Case Analysis : New Coke

The traditional change model consists of three steps: unfreezing, i.e. recognizing the need for change because of some event or threat, the actual change actions and refreezing, i.e. incorporating new ways of operating and thinking into everyday operations of the organization. Apply this model to the situation at the coca-cola company at the point when the lawsuit was served in 1999.

However, Pepsi began to slowly catch up to their status and in the early 1980s, Coke had only a one percent lead over Pepsi in exclusive drinkers. Coke was very concerned with this because there product was more readily available than Pepsi’s and they spent more than $100 million more annually on advertising and they really didn’t want Pepsi to usurp their rank as the leading cola. However, Pepsi had been running commercials on television where they put Coca Cola and Pepsi head-to-head in a blind taste test that came to be known as the Pepsi Challenge. In this challenge, Pepsi had faithful coke drinkers take a sip from two different glasses and pick which sample they preferred. One of the cups was marked with a “Q” and the other was marked with an “M.” They consistently chose the cup marked “M,” which would be the cup holding Pepsi. When Coca Cola heard of this challenge, they immediately wanted to prove it to be false, so they conducted blind taste tests themselves. However, when their tests were performed, they got the same results as Pepsi, and the majority of the testers, 57%, preferred Pepsi over Coke. These results really concerned Coca Cola, and they began to do a plethora of other market research projects. They couldn’t figure out exactly what it was that made testers prefer Pepsi, but eventually decided that it must be the taste. From this came the creation of what came to be known as “New Coke.” Coca Cola had their scientists experiment with the secret

Marketing strategies began to take broader dimensions as the soft drink industry continued to expand and became more complex. In 1976, Pepsi introduced the Pepsi Challenge in its campaigns, a moved that directly challenged Coca-Cola’s longstanding dominance. In 1985, responding to the pressure of the taste tests, which Pepsi always won, Coca-Cola decided to change its formula. This move set off a shock wave across America. Consumers angrily demanded that the old formula be returned, and Coca-Cola responded three months later with Classic Coke. Five years after the infamous Coke fiasco, the Coca-Cola

Rivalry: The rivalry between Coca-Cola and Pepsi is extremely high; however, both companies continue to remain profitable. Prior to the 1980s, pricing wars negatively affected profitability for Coca-Cola and Pepsi. After Coca-Cola renegotiated its franchise bottling contract and both companies increased concentrate prices, the rivalry began to focus on differentiation and advertising strategies. Through creative advertising campaigns, such as the “Pepsi Challenge” where Pepsi ran blind taste tests to demonstrate that consumers

Coca-Cola, as the leading brand in the world, has the highest position in soft drink industry. Its outstanding product “Coke” has been won the heart of everyone. However, in this case, we realize that they had a failed attempt at introducing the new product called New Coke in 1985.

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

In the Pepsi Challenge in the 1980’s, customers took a blind sip test of Coca-Cola and Pepsi and most people ended up favoring Pepsi. Coca-Cola became worried and started to alter their drink to make it sweeter however after the change people disliked the new Coca-Cola so they changed it back. Though after the challenge people thought

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

The revolution lead to a revolt as well as the rebirth of the old classic coke. Two new campaigns were introduced after the consumer crisis in 1985: the most popular Red White and You, pathetic appeal for Coca-Cola classic and the Catch the Wave for the new taste of coke (“The Real Story of New Coke”). During the summer, Coca- Cola announced the taste variance; frantic consumers purchased coke in bulk hoarding the remains in their homes while others formed protest bands with claims to having brought back the original formula. Coke’s prior history is significant because they used their short fall as a comeback. For instance if you fail a test but then study harder for the next one and receive a passing grade, you have redeemed yourself. Same with failing in an area of life there is still a chance reclaim the past downfall to enrich the future.

The Coca Cola company is perceived to be the most famous trademark on the globe, and it is equally so. The company claims more than 400 brands that appeal to a wide range of individuals throughout the world. They are in a position to fulfill needs of every one of their buyers making their experience with their beverages a better one. The entity’s drinks entice a lot of people across all races, age, and gender. Coca Cola is outstanding for its overall popularity as its items are sold in over four hundred countries in the world, while major contenders like Pepsi are just available in very few countries. Such a competitive advantage has placed

One of the world's most well-known brands is that of Coca Cola. It is one of America's most popular brand exports, and has seen major international success by opening up bottling and distribution plants abroad in several countries. One of these previously successful bottling plants was located in Colombia, yet events shocked both the nation and the world that would eventually tie Coca Cola into a major human rights violations scandal.

In an industry dominated by two heavyweight contenders, Coke and Pepsi, in fact, between 1996 and 2004 per capita consumption of carbonated soft drinks (CSD) remained between 52 to 54 gallons per year. Consumption grew by an average of 3% per year over the next three decades. Fueling this growth were the increasing availability of CSD, the introduction of diet and flavored varieties, and brand extensions. There is couple of reasons why the industry is so profitable such as market share, availability and diversity and brand name and world class marketing.

These two-company’s economic characteristic include their market size and growth rate from the early 2000’s to 2010. Coke and Pepsi have struggled for years in the carbonated and non-alcoholic sector. According to Barbara Murray (2006c) "But as the pop fight has topped out, the industry 's giants have begun relying on new product flavors and looking to noncarbonated beverages for growth.” (Murry, 2006). For instance, Coke boasts in the advertisement as the king of the soft drink; as a consumer of both products, I agree. About 15 years ago, I was selected to participate in a critiquing of Coke and Pepsi products. Additionally, my travel to Africa in 2007 and 2010 provided the same raving review for the Coke Cola products. Apparently, Coke and Pepsi have been rivals for ages locally, regionally, nationally, multinational, and globally, therefore, one expects them to have an on-going rivalry when marketing the high-energy beverages.

“Coca-Cola was founded in 1886 at a soda fountain in downtown Atlanta, Georgia” (Coca-Cola Facts para 1). Coca-Cola is better than Pepsi due to its’ longer experience “being in business for about 125 years, the big name beverage brand inspired many consumers and viewers; sparking social interaction and encouraging innovation” (Coca-Cola Facts para 1). “Coca-Cola had bottlers to create a distinctive bottle for the beverage, and it was so noticeable that it could be recognized in the dark, and this effectively set the beverage brand apart from competition, and because of the Coca-Cola’s bottle features — it was acknowledged by many artists from all around the

Coca-Cola has been around for generations with the same iconic taste, logo and symbolism. Its brand has represented family and the memories of good times, celebrations and comfort of being with those we love. Unfortunately, the company has not made good marketing decisions in the recent past and has lost relevancy. The purpose of this essay is to assess the conditions that created Coca-Colas marketing problems, evaluate the future of healthy beverages and non-carb drink brand extensions, and provide recommendations to the management.