Swot Analysis Of Soft Drink Industry

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 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.

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

Boston Beer Company Mission statement is to “seek long-term profitable growth by offering the highest quality product to the U.S. beer drinker”

The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the potential profitability and market share of the Coors brand upon its implementation into the state of Delaware. By using the data collected by Manson and Associates, our team was able to identify an optimal selling price, total fixed costs, estimated variable costs, the breakeven point in units and dollars, breakeven market share, as well as an overall profitability analysis for 6-pack sales as well as keg sales.

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

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

Soft drink industry is very profitable, more so for the concentrate producers than the bottler’s. This is surprising considering the fact that product sold is a commodity which can even be produced easily. There are several reasons for this, using the five forces analysis we can clearly demonstrate how each force contributes the profitability of the industry.

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.

Another important weakness is that the company’s products are seen as a major cause of obesity. (Melser, 2013) The beverage sales are affected by various factors including change in trends and preferences. Recently, beverage sales have fallen because of people’s increased preference for the health drinks. Around the world, obesity is a major problem and the Coca Cola products are seen as a major cause of obesity. As people are getting health conscious they are moving towards low calorie healthy drinks. This affects coca cola’s profitability and popularity. However, the brand can overcome this situation by increasing the number of low calorie products in its brand portfolio. It will need to add more healthy choices for its customers in its product portfolio.

This paper focuses on global business strategy of The Coca-Cola Company, who is the leader in the beverage industry as well as, the world?s leading soft drink maker that operates in more than 200 countries and owns or licenses 400 brands of nonalcoholic beverages. The paper will concentrate on the PESTEL analysis of the organization focusing on the external factors of the business and the environment where it operates. All of the following environments will be discusses in the research; Political, Economic, Sociological, Technological, Legal, and Environmental as they the changes in the market segment. Within this paper it will discuss some of thr

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.

Coca-Cola is the number one non-alcoholic beverage in the world and is also the golden standard in the beverage industry. Over the pass decade carbonated beverage sales has decrease which has lead Coca-Cola to seek for new opportunity and investor. Contribution of US soda sales in Coca-Cola’s revenue could decline to less than 15% by 2020. By the end of 2017 Coca-Cola is looking to refranchise two-thirds of its bottling territories in North America. The outcome of Coca-Cola refranchise two-third of its bottling territories will reduce the revenue to Coca-Cola sales of its products, however the operating margin will increase. Also, this could reduce the percentage contribution by the U.S to Coca-Cola overall revenue.

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.

PepsiCo has the potential to encourage consumers into drinking water and eating healthier snacks that they promote. Bottled water is rising and it is a healthy substitute to sugared drinks. Restaurants, clubs and venues are using their beverage to make special drinks. This is where alcohol industries gains more profit to their company. However, with the ability to adjust customer’s demands with new and appealing products it can dominate to success.