Free Essay

Cola Wars Continue

In: Business and Management

Submitted By yohan15410
Words 1823
Pages 8
COLA WARS CONTINUE
COKE and PEPSI IN 2006

Adityo Wibowo (10 / 310520 / PEK / 15397)
Yohan Suryanto P (10 / 310533 / PEK / 15410)
Muhammad Jusuf (26E1024)

MAGISTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS
GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY
2010

PROFIL PERUSAHAAN
Pada 8 Mei 1886, Dr.John Stith Pemberton, ahli farmasi berkebangsaan Amerika mencampurkan jenis sirup, obat elixir, French Wine of Coca, Bordeaux, kokain dan kafein (yang berasal dari biji kola). Ramuan itu adalah minuman soda pertama.
Saat Atlanta melarang mengkonsumsi alkohol tahun 1885, Pemberton mengganti French Wine of Coca menjadi anggur Prancis biasa lalu menambahkan gula murni, asam sitrat, dan minyak esensial aneka buah ke dalam minumannya. Pemberton menyebutnya Coca-cola.
Coca cola menjual empat dari lima top minuman non alkohol sedunia, diantaranya: Coca- cola, Diet coke, Sprite, dan Fanta. Coca cola mempekerjakan 71.000 orang dilebih dari 200 negara, kurang lebih memproduksi 400 merk yang terdiri lebih dari 2600 produk minuman. Produk-produk coca cola didistribusikan melalui restoran dan toko makanan, serta pemasok.
Dr. Pemberton menjual ciptaannya dengan harga 5 sen per gelas di apotiknya dan mempromosikan produknya dengan membagi ribuan kupon yang dapat ditukarkan untuk mencicipi satu minuman cuma-cuma. Pada tahun tersebut ia menghabiskan US$46 untuk biaya periklanan. Pada tahun 1892, Pemberton menjual hak cipta Coca - Cola ke Asa G. Chandler yang kemudian mendirikan perusahaan The Coca Cola Company bersama relasinya di Georgia Atlanta. Setahun kemudian, 1893 Candler mematenkan Coca Cola sebagai merek dagang. Chandler piawai dalam menciptakan berbagai macam benda-benda cinderamata berlogo Coca - Cola.
Gaya periklanan yang inovatif, seperti desain warna-warni untuk bus, lampu gantung hias dari kaca, serta serangkaian cinderamata seperti kipas, kalender dan jam dipakai untuk memasyarakatan nama Coca-Cola dan mendorong penjualan.

Pada tahun 1941, perusahaan mengikuti selera popular pasar, nama dagang Coke memperoleh pengakuan periklanan yang sama dengan Coca-Cola, dan pada tahun 1945, Coke resmi menjadi merek dagang terdaftar.

Tahun 1898 apoteker New Bern, North Carolina, Caleb Bradham menciptakan minuman berkarbornasi dan dinamai Pepsi Cola. Waktu itu Elmer Doolin dari San Antonio Texas memproduksi Fritos Corn Chip dan Herman Lay mendistribusikan keripik kentang di Nasville. Tahun 1961, Elmer Dollin dan Herman Lay melakukan merger antara perusahaan mereka dan mendirikan Frito-Lay.
PepsiCo didirikan tahun 1965 ketika pemegang saham Pepsi Cola dan pemegang saham Frito-Lay setuju melakukan merger. PepsiCo memproduksi merek-merek terkenal : Pepsi Cola, Mountain Dew, Fritos, Lay’s, Cheetos, Ruffles dan Rold Gold dan memperoleh pendapatan tahunan sebesar US$510 juta.
Tahun 1971 pendapatan PepsiCo meningkat hampir mencapai US$ 1 Miliar. Tahun 1968 perusahaan melakukan akuisisi di luar makanan dan minuman ringan. Tahun 1977 PepsiCo mengakuisisi Pizza Hut selama 20 tahun ke depan, tahun 1978 mengakuisisi Taco Bell dan restoran cepat saji KFC pada tahun 1986. Wayne Calloway, CEO PepsiCo (1986-1996) bertindak sebagai manajer 3 divisi perusahaan yang berbeda secara bergantian sebagai bagian dari pengembangan perusahaan secara keseluruhan. Tahun 1990, Wayney Calloway menambah akuisisi restoran cepat saji Hot-n-Now, tahun 1992 mengakuisisi California Pizza kitchen.
Di tahun 1993 mengakusisi East Side Mario’s, D’Angelo Sandwich Shops, and Chevy’s Mexican Restaurant. Selama tahun 1980an dan 1990an PepsiCo Memperkuat portofolio makanan ringan dan minuman dengan mengakuisisi Mug root beer, 7UP International, Smart Food Popcorn siap makan, Mexican Cookie company, Gamesa, Sunchip. Tahun 1992 PepsiCo mengadakan perjanjian dengan Ocean Spray untuk mendistribusikan single-serving juices, tahun 1993 memperkenalkan minuman teh siap minum (ready-to-drink) Lipton.
Tahun 1994 meperkenalkan minuman botol Aquafina dan Frappuccino ready-to-drink coffes.Tahun 1997 Roger Enrico sebagai CEO pepsi yang baru melakukan akuisisi antara PepsiCo dengan Cracker jack, Tropicana, dan Smith’s Snackfood Company di Australia, So Be teas, dan beberapa merek minuman. Di Saudi Arabia Pepsico mengakuisisi Tasali Snack Food yang menguasai pangsa pasar snack asin di Saudi Arabia dan Quaker Oats Company.
PERSAINGAN YANG TERJADI
Tahun 1950, Alfred Steele mantan Marketing Executive Coke menjadi CEO di Pepsi. Dia membuat moto “kalahkan Coke” dengan mengarahkan target menjadi konsumsi keluarga melalui penjualan ke supermarket dengan mendukung pengembangan kemasan botol menjadi lebih flexible.

Dilanjutkan dengan kampanye “PEPSI Generation” pada tahun 1963 ketika Donald Kendall menjabat CEO di Pepsi-Cola dengan target “yang muda dan yang berhati muda”, dimana kampanye ini berhasil membuat Pepsi sedikit tertinggal di banding Coke (selisih tipis).
Sementara diakhir 1950-an, Coca-Cola membuat moto “Pilihan rasa Amerika” (America preferred taste). Di tahun 1960-an Coke lebih focus pada pasar global. Coke dan Pepsi memulai eksperimen dengan minuman non cola maupun cola baru, serta dengan packing botol yang baru pula. Coke meluncurkan Fanta dan Sprite, sementara Pepsi mengimbangi dengan Teem dan Mountain Dew. Keduanya juga mulai melirik pada industri minuman non CSD.
Tahun 1974, Pepsi meluncurkan program “Pepsi Challenge” di Dallas – Texas, dimana Pepsi yang berada pada posisi ketiga setelah Coke dan Dr Pepper, di sini Pepsi men-demonstrasikan bahwa customer lebih memilih Pepsi dibanding Coke, yang dilanjutkan dengan program nasionalnya. Coke melawan dengan potongan, discount, dan mempertanyakan validitas uji tersebut. Program Pepsi tersebut berhasil mengikis pasar coke untuk pertama kalinya di toko-toko.
Di tahun 1980, Roberto Goizueta, CEO coca-cola company dan Don Keough sebagai President direktur. Coke mengganti penggunaan gula (glucose) menjadi gula jagung (high Fructose corn) dengan harga yang lebih murah, yang di ikuti Pepsi tiga tahun kemudian. Selain itu Coke juga gencar melakukan iklan kususnya antara 1981 – 1984, yang di respon Pepsi dengan membuat pengeluaran iklan dua kalinya utk periode yang sama. Coca-cola memperkenalkan “Diet Coke” untuk pertama kalinya tahun 1982 dan kemudian nama “COKE” menjadi brand baru dan diet coke meraih penghargaan “most successful consumer product launch of the eighties”.
Memasuki era 1990, industry minuman ringan menemui tantangan baru yang menyarankan pergeseran pasar untuk jangka waktu panjang, dimana pertumbuhan konsumsi minuman berkarbonasi mengalami stagnasi, dengan pertumbuhan antara 0% - 1%. Dalam mengahadapi situasi ini Coke mengalami hal yang lebih parah dari Pepsi, dimana selain faktor internal dan kegagalan dalam penentuan, juga karena menaruh kepercayaan yang sangat besar pada pasar tradisional minuman ringan.

Sepeninggal Robert Goizueta yang meninggal di tahun 1997, Coke mengalami kerugian dan banyak masalah seperti krisis mata uang di Asia dan Russia, produk recall karena kontaminasi di Belgia (walaupun tidak terbukti terkontaminasi). Masalah terus timbul ketika Coke dipimpin oleh Douglas Daft (1999-2004) pengurangan 7,000 karyawan antara 2001-2004 dimana coke memotong pengeluaran tenaga kerja sebesar 20% yang berdampak serius pada moral kerja. Coke juga bermasalah dengan keputusan yang tidak bijak ketika melakukan bailed out join venture dengan P&G.

MASALAH UTAMA
Perang di dunia Carbonated Soft Drink antara Coke dan Pepsi yang terkenal dengan Cola Wars seolah tiada henti. Kedua perusahaan ini mengeluarkan produk yang substitutive, mereka harus merebut pangsa pasar agar menjadi yang terdepan untuk memaksimalkan profit masing-masing.
Coke yang terkenal raksasa penghasil CSD terbesar di dunia tidak mutlak menjadi penguasa selamanya. Hal ini terbukti dengan sodokan Pepsi yang memanfaatkan krisis yang terjadi di Coke. Hal ini membuktikan bahwa kompetisi di dunia CSD masih terbuka lebar meskipun hanya terdapat beberapa pemain besar di dalamnya.
Strategi Pepsi untuk merebut pasar Coke memanfaatkan krisis yang terjadi pada Coke merupakan timing yang tepat. Namun luasnya jaringan serta kapital yang dimiliki Coke, Pepsi harus tetap waspada. Apakah Pepsi cukup puas dengan kondisi mereka sekarang? Apakah perang Cola akan berhenti?

ANALISA a. Analisis Consumer Vs. Competitor
Coke dan Pepsi sudah saling berhadapan secara langsung dalam kompetisi pasar CSD. Hal ini menyebabkan keduanya harus saling mempelajari strategi, tujuan, kelebihan dan kelemahan kompetitor masing-masing untuk merebut pasar. Hal ini karena Coke dan Pepsi mempunyai pasar yang sama dan berusaha untuk memuaskan konsumen dan kebutuhan yang sama dengan menawarkan produk yang subtitutif.
Oleh karena itu, mempelajari competitor dapat memberikan informasi tentang penawaran ataupun cara baru untuk memuaskan konsumen mereka. Perusahaan harus mengidentifikasi kempetitor dengan menggunakan analisis industry dan analisis pasar.
Pepsi sebelumnya terkesan menjadi follower karena selalu selangkah dibelakang Coke baik itu dalam hal pengembangan produk dan kemasan baru, perluasan jaringan, maupun pembuatan perusahaan pembotolan. Namun Pepsi mampu mengungguli Coke dengan memanfaatkan momentum kejatuhan Coke. b. Inovasi produk untuk menciptakan pasar baru
Kematangan
Setiap industri mempunyai life cycle. Dimulai dari tahap perkenalan, pertumbuhan, kematangan dan setelah itu adalah penurunan.
Penurunan
Pertumbuhan
Perkenalan

Coke menyadari akan siklus ini lebih dulu ketika pada tahun 1982 memperkenalkan diet coke. Produk baru ini dimunculkan ketika pasar coca cola mulai manurun. Diet Coke langsung disambut antusias oleh masyarakat sebagai produk baru. Setelah itu berturut-turut muncuk produk baru lainnya. Hal ini dimaksudkan untuk menyegarkan pasar yang telah jenuh karena pertumbuhan produk lama yang stagnan. Pepsi kemudian menjadi follower dengan menampilkan produk-produk baru setelah Coke.
Produk-produk baru dapat menjadi sasaran masyarakat yang telah jenuh dengan produk lama. Selain itu juga untuk semakin menguasai market share produk minuman. Hal ini terbukti dengan semakin mengecilnya produsen konsentrat kecil seperti Dr Pepper, Canada Dry, Sunkist maupun A&W.
Ketika produk-produk baru tersebut mencapai tahapan penurunan, maka Coke maupun Pepsi harus menciptakan inovasi baru untuk mengatasi pasar yang jenuh serta mempertahankan market share mereka.

c. Memahami komponen pasar CSD
Dalam bidang CSD, komponen-komponen utama didalamnya adalah produsen konsentrat, perusahaan bottling, jaringan retail serta supplier. Coke dan Pepsi sebagai produsen konsentrat harus menggunakan strategi yang tepat untuk menciptakan sebuah rangkaian produksi dan pemasaran yang tepat.

* Perusahaan bottling
Perusahaan bottling luar dari awal sebenarnya tidak diperlukan karena Coke dan Pepsi sebenarnya dapat membeli atau membangun bottling company mereka sendiri. Walaupun pada akhirnya mereka mempunyai bottling company sendiri, namun langkah ini sudah terlambat lama. Karena jika langkah ini dilakukan sedari awal maka Coke maupun Pepsi akan mendapatkan keuntungan yang lebih dan tidak ditekan oleh perusahaan bottling luar karena sebenarnya hanya menjadi produsen konsentrat terlalu mudah bagi mereka. Bahkan untuk mencari supplier bagi material pembotolan, Coke dan Pepsi harus mencarinya sendiri. * Jaringan retail
Dalam hal memilih jaringan, strategi Pepsi lebih tepat karena memilih jaringan supermarket sebagai retailer utamanya. Supermarket seperti wal-mart relah mempunyai banyak jaringan di Amerika akan menguntungkan Pepsi karena penetrasi pasarnya yang lebih luas.
SOLUSI
Perusahaan harusnya mampu mempertahankan prestasinya untuk saat ini dan bahkan untuk masa-masa yang akan datang, yang terpenting disini adalah coca-cola membuka pasar-pasar baru dan membuat komsumsi minuman ringan meningkat pada pasar yang sedang berkembang saat ini seperti China dan India.

Kami juga merekomendasikan pada Coca-cola untuk tetap memfokuskan pada pasar internasional serta kami juga mendorong agar Coke memberikan penawaran yang lebih dari saat ini (semacam program promo). Kami juga menganggap kalau Coca-cola telah membuat kesalahan yang cukup serius ketika gagal mengambil alih Quaker Oats dan Gatorade Sports Drink.

Jika Coke memfokuskan pada penawaran beberapa minuman mereka dapat menyerahkan proses pembotolan dan distribusinya pada pihak lain.
Beberapa tipe minuman dapat membuat keuntungan Coke secara menyeluruh tetap baik bila ada pergeseran preferensi konsumen, seperti dari minuman bersoda menjadi minuman alternative yang lebih menyehatkan.

Sementara untuk Pepsi kami secara prinsip mendasar tetap merekomendasikan hal yang sama dengan Coca-cola. Kami mendorong agar Pepsi memfokuskan pada business line nya di minuman soda alternative yang kelihatan memiliki market share yang lebih baik disbanding Coke, tetapi bila produk coke menguntungkan pepsi tetap bermain di pasar tersebut.…...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Cola War Continues

...Cola War Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 1. Over the century the CSD industry has its dominance in the non-alcoholic beverage market. The basic structure of the CSD industry is based on production and distribution, involving four participants: concentrate producers, bottlers, retail channels and suppliers. The concentrated manufacturing process requires a small capital investment for machinery, overhead and labor. They blend raw material ingredients, packaged the mixture and ships to bottlers. They are also in charge of negotiating CDAs with national retailers. The bottlers purchase concentrate, add carbonated water and high-fructose corn syrup, bottle or canned the product and deliveries to customers accounts, managing the CSD brand’s in positioning trademark label, self-space, point-of- purchase displays. Distribution to the retail channels is divided into supermarkets (29.1%), fountain outlets (23.1%), vending machines (12.5%), mass merchandisers (16.7%), convenience stores and gas stations (10.8%) and other outlets (7.8%). Suppliers provide inputs to concentrated producers and bottlers. In the 70’s the annual Americans consumption of CSD was 23 gallons, from that time, the industry grew by an average of 3% per year over the next 3 decades. Market share dropped in 1990 from 71% to 55% in 2009. The shift in consumption evolved in 2005 after CSDs was identified as the largest source of obesity-causing sugars in the Americans diet. To adapt to new time and......

Words: 369 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010

...The competition within the $74 billion carbonated soft drink (CSD) industry has been remarkable ever since Coca-Cola was formulated in 1886, and further intensified when Pepsi was introduced in 1893. Ever since then, the CSD industry has been dominated by these two companies, with Coke taking the lead in the early stage, followed by Pepsi doubled its market share between 1950 and 1970 by offering its concentrate at a lower price than its competitor. The CSD industry has been profitable historically due to numerous reasons. Firstly, in the world’s largest market for CSD products, consumption had been growing at a steady rate of 3% annually from 1970 to 2000 in the U.S., marking a high growth stage in the industry life cycle (Appendix B). This allowed both Coke and Pepsi (C&P) to achieve annual sales growth of around 10%, while competing head-to-head against each other and other smaller CSD producers. Competition between C&P reinforced their brand image, as the increase in marketing efforts could be transferred into profit and sales growth when the overall demand was increasing in a growing industry. However, the increasing industry volume was largely obtained by C&P, leaving other smaller firms vulnerable with stagnated growth opportunity. Secondly, according to Porter’s Five Forces analysis in Appendix A, high barrier for new entrants, low bargaining power of suppliers of both concentrate producers and bottlers, moderate buyer’s bargaining power and low degree of threats of......

Words: 1227 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue Coke and Pepsi in 2006

...15%-20%. The major distributor of soft drinks was supermarkets, with 32.9% of volume. Mass merchandisers distributor retailers and warehouse clubs such as Wal-Mart and Sam’s Clubs were also a growing category. It is worth as king students warehouses are so profitable for CPs. This would appear to be counter-intuitive since the answer gets to the heart of war Suppliers, which included packaging and sweetener companies, had virtually no power in the industry. Part of the reason was that even though the bottlers were purchasing from suppliers, Coke and Pepsi negotiated with suppliers on behalf of their bottlers, creating much more buying power than a fragmented bottling network could offer. The case then summarizes the history of the Cola Wars, spanning 100 years. Early History starts with the creation of both drinks in the late 1800s at the fountain counter. Pepsi managed to become a contender by selling 12 ounces of Pepsi for 5 cents, while Coke was selling 6.5 ounces for 5 cents. Pepsi almost went bankrupt twice but finally emerged as a viable competitor in the 1930s. Coke entered the overseas market with the advent of World War II giving the company a huge lead over Pepsi in international markets. Up until the 1970s Coke never referred to its closest competitor by name signal that it did not believe it had any real competition. Pepsi was fighting fiercely for share and managed to double its share between 1950 and 1970 by focusing on supermarket sales. The take-home......

Words: 2208 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Coca Cola Wars Continue

...Cola Wars Continue Case Analysis Executive Summary: Wal-Mart is the leader of discount retail stores in the United States. Opening in 1962, the company created its empire by providing low-priced goods to consumers (prices average 10% - 15% lower than conventional department stores). In the 1980’s, the company diversified its store options to include warehouse and supercenter stores. After the death of leader, Sam Walton, Wal-Mart’s new management team faces many challenges. With a stagnant economy and increased competition in the mid-1990s, Wal-Mart faced a staggering double-digit decline in share price in 1993 as growth began to slow down (Table 2). In order to sustain Wal-Mart’s competitive advantage as well as penetrate more growth, the following four suggestions can be considered: (1) increase the number of Wal-Mart supercenters, (2) expand international presence, (3) upscale the product line, and (4) decrease prices. I recommend a hybrid combination of (1) increasing the number of Wal-Mart supercenters and (2) expanding international presence. Analysis: Answer the discussion questions in the analysis. Bring in the game theory model. Thus, in order to sustain its position in the market place, as well as continue to grow, I assessed the following four recommendations: Recommendation 1: Increase the number of Wal-Mart supercenters Pros: By increasing the number of Supercenters, Wal-Mart can continue to compete with other discount retailers and......

Words: 1478 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010

...4 Competitive / corporate strategies of Coke and Pepsi 5 SWOT Analysis 6 Questions 6.1 How has the competition between Coke and Pepsi affected the industry’s profit? 6.2 If it has been such a profitable industry, why have so few firms successfully entered this business over the last century? What are the barriers? Why have Coke and been so successful in launching their products? 6.3 Why, historically, has the soft drink industry been so profitable? 6.4 Compare the economics of the concentrate business to that of the bottling business: Why is the profitability so different? 6.5 How can Coke and Pepsi sustain their profits in the wake of flattening demand and the growing popularity of non-CSDs? 7 9 11 Exam Case Study Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 1 Overview (Power Point Page (PPP) 2) For more than a century, Coke and Pepsi compete for market share within the world’s beverage market. The most intense battles were fought over the $74 billion carbonated soft drink (CSD) industry in the United States that lasted until the mid-1990s. Coke’s and Pepsi’s revenues grow annually, as the worldwide CSD consumption rose steadily by an average of 3% per year. In the early 2000s, however, domestic CSD consumption started to decline in consequence of the evolving linkage between CSDs and health issues such as obesity. Coke and Pepsi faced new challenges regarding the growth of non-CSD beverages accompanied by the demand of different bottling, pricing and brand......

Words: 5585 - Pages: 23

Premium Essay

Cola War Continue

...Cola War Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 The following characteristics are important to conclude the competitive intensity and attractiveness of the CSD industry: the threat of substitute products, the threat of established rivals, the threat of new entrants, the bargaining power of suppliers and the bargaining power of buyers. First, the threat of substitute products such as sports drinks, juice and bottled water is relatively high to the CSD industry due to the shift in consumption patterns. Customers show more concerns on the health issues. Especially, switching cost of the substitute products is very low. Coke and Pepsi had developed their non-carbs drinks and diet drinks to meet customers’ demands. Second, in the threat of established rivals, the CDS industry can be described as a Duopoly market with Coke and Pepsi. Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola claimed a combined 74.8% of the U.S. CSD market in sales volume in 2004. The rest players have low market share, which has a small impact on pricing and industry structure. So competition is always concentrated on these two companies. Coke and Pepsi mainly competed on advertising and differentiation, less on pricing except for a period in 1990’s and their international growth strategy. Third, the threat of new entrants in the CSD industry is low due to the high entry barriers. Coke and Pepsi had invested millions of dollars on advertising and marketing and continued to spend money on that filed. That had built strong......

Words: 488 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Coca Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi 2010

...Coke and Pepsi is extremely high because of the consolidated competitive strategy among the industry. With the low cost and availability of raw materials used by Coke and Pepsi, suppliers have no bargaining power over the buyers. On the other hand, buyers such as Coke and Pepsi, have the bargaining power over their suppliers due to the size of the company, the amount that is bought, and the threat of buyers buying from other suppliers or potentially making it themselves. Substitute product risk varies among each product. Carbonated beverages still have a fairly low risk of product substitution, but non carbonated beverages do not. After reading and analyzing this case, it is apparent that both Coke and Pepsi must fight in order to continue its market share. They must do what it takes to please the costumers and produce the products in which they demand....

Words: 852 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue

...Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 Report prepared by Bruno Arnaud Executive Summary Coke and Pepsi have competed for more than a century for the world’s beverage market share. In all this time they have executed many different strategies and taken various decisions concerning the future of their companies. However, during this period, they had always experienced an increasing domestic carbonated soft drink (CSD) consumption. Now, that the CSD consumption is declining, and the non-CSD consumption is growing, what should Pepsi do next? And how might Coke respond? Which strategies should the smaller competitors follow? I recommend Pepsi to pursue the market for its new non-CSD products, with sport and energy drinks, water, juices, teas, and snacks, while also focusing on its world expansion for the CSD and non-CSD market. Coke will, of course, do the same, while the smaller competitors will try to focus on each of their specific niche but also internationally. Analysis Why is that the concentrate producers have been so profitable? The concentrate manufacturing process involved relatively little capital investment in machinery, overhead, and labor. Also, one concentrate manufacturing plant cost between $50 million to $100 million, but can cover a very large geographic area (“as large as the United States”). Their most significant costs were for advertising, promotion, market research and bottler support. So, they heavily invested in their trademarks over time,......

Words: 1130 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue

...In the “Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010” the history of Carbonated Soft Drinks (CSD) and its development in modern society illustrates how these two companies advance and compete within an oligopoly market. One of the approaches used in oligopolies is the Game Theory Approach. The basic elements of game theory are (1) the players, (2) the strategies available for each, and (3) the payoff each receives. There are different “battlefields” on which Coke and Pepsi compete:  products, pricing, and marketing. Product: * Launch of Diet products - Pepsi launched Diet Pepsi in 1964 while Coke launched Diet Coke in 1982 * Launched new varieties, flavors and acquisition of non-soda products - Pepsi introduced a variety of non-carbonated drinks; Coke responded by acquiring some non-carbonated products. * Use of high fructose syrup instead of sugar (cut cost) - Coke began using high-fructose corn syrup in 1980, Pepsi followed three years later. Pricing: * World War II - Coke made sure all soldiers got coke for only five cents, with government exemptions from wartime sugar rationing gave Coke the upper hand and allowed them to have a dominant strategy; Pepsi responded with the best strategy they could, increasing their bottle size to 12 ounce bottle “twice as much for a nickel too” Marketing: * International markets - Both secured contracts to be sole providers to specific countries; both companies plan to invest $2 billion in China to build up their......

Words: 482 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Cola War Continues

...Cola Wars Continue Description: The competition between Coke and Pepsi is a classic corporate battle, which began in America at the turn of the century and has expanded into worldwide competitive warfare in the 21st century. We will use the case to examine competition and strategy in the carbonated soft drink industry. 1. Why has the carbonated soft drink (CSD) concentrate industry been so profitable for Coke and Pepsi over many decades? * Soft drinks industries have so profitable because of their market strategies, the cost of the their products/bottlers, and competition with one another. * Pepsi mentioned they would not have been as successful without Coca-Cola and Coca-Cola without Pepsi. * Coca-Cola, was very popular during World War II, offering soldier soft drinks at lower prices. Soft drinks industries constantly adapt to changes with bottling companies, competition and different cultures worldwide. * They also grew the company from primarily CSD to include non CSD, diet soda with less sugar options, and eventually to snack foods. 2. Why was Coke able to dominate the U.S. soft drink industry through the 1950s? How was Pepsi able to catch up in the United States? * The reasons come from internal factors and external environments. Because of Coke’s secret formula and marketing strategy, Coke was considered as a good quality carbonated drink and you can always get a coke since 1920s (very good distribution channels). They quickly grew a franchisees......

Words: 380 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continues

...To: Anthony Chan, Bus 478 Instructor From: Li Jiang, Bus 478 Student Date: January 11th, 2016 ------------------------------------------------- Subject: Cola War Continues: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 Coke and Pepsi have duopoly the soft drink market for decades. It is a mature market with low growth. For all the years, Coca-Cola and Pepsi have built significant brand identity. When people thinking about buying cola, they cannot tell a third brand’s name. Both of them have built mature distribution channels and their large sales volume archives them economic of scale already. Suppliers to Coke and Pepsi have weak power since there are many suppliers in market due to low entry level. Suppliers have to give Coke and Pepsi lowest price to keep their business with the giants or they will lose business to competitors. Coke and Pepsi corporate with many bottling companies. These regional companies are not capable for developing their own drink and advertising. The barrier of entry is also low so their profitability are restricted by Coke and Pepsi, and distribution channels. They have no power to raise price or competitors will take over their business. As concentrates businesses, Coca-Cola and Pepsi have strong power over bottling business. As long as these bottling companies want to corporate with Coca-Cola or Pepsi, they have to agree to refuse similar products from other new brands. However, Coke and Pepsi always have rights to change to another bottling company with......

Words: 450 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue

...Cola Wars Continue 1. The soft drink industry has been so profitable due to a plethora of reasons including: 1) direct distributors for companies; 2) low costs to produce concentrate for fountain sales and bottling; 3) utilizing their own subsidiaries to bottle, package, and produce concentrate; 4) tactical brand partnerships that allow penetration in mixed markets; 5) companies monopolizing pouring rights with exclusive chains through contracts ensuring profits with no competition. The leading reason for high profits in the past was largely due to high consumer demand where millions of gallons of soft drinks were consumed each year, creating an addicting dependence for consumers nationally. 2. The competition between Coke and Pepsi has affected the industry in a positive manner. A push-pull effect on the market resulted from these two key players as when one company introduced a new product to the market, the other company had to act quick to gain back the market share they had just lost to their competitor. Pepsi, generally speaking, monopolized their share with retail stores with respect to pouring rights with Taco Bell where Coke made up their lost market share with 70% fountain sales as Pepsi falls behind with 30%. 3. Coke and Pepsi have benefitted from adding diversity to their beverage portfolio, but the long-term sustainability for this diversity has proved to taper off. In the past, Americans were drinking more soda compared to any other drink,......

Words: 495 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue: 2010

...Based on the case “Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010,” use game theory approach/analysis to explain the competitive behavior of Coke and Pepsi making specific references to actions taken by each firm and the different “battlefields.” What conclusions can you draw about the competitive strategies pursued by both companies? At the time the Case was written was there a winner? Should both companies have acted differently? The game theory approach used between the two CSD giant Coke and Pepsi was at times very entertaining to see as a consumer. In the case study it explains the back and forth competition and in my point of view there still is no clear winner. Coke saw the importance of soda fountains and Pepsi was at times more “old fashioned” and felt bottle/retail sales were most critical. To counter Coke’s move, Pepsi entered the fast food market by purchasing Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, and Kentucky Fried Chicken. While the consumer became more informed with the ingredients used and the possible health issues caused by the artificial sweeteners, Pepsi and Coke began to battle to find the “healthiest” sweetener which ended up being Stevia. These battles branched out into the non-CSD drinks like, Vitamin Water, which was Coke’s largest purchase in their history. Even with that acquisition Coke was behind Pepsi on the U.S. non-carbs market share because of Pepsi’s advantage with the sales of Gatorade and Lipton tea. The game theory each used was basically who can be......

Words: 315 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Cola War Continue

...Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2006 Question: Identify the key marketing issues (Company weakness and the main opportunities and threats for company) met by Coke and Pepsi. SWOT | Cola | Pepsi | Strengths | * The flagship of soft drink global market share, approximately 40% * High profit margin by shifting some cost to bottlers * Strong marketing campaign * Expanded manufacturing and distribution system that kept prices low, Coke located in more than 200 countries. | * The biggest market share of non-carb productions in US and the second best selling soft drink brand in the world. * Aggressive marketing strategies using the target customer, Pepsi Generation. * Offered the product innovation. | Weakness | * Decreasing in CSD market. * Having a complex relationship with North American bottlers. * Reacting slowly with new market trends. | * Decreasing in CSD market. * Lack of sensitivity in expanding the global system. * Focusing only young people. | Opportunities | * The soft drink demand in Pacific-Asia Countries increases over 40% steadily. * Entry in the fast growing of energy-drink segment and new packages. * Dominating in Western Europe and much of Latin American. | * Positioning in the Middle East and Southeast Asia. * Growth in healthier beverages. * Growth in Tea Asia and functional drink beverages. * The younger generation structure of the global population. | Threats | * The powerful competitor......

Words: 581 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi 20120

...Product and Brand Strategies Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 1. Why, historically, has the soft drink industry been so profitable? Coca Cola was formulated in 1886 by a pharmacist in Atlanta who started to sell it in drug stores as a ‟portion for mental and physical disorders.“ Five years later the Asa Candler acquired the formula for Coca-Cola syrup which was a well-protected secret of the company. He also granted the first bottling franchise which grew qucikly. In the following years a lot of imitations were fight agressively by court for protecting their carbonated soft-drink (CSD) with its special flavour. Later on Coca Cola was advertised as a ‟lifestyle“ product and the international business began to develop. Pepsi was founded in 1893 and they also adopted a franchise bottling system which built up a big network very quickly. About 20 years later Pepsi went bankrupt and later on they declared bankrupcy the second time. However business went on and Pepsi built up a marketing strategy ‟Twice as much for a nickel, too.“ Pepsi step for step gained market shares and became the second behind Coca Cola. The competition in the soft drink industry began to grow. The soft drink industry consists of bottlers and suppliers. One fact which supports the profitability of the soft drink industry is that there are only two relevant players Coca Cola and Pepsi who have enough power for setting rules. The rivalry between both can be seen as a......

Words: 1704 - Pages: 7