Case: Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc.: Energy Beverages

As the founders developed their brand, Snapple became part of the Alternative beverage industry, which consisted of sports drinks, bottled water, 100% juice, non-premium beverages and premium beverages. Snapple was the leading company in the premium category of the Alternative beverage industry. Therefore, they could price their most successful products at a premium.

The SWOT Analysis shows that Dr Pepper/Snapple Group is the 3rd largest soda/drink brand in the United States behind Pepsi and Coca-Cola. They have many opportunities to expand upon their brand. Acquiring other drink companies under their brand would be the most beneficial to reach a more diverse market. Doing so will cater to a larger variety of people that might not have bought one of their products otherwise. The threats are obvious. They have competitors such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi that have

The survey found that the most commonly consumed energy drink brands were; Rockstr Energy Drink, Monster Energy, Red Bull Energy Drink, Redline Extreme Energy, and Amp Energy Boost Original Sugar Free. These energy drinks all have similar ingredients with varying amounts of caffeine and “blend” combinations.

The soft drink industry in the United States is a highly profitably, but competitive market. In 2000, carbonated soft drink retail sales were estimated $60.3 billion, however, soft drink consumption growth has slowed in recent years. There are three major companies that hold the majority of sales in the carbonated soft drink industry in the U.S. They are the Coca Cola Company with 44.1% market share, The Pepsi-Cola Company with 31.4% market share, and Dr. Pepper/ Seven Up, Inc. with 14.7% market share. These three companies market the top ten brands account for 73% of soft drink sales in the U.S. Dr. Pepper/ Seven Up, Inc. owns two of the top ten brands: Dr.

The Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex is a great place for business. It is home to multiple companies and their corporate headquarters – and with an international airport, open trade routes, multiple universities and academic institutions – it proves to be the perfect location for businesses and professionals alike. One such company that is headquartered in Plano, TX, and is an example of a thriving organization in the area, is the Dr Pepper Snapple Group. A mostly domestic company, with most of its business located in North American and Mexico, the DPS Group is a manufacturer of nonalcoholic beverages in the beverage industry and is third in overall market share (after Coca-Cola and Pepsico). The beverage industry is steady and growing, but the nonalcoholic beverage portion of the industry is facing many challenges with carbonated soft drinks declining in sales due to a more health-conscious population. Analyzing the DPS Group and how they are dealing with these challenges was very interesting, as I have always been a Dr Pepper fan and would hate to see them go out of business or die out in the market. I have known people who have worked for the company and loved it, and I hope to work for them someday as well. I collected my research on the company through their website, articles and journals, and my own knowledge of the company and research into the company history through a visit to the Dr Pepper museum.

The design and packaging of many energy drinks also relates to the target market. For example, Energy Fizz, which is sold as a powder that is mixed with water to create the drink, is easy to store and carry, so it is convenient for people continually on the go. Although the energy drink industry currently caters to a very specific target market, as it continues to grow and develop, it is likely that marketing efforts and the focus consumer base will be more diverse and expansive.

However, there is a large market for it and reputable brands like DPSGs’ with their bottling and distribution network which covers 80% of the US energy beverage market could gain a small share of the market. As the above quote eluded to, manufacturers with an extensive product offering and distribution network can gain shelf space in the off-premise retail channels.

Back in 1050, the first energy drink was created the “Black Drink.” The brand Coca-Cola is considered to be one of the first energy drinks. Later in 1987, the brand Red Bull was launched. Ever since the launch of Red Bull, it has been the top seller being followed closely by Monster. But, in the whole world Monster is the top of that chart. Athletes and sports organizations have been sponsoring Red Bull causing their market to boom (Energy Facts Everything You Need to Know). Recently research has shown that some of Starbucks drinks can be considered energy drinks. Along with some coffees, green teas with lots of sugars can be called energy drinks too. Minors most commonly drink soda and tea rather than energy drinks (What You Should Know About Energy Drinks). Energy drinks have evolved from just the energy drink itself to some other drinks being considered energy

The soft drink industry in the United States is a highly profitably, but competitive market. In 2000 alone, consumers on average drank 53 gallons of soft drinks per person a year. There are three major companies that hold the majority of sales in the carbonated soft drink industry in the United States. They are the Coca Cola Company with 44.1% market share, followed by The Pepsi-Cola Company with 31.4% market share, and Dr. Pepper/Seven Up, Inc. with 14.7% market share. Each company respectively has numerous brands that it sales. These top brands account for almost 73% of soft drink sales in the United States. Dr. Pepper/Seven Up, Inc. owns two of the top ten

Red Bull energy drink competes in the Non-alcoholic drink market which could be the overall Food and Beverage market. ‘Red Bulls target market is young, on the go, who enjoy extreme sports and live an active nightlife, anywhere from 18-35’(Swartz,Jon).

There are (3) reasons why I have chosen energy drinks as my NAB. First off, there is a growing market for energy drinks. Red Bull and Monster Beverage Corporation, together, form over 80% of domestic energy drinks volumes by estimates. Dollar sales for energy drinks grew almost 6% to $6.67 Billion in measured channels in 2013, which propelled sales growth for convenience stores (Team, 2014). A growing thirst for caffeinated “energy” drinks, which include the likes of Red Bull, Monster, and Rock star, has spurred a heart-thumping surge in sales. Globally, the energy drink industry has gone from a $3.8-billion business in 1999, to a $27.5-billion

In late 2007 the energy beverage category was reaching market maturity and projected to have a slower annual growth rate from 2007 to 2011 (10.5%) than it had between 2001 and 2006 (42.5%). Rising prices, packaging competition, and the introduction of hybrid energy beverages also added to the slower projected growth rate. However in 2007 the market still saw growth of 32%.

Energy drinks have outperformed the growth in carbonates in the last few years, and present a substantial opportunity for beverage manufacturers to extract further growth from their sales. There are many driving forces of change and critical success factors in the energy drink industry. Companies such as Coke Cola and Pepsi contend with criticism from health officials due to the excessive caffeine in most high-energy drinks. However, before the 2000’s consumers were accustomed to carbonated soft drinks as the traditional beverage. The shift to an energy drink, sports drink, and vitamin enhanced waters increased sales while becoming an alternative beverage choice for a fast-paced mobile society. Therefore, this industry endures many

Given the track record of Dr Pepper-Snapple and looking at the SWOT analysis I feel that Dr Pepper should introduce an entire new product line. They can leverage their ability to manage a diverse brand business, the leverage they have in the RTD segment, and the strengths that the business as a whole has.

Other key marketing mix failures that affected Snapple in the Quaker era fall under the promotion and product umbrellas. Quaker did not follow regular advertising schedules, ceased Snapple’s partnership with Wendy Kaufman, and beside reducing the numbers of flavors available, was also unable to introduce new ones quickly enough. The started selling the product in larger sizes (32 and 64 ounces bottle), but this initiative was another flop: bottles of that size were suitable for Gatorade, not for a leisure beverage like Snapple, customers simply would not buy it. These choices elicited negative response in consumers who stopped perceiving Snapple as a funky and fashionable brand; the beverage’s healthy reputation was damaged too. It is rather clear that Quaker’s executives did not fully understand the Snapple brand and erroneously modified its marketing mix. This failure resulted in the rise of a deleterious discrepancy between the experiential value and benefits customers were used to and expected form Snapple, and the brand’s altered nature. In synthesis, Quaker tried to transplant a marketing mix and execution strategy to a recipient who was not suitable for it, and Snapple, its distributors, and its customers ultimately suffered from