The basic scope of this study is to understand and evolved the possible attractiveness of bottlers business and its profitability in CSD industry using Michael Porter five force analyses.
• Power of suppliers,
• Power of buyers,
• Threat of new entry
• Threat of substitutes, and
• Rivalry among competitors.
1) Power of suppliers:
Concentrate producers (CPs) negotiate directly with bottlers’ major suppliers – particularly sweetener and packaging suppliers – to encourage reliable supply, faster delivery, and lower prices Coca-Cola and Pepsi are among the metal can industry’s largest customers and Maintain relationships with more than one supplier, giving these suppliers less Bargaining power due to the availability of alternative suppliers
…show more content…
Franchiser of CSD has fixed Bottlers territory to intervene any major competition due to high level brand competition. Individual or consumer buying power is very small but big distribution or retailer has high buying power for accommodating their product on to their venue. 1980 Soft Drink Inter-brand Competition Act preserved the right of CPs to grant exclusive.
Territories to their bottlers, giving less bargaining power to Bottler’s buyers because there is no alternative supplier Distribution statistic for the year 2010 shown in the figure below gives an indication of supermarket, Vending machine and fountain outlets are being the leader in distribution list. Fountain machine outlets are managed by concentrate producer without bottlers’ power. Super markets like wall mart, Costco, etc. has huge buying power to sell and attract customers for CSD products. But, due to high level of competition among CSD and to compete against retail store brand, bottlers always fought for store shelves space, which came to them at a cost. Competition among CSD drinks, gave bottlers less bargaining power and making this Industry force a weaker force in less favor of
Since SABMiller operate in the beer industry they face monopolistic competition, which according to Parkin et al. (2013:305) is a barrier-free market structure where many firms present, compete against each other. Each firm creates a product that differs from one another, also known as product differentiation, and competes on product quality, marketing programme and price. Consumers are usually very aware of the firms’ pricing of their products and available substitutes – so if a firm were to increase their price on a similar product, the quantity demanded of that variety would decrease and consumers would refer to close substitutes. Therefore firms in monopolistic competition have to be very observant of their consumer’s wants and preferences, what prices they charge and what quality is put into the process of production.
The beverage industry is highly competitive and presents many alternative products to satisfy a need from within. The principal areas of competition are in pricing, packaging, product innovation, the development of new products and flavours as well as promotional and marketing strategies. Companies can be grouped into two categories: global operations such as PepsiCo, Coca-Cola Company, Monster Beverage Corp. and Red Bull and regional operations such as Ro...
In both cases companies under this contract are not allowed to handle a direct competitive brand e.g. no possibility to bottle Pepsi and Cola at the same time. In 2000 Cokes bottling system was the most concentrated with its top 10 bottlers producing 94% of domestic volume followed by Pepsi with 85% and Schweppes with 71% of their respective franchisees. Focusing on the upstream of the supply chain it is to be said that bottlers have to contribute to CSD companies cost on Marketing but on the other hand have the right to refuse to contribute in promotion acitivities i.e. test marketing requested. Bottlers also play an important role in negotiating cooperative merchandising agreements with retailers i.e. retailers agreeing to specified promitional activity and discount levels in exchange for a payment from the bottler i.e. bottlers have a final say in decisions concerning retail pricing, new packaging, selling ads etc. In 2000 the distribution of CSDs in the US took place through food stores (35%), fountain outlets (23%), vending machines (14%), convenience stores (9%) and other outlets (20%).
In the Grocery industry today there are 4 major companies that dominate the United States market share; Kroger, Safeway, Super value and Publix. With the competitive advantage of being the largest stores in the industry these retail giants should have competition at a minimum and should be thriving (Farfan, US Largest Retail Supermarkets - Complete List). The application of Porter’s Five Forces that influence an industry shows that these retailers do have many advantages but being vulnerable in even one of the areas can make a significant difference in market share and profitability.
Bottling Network: Both Coke and PepsiCo have franchisee agreements with their existing bottler’s who have rights in a certain geographic area in perpetuity. These agreements prohibit bottler’s from taking on new competing brands for similar products. Also with the recent consolidation among the bottler’s and the backward integration with both Coke and Pepsi buying significant percent of bottling companies, it is very difficult for a firm entering to find bottler’s willing to distribute their product.
Although produced by main market players, soft carbonated drinks cost more than similar products from local and private label manufacturers, consumers are willing to pay an extra price for the name, particular taste, and image. Fierce competition in the CSD industry forces Coca-Cola and PepsiCo to expand into new and emerging markets which present high potential for the company’s development. However, some foreign markets proved to be highly competitive. Coca-Cola Company’s operations in China faced antitrust regulations, advertising restrictions, and foreign exchange controls. iii.
The Porter’s model of competitive advantage of nations is based on four key elements including factor endowments, demand conditions, related and supporting industries and firm strategy, structure and rivalry. This makes it suitable in understanding the competition existing in the soft drinks industry in the Asian markets. The factor conditions identify the natural resources, climate, location, and demographics. Coca cola and Pepsi enjoy the growing population in the Asian markets (Yoffie, 2002). A higher population guarantees the two companies adequate revenues. Other factors include communication infrastructure and availability of skilled workers. Most of the Asian countries are embracing new technologies that grow much knowledge of the diverse beverage drinks. Secondly, the demand conditions play a significant role in enhancing competitiveness for the firms. Both Coca cola and Pepsi are an
Control of market share is the key issue in this case study. The situation is both Coke and Pepsi are trying to gain market share in this beverage market, which is valued at over $30 billion a year. Just how is this done in such a competitive market is the underlying issue. The facts are that each company is coming up with new products and ideas in order to increase their market share.
... objects and customer regions. Do making a clear differentiation image between its soft drinks and bottled water. Because the consumers may believe that bottled water of Nestle sounds healthier than Coca-Cola brand since Nestle tend to emphasize their image on healthy food products. Then do market test for new taste, new packaging, or new innovation according to each regions, and especially for Europe, the company should launch the new one to replace Dasani image in order to seize their market shares. They may renew all nutrients and packaging. Finally Coca-Cola should continue its joint ventures with the regional companies in order to protect their products from barriers to entry both international trade restrictions and distribution channels. Furthermore, joint venture with local brand is a long term contract guarantee to make it easier for HOD to a specific region.
The small packaging and express surrender industry is a complicated and competitive industry. Most of the firms in this industry has apply the Michael Porter’s Five Forces model to have an idea about potency of make profit with less risk of entry and a weak bargaining power of dealers. There has been a strong competition among these firms and intense bargaining power of receiver has had an unfavorable influence over the prices which have started to lower incomes for some firms.
Mainly, it is price-based competition. The switching costs and product differentiation remains low, which increases the competition. The article mentioned that “10 to 25 percent of consumers looking for a specific brand and an additional two-thirds considering only a few brands acceptable,” which means that the brand of bottled water is not that important as long as the price remains low. Therefore, efficient distribution systems are needed in order to survive in this industry. For example, a company has to “maximize the number of deliveries per driver since distribution included high fixed costs for warehouses, trucks, handheld inventory tracking devices, and labor.” If a company has efficient distribution system, then it will possibly lower the selling price and keep the
The soft drink industry is a highly profitable industry and its success is due to the large consumption of non-alcoholic beverages through which both concentrate producers and bottlers are profitable. Given the U.S. Industry consumption Statistics, Exhibit 1, it is clear that, after deducting beer and wine, soft drinks account for about 90 % of the total liquid consumption, while Coke and Pepsi account for about 75 % of the soft drink industry. The high consumption of CSDs is related to the soft drink industry selling to consumers through five principal channels: food stores, convenience stores, vending, fountain and other. Out of the five channels the case describes vending as the most profitable channel for the soft drink...
The CSD (carbonated soft drink) industry is one that is very competitive. A few firms dominate this industry, most notably Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola. This is due to substantial barriers to entry. Cadbury-Schweppes, producer of products such as 7up and Dr. Pepper is the third leading company in this industry. Due to the dominance of Coca Cola and Pepsi, Cadbury-Schweppes faces the daunting task of having to fight for market share and survive in this fiercely competitive industry. Using economic analysis for support, Cadbury-Schweppes will need to use its strengths in the non-cola categories to compete in this CSD industry.
This competitive advantage has been rendered sustainable as other players have found it difficult to catch up with the company's competitive strategy. In spite of this clear advantage, it was noted that the company faces some challenges being the world leader in soft drink distribution. The canning and bottling of the product which is done in many countries have now fallen into the hands of independent companies, thus it becomes hard for a given company to control the quality of the packaging
Development in the political arena would have been handled well if Coke would have evaded having to sell 49% of its equity by approving to start new bottling plants. The timing of entry into the Indian markets brought In terms of promotional activities, the advertising and giving away of free offers and vacations by Coca cola and Basmati rice by Pepsi, the coca cola’s goal in connecting the youth to the market, the different promotional TV campaigns in India using of celebrities, and the Pepsi sponsorship of cricket and soccer sports. In terms of pricing policies, Pepsi got a quicker market share by their belligerent pricing policies and coca cola’s 15-25% price cut down in the market. In terms of distribution arrangement, the bottling and packaging of products for better distribution around Also, to save and recycle the usage of water.