The document discusses the cola wars between Coca-Cola and Pepsi from 1970 to 2010. It describes how consumption of carbonated soft drinks grew steadily at 3% annually from 1970 to 2000 due to increasing availability, new diet and flavored varieties, and declining prices. While Coca-Cola and Pepsi dominated the cola segment, their market share has declined in recent years as consumers have shifted to healthier beverage alternatives like water, juice, and sports drinks. Both companies have adapted by expanding their product portfolios internationally and acquiring companies in the snack and beverage industries to sustain profits in the face of flattening carbonated soft drink demand.
CSP is considering options for pricing, packaging, and demand forecasting for its new weight-loss drug Metabical. Three demand forecasting models were analyzed estimating the potential market between 4.3-9.8 million customers. Packaging and pricing strategies were evaluated using a matrix to determine ROI under different scenarios. Pricing at $150 targeting the ideal customer profile was estimated to achieve a 5.73% ROI, meeting CSP's objective.
Goodyear: The Aquatred Launch : Harvard Case AnalysisSameer Mathur
- Five tire companies once dominated the US tire market but faced decline due to foreign competition and rising costs. Radial tires with increased mileage replaced bias tires in the 1970s and 1980s.
- The document discusses the US tire market in the 1990s, noting increased average mileage per tire, lower prices due to overcapacity, and consumers' lack of brand loyalty. It profiles Goodyear as the only remaining US company and discusses its new Aquatred tire.
- Goodyear launched the Aquatred, positioned as an innovative radial tire with best-in-class wet traction and a 60,000 mile warranty. It was priced competitively at $89.95-$93.95 and marketed toward safety
TruEarth is considering expanding into the refrigerated pizza market from its successful Cucina Fresca fresh pasta brand. While the pizza market is larger, it also has much more competition. Research shows customer interest is high but some have concerns about price and variety. Overall, the findings suggest launching pizza is worthwhile but the company should revisit the price, focus on taste, and develop a better crust.
McKinsey & Company: Managing Knowledge and LearningDisha Ghoshal
As part of Strategy execution, this presentation on was on how McKinsey & Company flourished throughout the years by Managing Knowledge and Learning diligently.
ATLANTIC COMPUTER: A BUNDLE OF PRICING OPTIONS Akshay Jain
There are four main types of pricing strategies from which Atlantic Computers canchoose. First, Atlantic Computers could stay with the status quo and offer software tools for free. Second, it could choose competitive based pricing. Third it could choose from Cost-plus pricing. Finally, it could choose value-in use pricing.In addition to determining which pricing strategy to use, Atlantic
Manzana Insurance's Fruitvale branch is experiencing declining profits due to high turnaround times, uneven workload distribution, rising late renewals, increased renewal losses, inconsistent departmental priorities, and outdated completion time standards. This has allowed competitor Golden Gate to capture more market share by announcing a one-day turnaround time. Recommendations include revising how turnaround time is calculated using mean times rather than outdated standards, balancing workloads, prioritizing renewals, standardizing departmental processes, and potentially automating parts of the underwriting process.
Dominion Motors faces a challenge from an engineering report that could reduce demand for their motors. Their alternatives are to lower prices on a larger motor, reengineer smaller motors to higher torque, or build a new smaller motor. Building a new 5 HP motor allows them to be prepared if the report is accepted while avoiding actions that acknowledge the report prematurely. They will also lobby regulators and the engineer conducting the report to delay its impact and independently verify its findings.
Dana Wheeler is preparing recommendations for The Fashion Channel's new segmentation and positioning strategy to strengthen its competitive position against main rivals Lifetime and CNN. Three scenarios are suggested: 1) Targeting multiple segments including Fashionistas, Planners & Shoppers and Situationalists with a 20% rating increase but 10% CPM decrease. 2) Targeting just Fashionistas with a 20% rating decrease but 75% CPM increase and $15M in new programming. 3) Targeting Fashionistas and Planners & Shoppers with a 20% rating increase and 25% CPM increase requiring $20M in new programming. Scenario 3 is estimated to generate the highest net income of $168.8M
Cola Wars - Coke Vs Pepsi Harvard Business School Case StudyMohan Kanni
A brief presentation on case study Cola Wars where we try to analyse the past history and predict the future of their business and growth opportunities from a Marketing Management Perspective.
Harrah's Entertainment, Inc. Case Analysismbartugs
Harrah's Entertainment needs to decide how to attract new customers, retain existing customers, and regain lost customers while facing competitive pressures. It has strengths in strategic focus, 100% profit growth year-over-year, and strong marketing targeting specific customer segments. Harrah's has 18 casino locations, competitive pricing, and a loyalty program with 15 million members. However, aging facilities and increasing competition pose weaknesses and threats as competitors invest in newer, superior venues and technology like player cards and internet gambling expands.
The document analyzes the global soft drink industry using Porter's Five Forces model. It discusses the high level of rivalry between Coca-Cola and Pepsi, who together control 74.8% of the market. The threat of substitutes is also high given the many alternative beverage options. The document recommends that in India, Coca-Cola should develop its strategy to tap into the large rural market, pursue consolidation opportunities, and develop "nutritious" beverages to address health concerns.
Wal-Mart has been able to sustain its competitive advantage and superior performance over the years through several factors:
1) Efficient distribution capabilities and low-cost partnerships with suppliers
2) Advanced data collection and analysis to improve demand forecasting
3) A customer-oriented workforce culture focused on low prices and continuous improvement
4) Maintaining everyday low prices (EDLP) to increase customer satisfaction and loyalty
To continue this success, Wal-Mart should focus on cost leadership through large scale operations and private label brands, address public relations issues, and enhance worker benefits to protect its reputation.
The document discusses the Microfridge product, which combines a refrigerator, freezer, and microwave. It is targeted at institutional living situations like colleges, military bases, and hotels/motels. The main markets in 1994 were colleges (55% of revenue), military (25%), and motels (18%). Microfridge faced medium competition but had patent protection. It acquired another company and replaced refrigerators with Microfridge units. While using two suppliers reduced costs, it created compatibility issues. Microfridge planned to focus on new "home away from home" products, rapidly increase sales, get $4M in equity, and repay debt to withstand future competition. Recommendations included innovating for new markets, focused product development, and exploring new
This document summarizes the transformation of State Bank of India (SBI) from a state-owned bank to a modernized banking leader. It discusses how SBI was nationalized in 1969 and grew to over 60,000 branches by the 1990s. However, financial reforms in the early 1990s led to losses for the first time. SBI underwent restructuring in the 1970s and 1980s and established subsidiaries. In the 2000s, Chairman O.P. Bhatt led the 'Parivartan' initiative to make SBI customer-oriented, technology-focused, and improve employee attitude through communication. This helped SBI improve its market position, customer satisfaction, and win numerous awards.
The Coca-Cola and PepsiCo cola wars lasted from the 1950s to the 1990s as they battled for dominance in the US soft drink market. In the 21st century, both companies faced new challenges as carbonated soft drink sales began to flatten. They explored ways to boost domestic sales through innovation and boost revenue through profitable new beverages as consumer preferences shifted towards healthier options. While Coca-Cola struggled with execution issues, PepsiCo flourished through acquisitions and international expansion, gaining global market share over its rival. Both companies addressed slowing cola sales by diversifying their product portfolios and pursuing growth in non-carbonated drinks and bottled water.
Wilkerson, a mid-sized manufacturing company that produces water purification systems, is seeing a decline in margins. The company has one production department that machines and assembles three products: valves, pumps, and flow controllers. Wilkerson uses a volume-based costing system that may be incorrectly allocating overhead costs. Alternatives are analyzed to address the profitability of specifically the flow controller product line and combat the declining margins, including adjusting the cost accounting method or changing the flow controller's pricing.
Cola war continues: Coke and Pepsi 21st century and battle for Internationa...Sulabh Subedi
This document provides background information on the consumption of carbonated soft drinks (CSDs) in the United States from 1970 to 2010. It discusses the history of Coca-Cola and Pepsi, how CSDs are produced and distributed, Porter's five forces analysis of the CSD industry, and the strategic approaches taken by Coke and Pepsi over two stages from 1970 to 2010. It also analyzes the entry and competition between Coke and Pepsi in the Indian market.
Clique Pens - Case Study Solution by Kamal Allazov (Essay type)Kamal Allazov (MSc.)
Clique Pens Case Study by Harward Mba Center. This paper introduces possible solutions and recommendations by MSc. Marketing student - Allazov Kamal. (https://allazov.org/)
This document discusses Barco and Sony's positions in the projection market. It analyzes their strengths and weaknesses compared to each other. Sony introduced a new high-quality projector, the 1270, which threatened Barco's market share. The document considers how Barco should respond, concluding that lowering prices below Sony's 1270 would be the best option since Barco lacked a direct competitor at that time.
The major cost drivers for bottlers were direct store delivery, promotional payments to retailers, capital-intensive bottling process, concentrate costs dependent on supplier prices, and investments in distribution networks. Coke and Pepsi managed rivalry by targeting different demographics, aggressive Pepsi marketing, plant modernization, concentrate price differences, flavor experimentation, and rebates/price cuts. The companies should focus on emerging market expansion, healthier products, sustainability initiatives, and innovation to face challenges rather than short-term tactics against each other.
This document analyzes the cola wars between Coca-Cola and Pepsi using Porter's five forces model. It discusses the industry background and key events in 1886 and 1893. It finds that supplier power and buyer power are low due to commoditized raw materials and franchise agreements weakening bottlers' bargaining power. The threat of substitutes is high given many low-cost alternatives and customer switching costs. New entry threats are low due to high costs but rivalry is strong. The document concludes that the substitutes force is changing most as health concerns reduce carbonated soft drink consumption.
The document summarizes the cola wars between Coca-Cola and Pepsi from 2010. It provides histories of how each company was founded and evolved over time. Coca-Cola was formulated in 1886 and went public in 1919. Pepsi was created in 1893 and struggled before growing during the Great Depression. Both companies diversified their product lines beyond cola to respond to health concerns and a declining carbonated soft drinks market. They also expanded their international operations and adapted their strategies and relationships over time to remain competitive in the cola wars.
This document analyzes the soft drink industry, specifically Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, and discusses factors that contribute to the profitability of concentrate producers over bottlers. It examines Porter's five forces and determines that suppliers, buyers, substitutes and potential entrants do not greatly threaten the industry's profitability. While internal rivalry is intense between Coke and Pepsi, they primarily compete through advertising rather than lowering prices. The document concludes that vertical integration of concentrate producers into bottling may not be necessary, as bottlers already have incentives to cooperate, and contract amendments could ensure efficient investment in bottling infrastructure.
The document discusses Porter's five forces analysis of the concentrate industry occupied by Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. It finds the industry has high rivalry between the two major competitors and barriers to entry. There are many potential substitute products and buyer power is high due to various retail channels. Regulations differ between countries, affecting business operations on a global scale.
The document analyzes the soft drink industry using Porter's Five Forces model. It finds the industry is very profitable due to its oligopolistic structure with high barriers to entry. Concentrate producers (CPs) earn higher profits than bottlers. This is because CPs have more added value from their branded products and strategic capabilities, while bottlers have less value from operational effectiveness alone. Contracts between CPs and bottlers strategically favor the CPs through territorial exclusivity and pricing flexibility. The document concludes CPs should not vertically integrate into bottling given their current high profitability in concentrates versus bottlers' declining profits.
Cola Wars!!
Stage 1 (1950-1970) saw Pepsi target African Americans and younger consumers while Coke focused overseas. Pepsi doubled US consumers while Coke assumed saturation.
Stage 2 (1970-1990) saw both diversify into food while their market shares fluctuated between 30-40%. They imitated each other's ads and perceived brand differences.
Stage 3 (1990-2006) challenges included flat demand, obesity links to CSDs, and bottlers' profit pressures. Both shifted to non-CSD drinks and smaller packaging. Coke relied more on international markets while Pepsi was more aggressive in the US non-CSD market.
The document is a project report on the marketing strategies of Coca Cola. It discusses Coca Cola's history in India, including withdrawing from the country in 1977 due to government demands and then returning in 1993 to a changed soft drink market dominated by competitors like Parle. To gain market share, Coca Cola decided to take over Parle, gaining access to their network of over 200,000 retailer outlets and 60 bottlers. The marketing strategies Coca Cola employed in the 1990s to win the "Cola war" in India were successful, increasing their market share to 48.3% by 1998.
El documento presenta una breve historia del marketing de Pepsi desde su creación en 1893 hasta su estrategia actual. En 1893, Pepsi fue producida por primera vez en Carolina del Norte bajo el nombre "Brad's Drink". En 1898 pasó a llamarse "Pepsi Cola". Actualmente, Pepsi se enfoca en reforzar su marca a través de asociaciones con el deporte y la música, apuntando a personas jóvenes de 15 a 30 años de edad y ofreciendo un producto de alta calidad a un público de nivel socioeconómico medio-ba
This document provides an overview of PepsiCo Inc. including:
- It was founded in 1965 through the merger of Pepsi-Cola Company and Frito-Lay, Inc. and is now a global food and beverage company.
- Its portfolio includes Frito-Lay snacks, Pepsi-Cola drinks, Quaker foods, and Gatorade.
- The company aims to provide convenient foods and beverages while ensuring local relevance and encouraging healthy lifestyles.
The document discusses the ongoing competition between Coca Cola and Pepsi in the concentrate and bottling industries, noting that their rivalry has led to increased profitability for both companies but also makes it difficult for new competitors to enter the market. It analyzes factors affecting industry profits such as demand, substitutes, competition, and political issues like potential taxes on soda that could impact the companies.
This document analyzes the cola industry using Porter's Five Forces framework. It finds that the industry has high barriers to entry due to economies of scale, customer switching costs, and unequal access to distribution. Rivalry is high as the industry is dominated by two major competitors. Threats of substitution are currently low but may increase with greater health concerns. The analysis also finds that bottling operations have lower profitability than concentrate companies due to squeezed margins between suppliers and retailers. Key challenges for cola companies include health trends, substitutes, retailer power, and a mature market. Competition has lowered margins but also increased the power of major players like Coke and Pepsi.
The document discusses the history and strategies of Pepsi and Coca-Cola in their competition, known as the "Cola Wars". It provides background on the founding and growth of each company over the decades. Pepsi struggled early on and declared bankruptcy twice, while Coca-Cola saw steady growth. Both companies established nationwide bottling networks and used franchising agreements with bottlers. The document also analyzes the companies' market share and strategies over time in competing for consumers in the liquid refreshment beverage industry.
Este documento resume las campañas BTL (below-the-line) que Pepsi ha implementado desde 2004 hasta la actualidad. Explica que inicialmente Pepsi buscó posicionarse como la bebida favorita de los jóvenes a través de publicidad que los incitaba. Más adelante lanzó campañas como "El desafío Pepsi" y alianzas con figuras públicas. Recientemente, ha utilizado el deporte como eje de sus campañas, aprovechando eventos como el Mundial y el Super Bowl para involucrar a los consumidores a
This document discusses the Coca Cola concentrate and bottling businesses using Porter's Five Forces analysis. It finds that the concentrate business has high barriers to entry due to costly R&D and manufacturing. Competition is intense between Coca Cola and Pepsi who dominate the duopoly market. For bottlers, barriers to entry are also high due to capital requirements and exclusive territories. Competition is more limited for bottlers linked to concentrate producers. Overall, both the concentrate producers and bottlers are profitable but to different extents, with concentrate producers adding more value through branding and recipes.
The document compares Coca-Cola and Pepsi's performance in the soda market from 2008-2012. It shows that Coca-Cola outperformed Pepsi in market share, revenue, and campaigns over this period. Specifically, Coca-Cola had higher market share and revenues compared to Pepsi in most years. It also discusses some of Coca-Cola and Pepsi's major marketing campaigns, with Coca-Cola's "Happiness Machine" and "Share a Coke" campaigns noted as most successful. The document also provides some context on Coca-Cola and Pepsi's brands and performance in Indonesia, where Coca-Cola is described as dominating with its widespread cooler distribution, while Pepsi is
The document summarizes the 100-year rivalry between Coca-Cola and Pepsi in 3 paragraphs:
Coca-Cola and Pepsi initially competed for market share through carbonated soft drinks and focused on bottlers, retailers, and suppliers. Coca-Cola was first to franchise but struggled with acceptance due to inexperience. It began acquiring bottlers to boost competition.
In the 21st century, competition centered on emerging international markets and expanding beyond carbonated soft drinks. Price wars in the 1990s focused on low-price strategies. Globally, Coca-Cola dominated with 51.4% market share compared to Pepsi's 21.8%.
Coca-Cola faced challenges including execution
Zein Abdalla, CEO of PepsiCo Europe, outlines the company's strategy to build Europe's premier food and beverage business. PepsiCo has a diverse portfolio including #1 positions in snacks and juice, and covers 880 million consumers across Europe. The company focuses on differentiated value, revenue management, strong cost control, and cash flow generation to drive performance. PepsiCo is also committed to sustainability initiatives in areas like health, the environment, and talent. With continued growth opportunities in snacks and rising per capita consumption in Eastern Europe, PepsiCo is well positioned for future expansion across the region.
This document analyzes the competitive forces in the concentrate and bottling businesses of the cola industry using Porter's Five Forces framework. For the concentrate business, rivalry is fierce, buyers are price sensitive, and substitutes like health drinks pose a growing threat. In bottling, capital requirements are high, suppliers of cans have significant influence, and substitutes like soda streams present opportunities. Overall, while profit remains, health and environmental concerns will be key for future success in the industry.
PepsiCo is an American multinational food and beverage corporation headquartered in New York. It manufactures and markets a variety of carbonated and non-carbonated beverages as well as grain-based snack foods. PepsiCo entered the Indian market in 1989 and has grown to become one of the country's leading food and beverage companies. For distribution in India, PepsiCo uses both company-owned distributors and franchise-owned distributors to bring its products to consumers through a two-level distribution channel involving two intermediaries between bottling factories and end customers.
The document summarizes the history and competition between Coca-Cola and Pepsi from 1886 to 2006. It discusses how each company was founded and grew initially. In the late 20th century, both experienced ups and downs as consumption levels fluctuated and they launched new products and diversified. Pepsi became more aggressive in adapting to trends like the rise of non-carbonated drinks, while Coke struggled with execution issues. By 2004, Pepsi had grown its portfolio beyond cola drinks and achieved higher market shares across categories through proactive strategies.
The document provides a history and overview of Coke and Pepsi in 2006. It discusses the origins of each company in the late 1800s and their growth throughout the 20th century. It also analyzes their strategies, marketing, relationships with bottlers, and challenges faced in the 2000s from declining soda consumption and rising alternatives. Both companies diversified their portfolios and pursued international growth to address the changing landscape.
This document discusses the cola wars between Coca-Cola and Pepsi in the late 20th century. It provides financial data showing Coca-Cola had higher market share and profits than Pepsi in 1993 and 2000. Both companies used franchise bottling systems and pursued strategies like advertising, new products, and acquisitions to gain market share. By 2000, Coca-Cola's market share was 44.1% compared to Pepsi's 31.4%. The document performs SWOT and Porter's Five Forces analyses of both companies and the soft drink industry. It recommends strategies for Pepsi to better compete, such as differentiation, cost leadership, and strengthening its core competencies.
The cola wars are a series of mutually-targeted television advertisements and marketing campaigns since the 1980s between two long-time rival soft drink producers, The Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo. The battle between the two dominant brands in the United States intensified to such an extent that the term “Cola wars” was used to describe the feud.
In this presentation discussed regarding Rivalry between Cocacola and Pepsi
The Coca-Cola Company was founded in 1886 and is the world's largest beverage company. It manufactures concentrates and syrups that are then sold to bottlers who package and distribute over 400 brands of drinks in over 200 countries. While carbonated soft drinks make up most sales, the company has expanded its portfolio to include water, juice, tea, and sports drinks. Coca-Cola has maintained its dominance through effective marketing campaigns, strategic partnerships and acquisitions, and a focus on international growth.
The document summarizes the cola wars between Coca-Cola and Pepsi from 1993 to 2000 and beyond. It shows that while Coca-Cola had a larger market share and higher sales in 1993, Pepsi was gaining ground through innovative marketing campaigns targeting youth. By 2000, Pepsi had narrowed the gap, with costs and profits becoming more similar between the two companies. The document also analyzes the companies' strategies, financials, and issues using tools like SWOT analysis and Porter's five forces.
Coca-Cola has set goals to double revenues by 2020 and be the leading beverage company globally. It has had over 100 years of history growing from a single product to a diverse portfolio. Currently, Coca-Cola's business model involves concentrate producers, bottlers, retailers, and suppliers. However, changing consumer preferences toward healthier options and the rise of still beverages presents new challenges. Coca-Cola will need to continue adapting its business model to maintain growth and market leadership going forward.
Presentation on Cola Wars between Coke and Pepsi
(Presented in Marketing Planning and Implementation-1 Course at MDI Gurgaon)
P.S- Please feel free to share your views in comments.
This document summarizes the history and competition between Coca-Cola and PepsiCo in the cola industry. It discusses how Coca-Cola was founded in 1886 and PepsiCo in 1893. Throughout the 20th century, the two companies grew significantly and became major competitors in the cola industry. The document also analyzes Porter's Five Forces model and how consolidation among bottlers impacted industry profits. It notes that Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have majority market share in the cola industry but face challenges from health trends moving consumers to non-carbonated drinks.
The cola wars between Coke and Pepsi continued into the 21st century with both companies facing new challenges. While CSD consumption had grown steadily in the US from 1970 to 2000, growth slowed in the 2000s. Both companies relied on brand extensions like Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi to boost sales. By 2004, Pepsi had gained market share over Coke, but both remained the top two brands. To sustain profits, Coke and Pepsi expanded their product portfolios beyond carbonated soft drinks into non-carbonated beverages, bottled water and juices.
The document provides a history of Coca-Cola from its invention in 1886 to present day. Some key points include:
- Coca-Cola was invented in 1886 by Dr. John Pemberton and first sold for 5 cents.
- Asa Candler acquired sole ownership of Coca-Cola in 1892 for $2,300.
- Coca-Cola was first bottled in 1894 and removed cocaine as an ingredient in 1903.
- The Coca-Cola Company saw continued growth and expansion throughout the 20th century, including manufacturing its 1 billionth gallon of syrup in 1944.
- Coca-Cola re-entered the Indian market in 1993 and has since launched several popular Indian brands
This document analyzes the cola wars between Coke and Pepsi through history. It discusses how both companies were founded in the late 1800s and established their brands. In the 1960s and 1980s, both companies launched new products and doubled their advertising spending to compete. Coke switched from sugar to high fructose corn syrup, while Pepsi introduced new flavors. The document also examines both companies' marketing strategies, production and distribution networks, and how they targeted each other's employees and customers during the cola wars. It concludes that Coke and Pepsi still need to address issues with their global images and have potential to expand into new beverage categories.
Coca-Cola introduced New Coke to replace classic Coke in 1985 due to declining market share and the success of Pepsi's blind taste tests. However, customers strongly protested the removal of classic Coke and switched to Pepsi. Within 79 days, New Coke's market share dropped significantly. Coca-Cola then re-launched classic Coke due to public demand and their emotional attachment to the original formula. The introduction and failure of New Coke is considered one of the biggest marketing blunders of all time.
Coca-Cola is the world's largest beverage company founded in 1886 offering over 500 brands in over 200 countries. It owns top brands like Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, and Fanta and operates through four geographic segments. The company manufactures concentrates, syrups and finished beverages using raw materials like PET resin, sweeteners, and flavors. It has around 62,000 employees and spent $5.8 billion on advertising in 2018 maintaining its brand differentiation. The non-alcoholic beverage market is growing at 5.8% annually with Coca-Cola and Pepsi having the largest market shares.
The document discusses the cola wars between Coca-Cola and Pepsi. It provides background on how Pepsi attacked Coke on its home turf in the US after Coke started focusing overseas. It analyzes the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of both companies. It also examines the competitive strategies employed by each over the decades, including new product lines, marketing campaigns, pricing strategies, and acquisitions. Both companies have established a duopoly in the soft drink market through aggressive competition and global expansion.
This document provides an overview of Coca-Cola and the beverage industry. It discusses that Coca-Cola was invented in 1886 and is now the third most valuable brand globally. It analyzes Coca-Cola's marketing mix, competition with Pepsi, and performs a PESTEL, SWOT, and Porter's Five Forces analysis. The beverage industry is growing, particularly in Asia-Pacific, but Coca-Cola faces challenges from health concerns, water scarcity, and changing consumer preferences toward more nutritious drinks.
This document provides an overview of Grupo Modelo's international marketing strategies for Corona beer. It includes an analysis of the company's current situation, vision, mission, industry, key performance indicators, competitors, financial statements, PESTEL analysis, Porter's 5 forces model, SWOT analysis, 7P's of marketing, market segmentation, strategies, positioning, and recommendations. Grupo Modelo is Mexico's largest beer producer and Corona is the top imported beer in the US. The document outlines Corona's "fun in the sun" marketing campaigns and beach-themed positioning as an escape from everyday life.
The document analyzes the cola industry using Porter's Five Forces model. It finds that the concentrate industry has a moderate threat of new entrants due to low barriers to entry. Rivalry among Coke and Pepsi is intense due to their duopoly, slow industry growth, and high marketing costs. The threat of substitutes is also high given rising popularity of other beverages.
Pricing Strategies by Coca-Cola in IndiaRohan Bharaj
This document describes the the pricing journey of Coca-Cola India right from its entry till today. Coca-cola competes in a very fiercely competitive market and pricing is one of the most important factors it has to consider while conceptualizing its strategies.
Similar to Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 (20)
Questions about Hiring for AI EngineeringBryan Bischof
This discusses the most important questions (and my answers) about hiring for AI Engineering teams.
It specifically discusses what attributes you should look for in hires, how to interview them, and what the team makeup should look like.
Embracing Change_ Volunteerism in the New Normal by Frederik Durda.pdfFrederik Durda
The new normal has not diminished the spirit of volunteerism; rather, it has transformed it, opening up new avenues for individuals to connect with and support their communities. As we continue to adapt, volunteerism will remain a vital force in building resilient, compassionate, and inclusive societies.
Unlocking The Human Element in IT And Service ManagementDario Diament
The book "Unlocking the Human Element in IT" provides a comprehensive guide to understanding and leveraging the human aspects of information technology. Drawing on extensive research and real-world case studies, the book delves into the critical role that people, culture, and organizational dynamics play in the success or failure of IT initiatives.
The Importance of the Human Element in IT
The book begins by highlighting the often-overlooked human dimension of IT, emphasizing that technology alone is not enough to drive meaningful change and innovation. It argues that the true power of IT lies in its ability to empower and engage people, fostering a collaborative and adaptive organizational culture.
Key Themes and Insights
People-Centric Approach: The book underscores the need to shift from a technology-centric mindset to a people-centric approach in IT management. It explores strategies for aligning IT goals with the needs and aspirations of employees, customers, and stakeholders.
Organizational Culture: The authors examine the profound impact of organizational culture on IT initiatives, addressing topics such as change management, leadership, and team dynamics. They provide practical frameworks for cultivating a culture that embraces innovation, collaboration, and continuous learning.
Soft Skills and Talent Management: The book delves into the importance of developing soft skills, such as communication, empathy, and problem-solving, among IT professionals. It also explores effective talent management strategies to attract, retain, and develop high-performing IT teams.
Agile and Adaptive IT: The book highlights the rise of agile and adaptive IT methodologies, emphasizing the need for IT organizations to be nimble, responsive, and customer-centric. It offers guidance on implementing agile practices and fostering a mindset of continuous improvement.
Bridging the IT-Business Divide: The authors address the longstanding challenge of aligning IT with business objectives, providing strategies for enhancing collaboration, communication, and mutual understanding between IT and other organizational functions.
Practical Applications and Case Studies
Throughout the book, the authors present real-world case studies that illustrate the impact of the human element in IT. These case studies cover a range of industries and organizational contexts, offering valuable insights and lessons learned for readers to apply in their own environments.
Conclusion
"Unlocking the Human Element in IT" is a must-read for IT leaders, managers, and professionals who recognize the importance of people, culture, and organizational dynamics in driving successful IT initiatives. By embracing the human element, organizations can unlock the full potential of their technology investments and achieve sustainable, transformative change.
People mentioned:
- Matt Beran
- Deborah Monroe
- NJ Robinson
- Megan Engels
- Gregg Gregory
- Rocky McGuire
Learn more at invgate.com
Certified Administrative Officer CAO.pdfGAFM ACADEMY
The Certified Administrative Officer (CAO) is a gold-standard certification awarded exclusively by the Global Academy of Finance and Management ®. Earning this designation demonstrates that you have skills and experience in office administration which includes events coordination, time management, resource management, Microsoft Office applications, and business communication.
REQUIREMENTS
The Certified Administrative Officer designation requires a diploma or a bachelor's degree in business and administration, or related field.
Two years experience in office administration
Final year graduates with industrial attachment will be considered.
In addition to educational requirements, candidates must have knowledge in Microsoft Office applications, and business communication skills.
To apply: https://gafm.com.my/digital-certification/application-for-certification/
2. U.S. CSD Industry-Economics
• Consumption- 23 gallons annually(1970)
• Annual growth – 3% over three decades
• Dominance of cola segment
Market Share
Cola CSD
Others
Market Share
Cola CSD
Others
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
3. Reasons For CSD Growth
• Increasing availability
• Introduction of diet and flavoured varieties
• Affordability of CSDs-Declining real prices
• Americans’ preference to soda over any other
beverage
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
5. Concentrate Producers
• Blending raw material ingredients
• Packaging mixture in plastic canisters
• Shipping containers to bottlers
• Manufacturing process- low capital
investment- machinery, labor or overhead
• Advertising, promotion, market research,
bottler support-high costs
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
6. Concentrate Producers
• Customer Development Agreements: CDAs
with retailers like Wal-Mart
• Funds offered for marketing and other
purposes for shelf space
• Coke and Pepsi concentrate producers- 72% of
the U.S.
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
7. Bottlers
• Added carbonated water and high fructose
corn syrup to concentrate
• Bottled and delivered
• Door-to-door delivery – Pepsi and Coke
bottlers
• Bottling- Capital intensive, requires high speed
production lines
• Bottling and Canning lines-$4 million to $10
million each.
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
8. Bottlers
• Cost components
• concentrate and syrup(major)
• packaging
• Labor and overhead
• Capital in trucks and distribution networks
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
9. Bottlers
• Fall in number- Over 2000(1970) to fewer than
300(2009)
• First nationwide franchised bottling network-
Coke
• Franchised Bottler-Exclusive geographical
territory
• Exception- Fountain Accounts
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
10. Bottlers
Original Coca Cola Franchise Agreement(1899):
• Fixed price contract
• No provision for renegotiation
• Bitter legal disputes
• Amended in 1921, 1978 and 1987
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
11. Bottlers
Master Bottler Contract(1987):
• Right to Coke to fix concentrate price and
other terms of sales-using formula-maximum
price and quarterly price adjustment as per
sweetener prices
• Coke under no legal obligation to assist
bottlers with advertising or marketing
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
15. Fountain sales
• Investment in service dispensers, point of sale
advertising
• 2009 – Coke (69%), Pepsi (20%), DPS(11%)
• National accounts – Coke, DPS
• Local accounts - Pepsi
16. Concentrate producers & Bottlers
• Concentrate - Few inputs
• Bottlers – Packaging, sweeteners
• CSDs were packed in cans (56%), plastic
bottles (42%), glass bottles (2%)
• Cans – attractive packaging material
• PET bottles – larger and varied bottle sizes
17. Coke and Pepsi – over the years
1886-1899 1900-1929 1930-1959 1960-1973
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
1886- John
Pemberton
created the
original formula
1898-
Brodham
creates Pepsi
• Robert Woodruff
named CEO
• Bottling plants in
Europe and Asia
• Pioneers the
open top coolers,
vending
machines
• Franchises open in
24 states
• Goes bankrupt-
1923
• Bought by Craven
holdings
• Established market
share- 2nd largest
• Walter Mack
appointed as
President
• Adopts new logo-
blue, white and red
• Selling in cans
• Market leader-47%
• First price increase-
Price raised from a
nickel to a dime
• Diversifies offerings
(Mountain Dew)
• Merges with Frito-Lay
(PepsiCo) & expands
into the snack food
business
• Diversifies offerings
(Sprite, Tab)
• Remains #1 in national
cola sales
18. Coke wars begin
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
Alfred Steele
“Beat Coke”
1950
• Pepsi
Generation-
”Young at heart”
• Margin narrowed
• Modernize plants
and delivery of
bottlers
1963
1970s
• Increases
concentrate
prices
• New variety
introduced
• New flavours
19. Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
COLA War Years 1974-1999 2000-2010
• Low calorie beverages
• Supplies all Taco Bell, KFCs and
most Pizza Huts
• Snack food lines very profitable
• The “Pepsi Challenge”
• Pepsi Lite
• Fast-food business
• Outpaces Coke in food store sales
• High-fructose corn syrup replaces
sugar
• Pepsi Bottling Company goes public
• Low calorie beverages
• Subway account, retains exclusive
deals with Burger King and
McDonalds
• Holds big lead over Pepsi in cola
market
• High-fructose corn syrup replaces
sugar
• Diet Coke introduced, boosts profits
• New Coke fails, Coca Cola Classic
returns
• Coca Cola Enterprises established
• Maintains lead in cola market share
20. Adapting to the times
• Late 90s – CSD consumption began to
fizzle(Exhibit 1:- CSD-47.4 in 2008 and 46% in
2009)
• Americans became health conscious-obesity
• Coke – Freestyle soda machine, extensive
marketing
• Pepsi – Rebranding plan: The power of one,
promoting the overall portfolio-snack and
beverage company
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
21. Alternatives
• Diet sodas-Coca Cola Zero, double digit
growth
• Alternative sweeteners – natural sugar, Stevia-
a zero calorie sweetner
• Juices, energy drinks, tea-based drinks,
bottled water (Non carbs- Mkt Share-17%)
• Pepsi – a “total beverage company” outsold
coke’s rival non carb products
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
22. Bottled Water
• $14 billion bottled water category
• 20% of sales in the US non-alcoholic refreshment
beverage segment
• Pepsi – Aquafina; Coke – Dasani
• Price sensitive customers sought cheaper
alternatives
• PET bottles criticized
• Coke’s mkt share 15% in 2009 (down from 22% in
2004)
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
23. Coca-Cola Worldwide market
• Invested about $2 billion in china
• Served in 200 countries
• 80% of sales from international market
24. Pepsi Worldwide market
• Depended on the US for half of its sales
• Focused on emerging markets like Asia, Middle East and Africa
• In Russia, Pepsi paid $1.4 billion for 76% stake in Russia’s largest juice producer
26. Evolving structures and strategies
• Low-cost strategy by bottlers
• Coke’s difficult relationship with bottlers like
CCE was termed as “Dysfunctional”
• Incidence pricing
• Retailer resist price increase(Wal-Mart)
27. Future of the Cola wars
Fundamental shift in the Cola wars
Or
One more round of 100 year rivalry
28. Why historically has the soft drinks
industry been so profitable?
• Low power
Bargaining power of
supplier
• Locked in bottlers
• Low power to consumers
Bargaining power of
buyers
• Lots of substitutes, but advertising and widespread
distribution limit their impact.
• consumers prefers soft drink over any other beverage
Threat of substitutes
• Barrier to entry since high costs involved(advertising,
reputation)
• Bottling process was capital intensive- high speed
production lines
Threat of new
entrants
• Secret ingredients, similar products, competition over
promotion and advertising, brand loyal customersIndustry rivalry
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
29. Concentrate Producer Bottler
Dollars per
case
Percent of
net sales
Dollars per
case
Percent of net
sales
Net sales 0.98 100% 4.63 100%
COGS 0.22 22% 2.67 58%
Gross Profit 0.76 78% 1.97 42%
Direct
marketing exp 0.21 21% 0.45 10%
Selling &
delivery exp 0 0% 0.85 18%
Admin exp 0.24 25% 0.31 6%
Operating
income 0.3 32% 0.36 8%
Concentrate producers v/s bottlers
31. • The cola war enabled Coca-cola and Pepsi to elevate
their innovation level.
• Coke was the first concentrate producer to build a
nationwide franchise bottling network, that Pepsi and
Cadbury Schweppes followed suit.
• Franchise agreements with both Coke and Pepsi
allowed bottlers to handle the non-cola brands of
other concentrate producers.
• Bottlers could not carry directly competing brands.
• Throughout the 1980s, the growth of Coke and Pepsi
put a squeeze on smaller concentrate producers
Effect on Industry’s Profits
32. Effect on Industry’s Profits
• Shelf space were declined and shuffled from one to
another for small brands.
• Small players find it difficult to sustain in this
business.
– In a five year span, Dr Pepper was sold several
times, Canada Dry twice, Sunkist once, Shasta
one, and A&W once.
– Phillip Morris acquired Seven-UP in 1978 for a big
premium, but racked up huge losses in the early
1980s, and then left the CSD business in 1985.
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
33. Effect on Industry’s Profits
• New players relied on strategic acquisition to have
foothold in the market
– In 1990s, through a series of strategic
acquisitions, Cadbury Schweppes became the
third-largest concentrate product.
– Coke has a world market share of 51.4%, Pepsi
has 21.8% and Cadbury Schweppes has 6%
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
34. Flattening Demand – Sustaining Profit
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2002 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009
Unitcasevolume(inmillions)
Packaged Water
Juice
Sports drinks
Tea-based drinks
Energy drinks
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
35. Flattening Demand – Sustaining Profit
35 35 35 35
25
35
30
60 60
70
65
35
45
70
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Coffee
based
Tea based Energy Sports Juice Water CSD
Grossmargin%
Retailer's GM Brand's GM
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010