Over the last century, Coke and Pepsi have been waging war over the $74 billion carbonated soft drink industry in the United States. The degree of this competition has changed over the last decade as carbonated soft drink (CSD) consumption in America decreased to 46 gallons per year per person. To investigate these changes and evaluate the reasons why the industry has been so successful over the years, it is important to do an industry analysis looking at the different forces that affect both Coke and Pepsi as well as the changes in these forces and their effects on the industry competition. FORCE: Threat of Substitute Products Carbonated soft drinks have an abundance of substitute products that can be consumed by their customers. These include other drinks such as water, tea, beer, milk, coffee, juice, and sports drinks. With all these substitute drink options, most of which are much cheaper than CSDs, it would be seem as though the soft-drink industry would have a lot of heavy competition. Yet Americans continue to consume “more soda than any other beverage” (Harvard 2). This is due to a couple of reasons, one of which is the very strong brand name loyalty present in the soda industry. Consumers continue to come back to their favorite brands. Another reason is that Coke and Pepsi have both made a strong push into the marketing of their own alternative/substitute beverages which they use to protect themselves from competition. They each own one of the two largest bottled
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 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.
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.
Power of buyers: The soft drink industry sold to consumers through five principal channels: food stores,
Historically, the soft carbonated soft drink (CSD) industry has been valued at $74 billion in the United States. In order to understand the reasons why the industry has been hugely profitable despite the ‘Cola Wars’, an examination of the CSD industry with Porter’s five forces analysis will be conducted. As market leaders, the analysis will be centred on both Coke and Pepsi (hereafter “C&P”).
The case explains the economics of the soft drink industry. There activities that add value to consumer at nearly every stage of the value chain of the soft drink industry. The war is primarily fought between Coca-Cola and PepsiCo as market leaders in this industry; who combined have roughly a ninety percent market share in their industry. The impact of globalization on competition has allowed both of these major players to find new markets to tap which has allowed each continued growth potential.
PepsiCo. Incorporated and The Coca-Cola Company are the two largest and oldest archrivals in the carbonated soft drink (CSD) industry. Coca-Cola was invented and first marketed in 1886, followed by Pepsi Cola in 1898. Coca-Cola was named after the coca leaves and kola nuts John Pemberton used to make it, and Pepsi Cola after the beneficial effects its creator, Caleb Bradham, claimed it had on dyspepsia. The rivalry between the soda giants, also known as the "Cola Wars", began in the 1960’s when Coca-Cola's dominance was being increasingly challenged by Pepsi Cola. The competitive environment between the rivals was intense and well-publicized, forcing both companies to continuously establish and
The industry of Carbonated Soft Drinks (CSD) is highly concentrated. The three major companies, Coca Cola, PepsiCo, and Cadbury Schweppes accounted in 1998 for more than 90% of market share by case volume Exhibit 1-.
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.
The last two topics within Porter’s Five Force Analysis are the threats of substitutes and new entries. The threat of substitutes for PepsiCo and Pepsi products could be considered quite high. In recent years, Americans have been cutting back soda consumption, approximately 1.2% in 2015, and 0.9% in 2014 (Taylor, 2016). Customers have been replacing soft drinks, in particular, with water, coffees, and all natural juices. This also leads the way for the threat of new entries. As people are tending to lean away from traditional soft drinks, the threat of new entrants could be considered moderate. This is because the cost of entry is relatively low as it is not a technology driven industry. Most of the cost of entry would be related to branding and marketing of the new product (Thompson, 1996). In recent years many competitors have entered the market with desirable ingredients and non-soft-drink beverages.
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.
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
In carbonated soft drink market since 80s to till coca-cola and Pepsi are rival company and trying to dominating each other via advertising war through printing media, video advertising, campaigns, event and doing experiential marketing.
Coca-Cola spends huge amounts of fund on marketing every year to remain its competitiveness. However, recently, Coca-Cola had a weak global growth. The sales volume of soda is not so satisfactory. Coke is claimed to have too many calories and sugar, thus being bad to health, as a result of which, consumers turn their attention to other drinks (Kell n. pag.).
The global beverages industry is currently a low-growth market, with an expected compound annual growth rate of 5.7% between 2017 and 2025 (Grand View Research 2017). Additionally, the industry is quite saturated with firms that offer increasingly differentiated products. However, due to this low growth rate, companies have been engaging in price competition to gain competitive advantage and increase their market share. Nevertheless, Coca Cola is a dominant force in this market, controlling 40% of the industry, and is therefore at a low risk of losing its position.