99.99% of the U.S. population (including environmentalist bike-riding whackos like me) are absolutely dependent on oil. The concept of terror-free gasoline is a good one, but shifting a few gallons to “terror-free” gasoline does absolutely nothing to reduce U.S. demand for foreign oil overall.

It seems to me that you’re seeing the answer of “I would only buy the “Terror Free” gas if it were less expensive” as an endorsement of the product, while I see the response as something that’s certainly not an endorsement, but isn’t completely dismissive either.

33% of people stated that they would go out of their way to buy the “Terror Free” gas; that’s not exactly a staggering amount of people.

I look at that number and see the 67% (well over half) that wouldn’t go out of their way to buy the fuel.

While I think we could probably sit here and go back and forth regarding whether or not my argument is correct (and it very well may be incorrect), I don’t think you should question my integrity because I happen to see the data in a different light than yourself.

The numbers speak for themselves. 33% of that businesses local population are actively changing their buying habits in favor of this particular product. That’s successful marketing, regardless of the specific widget they’re buying, and it shows, despite your claim, that people do, in fact, care… for what that’s worth.

But I digress…

Since you put so much credence in your thesis, then THAT should have been the title of your article, something to the effect of: “Price Determining Factor in Terror Free Gas Sales.” That maintains a bit more journalistic integrity. Instead, you opted for the Fox News approach, smugly (and incorrectly) stating an subjective value judgement: “People Don’t Care About Terror Free Gas,” which is a ridiculous thesis, based on the objective data you show.

If you want people to take you seriously, how about some integrity? Otherwise, you’re just another scare happy pseudo-journalist with an agenda driven blog who thinks that because you have an honorable opinion, people should laud you as an expert, despite your lack of honest reporting.

“That being said, would the idea be enough to get people to change their buying habits?
Apparently!”

According to your numbers, a full third of consumers will go “out of their way” in order to make a purchase of this product. That is great success, particularly considering we’re talking about something as ubiquitous as fuel. The business owner’s marketing plan has changed a third of his market share’s buying habits to “go out of their way” to purchase this product. Obviously, people do indeed care, enough so that even if this were a town of 10,000 people, 3,333 would be willing to go out of their way to go to his station… and those are great numbers.

Now, 52% said “they would go out of their way if it were cheaper,” but that doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t buy it if it were “on their way,” increasing his already substantial client base that will go “out of their way.”

I guess your “apparently not” is the 14% who said they wouldn’t “go out of their way,” but again, that’s not the same as “I don’t care” or “I won’t buy it,” they just said that they wouldn’t go out of their way to buy it.

Try being a little more honest next time. One-sidedness is no virtue.