Marketing Research on Red Bull Energy Drink in Vietnam Market Essay

Marketing Research on Red Bull Energy Drink in Vietnam Market Essay.

1 – Objective: Nowadays, energy drink’s becoming an important part in food market holding great number of consumer in the world as well as in Vietnam. Thinking about high energy drink branches, many customers think about a popular name: Red bull. How successful this branch is, the way they develop their mark and how was they cared in Vietnam’s market. Everything related with Red bull will explained in this research. 2 – Targets: In this research, Customers, market share and Advertising are focused most.

Through 3 Literature reviews, more information about Customers, Market share and Advertising will discoed. 3 – Stakeholder: Supplier: Absolutely compliance all regulations in the contract between producer and supplier about timely and the quality raw materials as well as payments. The common purpose is getting benefit. The supplier can get benefit from selling raw materials while Red Bull Vietnam get from selling finished products Distribute Channels: Producer can not go every where to sell their products.

They need to the helps from distribute channels include representatives, wholesalers and retailer.

These distribute channels can be discount from producer depend on their agreement. Union: is an organization which can protect the benefits of staffs and workers in company. Red Bull also try to care for the life of staffs and workers, invest money to improve the skills of workers, make them feel free when working, bring the best effectiveness for production Government: A legal company is that is not only unlawful, but also full implementation of obligations with the government.

It is taxation. This is a condition for government to consider the legitimacy of that company Beside that, there are some organizations such as Vinatas_ The Standard and protect consumers Vietnam which will representing for consumers and protect for the benefits of consumers when their benefits were violated. 4 – Background (PEST) POLITICAL-In the beverage market of Vietnam, Red Bull is the non-alcoholic drinks ehich was first introduced , namely Energy Drinks- A phase “ Energy Drinks” is not really credible.

It is easy to be banned in domestic market if happening the scandals that relevant to the quality or safety such as: containing cocaine or other drugs…| ECONOMICS-Red Bull is a special drinks and it serve for a niche market. – Their target customers is sportsmen or people who must hard an d need to to pushed up-Product life cycles quickly, easy to turnover| SOCIAL-At the beginning, no many people wanted to try it because the psychology suspect.

but now people are changing and tend to open more new experiences- People take care more about healthy, only using products which have been confirmed by Health organizations- Red Bull has appeared in Vietnam market for a long time and has built a strong image in customer’s mind| TECHNOLOGY- Technique requires high technology, line modern machinery, closed line, ensure hygiene and safety-The main types of packaging are cans and glass bottle.

Can is made from recyclable aluminum which is very friendly with environment.moreover, glass bottle aldo can be recycled, therefore not be harmful for our environments ( Red Bull_ The macro environment, 2009)| Although still having a little bit difficulties about political, Red bull is a strong brand that has been a long time n customer’s mind, with many advantages of technology and economic, Red Bull has a potential opportunity to develop more and more in Vietnam beverage market.

| PEST Analysis 5 – Literature Review: 5. 1 – Literature review 1 (Customers) Red Bull’s one of the biggest energy drink branches all over the world – no one can negate that.

It seems not to stop at that point but keep developing wider and deeper. Red bull grasps in his hand which kinds of customer want to recover their energy faster and aim them as the target customer of branch. They are in the age from 18 to 35, who need more and more energy for work, study with serious stress and enjoy their life in nightclubs. Especially, universities are the good place to consume product every night and day because many students feel very hard to concentrate on their study without Red bull. So that this branch’s trying to create their promotional strategies target straight to university and students.

(Red Bull IMC Plan, 2008) In Vietnam, Red bull’s still a popular name in different appearance: red tin, blue words imported from Thailand or made in Binh Duong-Vietnam . However, recent years, its market share in energy drink market is decreasing lower than other branches such as Sting from Pepsico or Number1 from Coca-cola, even unmarketable. Many audiences have doubts about its quality, wonder if it’s not good for health with nicotine or don’t like its taste. Red bull seems to have more good strategies to please Vietnamese customers. (Red Bull ban t? i VN co ? nh hu? ng d? n s? c kh? e? , 2009) 5. 2 – Literature review 2 (Market share).

Red Bull is the product of Energy Drinks which are dominate in the market now. It has been in more than 100 countries all over the world. Production of annual sales is about 1 billion cans, the revenue of Red Bull has increased from 920 million USD in 2001 to 2 billion USD in 2004 ( Red Bull- Anh hung tu con so khong, 2007) In Vietnam, Red Bull Energy Dinks are becoming more and more popular. In any restaurant or bar, this beverage always be the first choice of custormers. The market share of Soft Drinks in Vietnam has been increased, average is 2% per year between 2001-2006 ( Soft Drinks in Vietnam to 2011, 2007).

The leading company in this filed is Red Bull company, the second is Pepsico with Sting ( Soft Drinks in Vietnam to 2011, 2007). The market share of Red Bull has decreased slightly in recent year, when some brands such as Coca-Cola, Pepsico, Wonderfarm…have been successful in building the image in Vietnam market, however, Red Bull still dominant in the market in Vietnam, about 30% of market share, productivity of Red Bull increased to 7 million safes per year (tuoitre. com. vn, 2009). Nowadays, Red Bull get 70% of global market share (Soft Drinks in Vietnam to 2011, 2007).

It is because of strong brand name and large of number people enthralled this attractive beverage. 5. 3 – Literature review 3 (Advertising) Red Bull is a famous brand of energy drink in Europe and all over the world. It was found out by Dietrich Mateschitz in 1982, in a trip of him to Hong Kong. Nowadays, Red Bull almost has no competitor in energy drink market, thanks to the brilliant marketing and advertisings strategies of Dietrich. Before Red Bull has come out of any market, Mateschitz always make a statement in public as he not only sold drinks, but also sold a cheerful, comfortable feeling for consumers (SGGP, 2009).

According to Hong Nhung (2008), Mateschitz has used sports as a tool to build the image of Red Bull brand, as he bought racing and football teams and renamed it following Red Bull. Of course, the traditional advertising, TV and radio have been used widely, to expand the brand of Red Bull. On the other hand, organize big shows was also one great way to advertise of Mateschitz, as the Red Bull Music Academy, a show of over 50 DJ was showed twice a week in Berlin the first time in 1998 (Vietnambranding, 2008). 6 – Reference list [1].

Red Bull_ The macro environment 2009, drawert. com, viewed 30 July 2009 http://www.drawert. com/red_bull_4. php. [2] Red Bull IMC Plan 2008, megaessays. com, viewed 30 July 2009 http://www. megaessays. com/viewpaper/14478. html [3] Red Bull ban t? i VN co ? nh hu? ng d? n s? c kh? e? 2009, thegioitrithuc. vn, viewed 30 July 2009 http://thegioitrithuc. vn/content/view/23874/169/ [4]

Red Bull- Anh hung tu con so khong, 2007, socbay. com, viewed 29 July 2009 http://www. socbay. com/news/detail/red-bull-anh-hung-tu-con-so-khong/600896582/50397184/0. html [5] Kho? ng tr? ng th? tru? ng n? i d? a – K? 3: Nh? ng cach lam thanh cong, 2009, tuoitre. com. vn, viewed 29 July 2009.

http://www. tuoitre. com. vn/Tianyon/Index. aspx? ArticleID=302421&ChannelID=11 [6] Soft Drinks in Vietnam to 2011, 2007, researchandmarket. com, viewed 29 July 2009 http://www. researchandmarkets. com/reports/586703 [7]SGGP, 2009, “Red Bull – thuong hieu manh ve nuoc tang luc”, Xa lo, viewed 24th July, 2009, http://tintuc. xalo. vn/20-2043108925/red_bull_thuong_hieu_manh_ve_nuoc_uong_tang_luc. html. [8]Hong Nhung, 2008, „Dietrich Mateschitz – Nguoi lam nen Red Bull“, VietnamleaderI, viewed 25th july, 2009, http://www. vietnamleader. com/index. php? option=com_content&view=article&am.

Marketing Research on Red Bull Energy Drink in Vietnam Market Essay

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Mrs. Acres Homemade Pies and Soft Drink Essay

Mrs. Acres Homemade Pies and Soft Drink Essay.

The company produces specialty pies and sells them in local supermarkets and select family restaurants. In each of the first six months, Shelly and three part time employees sold 2,000 pies for $4. 50 each, netting a profit of $1. 50 per pie. The pies were quite successful and Shelly could not keep up with demand. The company’s success results from a quality product and productive employees who are motivated by incentives and who enjoy being part of a successful new business. To meet demand, Shelly expanded operations, borrowing money and increasing staff to four full-time employees.

Production and sales increased to 8,000 pies per month, and profits soared to $12,000 per month. However, demand for Mrs. Acres Homemade Pies continues to accelerate beyond what Shelly can supply. She has several options: (1) maintain current production levels and raise prices; (2) expand the facility and staff while maintaining the current price; or (3) contract the production of the pies to a national restaurant chain, giving Shelly a percentage of profits with minimal involvement.

When Shelly Acres started selling her pies, she had to find her own customers.

None of the local restaurants and supermarkets knew her products, so she had to offer an affordable product to interest restaurants and supermarkets in her products. As demand increased, Shelly started producing more pies to meet this demand. At the moment, she cannot supply all the demand. A way to decrease this demand is to increase prices. She can also increase the production level to meet the demand. The first option implies that Shelly’s company is not going to grow since its current size will be maintained by keeping an artificially high price.

The second solution requires Shelly to find the resources to finance the expansion of her activities. The third option leads Shelly to lose her specific know-how by providing it to the national restaurant chain. It also implies that Shelly does not own her business any longer. In economics we classify goods as “tangible” products, example might include food and drink, cars, digital televisions, flat-screen televisions, energy products and cricket bats!

Services are sometimes known as intangibles, education and health-care are two important services and tourism, business consultancy, cleaning and home insurance are all examples of services. A soft-drink manufacturer produces several flavors of drink for example, cola, orange, and lemon. Each flavor has several versions such as regular, diet, and caffeine-free. The manufacturer operates factories in several states. You have input records that list version, flavor, yearly production in gallons, and state (for example: Regular Cola 5000 Kansas).

The aim of segmentation in consumer markets is to bring the focus on to manageable groups of like-minded individuals who have a high disposition for a product. Coca-Cola has customers who want low cost drinks for consumption at home. It has customers who want a mixer or a non-alcoholic drink in a bar. It has customers who are hot and thirsty and want a cool refresher outside the Duomo in Florence. The same consumers may at various times join one of the segments and when they do, they will see the product in a different light and value it in a different way.

In business-to-business markets the aim of segmentation is similarly to arrive at clusters of like-minded companies. There is a very strong pressure to use segmentation in business-to-business markets to win a competitive advantage as there is often little to differentiate one product from another. Segmentation therefore links strongly with a strategy to achieve a sustainable differentiated position.

References: highered. mcgraw-hill. com/sites/dl/free/… /ferrell_walkthrough. pdf http://www. b2binternational. com/library/whitepapers/whitepapers03. php.

Mrs. Acres Homemade Pies and Soft Drink Essay

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Soft Drink Industry Five Forces Analysis Essay

Soft Drink Industry Five Forces Analysis Essay.

Soft drink industry is very profitable, more so for the concentrate producers than the bottler’s. This is surprising considering the fact that product sold is a commodity which can even be produced easily. There are several reasons for this, using the five forces analysis we can clearly demonstrate how each force contributes the profitability of the industry. Barriers to Entry: The several factors that make it very difficult for the competition to enter the soft drink market include: Bottling Network: Both Coke and PepsiCo have franchisee agreements with their existing bottler’s who have rights in a certain geographic area in perpetuity.

These agreements prohibit bottler’s from taking on new competing brands for similar products. Also with the recent consolidation among the bottler’s and the backward integration with both Coke and Pepsi buying significant percent of bottling companies, it is very difficult for a firm entering to find bottler’s willing to distribute their product. The other approach to try and build their bottling plants would be very capital-intensive effort with new efficient plant capital requirements in 1998 being million.

Advertising Spend: The advertising and marketing spend (Case Exhibit 5 & 6) in the industry is in 2000 was around $ 2. 6 billion (0. 40 per case * 6. 6 billion cases) mainly by Coke, Pepsi and their bottler’s. The average advertisement spending per point of market share in 2000 was 8. 3 million (Exhibit 2). This makes it extremely difficult for an entrant to compete with the incumbents and gain any visibility. Brand Image / Loyalty: Coke and Pepsi have a long history of heavy advertising and this has earned them huge amount of brand equity and loyal customer’s all over the world.

This makes it virtually impossible for a new entrant to match this scale in this market place. Retailer Shelf Space (Retail Distribution): Retailers enjoy significant margins of 15-20% on these soft drinks for the shelf space they offer. These margins are quite significant for their bottom-line. This makes it tough for the new entrants to convince retailers to carry/substitute their new products for Coke and Pepsi. Fear of Retaliation: To enter into a market with entrenched rival behemoths like Pepsi and Coke is not easy as it could lead to price wars which affect the new comer. Suppliers:

Commodity Ingredients: Most of the raw materials needed to produce concentrate are basic commodities like Color, flavor, caffeine or additives, sugar, packaging. Essentially these are basic commodities. The producers of these products have no power over the pricing hence the suppliers in this industry are weak. Buyers: The major channels for the Soft Drink industry (Exhibit 6) are food stores, Fast food fountain, vending, convenience stores and others in the order of market share. The profitability in each of these segments clearly illustrate the buyer power and how different buyers pay different prices based on their power to negotiate.

Food Stores: These buyers in this segment are some what consolidated with several chain stores and few local supermarkets, since they offer premium shelf space they command lower prices, the net operating profit before tax (NOPBT) for concentrate producer’s in this segment is $0. 23/case Convenience Stores: This segment of buyer’s is extremely fragmented and hence have to pay higher prices, NOPBT here is $0. 69 /case. Fountain: This segment of buyer’s are the least profitable because of their large amount of purchases hey make, It allows them to have freedom to negotiate.

Coke and Pepsi primarily consider this segment “Paid Sampling” with low margins. NOPBT in this segment is $0. 09 /case. Vending: This channel serves the customer’s directly with absolutely no power with the buyer, hence NOPBT of $0. 97/case. Substitutes: Large numbers of substitutes like water, beer, coffee, juices etc are available to the end consumers but this countered by concentrate providers by huge advertising, brand equity, and making their product easily available for consumers, which most substitutes cannot match. Also soft drink companies diversify business by offering substitutes themselves to shield themselves from competition.

Rivalry: The Concentrate Producer industry can be classified as a Duopoly with Pepsi and Coke as the firms competing. The market share of the rest of the competition is too small to cause any upheaval of pricing or industry structure. Pepsi and Coke mainly over the years competed on differentiation and advertising rather than on pricing except for a period in the 1990’s. This prevented a huge dent in profits. Pricing wars are however a feature in their international expansion strategies. 2. Economics of Bottling vs Concentrate Business Factor Bottling Business Concentrate Business.

(Data from Exhibit 5) As the above table indicates concentrate business is highly profitable compared to the bottling business. The reasons for this are: Higher number of bottler’s when compared to the concentrate producer’s which fosters competition and reduces margins in the bottling business Huge capital costs to set up an efficient plant for the bottlers while the capital costs in concentrate business are minimal Costs for distribution and production account for around 65% of sales for bottler’s while in the concentrate business its around.

17% Most of the brand equity created in the business remains with concentrate producer’s Possible Reasons for Vertical Integration: With the decrease in the number of bottler’s from 2000 in 1970 to less than 300 in 2000, the concentrate producers were concerned about the bottler’s clout and started acquiring stakes in the bottling business. They could offer attractive packaging to the end consumer. To preempt new competition from entering business if they control the bottling. 3. Effect of competition between Coke and Pepsi on industry profits:

During the 1960’s and 70’s Coke and Pepsi concentrated on a differentiation and advertising strategy. The “Pepsi Challenge” in 1974 was a prime example of this strategy where blind taste tests were hosted by Pepsi in order to differentiate itself as a better tasting product from Coke. However during the early 1990’s bottler’s of Coke and Pepsi employed low priced strategies in the supermarket channel in order to compete with store brands, This had a negative effect on the profitability of the bottlers.

Net profit as a percentage of sales for bottlers during this period was in the low single digits (-2. 1-2. 9% Exhibit 4) Pepsi and Coke were however able to maintain the profitability through sustained growth in Frito Lay and International sales respectively. The bottling companies however in the late 90’s decided to abandon the price war, which was not doing industry any good by raising the prices. Coke was more successful internationally compared to Pepsi due to its early lead as Pepsi had failed to concentrate on its international business after the world war and prior to the 70’s.

Pepsi however sought to correct this mistake by entering emerging markets where it was not at a competitive disadvantage with respect to Coke as it failed to make any heady way in the European market. 4. Can Coke and Pepsi sustain their profits in the wake of flattening demand and growing popularity of non-carbonated drinks? Yes Coke can Pepsi can sustain their profits in the industry because of the following reasons:

The industry structure for several decades has been kept intact with no new threats from new competition and no major changes appear on the radar line This industry does not have a great deal of threat from disruptive forces in technology. Coke and Pepsi have been in the business long enough to accumulate great amount of brand equity which can sustain them for a long time and allow them to use the brand equity when they diversify their business more easily by leveraging the brand.

Globalization has provided a boost to the people from the emerging economies to move up the economic ladder. This opens up huge opportunity for these firms Per capita consumption in the emerging economies is very small compared to the US market so there is huge potential for growth. Coke and Pepsi can diversify into non–carbonated drinks to counter the flattening demand in the carbonated drinks. This will provide diversification options and provide an opportunity to grow. 5. Impact of globalization on Industry structure:

Globalization provides Coke and Pepsi with both unique challenges as well as opportunities at the same time. To certain extent globalization has changed the industry structure because of the following factors. Rivalry Intensity: Coke has been more dominant (53% of market share in 1999). in the international market compared to Pepsi (21% of market share in 1999) This can be attributed to the fact that it took advantage of Pepsi entering the markets late and has set up its bottler’s and distribution networks especially in developed markets.

This has put Pepsi at a significant disadvantage compared to the US Market. Pepsi is however trying to counter this by competing more aggressively in the emerging economies where the dominance of Coke is not as pronounced, With the growth in emerging markets significantly expected to exceed the developed markets the rivalry internationally is going to be more pronounced.

Barriers to Entry: Barriers to entry are not as strong in emerging markets and it will be more challenging to Coke and Pepsi, where they would have to deal with regulatory challenges, cultural and any existing competition who have their distribution networks already setup. The will lack the clout that have with the bottler’s in the US. Suppliers: Since the raw material’s are commodities there should be no problems on this front this is not any different Customers: Internationally retailers and fountain sales are going to be weaker as they are not consolidated, like in the US Market.

This will provide Coke and Pepsi more clout and pricing power with the buyers Substitutes: Since many of the markets are culturally very different and vast numbers of substitutes are available, added to the fact that carbonated products are not the first choices to quench thirst in these cultures present additional significant challenges. The consumption is very low in the emerging markets is miniscule compared to the US market. A lot more money would have to be spent on advertising to get people used the carbonated drinks.

Soft Drink Industry Five Forces Analysis Essay

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Thesis About Soft Drink Dealership Essay

Thesis About Soft Drink Dealership Essay.

1/A thesis proposal submitted to the Faculty of the Department of Management, College of Economics, Management and Development Studies, Cavite State University, Indang, Cavite, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with the degree of Bachelor of Science in Business Management, major in Business Economics. Prepared under the supervision of Dr. Nelia C. Cresino. INTRODUCTION Soft drinks can trace their history back to the mineral water found in natural springs. Bathing in natural springs has long been considered a healthy thing to do and mineral water is said to have curative powers.

Scientists soon discovered that gas carbonium or carbon dioxide is behind the bubbles in natural mineral water. Soft drinks by its term are beverages that are not alcoholic drinks. Carbonated soft drinks are also referred to as soda (About. com, 2011). What is special about soft drinks is that it is very easy to find and that all people could avail it. It is really good in satisfying thirst of an individual.

It gives a refreshing feeling especially on a very hot weather. According to the research conducted by the Gale Group Farmington Hills Michigan (2008), the soft drink industry began in the mid-1880s.

During the early years, soft drinks were sold only in stores that could provide fountain service. Increasing distribution was tied to building additional syrup manufacturing plants. The first marketed soft drinks appeared in the 17th century as a mixture of water and lemon juice sweetened with honey. In 1676 the Compagnie de Limonadiers was formed in Paris and granted a monopoly for the sale of its products. Vendors carried tanks on their backs from which they dispensed cups of lemonade.

Sari-sari stores remains the largest distribution channel in 2011, small neighborhood retail outlets called sari-sari stores accounted for the largest proportion of sales in soft drinks. Located in neighborhoods, these outlets make products easily accessible to lower- and middle-income consumers, especially in provincial areas where modern channels such as convenience stores and supermarkets are located in retail centers that are far from residential areas. It should also be noted that Filipino consumers typically do not buy in bulk and store soft drinks products at home.

Thus, sari-sari stores become a convenient channel for buying soft drinks in the favored smaller and returnable glass packaging (euromonitor, 2011). For dealership one will need a lot of collateral. The amount is based on the area of distribution. Soft drink dealership is profitable, but one should have to watch out for a lot of things where one can lose money like breakage, theft, etc. The dealer should be 200% hands-on because of the cash and lots of credit that will be handled. Based on the visitation on the sales office of Coca-cola, Pepsi-cola as well as Royal Crown in Cavite there are 52 soft drinks dealers in the province.

Soft drink dealerships as well as other businesses contribute to the improvement in the economic condition of people in a certain area or field and the community in general. Thus, the profitability of its operation is worth studying. Statement of the Problem Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following questions: 1. What are the socio economic characteristics of soft drink dealers in Cavite? 2. What is the income of soft drinks dealers in Cavite? 3. What is the profitability of soft drinks dealership business? 4. What are the problems encountered in soft drinks dealership? Conceptual Framework.

The framework of the study which is composed of the socio-economic characteristics as the input, the dealership as the process and the net income as the output is shown in Figure 1. The socio-economic characteristics of the soft drink dealers such as age, gender and educational background will be the used as input in operating a dealership business. The output which is the net income of the business will be based from the input which will be processed in operating the business to generate the profit. Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the profitability of the soft drinks dealership in Cavite.

Objectives of the Study Generally, the study will be undertaken to determine the profitability of soft drinks dealership in Cavite. Specifically, it aims to: 1. describe the socio-economic characteristics of soft drink dealers in Cavite; 2. determine the income of soft drinks dealers in Cavite; 3. determine the profitability of soft drinks dealership in Cavite; 4. identify the problems encountered in soft drink dealership business. Importance of the Study The prospective investors can use this information as basis in deciding to enter into the soft drinks dealership business.

This will provide a good source of data for their feasibility study. The student and researchers can use the result of the study as reference to have a deeper study about soft drink dealership in Cavite and other related researches. From the result of the study, the soft drinks dealer will have an idea of the current situation of other dealers and compare their pricing strategies with the other soft drink dealers in Cavite. Scope and Limitation of the Study This study will be conducted to analyze the profitability of soft drink dealership in Cavite. It will be conducted from October to December 2012.

The respondents will be the owners, managers, or owner-managers of soft drink dealership business. The study focused mainly on the socio-economic characteristics of the respondents, income of soft drink dealers and problems encountered in soft drinks dealership business. Only dealers of soft drinks such as Coca-cola, Pepsi- cola and Royal Crown will be interviewed. Accounting transactions for one year period, 2011 will be included in the analysis of income. The data that will be used in the study will be limited to what the respondents will provide during the interview. Operational Definition of Terms.

Cost of sale refers to an expense incurred by soft drinks dealers which is obtained by multiplying the monthly sales volume by unit cost. Gross income refers to the monthly total cash amount received by soft drink dealers from the business. Net profit refers to the total cash amount left to the soft drink dealer after deducting all relevant expenses from the total sales. Profitability is the ability of soft drink dealers to improve the financial position of the business. The ratios that will be used are: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Profit Margin and Net Profit Margin.

Sales volume refers to the monthly quantity of soft drink sold by soft drink dealers. Soft drinks is the main product traded by the soft drink dealers to their consumers. This include carbonated drinks such as Coca-cola, Pepsi- cola and Royal Crown. Soft drinks dealers refer to the person who sells soft drinks for cash. Total cost/ expense refers to all expenses incurred by soft drink dealers in a month. Total sales refers to the total amount of soft drinks sold in a month. It is obtained by multiplying the unit selling price by the monthly sales volume. METHODOLOGY.

This chapter will discuss the research procedure to be used in the study. This will be presented in the following section: 1. ) research design, 2. ) source of data, 3. ) data gathering procedure, 4. ) research instrument, 5. ) method of analysis. Research Design The cross- sectional survey research design will be used in studying the profitability of soft drink dealership in Cavite. This design will facilitate finding the answers to questions on socio-economic characteristics of soft drink dealers, income of soft drink dealers, profitability of soft drinks dealership and the problems encountered in soft drink dealership business.

In the cross sectional survey design, data will be collected at one point in time from October to December 2012 from a sample selected from a population at the particular time. Sources of Data The respondents for this study will be the soft drinks dealers in Cavite. A list of soft drink dealers in every town was requested from the sales office of the different companies such as Coca-cola, Pepsi- cola and Royal Crown cola in Cavite, namely: Alfonso, Amadeo, Bacoor, Carmona, Cavite City, Dasmarinas City, Gen. Trias, Imus, Indang, Kawit, Maragondon Naic, Noveleta, Rosario, Tagaytay, Tanza and Trece Martirez City.

Only towns that have soft drink dealers will be included in the study. Data Gathering Procedure The data to be used in the study will be gathered through interviews with the aid of questionnaires. Visitation to the different towns of Cavite will be done to determine the number of soft drinks dealers. Table 1 shows the distribution of respondents by products and by towns. A total of 52 respondents will be included in the study. Table 1. Distribution of respondents by products and by towns.

PRODUCT/TOWNFREQUENCYPERCENTAGE Pepsi- cola Carmona 2 4 Bacoor 3 6 Dasmarinas 3 6 G. M. A. 1 2 Silang 3 6 Coca-cola Amadeo 1 2 Bacoor 4 7 Cavite City 1 2 Dasmarinas 3 6 Gen. Trias 2 4 Imus 2 4 Indang 1 2 Kawit 1 2 Maragondon 1 2 Naic 1 2 Rosario 3 6 Tagaytay 1 2 Tanza 2 2 Ternate 1 4 Trece 1 2 Royal Crown cola Alfonso 1 2 Bacoor 2 4 Carmona 2 4 Cavite city 1 2 Dasmarinas 1 2 Gen. Trias 1 2 Imus 3 6 Noveleta 1 2 Silang 1 2 Tanza 1 4 Martirez 1 2 Total 52 100 Percent Research Instrument The questionnaire will be used as the main gathering tool of data. The questionnaire is divided into 5 parts.

The first part is about the general information of the respondents. The second part will focus on the form of business organization, and the third part will center on the practices and strategies in making profit. The fourth and the last part include the business income and expenditures of the soft drink dealers and the problems encountered in soft drink dealership. Method of Analysis Frequency count and percentage will be used to describe the socio-economic characteristics of soft drink dealers, factors affecting the income of soft drink dealers and problems encountered by soft drinks dealers.

Financial tool such as profitability ratios will be used to measure the earning capacity of the business. The ratios that will be used are: Gross Profit Margin, Operating Profit Margin and Net Profit Margin. Gross profit margin. Measures the percentage of each peso sales remaining after the firm has paid for its goods. The higher the gross profit margin, the better, the lower the relative cost of merchandize sale. Gross profit margin = Gross profit Sales Operating profit margin. It determines the percentage of each peso sales that is represented by operating profits.

It measures the overall operating efficiency and incorporates all the expenses associated with the ordinary or normal business activities. Operating profit margin =net operating income Net sales Net profit margin. Consider income after cost. Operating cost and taxes have been deducted. Net profit margin is divided by net income after taxes by net sales. In analyzing the income of soft drink dealers the formula that will used to solve the net income is: NI =TS – TC Where : NI = net income TS = total sales TC =total cost Return on expenses.

Measures the earning power of the business for every peso spent. It is obtained by dividing the net income after taxes by the total expenses. ROE= net income after taxes Total expense REVIEW 0F RELATED LITERATURE Carbonated Soft drinks Dealers Soft drinks are liquids which contains carbon dioxide. In the years that followed, many variations of carbonated beverages, the process of carbonation can occur naturally underground or artificially, it is through pressurizing. Examples of carbonated beverages include spring water, beer and soda, or pop.

Best example is Coca-Cola which is the household name all over the world. Makers of carbonated drinks use caramel coloring more than any other color in the food industry. Carbonated beverages can generally be 90 percent water. They are most commonly associated with being non-alcoholic, although by definition beer is also a carbonated drink (Jeanne, 2011). According to the Pinoy Progress Philippines. Com, The Philippine Beverage Industry is composed of companies producing ice tea drinks, soft drinks and colas, energy drinks, milk, juice drinks and mineral water.

In the soft drinks or soda category Coca-Cola and Pepsi of the US dominate. The soft drinks segment of this industry right now is dominated still by the two American giants–Coke and Pepsi (pinoyprogress. com2012). Royal crown soft drinks are also the leading brand of soft drinks for the Filipinos. Getting Filipinos to appreciate RC Cola, a century-old brand founded in Columbus, Georgia is something that the local bottlers of RC Cola have been doing daily for the past eight years (Manila Bulletin, May16, 2011).

Pepsi Cola Products Philippines reported its sales figured being down to $2. 74 million in 2008 from $3 million in 2007. This is expected to be a result of people’s growing orientation towards healthier drink options (Philippine Beverage Industry,2009). Consumption of and Sales of soft drinks The consumption of carbonated soft drinks is high, and is fast reaching saturation. So future growth in the Philippine soft drinks market is expected to come from non-carbonated soft drinks, says “Philippines Food and Drinks Market: Emerging Opportunities”, the latest research on the Philippine food and drinks market (Philippines Food and Drinks Market: Emerging Opportunities, Feb. 2009).

Status of sales in soft drink industry has been good performance over the recent years. Enjoying high per capita consumption among Asian countries. The sales of soft drinks are expected to come to reach 6 Billion Liters in 2008, 23% up over 2005 (Philippines Food and Drinks Market: Emerging Opportunities,Feb. 2009). Small retail outlet which is called sari- sari stores is accounted for the largest proportion of sales in soft drinks.

Because it is easily accessible to lower- and middle-income consumers, especially in provincial areas where modern channels such as convenience stores and supermarkets are located in retail centres that are far from residential areas (Euromonitor. com2012). In the Philippines, the competition in the carbonated drinks becomes stronger. The Coca-Cola Export Corp remains the undisputed leader in the Philippine soft drinks category. The Coca-Cola Co is able to cater to lower-income consumers through its fully-owned subsidiary Cosmos Bottling Corp, which manufacturer’s competitively-priced regional brands (Euromonitor.com2012).

According to the research conducted by the Canadian Beverage Association (2009), sales tend to be seasonal, with higher consumption occurring during the hotter summer months. Unusually cold or rainy weather during the summer months can have a negative impact on sales. Aside for carbonated drinks, bottled water and fruit juice will be the most profitable in the non carbonated soft drinks in the market. Many factors affecting the sales of soft drinks industry “Growing health awareness and health safety concerns among Filipinos will be the key deciding factors of this growth” ”, says an analyst at RNCOS.

Other factors, including growing young population, rising income and shifting consumer preference are also likely to add to the growth of health drink market in the country (S. C 2009). Problems Encountered by Soft drinks Industry According to the research conducted by the Euromonitor’s team, the year of 2011 is a very challenging year for the soft drinks industry in the Philippines. Because of the economic back drop, shorter summer periods and higher inflationary pressure, the industry’s total volume sales contracted (Euromonitor.com, 2012).

Increased competition from other non-alcoholic beverages, in particular bottled water, but also beverages such as fruit/vegetable-based drinks, energy drinks, sports drinks and relaxation drinks, has given consumers more beverage choices. Changing consumer preferences and demographics, with a larger segment of older consumers who are increasingly concerned about their own health, and concerns about obesity have resulted in an increased demand for new products (Canadian Beverage Association, 2009).

You may also be interested in the following: thesis about alcoholism in philippines

Thesis About Soft Drink Dealership Essay

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers

Competitors Analysis – Soft Drink Industry Essay

Competitors Analysis – Soft Drink Industry Essay.

In 2005, the global carbonated soft drink (CSD) market generated revenues of over $147 billion, all of which comes from three global powerhouse companies occupying 90% of the market. Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and Cadbury Schweppes, are one, two and three, respectively, in the very competitive CSD industry. Over past decades, the CSD market has been honored with record growth, showing consumption rates that have more than doubled over the last 25 years.

Americans are consuming twice as many beverages as they were 25 years ago; however, while carbonated soft drinks continue to remain the most popular beverage, consumer preferences are changing to include other types of beverages, such as waters, juices, and other drinks perceived to be a healthier alternative.

The changes in preferences and overall increases in new alternatives are beginning to bring the total consumptions rates for CSDs down from their 25 year high. In 2004, 10. 24 billion cases were sold, while 2005 showed a 0.

6% decrease translating to 10. 18 billion cases. This 2005 decline came after a small growth in both 2003 and 2004.

Coca-Cola lost some market share, Pepsi gained some, and diet drinks seems to be what is fueling the overall category growth. Dr. Pepper, Cadbury Schweppes’ only US sold CSD, was the only beverage to have growth in the US in 2005. This was due in part to the launch of Diet Cherry Vanilla Dr. Pepper. As mentioned above, the top-three players in the CSD market are Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and Cadbury Schweppes (Dr. Pepper).

Coca-Cola continues to hold the lead position with a market share of 45%, but Pepsi and Cadbury Schweppes are not far behind with 32% and 15%, respectively. At this stage in this very mature market, the only way market share will change significantly is through takeovers. However, the takeover targets that exist are so small, that the market share increase would be approximately 1%. Despite the 2005 decrease in consumption, three-year sales numbers for these companies show increases in both Coca-Cola and Pepsi from 2003 to 2005. While Coke remains the leader, Pepsi believes that they will continue to grow through product innovation.

Their diet carbonated beverages continue to grow, so as long as consumer interests stays relatively high on the diet beverages, Pepsi feels that it is positioned to remain in a tight competition with Coke. Product Quality Product quality is an extremely important issue for all companies. But when it comes to products that will be consumed, customers will turn their back on a product if they face a product issue. Coca-Cola ensures the safety and product quality of their beverages through a system they have designed call The Coca-Cola Quality System.

This in an integrated approach to managing all aspect relating to the product ? quality, the environment and health and safety. This worldwide system involves every aspect of their business. All employees are empowered to follow and expected to maintain the high quality standards. While PepsiCo is operating the beverage and food industry, the company is extremely committed to providing safe, wholesome products and protecting equity in their brands and trademarks. In all divisions throughout the globe, they have implemented strict policies related to food safety, labeling product integrity and quality.

Their policies cover food safety, sanitation, recalls and allergens and require that our products are coded, labeled, identifiable and traceable. Cadbury Schweppes, playing in both the beverage and confectionary industries, also has high quality standards. They use innovation, responsible marketing and ethical sourcing to deliver the best quality products to their consumers. They also have strict levels of control on their manufacturing processes and are committed to minimizing any environmental impacts these processes may cause. Management Each of the top three CSD companies has been in business for over 100 years.

As the times change, management has changed in order to keep up with the trends and consumer preferences. Changes that will keep each company fresh and on the cutting edge. Coca-Cola is the number one carbonated beverage company in the world, selling almost 1. 3 billion servings everyday. This is due, in part, to the strength of the management team behind the scenes. Coca-cola has a goal oriented work environment and a democratic management style. Their main focus, other than product innovation, is to focus on marketing and advertising of their leading products.

The real story of The Coca-Cola Company lies in what they are doing to build a sustainable-growth business for tomorrow. PepsiCo management has an average age of 49. 5. The top executive positions have been all been occupied within the last 5 years. While the top-level management is relatively new, they have all been with various divisions of PepsiCo for several years prior to assuming their current roles. Under Pepsi current management, they have developed a strategy that they hope will help gain the competitive edge they need to steal market share from Coke ? it’s called Pepsi’s Sustainable Advantage.

Pepsi’s Sustainable Advantage ? Source: www. pepsi. com Three major sustainable advantages give PepsiCo a competitive edge as we operate in the global marketplace: 1. Big, muscular brands; 2. Proven ability to innovate and create differentiated products; and 3. Powerful go-to-market systems. The management team of Cadbury Schweppes is to deliver superior shareowner performance for profitability and to significantly increase the global confectionary market share and ensure the growth of the regional beverage share. They believe strongly in innovation.

They take into consideration the changing trends in consumer preferences ?an important driver for their future growth. Cadbury Schweppes management team has an average age of 56. They, like Pepsi, have been brought up from other positions with in the Cadbury Schweppes organizations. The length of time in each of the top levels positions ranges from three to five years. The current management structure enables them to focus on delivering their commercial agenda and top-line growth, and allows the functions to develop and drive global strategies and processes towards best in class performance, while remaining closely aligned to the regions’ commercial interests.

Advertising Soft drink companies are realizing that the most important and fastest growing segment is multicultural youths. By connecting music trends, clothing trends, and electronic trends, among others, these companies are able to reach the multicultural youth segment. The most popular medium, however, being used by beverage companies to target this segment, is on-line advertising. In 2005, Pepsi had the most on-line ad impressions at over 92 million, while Coke came in with just over two million. Perhaps in an effort to bump up their on-line impressions, Coke is launching their version of iTunes, called iCoke.

Integrating music and web to reconnect their brand with the multicultural youth market. Hip-hop music is also one of the popular trends being used to target this audience. From black sileouttes grooving with an Ipod to a Superbowl ad featuring Diddy riding in Pepsi truck, hip-hop has definitely become apart of advertising to the young urban market. Global Sales Figures for Top Three CSD Companies Company Profiles The Coca-Cola Company is the world’s number one maker of soft drinks, selling 1. 3 billion beverage servings every day. Coke owns three of the top six soft-drink brands (Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, and Sprite).

Among its other brands are Barq’s, Minute Maid, POWERade, and Dasani water. Nearly 70% of Coke’s beverage sales are generated outside North America. The break down is as follows: North America, 30 percent; Europe, Eurasia, and the Middle East, 31 percent; Asia, 24 percent; Latin America (including Mexico), 10 percent; and Africa, 4 percent. Coca-Cola is the best-selling soft drink in most countries and has a presence in over 200 countries. Nevertheless, there are some places like Quebec and Prince Edward Island, Canada, where Pepsi is the market leader.

In the Middle East, the only region in the world where Coca-Cola is not the number one soda drink, Coca-Cola nonetheless holds almost 25% marketshare (to Pepsi’s 75%) and had double-digit growth in 2003. [www. answers. com, Coca-Cola Company, January 30, 2007] Pepsi, with a 21% share of the worldwide carbonated soft drink market and a 29% share in the United States, is the #2 carbonated soft-drink company. Their business focus is on offering quality and value to their consumers and customers while providing products that are safe, wholesome, economically efficient, and environmentally sound. (www. pepsico.com).

This focus is combined with a long-term goal of putting an end to their quest to steal market share away from Coke. Pepsi’s soft drinks, Pepsi and Mountain Dew make up more than one-quarter of its sales. They also own Frito-Lay, the world’s #1 maker of snacks such as corn chips (Doritos, Fritos) and potato chips (Lay’s, Ruffles, Stax). Pepsi also sells Tropicana orange juice brands, Gatorade sports drink, and water. Their Aquafina brand water is the #1 bottled water sold in the United States. On a global basis, Pepsi’s product portfolio consists of 16 brands that than created approximately $500 million in sales each year.

Like Coke, Pepsi owns three of the top six soft drinks, Pepsi, Diet Pepsi and Mountain Dew. Overall, Pepsi gains about 35% of its retail sales from outside the United States, with brands being marketed in about 160 countries, while Coke sits at 70% of their sales outside the United States with brands in 200 countries. Pepsi’s Sustainable Advantage ? Source: www. pepsi. com Three major sustainable advantages give PepsiCo a competitive edge as we operate in the global marketplace: 4. Big, muscular brands; 5. Proven ability to innovate and create differentiated products; and 6. Powerful go-to-market systems.

Cadbury Schweppes is one of the oldest and largest family-run businesses in the world today. The company is currently the world’s third leading producer of soft drinks and fourth leading confectionery manufacturer. Their number one soft drink, Dr Pepper is the oldest major soft drink in the US and the number one in its category with a 92 per cent share of the entire ‘pepper’ soft drink sector. It was the only soft drink in the US to experience growth in 2005. Its beverage brands are sold mainly in North America and Western Europe and include 7 UP (US only), A&W Root Beer, Canada Dry, Dr Pepper, and Hawaiian Punch.

Cadbury Schweppes holds the third position with a market share of %15. To catch Coke and Pepsi at this point, they would have to come up with and abosultely dynamic new product. Coca-Cola Company – (Information Compiled from www. coca-cola. com) Brief History John Stith Pemberton, a druggist, founded the Coca-Cola Company in 1885. John developed a non-alcoholic, carbonated drink from the French Wine Cola, and he named the beverage Coca-Cola because it was made with coca leaves and flavored kola nuts; these nuts were the primary source of caffeine. Today Coca-Cola is one of the largest corporations in USA.

Coco-cola is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, USA, and is the largest beverage selling company in the world; selling top five brands of beverages in 200 countries. They are an extremely successful company although they are not based on selling or manufacturing essential product. Coca-Cola’s motto is to possess as much “stomach share” as possible; market share comes second on their priority list. Today, the Coca-Cola companies’ net worth is $20 billion. It is rated as 233 on the Forbes Global 500 list and in US, is considered to be the “symbol of global marketing. ” Company Philosophy.

The Coca-Cola Company exists to benefit and refresh everyone it touches. The basic proposition of our business is simple, solid and timeless. When we bring refreshment, value, joy and fun to our stakeholders, then we successfully nurture and protect our brands, particularly Coca-Cola. That is the key to fulfilling our ultimate obligation to provide consistently attractive returns to the owners of our business. Management The key focus of the Company’s management is on advertising and sales. As Coke, Sprite, Fanta and other beverages are non-essential products; the company primarily focuses on sales and marketing of these products.

The Company has a democratic management style. Various meetings, discussion and brainstorming sessions take place to know more about the staffs’ opinion. The staffs’ judgments are also well taken care of by the senior management. This friendly relation is maintained so that the employees have full confidence on their managers/senior management and keep producing the best quality product/result. It is perhaps because of this friendly environment, employees are very loyal to their company. Coca-Cola is now considered to be a company with the largest diversity.

Since it is a multi-national company with presence all over the world, this new management approach (diversity) has enhanced its brand image as the company started emplying locally, serving its local communities and contributing for a better life of the local citizens. The Company maintains a very goal oriented culture and very often rewards its employee for successfully implementing a strategy or plan. CEO: Neville Isdell is the Chairman and CEO of the Coca-Cola Company from May, 4, 2004. E Neville has a bachelor’s degree in Social Sciences from University of Cape Town and is also a graduate of the Harvard Business School.

Mr. Isdell joined the company in 1966 in the Coca-Cola’s bottling company in Zambia. Then he moved to South Africa as the General Manager, as the region manager in Australia in 1980 and in 1981 he became the President of the joint venture of the bottling company of Coca-Cola and San Miguel Corporations in Philippines. After working with the company for few more years he left the company and became the president of his own investment company. During these years he remained as the senior international consultant to the then CEO Doug Daft and the Coca-Cola system. After Doug Daft he retired, E Neville Isdell became the CEO.

Previous Marketing Campaigns In mid 1970’s, seeing the political instability of US after the resignation of the then President, Nixon, Coca-Cola came up with a very creative campaign to remind the Americans of their country’s “positive values” ? the campaign was “Look up America”. The campaigned featured all that are “real things” such, football players, cattle herd and there was a narrator quoting a line, which meant “no matter what you’re doing or where you are, look up for the real things” like Coca-Cola. In 1976, Coke’s campaign was targeted towards the “young and young-at-heart”.

The ad was “Coke adds life to?. ” This ad was created to deliver the message that coke brings happiness to life. 1982’s ad was “Coke is it”. This campaign emphasized more on the quality and taste of the drink. In 1993, Coca-Cola’s campaign was “Always Coca-Cola”. This campaign had 27 commercials for specific target audiences. These ads were created for audiences all over the world and for the first time Coke introduced an animated polar bear in one of its ad called “Northern Lights”. The ad shows polar bears watching movies and drinking coke. This ad was hugely popular overnight. Coke’s Slogans: 1970 ?

It’s the real thing 1971 ? I’d like to buy the world a coke 1975 ? Look up America 1976 ? Coke adds life 1979 ? Have a Coke and a smile 1982 ? Coke is it! 1985 ? We’ve got a taste for you (Coca-Cola and Coca-Cola classic). America’s real choice 1986 ? Catch the wave (Coca-Cola), Red White & You (Coca-Cola classic) 1989 ? Can’t beat the Feeling 1990 ? Can’t beat the Real Thing 1993 ? Always Coca-Cola. Taste it all 1994 ? Play Red Hot Summer 1995 ? Play Red Hot Summer Again 1996 ? Enjoy 2001 ? Life is Good 2003 ? Real 2005 ? Make it Real 2006 ? The Coke side of life Coca-Cola ? Consumption and sales.

The table below shows the amount of Coca-Cola in servings that had been drunk by the respective year. As a logical consequence, these numbers are indicators of the amount of Coca-Cola produced and sold. Selling Numbers of Coca-Cola 1886 9 glasses per day 1899 over 100 million 1902over 200 million 1903over 300 million 1907over 1 billion 1910over 2 billion 1912over 3 billion 1914over 4 billion 1915over 5 billion 1919over 10 billion 1936over 100 billion 1944over 100 billion 1952over 200 billion 1958over 300 billion 1962over 400 billion 1965over 500 billion 1973over 1 trillion 1982over 2 trillion 1993over 4 trilion.

1996over 5 trillion 2003over 6 trillion Source: www. thecoca-colacompany. com Major Controversies ? On July, 21, 2001, some members and leaders of the Columbia Bottling factory of Coca-Cola filed a case in US ? the Sinatrainal leaders and members were constantly threatened, tortured, killed and kidnapped by the paramilitary death squads who were working in alliance with the Columbia Bottling factory managers and the government to destroy the factory union. The Centre for Science and Environment, India, in 2003 claimed that aerated waters produced by Coca-Cola and PepsiCo while manufacturing its carbonated drinks has toxins ?

DDT, lindane, malathion, chlorpyrifos; these pesticides can cause cancer after consumption and even damage the immune system. The Centre for Science and Environment also reports that the percentage of pesticide residual found in soft drinks produced by Coca-Cola is 30 times more than that is allowed by European Union Regulations. States like Kerala in 2006 banned the production and sale of Coca-Cola products as the state was concerned with the high level of pesticide residue in the soft-drinks.

In India, it was also reported that the farmers had to migrate to some other places as a very high amount of water is required to produce Coca-Cola, thus it dried up the aquifers. Surrounding these human rights violations in Columbia and India, 19 universities headed by University of Michigan and New York University in US, refused to renew their contract with the company. It has also been reported that until the company agrees to allow an independent investigation for these controversies, they will not have any contracts with Coca-Cola. But later, under certain terms and condition, the schools agreed o renew.

In 2000, the Company eliminated 6000 jobs in the process of restructuring. PepsiCo, Inc. (Information Compiled from www. pepsico. com) Brief History PepsiCo, Inc. manufactures, markets, and sells various snacks and beverages worldwide. It operates in four divisions: Frito-Lay North America, PepsiCo Beverages North America, PepsiCo International, and Quaker Foods North America. The company distributes its products through direct-store-delivery, broker-warehouse, and food service and vending distribution networks to its customers, including franchise bottlers, distributors, and retailers.

PepsiCo was founded in 1898 and is headquartered in Purchase, New York. Company Philosophy PepsiCo’s overall mission is to increase the value of our shareholder’s investment. We do this through sales growth, cost controls and wise investment of resources. We believe our commercial success depends upon offering quality and value to our consumers and customers; providing products that are safe, wholesome, economically efficient and environmentally sound; and providing a fair return to our investors while adhering to the highest standards of integrity.

Management PayExercised Ms. Indra K. Nooyi , 51 Chief Exec. Officer, Pres$ 2. 93M$ 2. 22M Mr. John C. Compton , 44 Chief Exec. Officer of North America and Member of Liquid Refreshment Beverage Oversight Council$ 1. 98M$ 1. 96M Mr. Donald M. Kendall , 86 Co-FounderN/A N/A Mr. Richard Goodman , 58 Chief Financial OfficerN/A N/A Mr. Hugh F. Johnston , 45 Exec. VP of Operations, Exec. VP of Global Procurement and Information TechnologyN/A N/A Dollar amounts are as of 31-Dec-05 and compensation values are for the last fiscal year ending on that date.

“Pay” is salary, bonuses, etc. “Exercised” is the value of options exercised during the fiscal year. Indra K. Nooyi The President and Chief Executive Officer of PepsiCo, the world’s fourth-largest food and beverage company. On August 14, 2006 she was named the next to succeed Steve Reinemund as chief executive officer of the company. Reinemund, 58, retired on October 1, 2006. According to Forbes magazine’s 2006 poll, Mrs. Nooyi is the fourth most powerful woman in the world. She has been named the #1 Most Powerful Woman in Business in 2006 by Fortune Magazine.

She received a bachelor’s degree from Madras Christian College and a Post Graduate Diploma in Management from the Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta and graduated from the Yale School of Management. Prior to joining PepsiCo, Nooyi started her career with The Boston Consulting Group (BCG), from where she moved on to hold senior management positions at Motorola and Asea Brown Boveri. John C. Compton Prior to being named CEO for PepsiCo North America, Mr. Compton was President & CEO for Quaker-Tropicana-Gatorade (QTG), a position he assumed in 2005.

Previously, Compton spent over 20 years at Frito-Lay North America, where he started in 1983 as a production supervisor. He moved from manufacturing into marketing and then sales assignments, serving as Senior Vice President of Sales and Chief Marketing Officer. Richard Goodman Effective October 1, 2006, Richard Goodman, 57, will assume the position of Chief Financial Officer for the Company, with responsibility for Tax, Treasury, Control, Risk Management and Audit and Investor Relations. Mr. Goodman has served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of PepsiCo International since 2003.

Mr. Goodman also served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of PepsiCo Beverages International from 2001 to 2003 and Vice President and General Auditor of PepsiCo from 2000 to 2001. Mr. Goodman joined PepsiCo in 1992 as Vice President of Corporate Strategic Planning, International and held a number of senior financial positions with the Company and its affiliates until 1997 when he left PepsiCo to pursue other opportunities. Before joining PepsiCo, Mr. Goodman was with W. R. Grace in a variety of global chief financial officer positions. Hugh F. Johnston.

Hugh Johnston is Senior Vice President, Transformation of PepsiCo. He is responsible for several of the company’s cross business initiatives which are designed to enhance operations and improve synergies across the company. These include Project One Up (PepsiCo’s ERP program), Supply Chain, and Go-To-Market Strategic Insights. Prior to assuming his current position in March of 2005, Mr. Johnston was Chief Financial Officer for PepsiCo Beverages & Foods where he was responsible for leading the finance function for Pepsi-Cola North America, Tropicana and Gatorade North America and Quaker Foods North America.

Previously, he was the Senior Vice President of Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) for PepsiCo, where he was responsible for leading the corporation’s global merger, acquisition, joint venture and divestiture activities. He started with PepsiCo in 1987 in the Pepsi-Cola North America division, and has held numerous M&A, finance and strategy positions in PepsiCo Corporate, Frito-Lay and Pepsi- Cola divisions. Prior to joining PepsiCo, Mr. Johnston held several finance positions with General Electric Company.

He graduated from the University of Chicago with an MBA in Finance and Accounting and from Syracuse University with a BS in Finance. With revenues of about $29 billion, PepsiCo ranks as the world’s third largest food and beverage company. It includes: Frito-Lay, the world’s largest manufacturer and distributor of snacks; Pepsi-Cola, the second largest soft drink business; Tropicana, the largest marketer and producer of branded juices; Gatorade, the world’s leading sports drink, and Quaker Foods, with leading brands such as Quaker Oats. STEVEN S REINEMUND 57, has been PepsiCo’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer since May 2001.

He was elected a director of PepsiCo in 1996 and before assuming his current position, served as President and Chief Operating Officer from September 1999 until May 2001. Mr. Reinemund began his career with PepsiCo in 1984 as a senior operating officer of Pizza Hut, Inc. He became President and Chief Executive Officer of Pizza Hut in 1986, and President and Chief Executive Officer of Pizza Hut Worldwide in 1991. In 1992, Mr. Reinemund became President and Chief Executive Officer of Frito-Lay, Inc. , and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Frito-Lay Company in 1996. Mr.

Reinemund is also a director of Johnson & Johnson. Mr. Reinemund will retire next May to spend more time with his family. He will serve as Executive Chairman of PepsiCo effective October 1, 2006 and will continue to serve as Chairman of PepsiCo’s Board of Directors until his retirement in May, 2007. Previous Marketing In 1975, PepsiCo introduced the Pepsi Challenge marketing campaign where PepsiCo set up a blind tasting between Pepsi-Cola and rival Coca-Cola. During these blind taste tests the majority of participants picked Pepsi as the better tasting of the two soft drinks.

PepsiCo took great advantage of the campaign with television commercials reporting the test results to the public. Some attribute this to the higher sugar content found in Pepsi compared to Coca-Cola, as seen in the book, “Big Secrets” by William Poundstone. In 1996, PepsiCo launched the highly successful Pepsi Stuff marketing strategy. By 2002, the strategy was cited by Promo Magazine as one of 16 “Ageless Wonders” that “helped redefine promotion marketing. ” Source: Promo Magazine, 2002. ?1939: “Twice as Much for a Nickel” ?1950: “More Bounce to the Ounce” ?1958: “Be Sociable, Have a Pepsi”.

?1961: “Now It’s Pepsi for Those Who Think Young” ?1963: “Come Alive, You’re in the Pepsi Generation”. ?1967: “(Taste that beats the others cold) Pepsi Pours It On”. ?1969: “You’ve Got a Lot to Live, Pepsi’s Got a Lot to Give”. ?1973: “Join the Pepsi people (feeling free)”. ?1975: “Have a Pepsi day”. ?1979: “Catch that Pepsi spirit”. ?1981: “Pepsi’s got your taste for life”. ?1983: “Pepsi’s Now! ” ?1984: “The Choice of a New Generation”. ?1991: “Gotta Have It”. ?1995: “Nothing Else is a Pepsi”. ?1997: “GeneratioNext”. ?1999: “Ask for More”/”The Joy of Cola”. ?2003: “It’s the Cola”/”Dare for More”.

Cadbury Schweppes (information compiled from www. finance. yahoo. com) Brief History Cadbury Schweppes PLC is one of the oldest and largest family-run businesses in the world today. Although confectioner Cadbury Limited merged with the carbonated drinks company Schweppes Limited in 1969, Cadbury Schweppes is still run by members of the Cadbury family, which has been represented in Cadbury’s top management for almost 180 years. The company is currently the world’s third leading producer of soft drinks and fourth leading confectionery manufacturer. In August 1993 Cadbury Schweppes obtained a 20.

2 percent stake in Dr Pepper/Seven Up; the following month, the company acquired A&W, the largest root beer producer in the United States, for $334 million. Although small steps, these deals helped set the stage for further growth. In 1995 the company paid $1. 6 billion for the remaining stake in Dr Pepper/Seven Up, giving it a 17 percent share of the overall U. S. soft drink market. Company Philosophy As a major global beverage and confectionery company, we are dedicated to the manufacturing, marketing, and distribution of our branded products around the world.

Today, Cadbury Schweppes employs over 36,000 people and our products are available in almost 200 countries across the world. Management Sir John Sutherland Appointed Chairman in May 2003, Sir John Sunderland joined Cadbury Limited in 1968. Over the years he has worked on both the confectionery and soft drinks sides of the business, on the boards of Cadbury Ireland, Cadbury Schweppes South Africa, as a founding director of the Coca-Cola Schweppes UK joint venture in 1987, and then as Managing Director of Trebor Bassett.

In 1993 he became Managing Director of the Confectionery Stream and a member of the Cadbury Schweppes Board. In September 1996 he was appointed Chief Executive. Todd Stitzer In 1988 Todd became vice president and general counsel to the world-wide beverages stream and, in 1991, moved to the UK as group development director responsible for strategic planning and external development. Returning to the US in 1993 as vice president of marketing and strategic planning for Cadbury Beverages North America, he held a succession of increasingly responsible sales, marketing and general management roles.

Prior to his appointment to the Cadbury Schweppes board as chief strategy officer in March 2000, he was, from 1997, president and chief executive officer of Dr Pepper/Seven Up Inc Todd was appointed deputy chief executive officer in December 2002 and became chief executive officer in May 2003. Ken Hanna Ken was appointed Chief Financial Officer and Board Director of Cadbury Schweppes plc in April 2004. Prior to joining Cadbury Schweppes he worked as an Operating Partner on fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) at Compass Partners International, a private equity firm.

He also held positions as Group Chief Executive and Group Finance Director at Dalgety plc, Group Finance Director, United Distillers plc and Group Finance Director of Avis Europe plc. www. marketresearch. com – Carbonated Soft Drinks ?

Global Industry Guide ? downloaded 1/24/2007 , The Coca-Cola Company, Company profile, downloaded, January 30, 2007 www. answers. com, PepsiCo, Company profile, downloaded, January 30, 2007 www. answers. com, Cadbury Schweppes, Company profile, downloaded, January 30, 2007.

Beverage Digest, Special Issue: All-Channel Carbonated Soft Drink Performance in 2005, Volume 48, No. 7, March 8, 2006 www. pepsico. com – 2005 Annual Report www. cocacola. com www. cadburyschweppes. com – 2005 Annual Report www. finance. yahoo. com www. clicks. com, Soda Pop Culture, by Rebecca Lieb, March 25, 2005. Downloaded, February 5, 2007 www. spinwatch. org, Coca-Cola prepares iCoke for global youth marketing drive, by Yinka Adegoke. Downloaded February 5, 2007.

Competitors Analysis – Soft Drink Industry Essay

Place this order or similar order and get an amazing discount.

Simple Steps to get your Paper Done
For Quality Papers