market analysis on pepsi

7/23/2019 market analysis on pepsi

1/53

1. INTRODUCTION

According to the marketing strategies used by Pepsi, Customers will have diverse experiences

and preferences, given their individual references and location. The Pepsi Company is modifying

its approach so that it can strike into these distinctions and provide the fitting marketing

activities, pricing strategies and beverages to be connected with current and potential customers.

Its "think local, act local" strategy to marketing permissible adopting communications to suit

local and global situations. It wants to offer consumers with beverages to be adaptable with their

different life styles and life stages.

Pepsi is placing more liability and answerability in the hands of its managers who are closest to

the target market, to create good channels of communication, and gain its loyalty, and achieve

the company marketing and overall goals.

Pepsi thrives when people are permitted to utilize their insight to construct the business in ways

best suitable to their culture and business conditions. Efforts were made to give flexibility to

managers to be adaptable with the market shocks, and try to make the significant modifications.

Moreover P& G used to utilize a flexible pricing strategy to avoid any loss in market share to

other rivals. it depends in certain scenarios to price its products low and obtain maximum profit

on spare parts, in addition it uses different prices and different price lists for different markets to

extract the fitting one .In other scenarios, it sets price for selected products at 10% below market

leader to maximize sales, and to allow increased production and reduce unit production cost.

In recent years a rapid health growth was witnessed in the Indian food sector, along with a few of

the local companies reporting massive growth. The food and beverage industry is being

reinforced by the Saudi government by offering financings and grants on designated equipment,

and through the burden of high prices on imports that competes with local products.

Important sub segments in the Indias food and beverage processing industry, comprising meat,

dairy, and juice business, which has established to a degree in current years to the point where

they are meeting most of the local demand.

1


2/53


3/53


4/53

Coca-Cola and PepsiCo compete through lemonade/lime carbonates

Lemonade/lime carbonates was among the stronger performers in the carbonates category in

2011. Coca-Cola India Pvt Ltd and PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt Ltd continue to compete

aggressively in this category by increasing the visibility of their brands Sprite, Limca and 7-Up

respectively. Catchy taglines were used by manufacturers to generate consumer interest,

alongside aggressive campaigns using Bolly wood actors.

Modern retail shows steady growth

Leading chained retailers are on a major expansion drive, which has led to an increase in soft

drinks volume sales. Manufacturers have leveraged this to showcase their new variants in a bid

to broaden their consumer base. The modern retailing channel is helping to facilitate the growth

of soft drinks. Modern retail offers a unique experience for consumers, where they can touch and

feel the product before buying. Tier two and three cities have also seen the robust growth of

modern retail outlets.

Indians will continue to consume more soft drinks

Dynamic products such as sports and energy drinks, bottled water and fruit/vegetable juice will

drive strong growth in soft drinks during the forecast period. Soft drinks giants pepsico India

Holdings Pvt Ltd and Coca-Cola India Pvt Ltd are targeting the rural segment to enhance their

presence. The outlook for soft drinks looks very positive in the forecast period due to strong

marketing activities and product innovations by manufacturers.

4


5/53

1.2 COMPANY PROFILE

One of the dynamic industries in our country is the soft drink industry. Soft drinks are a non-

alcoholic beverage made with carbonated water. Such drinks are called soft to distinguish them

from Alcoholic or hard drinks. Soft drinks are also called pop because the type of bottle caps

used before 1890s made a popping noise when removed. People in various areas call soft drinks

as soda. Most soft drinks are sweetened and flavored with specially prepared syrup, the

flavoring are usually made from various plant part such as root, bark and seeds of cola tree.

Most brands of soft drinks were manufactured through franchised bottle with a security

formulated beverage syrup or flavor base.

Mr. Joseph Priestly, an English Chemist, produced the first artificially carbonated water in the

year 1772. At that time mineral water was a popular remedy for certain diseases. Previously

artificial mineral water was also called as soda water. In 1806 bottled soft water was produced

and sold by Mr. Benjamin Sill man, a Chemistry Professor at Yale College. The number of soft

drink bottling company in the United States increased approximately from 65 to 2000, during

1970s increased in the price of soft drinks. Many people switched to less expensive non-

carbonated soft drinks, produced using powdered mixes which became an important part of an

industry

Corporate Overview

Pepsico was incorporated in the year 1919 and was re-incorporated in North Carolina in 1986.

Pepsi is engaged in beverage and snack food business. Pepsico is a multinational company and it

is most successful consumer product company in the world with annual revenue of $ 20 billion

and about 1, 43,000 employees. Some of pepsicos brand names are nearly 100 years old.

Pepsico has achieved a leadership position in each of the two major packaged good business i.e.

Beverage and snack chips. Pepsico the conglomerate king of soft drink has its wide range of soft

drinks products available in every book & corner of the world.

5


6/53


7/53


8/53

Tropicana was founded in Bradenton, Florida, USA, in 1947. It is now enjoyed almost

everywhere in the world. Carefully nurtured for over 50 years, Tropicana has matured into one of

the most respected beverage brands. Tropicana is the #1 brand in packaged 100% Juice in the

world in 2011 in off-trade volume. It is today available in 63 countries. Since 1998, Tropicana

has been owned by pepsico, Inc. Tropicana Premium Gold was re-launched as Tropicana 100%

in 2008.

Brand Advantage

Tropicana continues to select the best fruit to manufacture high-quality juices and original

products, pioneer innovative processes and explore new markets for its products. It is committed

to fostering healthy lifestyles by ensuring that its products are naturally nutritious and provide

the daily benefits that one needs.

In India, Tropicana comes in two categories: 100% Juices (sold as Tropicana 100%) and Juice

Beverages (sold as Tropicana).

Quick Brand Facts

1. Launched in India in 2004.

2. Available in two categories - 100 percent juice and juice-based drinks.

8


9/53

1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Estimating the market or market potential for a new business or business expansion is critical in

determining the economic feasibility of a venture. Estimating the market potential for a business

is critical in evaluating its viability and provides an estimate of the maximum total sales potential

for a given market. Estimating the market potential will determine if the market is large enough

to support your business. Hence we get precise and reliable information in this area after

conducting a market potential analysis.

9


10/53

1.4 NEED FOR THE STUDY

This study is bases on maximum demand response possible for a given group of customers

within a well defined geographic area for a given product or service over a specified period of

time under well defined competitive environmental conditions

1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

1. Gaining a better understanding on the market strategies and planning used by the

company for marketing the product of Tropicana.

2. Comprehending how key trend affects the industry and Tropicana as one of PepsiCos

products and how a consumer buying behavior affects the product.

3. To Understand and differentiate between the market segmentation, positioning and target

audience in order to develop an effective marketing plan, and achieve the overall

objectives of the company.

4. Examining the pricing plan designed for Tropicana and gives recommendations to help

increase its sales size.

5. Understanding how and what are the tactics to eradicate Tropicanas strong competition

is the main reason of this report.

10


11/53

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The soft drink industry is very competitive for all corporations involved, with the greatest

competition being that from rival sellers within the industry. All soft drink companies have to

think about the pressures; that from rival sellers within the industry, new entrants to the industry,

substitute products, suppliers, and buyers.

The competitive pressure from rival sellers is the greatest competition that Coca-Cola faces in

the soft drink industry. Coca-Cola, Pepsi Co., and Cadbury Schweppes are the largest

competitors in this industry, and they are all globally established which creates a great amount of

competition. Though Coca-Cola owns four of the top five soft drink brands (Coca-Cola, Diet

Coke, Fanta, and Sprite), it had lower sales in 2005 than did PepsiCo (Murray, 2006c).

However, Coca-Cola has higher sales in the global market than PepsiCo. In 2004, PepsiCo

dominated North America with sales of $22 billion, whereas Coca-Cola only had about $6.6

billion, with more of their sales coming from overseas. PepsiCo is the main competitor for Coca-

Cola and these two brands have been in a power struggle for years (Murray, 2006c).

Barbara Murray (2006c) explained the soft drink industry by stating, For years the story in the

nonalcoholic sector centered on the power struggle betweenCoke and Pepsi. But as the pop

fight has topped out, the industry's giants have begun relying on new product flavorsand

11


12/53

looking to noncarbonated beverages for growth. In order to fully understand the soft drink

industry, the following should be considered: the dominant economic factors, five competitive

sources, industry trends, and the industrys key factors. Based on the analyses of the industry,

specific recommendations for competitors can then be created. Dominant Economic Factors

Market size, growth rate and overall profitability are three economic indicators that can be used

to evaluate the soft drink industry. The market size of this industry has been changing. Soft drink

consumption has a market share of 46.8% within the non-alcoholic drink industry, illustrated in

Table 1. Datamonitor (2005) also found that the total market value of soft drinks reached $307.2

billion in 2004 with a market value forecast of $367.1 billion in 2009. Further, the 2004 soft

drink volume was 325,367.2 million liters (see Table 2). Clearly, the soft drink industry is

lucrative with a potential for high profits, but there are several obstacles to overcome in order to

capture the market share. The growth rate has been recently criticized due to the U.S. market

saturation of soft drinks. Datamonitor (2005) stated, Looking ahead, despite solid growth in

consumption, the global soft drinks market is expected to slightly decelerate, reflecting

stagnation of market prices. The change is attributed to the other growing sectors of the non-

alcoholic industry including tea and coffee (11.8%) and bottled water (9.3%). Sports drinks and

energy drinks are also expected to increase in growth as competitors start adopting new product

lines.

Profitability in the soft drink industry will remain rather solid, but market saturation especially in

the U.S. has caused analysts to suspect a slight deceleration of growth in the industry (2005).

Because of this, soft drink leaders are establishing themselves in alternative markets such as the

snack, confections, bottled water, and sports drinks industries (Barbara Murray, 2006c). In order

for soft drink companies to continue to grow and increase profits they will need to diversify their

product offerings. The geographic scope of the competitive rivalry explains some of the

economic features found in the soft drink industry. According to Barbara Murray (2006c), The

sector is dominated by three major playersCoca-Cola is king of the soft drink-empire and

boasts a global market share of around 50%, followed by PepsiCo at about 21%, and Cadbury

Schweppes at 7%. Aside from these major players, smaller companies such as Cott Corporation

and National Beverage Company make up the remaining market share. All five of these

companies make a portion of their profits outside of the United States. Table 3 shows that the US

12


13/53

does not hold the highest percentage of the global market share, therefore companies need to be

able to compete globally in order to be successful. Table 4 indicates that Coca-Cola has a similar

distribution of sales in Europe, NorthAmerica, and Asia. On the other hand, the majority of

PepsiCos profits come from the United States (see Table 5). Compared to PepsiCo, Cadbury

Schweppes has a stronger global presence with their global mix (see Table 7). Smaller

companies are also trying to establish a global presence. Cott Corporation is a good example as

indicated in Table 8. The saturation of the US markets has increased the global expansion by soft

drink leaders to increase their profits. The ease of entry and exit does not cause competitive

pressure on the major soft drink companies. It would be very difficult for a new company to

enter this industry because they would not be able to compete with the established brand names,

distribution channels, and high capital investment. Likewise, leaving this industry would be

difficult with the significant loss of money from the fixed costs, binding contracts with

distribution channels, and advertisements used to create the strong brand images. This industry is

well established already, and it would be difficult for any company to enter or exit successfully.

Three leading companies have prominent presence in the soft drink industry. The leaders include

the Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, and Cadbury Schweppes. According to the Coca- Cola

annual report (2004), it has the most soft drink sales with $22 billion. The Coca-Cola product

line has several popular soft drinks including Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Fanta, Barqs, and Sprite,

selling over 400 drink brands in about 200 nations (Murray 2006a). PepsiCo is the next top

competitor with soft drink sales grossing $18 billion for the two beverage subsidiaries, PepsiCo

Beverages North America and PepsiCo International (PepsiCo Inc., 2004). PepsiCos soft drink

product line includes Pepsi, Mountain Dew, and Slice which make up more than one- quarter of

its sales. Cadbury Schweppes had soft drink sales of $6 billion with a product line consisting of

soft drinks such as A&W Root Beer, Canada Dry, and Dr. Pepper (Cadbury Schweppes, 2004).

The carbonated beverage industry is a highly competitive global industry as illustrated in the

financial statements. According to John Sicher of Beverage Digest (2005), Coca-Cola was the

number one brand with around 4.5 billion cases sold in 2004. Pepsi followed with 3.2 billion

cases, and Cadbury had 1.5 billion cases sold. However, the market share shows a different

picture. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo control the market share with Coca-Cola holding 43.1% and

Pepsi with 31.7% (see Graph 1); however these market shares for both Coca-Cola and PepsiCo

13


14/53

have slightly decreased from 2003 to 2004. Coca-Colas volume has also decreased 1.0% since

2003, whereas PepsiCos volume has increased 0.4% (see Graph 1). Diet Coke posted a 5%

growth, but Coca-Colas other top 10 brands declined (Sicher, 2005). Overall, Coca-Colas

market position has declined in 2004. The strategic group map (see Graph 1) also shows the

growth of Cott Corp. of 18% which is significantly higher than that of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo.

The American Beverage Association (2006) states that in 2004, the retail sales for the entire soft-

drink industry were $65.9 billion. Barbara Murray (2006e) analyzed the industry averages for

2004 and average net profit margin was 11.29%. The current ratio average was 1.11 and the

quick ratio average was 0.8. These figures help analyze the financial statements of the major

corporations in the industry. As shown in Table 13, Coca-Cola has seen their net profit margin

increase from 20.7% to 22.1% from 2003 to 2004. According to Coca-Colas annual report

(2004), 80% of their sales are from soft drinks; therefore the total sales amount was used for their

financial analysis. These figures show that their profits are increasing, but at a slow rate. This is

in line with what is happening in the soft drink industry. The market is highly competitive and

growth has remained at a stable level. The slight increase in Coca-Colas profit margin is most

likely from their new energy drink product line. This industry is currently expanding rapidly, and

is allowing the major beverage companies to increase their profits. Table 13 also shows Coca-

Colas working capital was around $1.1 billion in 2004. This is a large increase from 2003 at

only $500 million. This shows that they have sufficient funds to pursue new opportunities.

However, their current ratio and quick ratio are a cause for concern. A current ratio of 2 or better

is considered good and Coca-Colas was 1.102. This number shows that they may not have

enough funds to cover short term claims. The quick ratio for 2004 was at 0.906 and is considered

good when it is greater than 1. This illustrates that Coca-Cola may not have the ability to pay

short term debt without selling inventory. These two numbers are a concern because they are not

able to satisfy their short term obligations. The current and quick ratios are in line with the

industry averages, however (Murray, 2006e), Coca-Cola needs to improve these ratios in order

focus on long-term plans (Coca-Cola Company, 2004). PepsiCos financial statements cannot be

analyzed for only the soft drinks industry because they do not distinguish between businesses.

Over half their profits are from snacks or other beverage items; however there are sales and

profit figures for their two beverage subsidiaries. These sales figures grew from almost $16.5

billion in 2003 to $18 billion in 2004 (Pepsi Co. Inc., 2004). Their operating profit margin also

14


15/53

increased 1% from 2003 to 2004 as illustrated in Table 13. This shows that beverage profits are

increasing for them, but also at a slow rate. The increase could be due to the increase in market

share that the Pepsi products gained in 2004 (Sicher 2004). The PepsiCo. Annual Report (2004)

stated that beverage volume increased 3% in 2004, but was driven by the high growth of the non-

carbonated beverage industry.

Cadburys current and quick ratios are very similar to those of Coca-Cola. The current ratio and

quick ratio for Cadbury Schweppes for 2004 were both 0.917 (see Table 13). Again, the current

ratio should be 2 or more, and the quick ratio should be over 1. This illustrates that Cadbury also

has difficulty paying short term debt and claims. Cadburys net profit margin has increased by

0.7% from 2003 to 2004. This can be attributed to their market share growth in 2004 of 0.2%

(Sicher, 2005). One ratio that is concerning is their debt to equity ratio for 2004 in Table 13.They have almost two times as much debt as they do to equity, which means that their funds are

mainly provided by creditors as opposed to owners. This is concerning because they owe a lot of

money, and must make a decent profit to be able to pay it off. The industry average for debt to

equity is 81%, and Cadbury is far from that number (2006e). Also, Cadbury has a negative

working capital for both 2003 and 2004, meaning they have more liabilities than assets. This

shows that they do not have any funds to pursue new opportunities, as their current assets are

being used to pay off liabilities (Cadbury, 2004). Overall, the financial statements of the three

top competitors in the soft drink industry show that the industry is highly competitive and has

little growth. Net profit margins increased for all three corporations, however only at a small

rate. It also seems that all three companies lack sufficient current and quick ratios, but are all

within a reasonable range of the industry average (2006e). This may be due to expanding their

product lines to include energy drinks and non-carbonated beverages in order to increase profits

and diversify their business. The soft drinks market is now in the matured stage of the life cycle.

Growth in the industry has remained stagnant, and the financial statements of the major

corporations in the industry illustrate that their sales and income are following this trend. The

companies are in good financial positions; gross profits and net profit margins are continuing to

increase each year. The leverage and activity ratios are all within reasonable range. However,

one area all three corporations need to improve on is the liquidity ratios. Their quick and current

ratios are low and need to be increased so they are able to meet short-term obligations.

15


16/53

Brand name loyalty is another competitive pressure. The Brand Keys Customer Loyalty

Leaders Survey (2004) shows the brands with the greatest customer loyalty in all industries. Diet

Pepsi ranked 17th and Diet Coke ranked 36th as having the most loyal customers to their brands.

The new competition between rival sellers is to create new varieties of soft drinks, such as

vanilla and cherry, in order to keep increasing sales and enticing new customers (Murray,

2006c).

New entrants are not a strong competitive pressure for the soft drink industry. Coca-Cola and

Pepsi Co dominate the industry with their strong brand name and great distribution channels. In

addition, the soft-drink industry is fully saturated and growth is small. This makes it very

difficult for new, unknown entrants to start competing against the existing firms. Another barrier

to entry is the high fixed costs for warehouses, trucks, and labor, and economies of scale. Newentrants cannot compete in price without economies of scale. These high capital requirements

and market saturation make it extremely difficult for companies to enter the soft drink industry;

therefore new entrants are not a strong competitive force (Murray, 2006c). Substitute products

are those competitors that are not in the soft drink industry. Such substitutes for Coca-Cola

products are bottled water, sports drinks, coffee, and tea. Bottled water and sports drinks are

increasingly popular with the trend to be a more health conscious consumer. There are

progressively more varieties in the water and sports drinks that appeal to different consumers

tastes, but also appear healthier than soft drinks. In addition, coffee and tea are competitive

substitutes because they provide caffeine. The consumers who purchase a lot of soft drinks may

substitute coffee if they want to keep the caffeine and lose the sugar and carbonation. Specialty

blend coffees are also becoming more popular with the increasing number of Starbucks stores

that offer many different flavors to appeal to all consumer markets. It is also very cheap for

consumers to switch to these substitutes making the threat of substitute products very strong

(Datamonitor, 2005).

Suppliers for the soft drink industry do not hold much competitive pressure. Suppliers to Coca-

Cola are bottling equipment manufacturers and secondary packaging suppliers. Although Coca-

Cola does not do any bottling, the company owns about 36% of Coca-Cola Enterprises which is

the largest Coke bottler in the world (Murray, 2006a). Since Coca-Cola owns the majority of the

bottler, that particular supplier does not hold much bargaining power. In terms of equipment

16


17/53

manufacturers, the suppliers are generally providing the same products. The number of

equipment suppliers is not in short supply, so it is fairly easy for a company to switch suppliers.

This takes away much of suppliers bargaining power. The buyers of the Coca-Cola and other

soft drinks are mainly large grocers, discount stores, and restaurants. The soft drink companies

distribute the beverages to these stores, for resale to the consumer. The bargaining power of the

buyers is very evident and strong. Large grocers and discount stores buy large volumes of the

soft drinks, allowing them to buy at lower prices. Restaurants have less bargaining power

because they do not order a large volume.

However, with the number of people are drinking less soft drinks, the bargaining power of

buyers could start increasing due to decreasing buyer demand (Murray, 2006a). Porters Five

Forces Model identifies the five forces of competition for any company.

The recognition of the strength of these forces helps to see where Coca-Cola stands in the

industry. Of the five forces, rivalry within the soft drink industry, especially from PepsiCo, is

the greatest source of competition for Coca-Cola the soft drink industry is affected by macro

environmental factors of the industry that will lead to change. First, the entry/exit of major firms

is a trend in the industry that will likely lead to change. More specifically, merger and

consolidation has been prevalent in the soft drinks market, causing some firms to exit the

industry and then re-enter themselves. Several leading companies have been looking to drive

revenue growth and improve market share through the increased economies of scale found

through mergers and acquisitions. One specific example is how PepsiCo acquired Quaker Oats,

who bought Gatorade which will help expand PepsiCos energy drink sector (Datamonitor,

2005). This trend has increased competition as firms diversification of products is increasing.

A second trend in the macro environment is globalization. With the growing use of the internet

and other electronic technologies, global communication is rapidly increasing. This is 10

allowing firms to collaborate within the country market and expand into world markets. It has

driven competition greatly as companies strive to be first-movers. Specifically, the global soft

drink markets compound annual growth rate (CAGR) is expected to expand to 3.6% from 2004

to 2009 (Datamonitor, 2005).

17


18/53

Third, changing societal concerns, attitudes, and lifestyles are important trends. In the United

States and Europe, people are becoming more concerned with a healthy lifestyle. Consumer

awareness of health problems arising from obesity and inactive lifestyles represent a serious risk

to the carbonated drinks sector (Datamonitor, 2005, p. 15). The trend is causing the industrys

business environment to change, as firms are differentiating their products in order to increase

sales in a stagnant market. Thus, the long-term industry growth rate, the fourth trend, shows low

growth in recent years. Since 2000, the CAGR is 1.5 per cent (Datamonitor, 2005). The low

growth rates are of concern for soft drink companies, and several are creating new strategies to

combat the low rates.

This leads to the fifth trend of growing buyer preferences for differentiated products. Because

soft drinks have been around since as early as 1798 (American Beverage Association, 2006),buyers want innovation with the products they buy. In todays globalizing society, being plain is

not good enough. According to Barbara Murray (2006c), The key for all of these beverage

companies is differentiation. The giants have new formulations and appearances. Whatever the

strategy, be it a new color, flavor, or formula, companies will strive to create the greatest brand

awareness in the minds of the consumer in the hopes of crowding out its competitors. Thus, the

last trend, product innovation, is necessary to combat buyers need for a variety of tastes. Firms

are already differentiating by taste, with the Coca-Cola Company as an example. The firms

product line includes regular Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Diet cherry Coke, 11cherry Coke, Vanilla

Coke, Coca-Cola with Lime, Coca-Cola with lemon and many more (Murray, 2006a).

Key factors for competitive success within the soft drink industry branch from the trends of the

macro environment. Primarily, constant product innovation is imperative. A company must be

able to recognize consumer wants and needs, while maintaining the ability to adjust with the

changing market. They must keep up with the changing trends (Murray, 2006c). Another key

factor is the size of the organization, especially in terms of market share. Large distributors have

the ability to negotiate with stadiums, universities and school systems. Making them the

exclusive supplier for a specified period of time. Additionally, they have the ability to commit to

mass purchases that significantly lower their costs. They must implement effective distribution

channels to remain competitive. Taste of the product is also a key factor for success.

18


19/53

Furthermore, established brand loyalty is a large aspect of the soft drink industry. Many

consumers of carbonated beverages are extremely dedicated to a particular product, and rarely

purchase other varieties. This stresses the importance of developing and maintaining a superior

brand image.

Price, however, is also a key factor because consumers without a strong brand preference will

select the product with the most competitive price. Finally, global expansion is a vital factor in

the success of a company within the soft drink industry. The United States has reached relative

market saturation, requiring movement into the global industry to maintain growth (Datamonitor,

2005).

Looking towards the future, the most important recommendation to Coca-Cola is continuing

product innovation and expansion of their product line. The soft-drinks industry is fully

saturated with competitors. Also, the industry is no longer expanding, and market share is

actually decreasing as more consumers are looking to healthier options. By continually

introducing new products, Coca-Cola will be able to increase their profits and allow the company

to continue to grow. Also, having a diverse product line will make the corporation very stable,

which is appealing to investors and creditors. A second recommendation would be to sustain or

increase the global market share.

Coca-Cola is very well-established globally, and is the global soft-drinks leader. This is very

important to sustain because it is the source of the majority of their profits. If they lose global

market share, their profits will decline dramatically. A final recommendation for Coca-Cola is to

maintain and try to increase their brand loyalty. Diet Coke has the second highest brand loyalty

of all the soft-drink competitors brands, and solid advertising campaigns will help maintain the

brand loyalty. They can also strive to obtain higher brand loyalty in all other brands, not solely

Diet Coke. The brand loyalty is important because it will allow Coca-Cola to sustain profits and

maintain their market share.

Energy drinks refer to beverages that contain, besides calories, caffeine in combination with

other presumed energy-enhancing ingredients such as taurine, herbal extracts, and B

vitamins. They first appeared in Europe and Asia in the 1960s in response to consumer

19


20/53

demand fora dietary supplement that would result in increased energy (Reissig and others

2009). In 1962, a Japanese company, Taisho Pharmaceuticals, launched Lipovitan D, one

of the very 1st energy drinks, which is still dominating the Japanese market. Lipovitan D

contains B vitamins, taurine, and ginseng, which are all frequent constituents of

mainstream energy drinks with the intended purpose ofproviding the consumer with

sustained energy, and to reduce mental and physical fatigue (Taisho Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.

2009). Energy drinks did not make theirway into the U.S. market until 1997 when Red Bull

was first intro- duced, which originated and was initially launched 10 y earlierin Austria

(Reissig and others 2009). Since the 1960s, the energy drink market has grown into a

multibillion dollarbusiness which has been reported as being the fastest growing segment

in the beverage industry since bottled water (Agriculture and Agri- Food Canada 2008).

Energy drinks have established a viable position in the beverage market as evidenced by

their commonplace consumption in the morning, afternoon, an d night, not only by the

general consumer, but those ofage 18 to 34 in particular (Lal 2007). Importance should be

placed on consumer safety and the understanding on how these beverages are regulated.

The ob- jective of this review is to give a general overview of the current energy drink

market in regard to its size, target market, ingredient profile, potential benefits, safety, and

regulations.

Additionally, some nutraceutical beverages are found to be fortified with vitamins and

minerals and contain significant levels ofantioxidants, particularly polyphenols. In some

instances, energy drinks could overlay into the nutraceutical beverage category depending

on their ingredient composition. The energy drink segment encompasses an array of

options including ready-to-drink (RTD), shots, and in powder form. Globally, energy

drinks hold 47.3% of the functional beverages overall market share, while in the United

States they comprise 62.6% (Datamonitor 2008a, 2008b). Energy drinks in particular

have experienced impressive growth of more than 240% in the United States, as well as

abroad, from 2004 to 2009 (Mintel 2009). In 2008, the functional beverage industry

reached global sales of $26.9 billion with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of

8.6% from 20042008. The United States contributed significantly to the functional

beverage industrys total accounting for$7.6 billion in revenue and a CAGRof20.6%. In

20


21/53


22/53

(a) Primary data collection method:

Survey method was used for primary data collection.

We used questionnaire as an instrument for survey method.

Structured questionnaire.

(b) Secondary data collection method:

Reference books and Internet.

Sampling detail

1. Target population: the population for this research study consists of the soft drink

users and retail outlets.

2. Sampling unit: in this study the sampling unit is individual consumer.

3. Sample size: 250 consumers 250 retailers.

4. Sampling method: the sample is selected by using convenience-sampling method.

4. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS

4.1 Percentage analysis for retailers

Table 1: Opinion about first impression on Tropicanas taste

Options Frequency Percent

Unique taste 39 15.6

Refreshing taste 72 28.8

Perfect taste 76 30.4

New taste 63 25.2Total 250 100

Inference

22


23/53

The above table infers that 15.6% respondents impressed because of Tropicanas unique taste,

28.8% respondents impressed due to refreshing taste, 30.4% respondents impressed due to

perfect taste and 25.2% respondents impressed because of new taste.

Table 2: Opinion about type of retailer business


Fast food restaurants 25 10

Super market or Hyper market 88 35.2

Mini markets 79 31.6

Wholesales 58 23.2

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 2 shows that 10% respondents running fast food restaurants, 35.2% respondents runs

supermarkets and hyper markets, 31.6% respondents runs mini markets like local retail shops

and 23.2% respondents are wholesalers.

Table 3: Availability of soft drinks


Coke 3 1.2

Thumps up 16 6.4

Tropicana 33 13.2

Sprite 27 10.8

7 UP 31 12.4

Fanta 35 14

Mirinda 36 14.4

Pepsi 38 15.2

Local products 31 12.4

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 3 shows that 1.2% respondent says coke is available, 6.4% respondent says Thumps up is

avail, 13.2% respondent says Tropicana is available. 13.2% respondent says sprite and 10.8%

respondent say 7UP is available in their retail outlets. 14% respondent says Fanta and Mirinda is

23


24/53

available, 15.2% respondents says Pepsi and 12.4% respondent says other local products are

available in the retail shops.

Table 4: Availability of Cooled space


Yes 139 55.6

No 111 44.4

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 4 shows that more than 55% respondents having cooled space (coolers) in their retail

shops for displaying, 44% respondents dont have any cooled space (coolers) for displaying sfot

drinks in their retail shops.

Table 5: Soft drink cooler provided by the company


No 48 19.2

Yes 202 80.8

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 5 shows that 202 respondents are provided with soft drinks coolers and 48 respondents are

not provided with any soft drink coolers.

Table 6: Cooking space brand

24


25/53


Coke 173 69.2

Pepsi 59 23.6

Both 18 7.2

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 6 infers that 69% respondent are using cokes cooler, 24% respondent are using Pepsis

coolers and only 7% respondents using both cokes and Pepsis coolers in their retail outlets.

Table 7: Majority of the buyers (Gender wise classifications)


Male 137 54.8

Female 113 45.2

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 7 shows that 55% male respondents are mainly using Tropicana drinks. 45% females are

mainly using Tropicana drinks. It shows that males are majority of the Tropicana buyers.

Table 8: Majority of the buyers (Age wise classifications)

Options Frequency PercentLess than 15 years 122 48.8

16-20 years 50 20

21-25 years 19 7.6

26-30 years 59 23.6

Total 250 100

25


26/53

Inference

Table 8 shows that 49% respondents who belongs to less than 15 years old are mainly usingTropicana, 20% of age group between 16-20 years of respondents using Tropicana, 24%

respondents belongs to 26-30 years old are mainly using Tropicana soft drinks and only 21-25

years old respondents (8%) using Tropicana drinks.

Table 9: Opinion about stock updates


Every day 31 12.4

Every Week 103 41.2

Twice in a week 79 31.6

Monthly once 37 14.8

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 9 infers that 12% respondents updating their stock every day, 41% respondents updating

their soft drinks stock every week, 32% respondents updating twice in a week and 15%

respondents updating monthly once.

Table 10: Opinion about most selling brands


Mirinda 12 4.8

Pepsi 36 14.4

Tropicana 28 11.2

Sprite 30 12

Coke 43 17.2

Fanta 35 14

7 UP 26 10.4

Thumps up 25 10

Local products 15 6

Total 250 100

26


27/53

Inference

Table 10 infers that Pepsi, Fanta (14%) and Coke (17%) are the most selling brand, Tropicana

(11%), Sprite (12%) ,7UP & Thumps up (10%) are the second most selling soft drinks and only

6% of the respondents feels Local products are most selling soft drinks brands.

Table 11: Opinion about out of stock issues


Once 26 10.4

Twice 78 31.2

Three times 95 38

Many times 51 20.4

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 11 shows that 10% respondents received out stock problem once in a month, 31%

respondents received twice in a month, 38% respondents received out of stock problems for

Tropicana three time in a month and 20% respondents received out of stock issues many time in

a single month for the Tropicana products.

Table 12: Opinion about soft drink prices


Yes 113 45.2

No 137 54.8Total 250 100

Inference

27


28/53

Table 12 shows that 45% respondents are received complaints about the soft drinks pricings and

55% of the respondents not received any complaints regarding soft drinks pricings from the

consumers.

4.2 Weighted average

Table 13: Descriptive statistics for brand shifting

Factors Mean Std. Deviation

Brand shifting because of taste and flavors 3.54 1.46

Brand shifting because of pricing strategies 3.50 1.43

Brand shifting because of availability 3.34 1.39

Brand shifting because of discounts 3.34 1.44

Brand shifting because of advertisements 3.32 1.41Brand shifting because of quality 3.27 1.47

Brand shifting because of package attractiveness 3.16 1.45

Brand shifting because of nutritional value 3.04 1.53

Inference

Table 13 shows that soft drinks taste and flavors are the top ranked factor that affects the brand

shifting with mean value of 3.54 and the stand deviations of 1.46. Pricing strategies of the soft

drinks with the mean value 3.50 and the standard deviation is 1.43. Product availability and

product discounts are the third main reason for brand shifting with the mean value of 3.34.

Product advertisement, quality of the soft drinks is the next factors for brand shifting. Package

28


29/53


30/53

Null hypothesis is rejected. All the factors are strongly and positively correlated with other

variables.

4.4 Reliability test

Table 15: Reliability test

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

0.579 8

Inference

Table shows Cronbach's alpha is 0.579, which indicates a high level of internal consistency for

scale with this specific sample.

4.5 Percentage analysis for consumers

Table 16: Age wise classifications


Less than 15 years 33 13

16-20 years 52 21

21-25 years 11 426-30 years 76 30

More than 30 years 78 31

Total 250 100

Inference

30


31/53

Table 16 shows that 13% respondents are less than 15 years old, 21% respondents are 16-20

years old, only 4% respondents are 21-25 years old, 30% respondents are 26-30 years old and

31% of respondents are more than 30 years old.

Table 17: Income wise classification


Less than 20000 Rs 31 12

20001-30000 Rs 92 37

30001-40000 Rs 59 24

More than 40000 Rs 68 27

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 17 shows that 12% respondents are getting less than 20000 rupees, 37% respondents are

getting 20001-30000 rupees, 24% respondents are getting 30001-40000 rupees and only 27%

respondents getting more than 40000 rupees as a monthly salary.

Table 18: Family member wise classification


1-3 members 30 12

4-6 members 214 86

More than 6 members 6 2

Total 250 100

Inference

31


32/53

Table 18 shows that 12% respondents are having 1 to 3 members in their family, 86%

respondents are having 4 to 6 members and only 2% respondents are having more than 6

members in their family.

Table 19: Occupation wise classification


Students 121 48

Private employee 57 23

Government employee 17 7

Business 55 22

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 19 infers that 48% respondents are students, 23% respondents are private employees, 7%

respondents are government employees and 22% respondents are business persons.

Table 20: Favorite drinks


Carbonated soft drinks 11 4

Non carbonated soft drinks 22 9Non alcoholic beer 30 12

Shanks 78 31

Mineral water 41 16

Sparkling water or Flavored water 68 27

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 20 shows that 4% respondents are like carbonated drinks, 9% respondents like non

carbonated drinks, 12% respondents like non alcoholic beer, 31% respondents like shanks and

16% respondents prefers mineral water and 27% respondents prefers sparkling water and

flavored water.

32


33/53

Table 21: Favorite carbonate drink


Mirinda 9 4

Pepsi 17 7Tropicana 17 7

Sprite 36 14

7 UP 30 12

Fanta 37 15

Coke 39 16

Thumps up 33 13

Local products 32 13

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 21 shows that 4% respondents like Mirinda, 7% respondents like Pepsi and Tropicana

drinks, 14% respondents like Sprite, 12% respondents like 7 UP and 15% respondents like Fanta.

16% respondents like Coke, 13% respondents like Thumps up and only 13% respondents like

local products.

Table 22: Alternative favorite soft drinks

33


34/53


Coke 15 6

Pepsi 30 12

Tropicana 28 11

Sprite 32 13

7 UP 40 16

Fanta 32 13

Mirinda 28 11

Thumps up 25 10

Local products 20 8

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 22 shows that 6% respondents like coke as alternative drink, 12% respondents like Pepsi

as a alternative drink, 11% respondents like Tropicana as a alternative, 13% respondents like

Sprite, 16% respondents like 7UP, 13% respondents like Fanta and 11% respondents like

Mirinda as a alternative drink. 10% respondents like thumps up and only 8% respondents like

local products as a alternative soft drink.

Table 23: Type of drinks preferred


Regular drinks 33 13

Diet drinks 94 38

34


35/53

sugar free drinks 73 29

Fresh fruits drinks 50 20

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 23 shows that 13% respondents like regular drinks, 38% respondents prefers diet drinks,

29% respondents prefers sugar free drinks and 20% respondents like fresh fruit drinks.

Table 24: Place of Purchase


Fast food restaurants 38 15

Super market or Hyper market 105 42Mini markets 63 25

Local shops 44 18

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 24 shows that 15% respondents purchasing soft drinks from fast food restaurants, 42%

respondents purchasing soft drinks from super markets and hyper markets, 25% respondents

mini markets and 18% respondents purchases from local retail shops.

Table 25: Suggestions to the soft drink brands


Discounts 32 13

Broaden the target 25 10

Change the packing design 31 12

Change the flavor 27 11

Change the color 38 15

35


36/53

Change name 30 12

Adding new distribution lines 30 12

Potential outlets 37 15

Total 250 100

Inference

Table 25 infers that 13% respondents suggest to increase the product discounts, 10% respondents

suggest to on concrete on broaden the target, 12% respondents suggest to change package design,11% respondents suggest to change the flavors, 15% respondents suggest to change the color and

taste of the drink, 12% respondents suggest to change the name and increasing the new

distribution channels, 15% respondents suggest to increase the potential outlets.

5. FINDINGS

Percentage analysis shows that 15.6% respondents impressed because of Tropicanas

unique taste, 28.8% respondents impressed due to refreshing taste, 30.4% respondents

impressed due to perfect taste and 25.2% respondents impressed because of new taste.

10% respondents running fast food restaurants, 35.2% respondents runs supermarkets and

hyper markets, 31.6% respondents runs mini markets like local retail shops and 23.2%

respondents are wholesalers.

36


37/53

1.2% respondent says coke is available, 6.4% respondent says Thumps up is avail, 13.2%

respondent says Tropicana is available. 13.2% respondent says sprite and 10.8%

respondent say 7UP is available in their retail outlets. 14% respondent says Fanta and

Mirinda is available, 15.2% respondents says Pepsi and 12.4% respondent says other

local products are available in the retail shops.

55% respondents having cooled space (coolers) in their retail shops for displaying, 44%

respondents dont have any cooled space (coolers) for displaying sfot drinks in their retail

shops.

202 respondents are provided with soft drinks coolers and 48 respondents are not

provided with any soft drink coolers.

69% respondent are using cokes cooler, 24% respondent are using Pepsis coolers and

only 7% respondents using both cokes and Pepsis coolers in their retail outlets.

55% male respondents are mainly using Tropicana drinks. 45% females are mainly using

Tropicana drinks. It shows that males are majority of the Tropicana buyers.

49% respondents who belong to less than 15 years old are mainly using Tropicana, 20%

of age group between 16-20 years of respondents using Tropicana, 24% respondents

belongs to 26-30 years old are mainly using Tropicana soft drinks and only 21-25 years

old respondents (8%) using Tropicana drinks.

12% respondents updating their stock every day, 41% respondents updating their soft

drinks stock every week, 32% respondents updating twice in a week and 15%

respondents updating monthly once.

Pepsi, Fanta (14%) and Coke (17%) are the most selling brand, Tropicana (11%), Sprite

(12%) ,7UP & Thumps up (10%) are the second most selling soft drinks and only 6% of

the respondents feels Local products are most selling soft drinks brands.

10% respondents received out stock problem once in a month, 31% respondents received

twice in a month, 38% respondents received out of stock problems for Tropicana three

37


38/53

time in a month and 20% respondents received out of stock issues many time in a single

month for the Tropicana products.

45% respondents are received complaints about the soft drinks pricings and 55% of the

respondents not received any complaints regarding soft drinks pricings from the

consumers.

Soft drinks taste and flavors are the top ranked factor that affects the brand shifting with

mean value of 3.54 and the stand deviations of 1.46. Pricing strategies of the soft drinks

with the mean value 3.50 and the standard deviation is 1.43. Product availability and

product discounts are the third main reason for brand shifting with the mean value of

3.34. Product advertisement, quality of the soft drinks is the next factors for brand

shifting. Package preference and nutritional value in the soft drinks are the last ranked

factors for brand shifting with the mean value of 3.16 and 3.04.

All the brand shifting variables are positively correlated with other variables.

Significance of brand shifting variables is less than 0.05 and less than 0.01 for remaining

factors. Null hypothesis is rejected. All the factors are strongly and positively correlated

with other variables.

Reliability result shows Cronbach's alpha is 0.579, which indicates a high level of

internal consistency for scale with this specific sample.

13% respondents are less than 15 years old, 21% respondents are 16-20 years old, only

4% respondents are 21-25 years old, 30% respondents are 26-30 years old and 31% of

respondents are more than 30 years old.

12% respondents are getting less than 20000 rupees, 37% respondents are getting 20001-

30000 rupees, 24% respondents are getting 30001-40000 rupees and only 27%respondents getting more than 40000 rupees as a monthly salary.

12% respondents are having 1 to 3 members in their family, 86% respondents are having

4 to 6 members and only 2% respondents are having more than 6 members in their

family.

38


39/53

48% respondents are students, 23% respondents are private employees, 7% respondents

are government employees and 22% respondents are business persons.

4% respondents are like carbonated drinks, 9% respondents like non carbonated drinks,

12% respondents like non alcoholic beer, 31% respondents like shanks and 16%

respondents prefers mineral water and 27% respondents prefers sparkling water and

flavored water.

4% respondents like Mirinda, 7% respondents like Pepsi and Tropicana drinks, 14%

respondents like Sprite, 12% respondents like 7 UP and 15% respondents like Fanta. 16%

respondents like Coke, 13% respondents like Thumps up and only 13% respondents like

local products.

6% respondents like coke as alternative drink, 12% respondents like Pepsi as a alternative

drink, 11% respondents like Tropicana as a alternative, 13% respondents like Sprite, 16%

respondents like 7UP, 13% respondents like Fanta and 11% respondents like Mirinda as a

alternative drink. 10% respondents like thumps up and only 8% respondents like local

products as a alternative soft drink.

13% respondents like regular drinks, 38% respondents prefers diet drinks, 29%

respondents prefers sugar free drinks and 20% respondents like fresh fruit drinks.

15% respondents purchasing soft drinks from fast food restaurants, 42% respondents

purchasing soft drinks from super markets and hyper markets, 25% respondents mini

markets and 18% respondents purchases from local retail shops.

13% respondents suggest to increase the product discounts, 10% respondents suggest to

on concrete on broaden the target, 12% respondents suggest to change package design,

11% respondents suggest to change the flavors, 15% respondents suggest to change thecolor and taste of the drink, 12% respondents suggest to change the name and increasing

the new distribution channels, 15% respondents suggest to increase the potential outlets.

39


40/53

6. SUGGESTION

The survey explicitly several that the company should provide some more schemes and

incentives mainly in seasons to retailers if they achieve target.

The company should be improving poor claim statement.

Pouches, foreign particles were found in few bottles so proper quality control measures

should be implemented as companies reputations are at stake.

Company should try to make monopolists fat dealers it necessary because them they will

be forced to sale the Pepsi product even if the company isnt providing any further

discount scheme.

Today in the situation of day-by-day competitions. Pepsi should because widely awake

and alert to maintain its present market share and should devise fresh situation and

program to enhance its sales.

That time many companies are entering the soft drink segment so company should are

more attraction on display schemes no of holding should be increased and more change

should be provide as Pepsi ahead of Pepsi in providing these above in Chennai.

School students, collages, canteens, cinema hall should be targeted.

Taste of Tropicana should be improved.

In promotions of sales of Tropicana the company should provides different schemes with

the Tropicana like(collection of crown and get attractive prize or t-shirts or cap.etc)

Advertisement must be improved and should show more appeal and targeted to youth and

children.

A Company creates favorable impression among the youth if they sponsors small events

like collages festivals, university programs & school functions.

40


41/53

The company should also organize some fashion shows; quiz programs etc promote their

sales.

The company should ensure the timely product supply to the distributor and the retailers

it was seen that staff in general & flavor in particular remains in short during the seasons.

Better schemes & benefit should be providing to retailers because it is retailers only who

promote the product of company.

To argument the sale of Tropicanas the company must provide some attractive free gifts

& schemes.

Quality of pet bottle should be improved so that most problems can be minimized.

Soft drink is still considered a treat virtually a luxury so it possible company should cut

down its price especially of cans.

41


42/53

7. CONCLUSION

Service aspect of agencies is very effective, they deliver their product according to the demand a

just in time. After conducting the field market survey of retailer in Chennai city, I analyze that

other soft drinks like coca cola brands are dominating over Pepsi.

The analysis several that minimum discount or schemes are available on coke compare to Pepsi.

Consumers do have a demand for 200ml, 300ml bottle and 2 liter. Retailers have problem in

advertisement material. Retailers have complaint regarding the plastic bottle that better quality

pet bottle should be used. Consumers are satisfied with the quality of coca-cola products.

The market share of Tropicana has good market in Chennai. Pepsi found to have good market

coverage in Chennai.

Retailers have a demand of some extra quantity and free gifts. Most of the consumers considered

RGB bottles as the best package. Tropicana product is highly demanded by consumers. Only

25% of the consumers retain with the brand. Of course Pepsi advertisement is more preferable by

consumers. Advertisement is not a very major factor in consumption of the soft drinks. Chilled

bottles influence the consumer to change the preference, so its a major factor. Taste and

availability of stock is the major factor.

42


43/53

8. APPENDIX

Retailer questionnaire

1. What is your first impression about Tropicana taste?

a. Unique taste

b. Refreshing taste

c. Perfect taste

d. New taste

2. What type of business are you in?

a. Eateries (Fast food restaurants)

b. Modern Trade (supermarkets, hypermarkets)

c. Traditional Trade (Mini markets)

d. Wholesales

3. What type of soft drinks do you sell?

a. Coke

43


44/53

b. Pepsi

c. Tropicana

d. Stream

e. Sprite

f. 7 UP

g. Fanta

h. Mirinda

i. Other, Please specify

4. Do you have cold space (coolers) available in your store?

a. Yes

b. No

5. If yes, are these soft drink coolers provided by the company?

a. Yes

b. No

6. If yes, which companies are providing coolers?

a. Pepsi

b. Coke

c. Others, Please specify

7. The majority of buyers are from which gender?

a. Males

44


45/53

b. Females

8. The majority of buyers are from which age group?

a. Younger than 15

b. 16-20

c. 20-25

d. 26-30

e. More than 30

9. When do you usually get your stocks?

a. Every day

b. Every weeks

c. Every month

d. Twice in a week

10. What is the most selling brand from the bellow?

a. Coke

b. Pepsi

c. Tropicana

d. Stream

e. Sprite

f. 7 UP

g. Fanta

45


46/53

h. Mirinda


11. In length period of a month how many times do you get Out Of Stock issue?

a. Once

b. Twice

c. Three times

d. More

12. Do you ever get complains about the prices of a soft drink?

a. Yes

b. No

13. Many customers have shifted from PepsiCo products to other B-brands after the new

pricing strategy.

a. Strongly agree

b. Agree

c. Neither agree nor disagree

d. Disagree

e. Strongly disagree

14. Many customers have shifted from PepsiCo products to other B-brands after the new

advertisement strategy.

a. Strongly agree

b. Agree

46


47/53


d. Disagree


15. Many customers have shifted from PepsiCo products to other B-brands due to changes in

nutritional values.

a. Strongly agree

b. Agree


d. Disagree


16. Many customers have shifted from PepsiCo products to other B-brands due to availability

a. Strongly agree

b. Agree


d. Disagree


17. Many customers have shifted from PepsiCo products to other B-brands due to package

preference

a. Strongly agree

b. Agree


d. Disagree

47


48/53


18. Many customers have shifted from PepsiCo products to other B-brands due to taste and

flavors

a. Strongly agree

b. Agree


d. Disagree


19. Many customers have shifted from PepsiCo products to other B-brands due to quality of

the drinks

a. Strongly agree

b. Agree


d. Disagree


Consumer questionnaire

1. What is your gender?

a. Female

b. Male

2. In what age group are you?

a. Younger than 15

48


49/53

b. 16-20

c. 20-25

d. 26-30

e. More than 30

3. What is your current salary:

a. Below 20000 Rs

b. Between 20000-30000

c. Between 30001-40000

d. 40000 and above

4. How many members are in your family?

a. 1-3

b. 4-6

c. 7-9

d. 10 and above

5. What is your occupation?

a. Student

b. Businessman

c. Employed by a local company

d. Employed by a multinational company

6. Which type is your favorite drink?

49


50/53

a. Carbonated Soft Drinks

b. Non-carbonated Soft Drinks

c. Non-alcoholic beer

d. Shakes

e. Mineral waters

f. Sparkling water or Flavored water

7. If you choose carbonated soft drinks, which brand is your favorite?

a. Coke

b. Pepsi

c. Tropicana

d. Stream

e. Sprite

f. 7 UP

g. Fanta

h. Mirinda


8. What is the alternate brand if your favorite drink is not available?

a. Coke

b. Pepsi

c. Tropicana

d. Stream

50


51/53

e. Sprite

f. 7 UP

g. Fanta

h. Mirinda


9. Which kind do you prefer?

a. Regular drink

b. Diet Drink

c. Sugar Free drink

d. Fresh fruit drinks

10. Where do you usually purchase your drink from?

a. Eateries (Fast food restaurants)

b. Modern Trade (supermarkets, hypermarkets)

c. Traditional Trade (Mini markets)

d. Wholesales

11. What other improvements do you suggest for the brand?

a. Incentives (discounts)

b. Broaden the target market

c. Change the design of bottle

d. Change the formula, flavor

51


52/53

e. Change the color

f. Change the name

g. Add a New distribution lines

h. Potential outlets (Hotels ,colleges, schools)

9. BIBLIOGRAPHY

American Beverage Association (2005). Soft Drink Facts. Retrieved February 21, 2006

from http://www.ameribev.org/variety/facts.asp

Cadbury Schweppes. (2004). 2004 Annual Report. Retrieved February 17, 2006 from

http://www.cadburyschweppes.com

Datamonitor. (2005, May). Global Soft Drinks: Industry Profile. New York. Reference

Code: 0199-0802.

Hein, Kenneth. (2004). Brand Loyalty 2004. Retrieved February 12, 2006 from

http://www.brandkeys.com/news/press/102504Brandweek.Loyalty.pdf

Murray, Barbara. (2006a). The Coca-Cola Company. Hoovers. Retrieved February 13,

2006, from http://premium.hoovers.com/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=10359

Murray, Barbara. (2006b). Pepsi Co. Hoovers. Retrieved February 13, 2006, from

http://premium.hoovers.com/subscribe/co/profile.xhtml?ID=11166

Murray, Barbara. (2006c). Carbonated Beverages. Hoovers. Retrieved February 13, 2006,

from http://premium.hoovers.com/subscribe/ind/overview.xhtml?HICID=1049

Murray, Barbara. (2006d). Cadbury Schweppes Inc. Hoovers. Retrieved February 13,

2006, from http://premium.hoovers.com/subscribe/co/profile.x html?ID=41767

52


53/53

Murray, Barbara. (2006e). Comparison Data. Hoovers. Retrieved February 13, 2006,

from http://premium.hoovers.com/subscribe/co/fin/comparison.xhtml?ID=10359

PepsiCo Inc. (2004). 2004 Annual Report. Retrieved February 17, 2006 from

http://www.pepsico.com

Sicher, J. D. (2005). Beverage Digest/Maxwell ranks U.S. soft drink industry for 2004.

Retrieved February 10, 2006 from http://www.beverage-digest.com/pdf/top-10_2005.pdf

25

The Coca-Cola Company. (2004). 2004 Annual Report. Retrieved February 17, 2006

from http://www.cocacola.com

Walker, Tim. (2006). Cott Corporation. Hoovers. Retrieved February 13, 2006, from

http://premium.hoovers.com/subscribe/co/profile.xhtml?ID=42846.

Documents

market analysis on pepsi