Essay on Soft Drink Industry Porter's Five Forces Analysis:

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 soft drink industry is one of the most highly profitable industries in the USA. Also, the competitive market is a very large market. Americans consumed about 53 gallons of soft drinks per person a year in 2000 by $ 60.3 billion!! Comparing with the market in 1990, since it was 47 gallons. In recent years, the market growth has slowed.

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.

Customers have bargain power in the market since soft drink is an elastic product which is not necessary for daily life.

and Pepsi Co dominate the industry with their strong brand name and great distribution channels. In addition, the soft-drink industry is fully saturated and growth is small. This makes it very difficult for new, unknown entrants to start competing against the existing firms. Another barrier to entry is the high fixed costs for warehouses, trucks, and labor, and economies of scale. New entrants cannot compete in price without economies of scale. These high capital requirements and market saturation make it extremely difficult for companies to enter the soft drink industry; therefore new entrants are not a strong competitive force.

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

Defining the industry: Both concentrate producers (CP) and bottlers are profitable. These two parts of the

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.

As the above table indicates concentrate business is highly profitable compared to the bottling business. The reasons for this are:

The economics of the concentrate business and bottling is different from each other in terms of number and size of rivals and cost structure etc. Concentrate business has few buyers and through its value chain compare to bottling business has many buyer and mid-way player in the soft drink industry. The concentrate manufacturing process involved a little capital investment in machinery, overhead, or labour to reduce the risks whereas bottlers involving high capital investment. Franchise agreements with soft drink industry allowed bottlers to handle the non-cola brand of other concentrate producers. It also allowed bottlers to choose whether to market new beverages introduced by a concentrate producer. Concentrate producers product cost structure is mostly based on variable costs such as advertising, promotion, market research, and bottler support however, bottler products cost constitution is mostly based on fixed costs and have higher cost leverage. Concentrate producers also took charge of negotiating customer development agreements with nationwide retailers such as Wal-Mart. Concentrate producers collaborated to make more profitable control with bottlers, for example, raw material negotiation with suppliers and sales price

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.

The pricing technique of Coca-Cola has supported the firm to compete and grow in the soft drink effectively. The volume discount and pricing penetration are the vital aspects to provide the firm generates its sales in the market. For instance, Coca-Cola partners with large supply chains such as Costco, Sam’s Club, and Walmart to provide great discount pricing in order to generate its sales substantially in the U.S and the global market. Equally, the firm also distributes its

Moreover, Pepsi attempted to differentiate its products from Coke's by targeting a different category of consumers, as Pepsi focused on the teen's market segment. The competition goes beyond the domestic market. Coke and Pepsi have fought over international markets in order to increase sales and profitability as the US market becomes more mature, with a slowing growth rate.

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.

The non-alcoholic beverages industry requires significant levels of infrastructure and technology, as well as large capital investments, in order to successfully compete in the market. As a result, it is considered as an industry with high barriers to entry that are difficult to overcome for new entrants. Additionally, the dominant position of the industry’s key players - Coca Cola and Pepsi - lower the threat of entry on the market as new entrants do not have the resources or capabilities to compete with these