1
1. Why is the soft drink industry so profitable?
An industry analysis through Porter’s Five Forces reveals that market forces are favorable for profitability.
Defining the industry: Both concentrate producers (CP) and bottlers are profitable. These two parts of the industry are extremely interdependent, sharing costs in procurement, production, marketing and distribution.
Many of their functions overlap; for instance, CPs do some bottling, and bottlers conduct many promotional activities. The industry is already vertically integrated to some extent. They also deal with similar suppliers and buyers. Entry into the industry would involve developing operations in either or both disciplines.
Beverage substitutes would threaten both
…show more content…
Power of buyers: The soft drink industry sold to consumers through five principal channels: food stores, convenience and gas, fountain, vending, and mass merchandisers (primary part of “Other” in “Cola Wars…” case). Supermarkets, the principal customer for soft drink makers, were a highly fragmented industry. The stores counted on soft drinks to generate consumer traffic, so they needed Coke and Pepsi products. But due to their tremendous degree of fragmentation (the biggest chain made up 6% of food retail sales, and the largest chains controlled up to 25% of a region), these stores did not have much bargaining power. Their only power was control over premium shelf space, which could be allocated to Coke or Pepsi products. This power did give them some control over soft drink profitability. Furthermore, consumers expected to pay less through this channel, so prices were lower, resulting in somewhat lower profitability.
National mass merchandising chains such as Wal-Mart, on the other hand, had much more bargaining power. While these stores did carry both Coke and Pepsi products, they could negotiate more effectively due to their scale and the magnitude of their contracts. For this reason, the mass merchandiser channel was relatively less profitable for soft drink makers.
The least profitable channel for soft drinks,
industry covers services and platforms with a vast variety of focal markets. The portion of the
4) Product Differentiation: in order to communicate differentiation of their products to consumers, Big Three spent massively on advertising (advertising/sales ratio: 18.5%). In this regard, also brand extensions have to be considered, because in this way they’re reaching different markets (e.g., healthy-food lovers, with the introduction of fruit in cereals). In order to further differentiate from new entrants, the incumbents used to provide customers “In-Pack Premia” (only one at a time, in order not to be negatively affected one by the other).
Customers have bargain power in the market since soft drink is an elastic product which is not necessary for daily life.
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.
As the above table indicates concentrate business is highly profitable compared to the bottling business. The reasons for this are:
jointly with bottlers, they usually took the lead in developing those programs, particularly when it
Therefore this industry is a pretty good one to already be in, but would be very tough to try and break into. Since established firms do not have to worry about threat of entrants or substitution, they can focus on making their core business practices cost efficient and profitable. Although firms have to deal with high buyer and supplier power, every firm has to deal with these issues. Therefore this leaves only rivalry to compete on, which forces firms to stay sharp, observe the competition, and provide excellent service to the firm’s customers to generate profit.
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
As we all go about our day, we rush to place to place. Around us there are things for sale, people everywhere trying to make money. As we are rushing around, we all tend to get thirsty as we have a thousand things going on. In America we have dozens of choices when it comes to soft drinks, although the two most widely known are Coca-Cola and Pepsi. Many are often stuck between choosing Coke or Pepsi; even though they are slightly different in appearance, taste, and price it makes a world of difference to the customer.
Stability. The returns received by bottlers are less than returns received by concentrate producers due to the risk levels as well. The concentrate producers are responsible for brand promotion and invest heavily in trademark to stimulate sales. High returns are what they get as the result. However, bottlers have little risk in their operations as they are given the famous name well-known all over the world. This development provides them with stable returns, and low risk.
Coca-Cola’s confidence in its domination over the soft drink industry eroded, and its advertising slogans began to recognize industry competition: “No Wonder Coke Tastes the Best”. While Coke’s slogans have always centered on the product, Pepsi’s advertisement emphasized the users of the product. Rather than targeting every market, Pepsi focused on the demographic environment. Pepsi foresaw the mass appeal of the youth generation for soft drinks and in 1961 divulged the successful slogan “Now, It’s Pepsi, for Those Who Think Young”. The campaign was such a success that Pepsi’s sales growth outperformed that of Coca-Cola.
The three major participants in US market: concentrate producers, bottlers, and retail outlets. In the U.S. market, there are about 500 bottlers, and Concentrate producers are either owned or
After reviewing the problem it is clear that our organization cannot sit back idly and hope for the best. Soda companies have continued to struggle with the political interference in the market. In the past few years, nations all over the world have passed taxes on soda beverages. France passed a tax on soda and sales dropped by 3%. In Mexico, sales dropped by 2% after a similar tax was passed. And though the drops in sales are alarming, it is not event the biggest threat. Ultimately, the goal of the politicians is to drastically decrease the consumption of soda drinks. Their attempt to pass these taxes is a power play to make soda beverages viewed as similar to cigarette companies. It is imperative that we do everything in our power to stop these taxes from occurring.
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.
For more than a century, Coca Cola and PepsiCo have been the major competitors within the soft drink market. By employing various advertising tactics, strategies such as blind taste tests, and reward initiatives for the consumer, they have grown to become oligopolistic rivals. In the soft-drink business, “The Coca-Cola Company” and “PepsiCo, Incorporated” hold most of the market shares in virtually every region of the world. They have brands that the consumers want, whether it be soft-drink brands or in PepsioCo’s case, snacks. With only one soft-drink market, the two competitors have no choice but to increase sales by stealing the other competitor’s clients. This led to the term, the “cola wars” which was first used