Abstract This paper discusses PepsiCo and its incisive marketing strategies that have led it to dominate its primary competitor, Coke, in total overall sales. PepsiCo has utilized a strategy of acquisition and smart product line extensions that have anticipated major cultural and social shifts in the beverage and snack industry. Led by its snack division, Frito-Lay, PepsiCo has forced Coke to be reactive and perpetually trying to catch up.
From the Paper "PepsiCo, outside of the cola segment, has come to dominate is primary competitor, Coke, in a way that Coke never did during the height of its own dominance. Much of PepsiCo's success has been, as some analysts point out, due to a willingness to move out of its traditional market segments, either through organic growth or acquisition, and introduce new products that seem to capture the cultural zeitgeist of the moment: To capitalize on the growing market for New Age herbally enhanced beverages...the company acquired SoBe Beverages for $370 million in 2001...the company has extended the brand with such offerings as the energy drink SoBe No Fear, SoBe Synergy targeted at the school-aged market with 50% juice, and SoBe Fuerte, aimed at the Hispanic market.(Brady par.2) The brilliance of PepsiCo's marketing strategies is all the more..."
Abstract The paper discusses the marketing device that Coke and PepsiCo each use in their advertising strategies of specifically referring to the others' products. In some ways this is counter-productive since it indirectly elevates the market awareness of the competitor's products. Yet, since these two companies dominate the cola market it behooves them to ensure that the market perceives the benefits of their specific product in relation to the other. The paper also looks at how PepsiCo has finally managed to overtake Coke in overall market share and performance.
From the Paper "PepsiCo is popularly associated with its flagship product Pepsi Cola. Since Pepsi Cola is a sizable portion of PepsiCo's revenue stream, PepsiCo has always struggled to confront Coke's market dominance through advertising which often portrays Pepsi Cola in head to head comparisons to Coca-Cola (Overview). The result is that both companies' products are often portrayed in each others' advertisements. PepsiCo's Pepsi Cola has long been second in market share to Coca-Cola and the competition between Pepsi and Coke has been the stuff of business school legend for many years. However, recently, thanks to a series of strategic acquisitions and marketing campaigns run internationally, PepsiCo has finally overtaken Coke in overall market share and performance: "PEPSICO...has raced ahead of...Coke.."
Abstract This paper examines the PepsiCo company, a company that is popularly associated with its flagship product Pepsi Cola. The paper explains that, while Pepsi Cola is a sizable portion of PepsiCo's revenue stream, PepsiCo actually has significant revenue generated from a slew of other products and divisions such as PepsiCo Beverages North America, PepsiCo International, Frito-Lay and Quaker Foods North America. The paper also looks at how PepsiCo's Pepsi Cola has long been second in market share to Coca-Cola and how the competition between Pepsi and Coke has been the stuff of business school legend for many years. However, thanks to a series of strategic acquisitions and market entry moves internationally, PepsiCo as a company has finally overtaken Coke in overall market share and performance. It could be said that PepsiCo has lost the cola battle but won the overall war with its arch-rival Coca-Cola Company.
Abstract This paper examines the similarities and differences of the marketing environment and strategies of Coca Cola and Pepsi. The paper discusses these two corporation's ongoing battle for global soft drink domination. The paper describes how Coke and Pepsi share the same demographics, economic conditions, competition, social and cultural facets, technology, and political and legal problems inherent with each of their markets. The paper explains that the external macro environments are similar for each, but how they both use their marketing programs involve different tactics and strategies.
From the Paper "One micro external environment advantage both Pepsi and Coke enjoy is their extensive distribution, or marketing intermediaries. These distributors increase their profits by producing and selling the products directly to customers at the local level. Pepsi and Coke use these firms and distributors to make their large profits in exchange for their knowledge and their soft drink bases and concentrates."
Abstract This paper looks at the differences in Coke's and Pepsi's financial performance in 2004 and expected earnings for 2005. The paper also explains how each company's ethical code of conduct and mission statement affects the success of the respective companies.
From the Paper "PepsiCo is on an upswing, Coca-Cola is headed in the opposite direction. For 2004, Pepsis' net income rose to $457 million, or $1.73 a share, from the previous year's $416 million, $1.50 a share (Pepsi Bottling Group 4Q profit increases). For 2005, Pepsi expects earnings of $1.78 to $1.87 per share. Coca-Cola has not yet released full year 2004 results. However, for the first nine months of the year, its net income declined to $514 million, or $1.09 a share, from the prior year's $545 million, or $1.19 a share (Coca-Cola Enterprises' profit falls). For the full year 2004, Coca-Cola expects earning of $1.21 to $1.25 a share and has recently cut long-term growth targets for operating income to a range of six percent to eight percent from ten percent. Shares of PepsiCo have outperformed those of Coca-Cola for two decades (Twitchell, 2004). In the past five years, Pepsi's stock has returned sixty-nine percent, while Coke investors have lost more than twenty percent of their money."
Abstract The paper examines the Coke bottle, with specific reference to its status as a global meta-commodity or meta-symbol. The paper explores how material artifacts provide valuable insights into what is important to a culture. The paper analyzes the film "The Gods Must be Crazy", which illustrates how even the most powerful meta-symbol is powerful only because of its connotations and associations. The paper concludes by emphasizing how material artifacts affect our lives.
From the Paper "The Coke bottle is one of the most recognizable material artefacts in the world. Its shape and distinctive label is recognized globally. For some it evokes warm, fuzzy feelings, and for others it invokes a paroxysm of anti-capitalist or anti-American feelings. It may evoke arguments about art vs. commodities, or about West vs. Islam. In the USA, your attitude to the bottle may depend on which side of the colour divide you fall on. Love it or hate it, it is unquestionably an important aspect of contemporary material culture."
Provides a beverage industry overview, with emphasis on the market positions of Coca-Cola and Pepsi. Also examines the future prospects of Coke and Pepsi.
2,925 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 15 sources, 1995, $ 103.95
Industry Overview
Just before the turn of the century, prospective soft drinks were being formulated by southern pharmacists, with an eye towards relieving indigestion (Hoover's, 1995). From the first decade of the twentieth century until the 1960s, the competition in the beverage industry was primarily between equals; Coca Cola fought it out with Pepsi Cola for market share, and juice or coffee companies competed with each other.
In the 1960s, the competitive edge in the beverage industry went to Coca Cola, with its purchase of Minute Maid in 1960, the introduction of Sprite in 1961, and the introduction of Tab in 1963 (Hoover's, 1995)."
Abstract This analysis begins with an overview of the market in which Snapple competes and a history of the company. The first part of the plan details Snapple in relationship to its major competitors, primarily the soft-drink giants, Coke and Pepsi, both of whom are vying for the same market as Snapple. A great amount of background detail on the beverage industry is provided, with special concentration on the ways that distribution is handled, how the companies relate to the distributors and what their strategies are. This report makes great use of the annual reports for Triarc that details the growth and projections for Snapple. Original marketing ideas and projections are reanalyzed in terms of how this acquisition would affect Snapple as a company. In the assumptions section of this plan, Cadbury's possible reactions are detailed, based on secondary evidence of that company's past experiences. Because of the complexity of comparing specific figures and competitive positions for Snapple and all of its competitors, the plan contains a number of tables for easy reference. One table that is of particular interest is the competitive matrix in which Lipton?s, Snapple, Nestea, Arizona and SoBe are analyzed.
Some attention is also directed to the way Snapple creates new products, and brings them to market, as well as how the company disposes of its old flavors by use of a "flavor graveyard" on the company's website. As a part of Snapple's strong consumerism, the plan details how customers around the world vie for the honor of creating a new flavor. All referenced material is numbered, and the sources and notes appear at the end of the plan.
Executive Summary
Background Assessment
Historical Appraisal
Market
Market activity
Sales, Costs and Gross Profits
Technology Product and Process Improvements
Market Characteristics
Government and Social
Notes and Sources
From the Paper "Standard & Poor's Industry Classification states that the soft drink industry, the one in which Snapple competes, is a sub-segment of the larger Foods and Nonalcoholic Beverage Industry. There are five major categories in this $81.7 billion sub-segment: A) soft drinks ($55.5 billion); B) fruit beverages ($15.4 billion), C) bottled water ($5 billion); D) ready-to-drink (RTD) tea ($3.5 billion); and E) sports drinks ($2.3 billion). Within this industry, costs are broken down into two main categories: "Marketing" costs which account for a total of 80% of consumer spending and raw materials costs which account for the remaining 20%. 1 By tradition, the sub-segment allots to marketing costs, all amounts direct or indirect connected to labor, packaging, transportation, distribution, advertising and promotions. Raw material costs of agricultural commodities have been on the decline in recent years. The soft drink industry is composed primarily of franchise companies. The typical business model is for the firm to produce soft drink concentrates, and then mix those with carbonated water to produce the final beverages. Generally, the companies manufacture and sell the beverages themselves, or outsource these functions to bottlers."
Abstract This paper evaluates the marketing strategies of Coca-Cola and Pepsi in Thailand and the United Kingdom and recommends effective marketing strategies for each country. The paper presents the soft drink industry statistics for each country and examines the market trends over the years.
Outline
Introduction
Thailand
Coca-Cola in Thailand
Pepsi in Thailand
Suggested Marketing Strategies for Thailand
United Kingdom
Coke in the United Kingdom
Pepsi in the United Kingdom
Bottled Water Market in the UK
Recommended Marketing Strategies for the UK Market
Conclusion
From the Paper "Coca-Cola and Pepsi, rated among the top companies in the world share a common fact ? for several years, both these companies have been successfully selling a simple product made of water and sugar to almost all countries. This would have been impossible unless the companies were able to create sustained excitement over their products and brands among the people and its employees. (Davis and Dunn, 2002) "
Abstract This paper discusses and compares the soft drink companies that produce Coca Cola and Pepsi, giants within their respected industry. The paper contends that each company has its own unique way to reach the consumer, which is the ultimate company goal. The paper discusses how these two companies really match up against each other. Are they both giants of the same size, or does one have more net worth than the other? Is it Coke or Pepsi you'll be having today?
From the Paper "Coca-Cola was created on May 8, 1886 by Dr. John Stith Pemberton, an Atlanta Pharmacist. Pemberton was curious about the caramel-colored liquid he created so he took the syrup a few doors down to Jacobs' Pharmacy. The syrup was mixed with carbonated water and the rest is effervescent history. During the first year Jacobs' pharmacy sold about nine glasses of Coca-Cola a day at five cents per glass. In the 119 years since then, Coca-Cola has produced 10 Billion gallons of syrup which are used to produce more than 400 different brands of beverages today. Dr. Pemberton was a great inventor to create the ingredients for the most popular soft drink in the world, but not the smartest businessman. In 1891 Dr. Pemberton sold the company to an Atlanta businessman, Asa Griggs Candler, for $2,300."
Abstract This paper describes the competition between PepsiCo and Coca-Cola and analyzes the balance sheets for these two publicly traded companies. The paper provides an examination of each company's history, market share and investor holdings. The paper includes a comparison of the company's stock price, dividend distributions and the types of financial data in each company's financial statements. The paper concludes that Coca-Cola currently leads PepsiCo in sales, but no one knows for how long, as these two warring companies compete for the last consumer, the last dollar.
Outline:
Abstract
Pepsi vs. Coke Products and Services
Companies Established
Trade Index / Stock Ticker Symbols
Independent Audit Firms
Conclusion
From the Paper "It would be simple to say that both Pepsi and Coke are in the soft drink business, but the truth today is that both are engaged in the overall beverage industry. Both distribute soft drinks, water, juices, teas, coffees, and isotonic. The number of SKUs has grown from one to approximately 300, mostly in the past decade (Foote, 2005). Both Pepsi and Coke share a common history. Both were born in the rural South and created by drugstore operators. Both drinks were originally marketed as ''medicines,'' not "liquid candy" (McDonough, 1998)."
Abstract In this paper the author takes a close look at the Coca-Cola Corporation. The author looks at the management and how Douglas Daft came to the helm with his new philosophy of thinking "local", rather than global management. The author examines what has happened to Coca-Cola over the last few years in various countries and how this has effected its reputation. The author them moves on to discuss Coca-Cola's relationship with its bottlers, trade unions and profit margins. Finally the author looks at how Coca-Cola has re-established itself in China, creating a new business model and its wars with competitors.
From the paper:
?Coke's overwhelming success in the U.S. is in large part due to its bottlers. Daft's decentralization strategy reassigns much of the work performed by 29,000 laid-off employees to the "anchor bottlers" (for marketing and sales) and to sub-contractors (for plant and office maintenance) resulting in fewer direct employees worldwide. This strategy allows the company to concentrate its efforts on garnering market share while not having to take responsibility for global industrial relations. The anchor bottlers, Coca-Cola Enterprises and Cola-Cola Amatil, actually have more employees than Coca-Cola Company (CCC). The company relies on them to bottle and distribute the lion's share of its products.?
Abstract This paper examines the position of the Coca-Cola Company in Belgium, looking at its recent serious problems in that country, how it has tried to overcome them, and the continuing challenges that it will face in this market.
From the Paper "Before looking specifically at the Coca-Cola Company in Belgium, it may be helpful to give the briefest of overviews of the entire company. The picture of corporate health is indeed impression, even in the company's own words. It is clear from every aspect of the company ? from its mission statement to its sales strategies to where it builds new bottling plants ? that while Coca-Cola may be as American as apple pie, the company itself is resolutely international."
Abstract This paper examines the possible entrance of the Coca-Cola Company into Iran, looking at what problems it may have in entering this market, how it might be able to overcome these challenges, and what continuing challenges that it would face in this market.
From the Paper "We all know ? at least if we are old enough to have heard the jingle ? that Coke would like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony. Except that this isn?t quite true. What the Coca-Cola Company would most like to do is to teach the world to drink Coke ? or one of its other wholly owned brands. The company has in fact proved to be remarkably hardy in the ever-more-globalizing economy. It's hard to travel anywhere in the world today and not see someone sipping a Diet Coke."
Abstract The paper shows that although Pepsi has dynamic strategic planning capabilities, it still cannot capture the competitor's markets and consumer loyalty that Coke possesses. It shows how Pepsi drastically needs to change its strategies so that it can capture a larger market and utilize its resources to the maximum. Various issues are addressed, including: Strengths (campaign leadership, organizational structure, retailers), Weaknesses (customer loyalty), Opportunities (brands, channels, geographical growth, technology), Threats and Strategic Planning.
From the Paper "Firstly Pepsi should expand its revenue. Currently the revenue is the same as Coke's but the difference is that Coke generates the same amount from the local market as the amount that Pepsi generates from its international markets combined. That is how strong a hold Coke has on the local market. Defeating Coke in its local market would mean that Pepsi is on top. It is going to be very difficult to expand itself here and capture the local market because from the past experiences Pepsi has learnt that Coke will apply any legal or illegal means to deter Pepsi from strengthening itself. So to increase the revenue, it would be wise to capture the international; markets and establish itself there. This is achievable because Pepsi gives competitive prices and can manage to sell internationally at prices that are equal lent to the local market that they intend to penetrate. That is why consumers internationally readily accept Pepsi. "
