and then all these smoothies. And we were just like, ‘Oh, my gosh! Is it ever going to end?’”
About the Author
