Corona Beer Case Study Essay

Started in the year 1925 by Guntar Prangel Mountain Man Brewing Company (MMBC) was a well-entrenched company in the East Central US by 1960. Consecutively the company grew as a legacy brewery, gathering a very strong brand loyalty and positioning. Known for the authenticity, quality and taste the company grew out to be a market leader in the currently matured business. However, off late the company has been witnessing a drop in sales for their core beer product the “Mountain Man Leger” in contrary to the growing beer sales in the US.

You are the investment banker assigned with the task of setting the IPO price for Boston Beer Company (BBC). Prepare a research report to support your recommendation. As you prepare this report, you may find that you would like to have more field information than what the case offers you. However, the case contains critical information that gives you a reasonable basis to compute its valuation. In addition use the following information for 1995.1 Sales ($ millions) Redhook Pete’s BBC 25.89 59.17 151.31 EPS .75 .25 .40 Book value/share 7.70 4.33 3.00 Price 27.00 24.75 ?

| Weaknesses * Many consumers consider the taste to “watered down”. * Challenge of expanding internationally due to the stigma of an American beer.

It had increased its market share to about 50% in each of its regional markets and remained highly profitable. Deltex was also one of the few Pepsi bottlers in Mexico whose share had risen since the 1960s.

b) Large national brands that maintained economies of scale in brewing, transportation and marketing put tremendous pressure on the smaller, regional brewers like Mountain Man.

Boston Beer’s strategy is primarily focused on growth through differentiation. The sources of its competitive advantage can be classified as a company that provides high quality beer with unique flavors, a market driven approach, and a very efficient contract brewing strategy.

Volume decreased for the first time in over twenty years in 1975 by four percent, during that same time Coors started to push out further in an attempt to become a national brand. 1985 marked a major year for the company as it set records in volume sold and revenues from the brewing division. Between 1975 and 1985 there were major changes in the company that eventually led to the company possibly opening its second brewing facility in history in Virginia. Through these years there were many new strategies implemented to foster this growth. In this paper I will diagnose key decisions, analyze potential solutions and show the actions needed to achieve the suggested changes.

iii. Import beer companies: These companies include Beck’s(Germany), Heineken (Holland) and Corona (Mexico). They control about 12% of the region’s market. However, these companies are seen to operate at disadvantage due to higher shipping costs, weaker distribution networks and an inability to control product freshness

Based on data found, there is a high amount of competition in the Mexican spirit market. In Mexico, Costco sells American-made whisky including: Jack Daniels and Johnnie Walker (Costco Mexico, n.d.). Walmart sells American-made bourbon including: Bulleit and Jim Beam (Walmart, n.d.). Furthermore, tequila is the leading alcoholic beverage consumed with Casa Pedro Domecq Mexico SA de CV leading the market in 2014 with 13% of total market sales. The distribution channel used is producer to retailer to consumer (Spirits in Mexico, n.d.). Without local connections and proper marketing, SOA will have a hard time building a customer following.

“Foreign trade, then, . . . [is] highly beneficial to a country, as it increases the amount and variety

In May of 2016, The European Commission signed off on Anheuser- Busch InBev’s more than $100 billion merger with SABMiller after the companies agreed to sell SABMiller’s premium brands in Europe and some other European operations (Bray). The merging of SABMiller and AB Inbev create the worlds largest beer company accounting for approximately 30% of beer industry sales (Bray). Margrethe Vestager, the commissioner in charge of European competition policy defended the decision to allow the merger to go through by stating “Today’s decision will ensure that competition is not weakened in these markets and that E.U. consumers are not worse off….Europeans buy around 125 billion euros of beer every year, so even a relatively small price increase could cause considerable harm to consumers” (Bray).

     In this paper I will be talking about the U.S. beer industry and in short an overview of the brewing industry worldwide. I will talk about the barriers to entry, economies of scale, government intervention, pricing, current market trends, product differentiation, and imports. The focus being mainly on the U.S. brewing industry oligopoly. The U.S. brewing industry has three major players: Anheuser-Busch, SAB Miller, and Coors/Molson. Anheuser-Busch is currently the largest brewer in the world, producing over 100 million barrels a year. Anheuser-Busch currently owns over 50% of the market in the United States, with Miller trailing behind at 20% and Coors at about 11% with the rest of the market occupied by imports and craft breweries. When analyzing any industry, how easy it is for newcomers to enter the market is a great importance. If there are high barriers to entry

Meanwhile, since Grolsch used other brewers for distribution while importing beer into foreign countries, the ongoing industry consolidation often led to a need for changing distributors. In several of their markets Grolsch was already on its third or fourth distributor in the span of 15 years. Besides the political, economic, and logistical issues Grolsch had to adapt to, they also were adapting to cultural differences. Their marketing campaigns would vary significantly from market-to-market. While their ability to be nimble, change strategies, and adapt where necessary has been a benefit, it has also been limiting in that Grolsch has struggled to build a consistent brand image and market position in several of its key markets. For example, even though the UK accounted for 25% of Grolsch’s volume, they still only held 1.5% of the UK market. Further, operations have been impacted by the consistent turnover of distributors in several important markets. Grolsch’s adaptation strategy has kept them nimble but has prevented any large scale and stability in certain countries outside the Netherlands.

Even though their shipping costs were twice the industry’s, average shipping costs would have been much more had they attempted to enter other states. Besides, Coors made up for the inefficiency with the scale of their plant, the largest in the nation. The location lent itself well to Coors’ ability to differentiate its product. For example Coors was brewed using “pure Rocky Mountain spring water.” Coors had a great opportunity to serve an underserved geographical market. Seven of 24 million barrels sold in the region had to be imported from production facilities outside of the region, and Coors’ Colorado facility was more central to the area than the three other closest facilities in Missouri, Texas, and Wisconsin. Coors had the second lowest production cost per barrel in the industry, in spite of their claim of the most expensive raw material costs. Their cost advantage stemmed from the industry’s highest capacity utilization, economies of scale through the country’s largest brewery, single product focus, and the industry’s fastest packaging lines. Matching their low production cost was the lowest advertising cost relative to the industry. The mystique that had been built up about Coors and their differentiating, all-natural appeal allowed them to get away with lower advertising costs than average for the industry. Coors differentiated their product, both in the

Grupo Damm’s current situation is the third largest beer company in Spain. It is a large player in a market dominated by two other beer