Premium Essay

Coke and Pepsi Wars

In:

Submitted By randomz
Words 282
Pages 2
Over the years Coke and Pepsi managed their rivalry in the carbonated soft drinks (CSD) industry by following some of the tactics identified below. Both companies came up on the market with the same product coca-cola, two different recipes. Coca-Cola was discovered in 1886 in Atlanta Georgia, by pharmacist John Pemberton, while Pepsi-Cola was formulated 7 years later, in New Bern, North Carolina, by pharmacist Caleb Bradham. Since then the two giants, Coke and Pepsi are on a continuous “battle without blood” over the $74 billion CDS industry in the United States.
One of the first tactics identified is that Coke first introduced its product in grocery stores and other channels through open-top coolers. Also, they developed automatic fountain dispensers and introduced vending machines. Pepsi had a rough start, but they were willing to achieve. In this way after bankruptcies in 1923 and again in 1932, they came back and the business started to pick up. Their first move was to price their 12-oz container to a nickel, same as Coke would charge for a 6.5-oz. After that Pepsi started focusing more on take-home sales to target family consumption. With an aggressive marketing campaign, called “Pepsi Generation” Pepsi targeted the young and “young at heart. Not only that, but Pepsi put a special accent on quality by working to modernize their plants and the store delivery.
In the 1960s, both Coke and Pepsi experimented with cola and non-cola flavors and new packaging options. Non-returnable glass bottles were introduced along with metal cans.
Another Pepsi’s strategy was to sell concentrate at 20% lower than Coke, promising to spend the extra income

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010

...3.4 Porter’s five forces 4 5 4 2 2 2 2 4 Competitive / corporate strategies of Coke and Pepsi 5 SWOT Analysis 6 Questions 6.1 How has the competition between Coke and Pepsi affected the industry’s profit? 6.2 If it has been such a profitable industry, why have so few firms successfully entered this business over the last century? What are the barriers? Why have Coke and been so successful in launching their products? 6.3 Why, historically, has the soft drink industry been so profitable? 6.4 Compare the economics of the concentrate business to that of the bottling business: Why is the profitability so different? 6.5 How can Coke and Pepsi sustain their profits in the wake of flattening demand and the growing popularity of non-CSDs? 7 9 11 Exam Case Study Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 1 Overview (Power Point Page (PPP) 2) For more than a century, Coke and Pepsi compete for market share within the world’s beverage market. The most intense battles were fought over the $74 billion carbonated soft drink (CSD) industry in the United States that lasted until the mid-1990s. Coke’s and Pepsi’s revenues grow annually, as the worldwide CSD consumption rose steadily by an average of 3% per year. In the early 2000s, however, domestic CSD consumption started to decline in consequence of the evolving linkage between CSDs and health issues such as obesity. Coke and Pepsi faced new challenges regarding the growth of non-CSD beverages...

Words: 5585 - Pages: 23

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue Coke and Pepsi in 2006

...producers (CPs) sold syrup and concentrate to franchised of company owned bottlers, and made gross margins of 83% and a pretax profit margin of 30%. The best-know CPs were Coke and Pepsi. Historically, Coke and Pepsi were also major bottlers, but in the mid-to late 1990s, both had divested their bottling operations while maintaining significant equity ownership and indirect control of bottling networks. CPs invested heavily in advertising and marketing. One of the key issues for students to understand is why most of the profits in this industry are earned upstream in the concentrate business. The bottling business was much less profitable than concentrate, particularly in the mid- 1990s. Bottling profits improved somewhat in recent years, in part because the concentrate manufacturers could no longer squeeze the bottlers without disrupting their own distribution. Bottlers invested in bottling and caning lines, trucks, and warehouses and earned gross margins 40% and pretax profit of 9%. Coke and Pepsi bottlers delivered their products directly to the store which was part of their strategy for differentiation over private label. Private label offered warehouse-delivered product. Historically, bottling had been a very good business: Franchised bottling contracts were very generous to the bottler. Coke and Pepsi had given bottles franchises in perpetuity, allowed bottlers the final say on pricing and gave bottlers significant influence...

Words: 2208 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi 20120

...Product and Brand Strategies Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 1. Why, historically, has the soft drink industry been so profitable? Coca Cola was formulated in 1886 by a pharmacist in Atlanta who started to sell it in drug stores as a ‟portion for mental and physical disorders.“ Five years later the Asa Candler acquired the formula for Coca-Cola syrup which was a well-protected secret of the company. He also granted the first bottling franchise which grew qucikly. In the following years a lot of imitations were fight agressively by court for protecting their carbonated soft-drink (CSD) with its special flavour. Later on Coca Cola was advertised as a ‟lifestyle“ product and the international business began to develop. Pepsi was founded in 1893 and they also adopted a franchise bottling system which built up a big network very quickly. About 20 years later Pepsi went bankrupt and later on they declared bankrupcy the second time. However business went on and Pepsi built up a marketing strategy ‟Twice as much for a nickel, too.“ Pepsi step for step gained market shares and became the second behind Coca Cola. The competition in the soft drink industry began to grow. The soft drink industry consists of bottlers and suppliers. One fact which supports the profitability of the soft drink industry is that there are only two relevant players Coca Cola and Pepsi who have enough power for setting rules. The rivalry between both can be seen as a copmpetitive...

Words: 1704 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Cola Wars: Coke and Pepsi in the 21st Century

...COLA WARS : COKE AND PEPSI IN THE 21ST CENTURY” INTRODUCTION "Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in the 21st Century” explains the economics of the soft drink industry and its relation with profits, taking into account all stages of the value chain of the soft drink industry. By focusing on the war between Coca-Cola and PepsiCo as market leaders in this industry – with a 90% market share in carbonated beverages – the study analyses the different stages of the value chain (concentrate producers, bottlers, retail channels, suppliers) and the impact of the modern times and globalisation on competition and interaction in the industry. Throughout this analysis, I will assess how the strategic interaction between the two players allowed the creation of a “healthy" competition, where both companies need each other in order to remain competitive. Afterwards, I will go on to analyse the way that pricing and output decisions have affected the industry’s profits. Finally, I will discuss how Coca-Cola and PepsiCo could sustain their leadership in a market increasingly dominated by non-carbonated drinks. WHY IS THE SOFT DRINK INDUSTRY SO PROFITABLE? The soft drink industry refers to all drinks which do not contain alcohol. However, the original definition referred to carbonated and non-carbonated drinks made from concentrate. In this case discussion, I will take into consideration the US market, where the three major players – PepsiCo, Coca-Cola and Cadbury Schweppes – represent...

Words: 3841 - Pages: 16

Premium Essay

Coke vs Pepsi 100 Year War

...Date: 01-28-2014 Subject: A Hundred-Year War: Coke vs. Pepsi, 1890s – 1990s Case Analysis The cola war between Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola is a ongoing battle over the $56 billion soft drink industry. Taking in consideration that the industry in the U.S. is a mature and saturated market, both companies are expanding their brands abroad looking for growth opportunities. As the war between the companies continues, they face several issues about their future in the U.S. and abroad. What strategies can the companies implement to continue their growth in the domestic market? How can the companies respond to the constant changes in the international market conditions? And would the changes in the soft drink industry landscape affect the companies’ profitability? How? Industries like soft drinks, electronics, and others are hypercompetitive, meaning that firms that are in these industries need a fundamental shift in the focus of their strategies to maintain themselves in the future. These firms need to develop temporary advantages to either react to a competitor or to create distance. The goal is to disrupt the status quo by moving to the next innovation quickly. In order for the companies to sustain growth domestically, they need to move on to the next innovation. As was reported in the case, aside from soft drinks, bottled water is the only segment that has shown constant increases in consumption every year since 1975. For the past 23 years, bottled water has increased...

Words: 633 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010

...The competition within the $74 billion carbonated soft drink (CSD) industry has been remarkable ever since Coca-Cola was formulated in 1886, and further intensified when Pepsi was introduced in 1893. Ever since then, the CSD industry has been dominated by these two companies, with Coke taking the lead in the early stage, followed by Pepsi doubled its market share between 1950 and 1970 by offering its concentrate at a lower price than its competitor. The CSD industry has been profitable historically due to numerous reasons. Firstly, in the world’s largest market for CSD products, consumption had been growing at a steady rate of 3% annually from 1970 to 2000 in the U.S., marking a high growth stage in the industry life cycle (Appendix B). This allowed both Coke and Pepsi (C&P) to achieve annual sales growth of around 10%, while competing head-to-head against each other and other smaller CSD producers. Competition between C&P reinforced their brand image, as the increase in marketing efforts could be transferred into profit and sales growth when the overall demand was increasing in a growing industry. However, the increasing industry volume was largely obtained by C&P, leaving other smaller firms vulnerable with stagnated growth opportunity. Secondly, according to Porter’s Five Forces analysis in Appendix A, high barrier for new entrants, low bargaining power of suppliers of both concentrate producers and bottlers, moderate buyer’s bargaining power and low degree of threats of substitutes...

Words: 1227 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Case Analysis - Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010

...Case Analysis – Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 Coke and Pepsi are two leading companies in the soft drink industry. They contend with each other during decades. The Cola Wars are a campaign of mutually-targeted television advertisements and marketing campaigns since the 1980s between soft drink manufacturers The Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo. Historically, the soft drink industry has been so profitable. Porter’s Five- Forces Model of industry competition can define and analyze an industry in terms of five main factors. In this industry, competition is quite cruel between rivalries since Coca-Cola and Pepsi are already powerful leaders in the industry. It is basically a duopoly situation in soft drink field. The two companies share the whole market making them a huge profit even the industry itself is flattening. Due to the situation in the industry, there is not any barrier for entering but new company will be extremely risky to enter the market, since both Coca-Cola and Pepsi are mature companies with high reputation during decades. Unless the new enterprise is highly innovative and surely can do a better job than the two industry leaders. Therefore, threat of new entrants is expected to be very low. The threat of substitute products mainly comes from the promotion of a healthy diet, which makes juice, power drinks and other non-CSDs a better choice other than sodas with lots of sweetener and fat. This threat however, has been overcome by the introduction of...

Words: 598 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Coca Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi 2010

... Risk of Entry by Potential Competitors With high barriers to entry, the risk of potential competitors entering into the CSD industry is low. The high cost of developing a manufacturing plant in order to meet demand is a barrier that makes the risk of entry low. Coke and Pepsi have spent numerous amounts of money to gain the brand loyalty of their customers. Because brand loyalty is already established in the CSD industry, the risk of competitors entering is lowered. Due to brand loyalty, both Coke and Pepsi have a high demand for their products. Both companies are able to produce in mass quantities and lower the variable cost for each product. With the variable cost being lowered, they are able to lower their selling price. Another barrier that lowers the risk of entry is franchise agreements that Coke and Pepsi have made with their bottlers. The agreements state that the bottlers are prohibited from developing any new contracts with present or potential competitors. Rivalry among Established Companies The CSD industry is consolidated in regards to its competitive structure. The industry is made of a small amount of large companies meaning the competition in market share is high. Coke and Pepsi together make up 68% of the CSD industry. The rivalry...

Words: 852 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in the Twenty-First Century

...4. ¿Pueden Coke y Pepsi mantener sus ganancias ante una demanda declinante y la creciente popularidad de bebidas no gaseosas?   Este problema lo obtuvieron ambas empresas desde el año de 1990 en el cual llevaban 2 años consecutivos donde el consumo anual por persona había disminuido, fue donde ambas empresas debieron de modificar su estrategia de comunicación en precio, embazado y la estrategia de la marca, así como también incluir en la marca productos de bebidas sin gas, tea, bebidas deportivas y agua embotellada. La estrategia que ellos han tomado en el negocio entero mejorando el proceso de entrega, de productos, de suministros para la producción, ha invertido en promoción y publicidad para impulsar las nuevas bebidas y las ya existentes. Desde el inicio de ambas compañías han luchado por la participación del mercado norteamericano y mundial introduciendo bebidas de sabores para seguir con la tendencia de crecimiento. Sin embargo ambas compañías no se dieron cuenta hasta después de hacer las investigaciones pertinentes que desde el año 1990 los consumidores empezaron a reflejar un cambio en el hábito de beber bebidas con gas y empezaron a tomar otro tipo de bebidas. Lo que paso con esto fue que el crecimiento fuera negativo o muy bajo sin embargo ambas marcas tiene una gran presencia en el mercado por lo cual la diversificación de productos según la tendencia del mercado. Si bien es cierto la competencia ahora es mayor sin embargo la estrategia de comunicación y de la...

Words: 297 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Pgdm Mba Material Case Study- Cola Wars Continue Coke and Pepsi in the Twenty-First Century

...9/8/2015 PGDM/MBA Material: Case Study- Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in the Twenty-First Century www.mbapgdmstuff.blogspot.com Home Human Resource Marketing Information system management Images You are visitor # Case Study- Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in the Twenty-First Century 110,588 Search This Blog Translate Select Language  ▼ Category Assignment Business Communication Business Environment Business Law Case Study Compensation MAnagement E- Business Summary: "Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in the 21st Century” explains the economics of the soft drink industry and  its  relation  with  profits,  taking  into  account  all  stages  of  the  value  chain  of  the  soft  drink  industry.  By focusing on the war between Coca‐Cola and PepsiCo as market leaders in this industry – with a 90% market share  in  carbonated  beverages  –  the  study  analyses  the  different  stages  of  the  value  chain  (concentrate producers,  bottlers,  retail  channels,  suppliers)  and  the  impact  of  the  modern  times  and  globalization  on competition and interaction in the industry. Analysis: It is quite clear that there was a “war" between Coca‐Cola and PepsiCo: not only have they been rivals for entrepreneurship For your Information Formates Human Resource Management Human Resource Mangement Human resource Planning Indian Labour Law Industrial Relation Information system Management International Marketing ...

Words: 1069 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Cola Wars

...The Cola Wars Competitive Strategy  Introduction Coke and Pepsi have been going to war for over a century. This war has been fought with prices, with taste challenges, and with advertising. Throughout this bottle battle both companies have remained dominant players in the carbonated soft drink industry and have moved beyond their original products into many new areas. Resources The core resources that have allowed Coke and Pepsi to maintain dominance are their brand image and their marketing strategies. Coke has focused on a brand image that relates more to a way of life then to a soft drink. With “Buy the world a Coke” and other such campaigns Coke has strived to position itself in the minds of consumers as a lifestyle choice to choose Coke instead of just a purchase decision. Pepsi has pursued a similar yet differentiated version of Coke’s strategy. “The Pepsi Generation” was an ad campaign aimed at making Pepsi the drink of the next generation. Advertising was trying to position Pepsi as the preferred drink of the youth of America. Pepsi furthered this image as the preferred drink through the Pepsi challenge, a campaign aimed at boosting total soft drink sales as well as allowing the two soda giants to be directly compared. What makes these resources valuable? The large anchor-bottling corporations and the contracts that bind them to Coke and Pepsi are also huge resources. Both companies own large equity stakes in these major bottlers and are able to use this to...

Words: 1935 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continues

...------------------------------------------------- Subject: Cola War Continues: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 Coke and Pepsi have duopoly the soft drink market for decades. It is a mature market with low growth. For all the years, Coca-Cola and Pepsi have built significant brand identity. When people thinking about buying cola, they cannot tell a third brand’s name. Both of them have built mature distribution channels and their large sales volume archives them economic of scale already. Suppliers to Coke and Pepsi have weak power since there are many suppliers in market due to low entry level. Suppliers have to give Coke and Pepsi lowest price to keep their business with the giants or they will lose business to competitors. Coke and Pepsi corporate with many bottling companies. These regional companies are not capable for developing their own drink and advertising. The barrier of entry is also low so their profitability are restricted by Coke and Pepsi, and distribution channels. They have no power to raise price or competitors will take over their business. As concentrates businesses, Coca-Cola and Pepsi have strong power over bottling business. As long as these bottling companies want to corporate with Coca-Cola or Pepsi, they have to agree to refuse similar products from other new brands. However, Coke and Pepsi always have rights to change to another bottling company with no restrictions. Coke and Pepsi are also buying bottling companies in mature market so increase profitability. Since Coke and Pepsi dominant the soft drink...

Words: 450 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Cola Wars

...For the exclusive use of R. PONCE 9-702-442 REV: JANUARY 27, 2004 DAVID B. YOFFIE Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in the Twenty-First Century For over a century, Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola vied for “throat share” of the world’s beverage market. The most intense battles of the cola wars were fought over the $60-billion industry in the United States, where the average American consumed 53 gallons of carbonated soft drinks (CSD) per year. In a “carefully waged competitive struggle,” from 1975 to 1995 both Coke and Pepsi achieved average annual growth of around 10% as both U.S. and worldwide CSD consumption consistently rose. According to Roger Enrico, former CEO of Pepsi-Cola: The warfare must be perceived as a continuing battle without blood. Without Coke, Pepsi would have a tough time being an original and lively competitor. The more successful they are, the sharper we have to be. If the Coca-Cola company didn’t exist, we’d pray for someone to invent them. And on the other side of the fence, I’m sure the folks at Coke would say that nothing contributes as much to the present-day success of the Coca-Cola company than . . . Pepsi.1 This cozy relationship was threatened in the late 1990s, however, when U.S. CSD consumption dropped for two consecutive years and worldwide shipments slowed for both Coke and Pepsi. In response, both firms began to modify their bottling, pricing, and brand strategies. They also looked to emerging international markets to fuel...

Words: 13837 - Pages: 56

Premium Essay

Cola Wars Continue

...In the “Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010” the history of Carbonated Soft Drinks (CSD) and its development in modern society illustrates how these two companies advance and compete within an oligopoly market. One of the approaches used in oligopolies is the Game Theory Approach. The basic elements of game theory are (1) the players, (2) the strategies available for each, and (3) the payoff each receives. There are different “battlefields” on which Coke and Pepsi compete:  products, pricing, and marketing. Product: * Launch of Diet products - Pepsi launched Diet Pepsi in 1964 while Coke launched Diet Coke in 1982 * Launched new varieties, flavors and acquisition of non-soda products - Pepsi introduced a variety of non-carbonated drinks; Coke responded by acquiring some non-carbonated products. * Use of high fructose syrup instead of sugar (cut cost) - Coke began using high-fructose corn syrup in 1980, Pepsi followed three years later. Pricing: * World War II - Coke made sure all soldiers got coke for only five cents, with government exemptions from wartime sugar rationing gave Coke the upper hand and allowed them to have a dominant strategy; Pepsi responded with the best strategy they could, increasing their bottle size to 12 ounce bottle “twice as much for a nickel too” Marketing: * International markets - Both secured contracts to be sole providers to specific countries; both companies plan to invest $2 billion in China to build up their market...

Words: 482 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Cola Wars

...CASE STUDY : COLA WARS CONTINUE : COKE AND PEPSI IN 2006 The case study “Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2006” focuses on describing Coke and Pepsi within the CSD industry by providing detailed statements about the companies’ accounts and strategies to increase their market share. ‘ Cola war’ is the term used to describe the campaign of mutually targeted television advertisement & marketing campaigns between Coke & Pepsi. Furthermore, the case also focuses on the Coke vs. Pepsi goods which target similar groups of costumers, and how these companies have had and still have great reputation and continue to take risks due to their high capital. Both Coke & Pepsi have segmented the soft drink industry into two divisions, via – 1.Production of soft drink syrup. 2.Manufacturing & distribution of soft drinks at retail level. Coke & Pepsi have chosen to operate primarily on the production of soft drinks syrup,while leaving independent bottlers with more competitive segment of the industry.The purpose of this report is to gain insight into the possible strategies that can be applied, in order to expand the overall throat share in the future. History revealed that a highly competitive strategy that was utilized in the past by both companies resulted in cannibalization. Because of this, the report is described from the perspective of both Coca-Cola and Pepsi. This report focuses on increasing the overall share and finding new opportunities in the unrevealed...

Words: 1192 - Pages: 5