Coke Vs Pepsi Analysis

3403 words - 14 pages

1. Why is the soft drink industry so profitable? An industry analysis through Porter’s Five Forces reveals that market forces are favorable for profitability. Defining the industry: Both concentrate producers (CP) and bottlers are profitable. These two parts of the industry are extremely interdependent, sharing costs in procurement, production, marketing and distribution. Many of their functions overlap; for instance, CPs do some bottling, and bottlers conduct many promotional activities. The industry is already vertically integrated to some extent. They also deal with similar suppliers and buyers. Entry into the industry would involve developing operations in either or both disciplines. ...view middle of the document...

Substitutes: Through the early 1960s, soft drinks were synonymous with “colas” in the mind of consumers. Over time, however, other beverages, from bottled water to teas, became more popular, especially in the 1980s and 1990s. Coke and Pepsi responded by expanding their offerings, through alliances (e.g. Coke and Nestea), acquisitions (e.g. Coke and Minute Maid), and internal product innovation (e.g. Pepsi creating Orange Slice), capturing the value of increasingly popular substitutes internally. Proliferation in the number of brands did threaten the profitability of bottlers through 1986, as they more frequent line set-ups, increased capital investment, and development of special management skills for more complex manufacturing operations and distribution. Bottlers were able to overcome these operational challenges through consolidation to achieve economies of scale. Overall, because of the CPs efforts in diversification, however, substitutes became less of a threat. Power of Suppliers: The inputs for Coke and Pepsi’s products were primarily sugar and packaging. Sugar could be purchased from many sources on the open market, and if sugar became too expensive, the firms could easily switch to corn syrup, as they did in the early 1980s. So suppliers of nutritive sweeteners did not have much bargaining power against Coke, Pepsi, or their bottlers. NutraSweet, meanwhile, had recently come off patent in 1992, and the soft drink industry gained another supplier, Holland Sweetener, which reduced Searle’s bargaining power and lowering the price of aspartame.

1

With an abundant supply of inexpensive aluminum in the early 1990s and several can companies competing for contracts with bottlers, can suppliers had very little supplier power. Furthermore, Coke and Pepsi effectively further reduced the supplier of can makers by negotiating on behalf of their bottlers, thereby reducing the number of major contracts available to two. With more than two companies vying for these contracts, Coke and Pepsi were able to negotiate extremely favorable agreements. In the plastic bottle business, again there were more suppliers than major contracts, so direct negotiation by the CPs was again effective at reducing supplier power. Power of buyers: The soft drink industry sold to consumers through five principal channels: food stores, convenience and gas, fountain, vending, and mass merchandisers (primary part of “Other” in “Cola Wars…” case). Supermarkets, the principal customer for soft drink makers, were a highly fragmented industry. The stores counted on soft drinks to generate consumer traffic, so they needed Coke and Pepsi products. But due

to their tremendous degree of fragmentation (the biggest chain made up 6% of food retail sales, and the largest chains controlled up to 25% of a region), these stores did not have much bargaining power. Their only power was control over premium shelf space, which could be allocated to Coke or Pepsi products. This power did...

Other Essays Like Coke vs Pepsi Analysis

Problem Set - Cola Wars Essay

1152 words - 5 pages Question 1: Conduct a Porter's Five Forces Analysis on the soft drink industry and pull out strategic implications for each of the five forces. The threat of new entrants in the soft drink industry is relatively low. Barrier for entering the CSD industry is relatively high because the industry type is oligopoly, and consumers have high brand loyalty towards either Coke or Pepsi. The new entrants are facing large‐scale investment, or cost

Analysis of Cola Industry

944 words - 4 pages industry in the United States is dominated by two competitors, Coke and Pepsi. These two firms accounted for 72% of the U.S.’s CSD market sales volumes in 2009 (“Cola Wars Continue”, pg.2). There are many social factors that account for this advantage. Both Coke and Pepsi began operations in the late 1800’s and they have used their history to build strong customer loyalty. Coke has even focused their advertising around the use of their product

Marketting Strategies of Coke and Pepi

2795 words - 12 pages Comparative study on the marketing strategies of Pepsi and Coca-Cola on the youth A Research Project under Research Methodology INTRODUCTION This report includes a comparative analysis of the marketing strategies of the two rivals Coca-Cola and Pepsi. Analysis of research data will provide an overview of the market, which will be evaluated to provide a conclusion of the two different brands of cola in terms of their marketing

Analysis of Coke and Facebook

1880 words - 8 pages how close the buyer’s product specifications, production equipment, and purchasing cycle are tied to current suppliers’ products and operations. My Coke Rewards is an example of a switching cost because after acquiring points towards products offered by the Coke Rewards program, if a customer switches to Pepsi, they forfeit the points towards the products offered by Coke and must buy the Pepsi products and invest time in accumulating points for

Porter Five Forces of Coca Cola

556 words - 3 pages market. Coca-cola doesn’t really have a special flavor. In a blind taste test, people couldn’t tell the difference between Coca-Cola coke and Pepsi coke. The Bargaining Power of Buyers: Low pressure • The individual buyer has little to no pressure on Coca-Cola • The main competitor, Pepsi is priced almost the same as Coca-Cola. • Consumer could buy those new and less popular beverages with lower price but the flavor is different and

Coca Cola Marketing Research

3376 words - 14 pages Fall/Winter 2013 13BMKT17H | Marketing Research | 13BMKT17H | Marketing Research | Module Leaders: Dr Aida Nakhla Ms Ahella El Saban Module Leaders: Dr Aida Nakhla Ms Ahella El Saban Table of Contents Introduction……………………………………………………………………… Section 1: Problem Recognition………………………………………….. 1.1-Problem Recognition…………………………………………………………… 1.2- New Coke Problem Recognition……………………………….……….. 1.3- Critical Analysis on

The Strategies in Marketing Pespi

781 words - 4 pages product and evolving the drink over a period time for many generations. This marketing strategy aims to conduct the analysis of the Pepsi product to determine the approach whether the development of marketing will determine the success with the public. The very important marketing approach for Pepsi is the customer. Pepsi knows that the reason for its success of the organization’s popularity and the welcomed satisfaction of the customers

Coke Zero Case Study

1472 words - 6 pages Chapter Eight Case Study - Coke Zero Coke Zero Coca Cola has been the leader in the soft drink market for decades, consistently besting their nearest competitor, Pepsi. The struggle for the top spot has been on-going for over one hundred years, and at times has been fairly interesting. Both companies have been trying new strategies, flavors; can designs and even recipe changes in order to gain market share, niche competitive advantage as

Introduction to Market Research

1699 words - 7 pages brand) NEW COKE: A CLASSIC MARKET RESEARCH BLUNDER New Coke came out because in blind taste tests, people preferred Pepsi to Coke. The revelation was startling and Coca Cola decided that it was time to change their formula to make it sweeter like Pepsi. Coca Cola misjudged the market after spending $4 million and more than two years to test a reformulation of Coke. According to some analysts, the company made serious methodological mistakes

Holland Sweetener Case Analysis

1726 words - 7 pages aspartame as well. NutraSweet’s Anticipated Response to HSC’s entry NutraSweet’s monopolistic position allowed it to earn generous margins by charging a price premium. Consequently, Vermijs should anticipate an aggressive response to the threat posed by HSC to NutraSweet’s dominance in this industry. To achieve the minimum efficiency scale required for the manufacturing of aspartame, any new player would need to land either Coke or Pepsi as its

Financial Accounting 557

1704 words - 7 pages last year, last 2 years, last 3 years, and since the day of initial public offering respectively. For the last 3 years, Pepsi’s stock increased with only $6, or 10%, while CC’s increase was $9, or 24%, which is a testament for the overall better performance of CC stock. I’d like to take the analysis one step further and look at the 10-year comparison-Pepsi increased with $30, or 43% and CC-with $10, or 26%. My conclusion is that the current

Related Papers

Coke Vs Pepsi: The Innovation Winner

1120 words - 5 pages Coca-Cola (herein referred to as “Coke”) and Pepsi have both been in business since the late 1800s selling their respective brands of carbonated beverages (Zmuda, 2011). In 1975, Pepsi began the “Pepsi Challenge” that pitted Pepsi against Coke in taste tests across North America. This “challenge” continued into the 1980s and has been coined the “Cola Wars” (Zmuda, 2011). Zmuda (2011) states that in 2011 Pepsi lost the “Cola Wars” when Diet Coke

Coke Pepsi Case Study

3415 words - 14 pages that the profitability metrics are different. Third, this essay explains how the competition between Coke and Pepsi have affected the world beverage markets profits with carbonated soft drinks. Fourth, this essay forecasts the feasibility of Coke and Pepsi being able to sustain their profits as a result of demand decreasing and the emergence of non-carbonated drinks. COLA WARS Context: A free market is conceived and

Pepsi Versus Coke Essay

2866 words - 12 pages -and-tracking-usage/c28029.aspx Reid, R.D. & Sanders, N.R. (2010). Operations management: An integrated approach (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Small Business Planner http://www.sba.gov/smallbusinessplanner/index.html Stephens, A., Garcia, C, Yang Ng, M. & Kusumaatmaja, W. (2006). The fallacy of acceptance sampling. Understanding Statistical Process Control. 2nd Edition. SPC Press. Knoxville, Tennessee. Taylor, E. (2012). Difference between a product life-cycle and a project life-cycle. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/systems-analysis-life-cycle-vs-project-life-cycle-35670.html

Soft Drinks Menace Essay

1040 words - 5 pages Yeh Dil Mange No More Divya Prabhakar Soft drink brands such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi are powerful icons, symbols not only of westernization but also globalization, creating a unifying idiom across the world, from Bombay to Bonn to Boston, from Tokyo to Tenali to Timbaktu. Coke and Pepsi logos, recognized in over 200 countries, are embraced by billions to whom they promise refreshment and rejuvenation, respite and relaxation. According to Zenith