Dr Pepper Snapple And Minute Companies: A Case Study

Essentially, the soft-drink industry is largest beverage industry. It gross millions a year, and has different distribution channels. For example, these soft-drinks are sold in supermarket, Vending Machines, Gas stations, etc. The cost is incomparable to the amount of consumer we currently have in America. If Americans consumer on average 50 gallons in a year. The cost of 2.00 is not missed by the average person. With that said, there is a least likely chance that a person would attempt to duplicate the process at home. The soda making process is too time consuming, and inconvenient when a person can simply can go to the store to purchase. Consumers can either be very loyal to the brand or fickle. Influx in prices can make consumers switch very quickly. However, there are typically incentives associated with loyalty. There are giveaways and contest that entices the customers to keep purchasing. For example, Snapple does this with a real fact on every lid. I personally know people that will buy the product just to read the facts.

The existing concentrate business is largely controlled by Coca-Cola Company (Coca-Cola) and PepsiCo (Pepsi), together claiming a combined 72% of the U.S. carbonated soft drink (CSD) market sales volume in 2009. Refer to Exhibit 1 for an illustration of the CSD industry value chain. For more than a century, Coca-Cola and Pepsi have maintained growth and large market shares through mastering five competitive forces, shown in Exhibit 2, that drive profitability and shape the industry structure.

Power of buyers: The soft drink industry sold to consumers through five principal channels: food stores,

Also soft drink companies diversify business by offering substitutes themselves to shield themselves from competition. Rivalry:

One of the external factors that have an effect on Coca-Cola is the newer technology. People know that Coca-Cola first provide their product in a form of a fountain drink. It has a fixed ingredient ready for people to get some ice and get Coke from their fountain. But with the advances in the technology today, Coke has invented a new Freestyle soda machine that allows people to create a custom beverage for themselves. Their new machine benefits Coca-Cola because it can shake up the market. It gets people to become curious and want to try it out the new machine. This is an opportunity that could boost the sales for coke and their other fountain drink products.

big market share, such as Pepsi Cola, Mt.Dew, and so on. I like to drink Coke

_1. HOW WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THE ENERGY BEVERAGE CATEGORY, COMPETITORS, CHANNELS, AND DPSG'S CATEGORY PARTICIPATION IN LATE 2007?_

How would you characterize Snapple’s brand image and sources of brand equity? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the brand’s existing personality and image?

The economics of the concentrate business and bottling is different from each other in terms of number and size of rivals and cost structure etc. Concentrate business has few buyers and through its value chain compare to bottling business has many buyer and mid-way player in the soft drink industry. The concentrate manufacturing process involved a little capital investment in machinery, overhead, or labour to reduce the risks whereas bottlers involving high capital investment. Franchise agreements with soft drink industry allowed bottlers to handle the non-cola brand of other concentrate producers. It also allowed bottlers to choose whether to market new beverages introduced by a concentrate producer. Concentrate producers product cost structure is mostly based on variable costs such as advertising, promotion, market research, and bottler support however, bottler products cost constitution is mostly based on fixed costs and have higher cost leverage. Concentrate producers also took charge of negotiating customer development agreements with nationwide retailers such as Wal-Mart. Concentrate producers collaborated to make more profitable control with bottlers, for example, raw material negotiation with suppliers and sales price

Dr Pepper could always do nothing at this time. During the stand down they could evaluate mergers, joint ventures, or buyouts as they market strengthens.

The success the Snapple Beverage Company had achieved by the early 1990s drew the attention of the Quaker Oats Company which bought it in 1994 for $1.7 billion, and planned on maximizing the professedly unequivocal synergies between the “funky” iced tea brand and their established Gatorade brand. Despite Quaker’s efforts and ambition, which some might classify as hubris, the company’s decision to acquire Snapple is often regarded as a clamorous example of a merger and acquisition disaster. This paper analyzes Quaker’s failures using the 4 P’s framework, and proposes an action plan for Triarc’s turn-around of the Snapple brand, tailoring it to a modern market setting.

In year 1965, PepsiCo Inc. is founded by Donald M. Kendall and Herman Lay. PepsiCo Inc. was merged by Pepsi-Cola and Frito-Lay in 1965. PepsiCo is an American multination industry that selling food and beverage. PepsiCo Inc. is the second-largest organisation that produces food and beverage in the world.

The last two topics within Porter’s Five Force Analysis are the threats of substitutes and new entries. The threat of substitutes for PepsiCo and Pepsi products could be considered quite high. In recent years, Americans have been cutting back soda consumption, approximately 1.2% in 2015, and 0.9% in 2014 (Taylor, 2016). Customers have been replacing soft drinks, in particular, with water, coffees, and all natural juices. This also leads the way for the threat of new entries. As people are tending to lean away from traditional soft drinks, the threat of new entrants could be considered moderate. This is because the cost of entry is relatively low as it is not a technology driven industry. Most of the cost of entry would be related to branding and marketing of the new product (Thompson, 1996). In recent years many competitors have entered the market with desirable ingredients and non-soft-drink beverages.

In addition, if PepsiCo were to lose Wal-Mart it would mean losing 13 percent of its revenue and competitive advantage. Another weakness is that PepsiCo products are perceived as low quality; this is because they price their goods at a much lower rate than their competitors. There are other reasons other than lower pricing that may lead to the belief that their products are low quality; some of those reasons have to do with their questionable practices. PepsiCo has been criticized for using water that has a higher than allowed amount of pesticides in it and has been accused of selling tap water. (www.cbsnews.com) PepsiCo tends to have a competitive disadvantage because of other competitors in their market being more successful. An example of this is The Coca Cola Company, which has the largest market share of beverages in the world. PepsiCo’s net profit margin is 9.7% compared to Coca Cola’s 18.55% and Nestlé’s 11%. (www.sec.gov)

The global beverages industry is currently a low-growth market, with an expected compound annual growth rate of 5.7% between 2017 and 2025 (Grand View Research 2017). Additionally, the industry is quite saturated with firms that offer increasingly differentiated products. However, due to this low growth rate, companies have been engaging in price competition to gain competitive advantage and increase their market share. Nevertheless, Coca Cola is a dominant force in this market, controlling 40% of the industry, and is therefore at a low risk of losing its position.