Chapter 2 Strategy Analysis Essay

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.

Both potential and existing competitors influence average industry profitability. The threat of new entrants is usually based on the market entry barriers. They can take diverse forms and are used to prevent an influx of firms into an industry whenever profits, adjusted for the cost of capital, rise above zero. In contrast, entry barriers exist whenever it is difficult or not economically feasible for an outsider to replicate the incumbents’ position (Porter, 1980b; Sanderson, 1998) The most common forms of entry barriers, except intrinsic physical or legal obstacles, are as follows:

Entry Barriers: Both Coca-Cola and Pepsi have strong entry barriers for new competitors, especially in high-end markets like the US. Because of the two companies’ sizes, market maturity, and good market position, many barriers exist for new entrants.

The competition between Coke and Pepsi reached its peak to become a real war battle by the year 1980. This war had affected the industry profit for both concentrate producers and bottlers, while the effect of bottlers was much higher. After the successful “Pepsi Challenge” (blind taste tests: sales shot up) in 1974, Coke countered with rebates, retail price cuts and significant concentrate price increases. Pepsi followed of a 15% price increase of its own. During the early 1990’s bottlers of Coke and Pepsi employed low price strategies in the supermarket channel in order to compete with store brands. The concentrate producers were always able to increase their profits by increasing the concentrate price, while the bottlers, especially the

Businesses are not only faced with competition within the industry they operate in. They also face competition from businesses in other industries.

Factors that can limit the threat of new entrants are known as barriers to entry. In this case barriers to entry are low because: there is no government intervention to prevent businesses from entering the industry, resources are abundant, and customers’ switching costs are low as well as fixed costs to start this type of business.

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

Coca Cola and Pepsi are the brands with the highest brand equities. Both, Coca Cola and Pepsi have gone through the highs and lows of their business to reach that position. Coca Cola’s marketing has been changing over time with more and more products being added every day, while Pepsi has implemented several smart marketing strategies to improve its turnover and profits. So, let’s see what were the marketing strategies implemented by Coca Cola and Pepsi.

The threat of new entrants is measured by the level of entry barriers, brand reputation and customer loyalty, potential for existing competitors to expand, growth of buyer demand,

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.

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.

Existing Competitors. Rivalry among competitors within an industry use price discounting, new products, marketing, and other techniques to be competitive. Profitability of an industry suffers from high rivalry. The intensity with which companies compete and the basis on which they compete determine to which degree rivalry brings down an industry’s profitability (Porter, 2008). Pure competition is considered by economists as a competition with a high

The threat of new entrants refers to the threat posed by new competitors within an industry. If it is easy for new firms to enter the industry barriers to entry are low and the threat of new entrants is high. A profitable industry attracts more competitors. Economies of scale, learning curve effects and other macro factors impact the nature of an industry 's

The threat of new entrants: According to our text, the threat of new entrants is the possibility that the profits they make in an area may be eroded by new competition. The McDonald’s by me competes with Burger King, Wendy’s, Dairy Queen, and other smaller places like Zel’s. Each time a new place opens the less business they will have. For the other company, there will be a barrier to entry. They will have to use product differentiation to bring in the customers…to make them overcome their loyalty to McDonald’s (Dess, p. 53).

If an industry is profitable, it will become a magnet to attract more competitors looking to do same business with us. If it is easy for these new entrants to enter the market, this poses a threat to the firms already competing in that market. Threat of new entrants is one of the forces that shape the competitive structure of an industry (Marc, 2014). A high threat of entry means new competitors are attracted by the profits of the industry and can enter the industry easily. New competitors entering the marketplace can make the market share and profitability of existing competitors more threaten cause the existing competitor to make some changes to existing product quality or price levels. A high threat of new entrance can make an industry more competitive and decrease profit potential for existing competitors whereas a low high threat of new entrance can make an industry less competitive and increases profit potential for the existing