An Energy Drink Comparison: Red Bull vs. Cocaine
Taylour Cannon
BA 320
James Scholar Project
November 28, 2011
Section I. Description
“Energy drinks are carbonated drinks that contain large amounts of caffeine and sugar
with additional ingredients, such as B vitamins, amino acids (e.g. taurine), and herbal stimulants
such as guarana” (Wong, 2006). Though posing negative health effects for obvious reasons,
energy drinks are wildly popular in the United States, as evidenced by a 2011 Journal of
Pediatrics report that states 30 to 50 percent of adolescents and young adults consume energy
drinks (NCFS, 2011). However, though there is a large market with plenty of opportunity, only
certain brands, such as Red Bull, achieve a high level of success, while others, such as Cocaine,
fall by the wayside.
In 1982, Dietrich Mateschitz sampled a Thai energy drink called Krating Daeng (Funding
Universe, 2004). Upon realizing the drink’s popularity throughout Asia, he came up with the idea
to bring such energy drinks to the rest of the world and founded Red Bull GmbH in Austria in
1984, with sales beginning shortly thereafter in 1987. Since then, Red Bull has expanded to
foreign markets, establishing its presence in Singapore in 1989, Hungary in ‘92, Germany in ’94,
the U.K. in ’95, and eventually the United States in 1997, setting up shop in California. At the
end of 2010, Red Bull had over 7,700 employees working in 161 different countries (Red Bull,
2011).
Since its founding in 1984, Red Bull has sold roughly 30 billion energy drink cans.
Moreover, annual sales are around 4 billion, with over 4.2 billion being sold in 2010. In
comparison to the rest of the energy drink market, these numbers dwarf competitors’ figures
(ibid.) Consequently, and maybe rightfully so as Mateschitz basically created the market in the
not so distant past, Red Bull currently dominates the energy drink arena, controlling a 40 percent
share (Yahoo! Finance, 2011).
The aforementioned creation of the energy drink market also gave birth to a new energy
drink target market. As such, it was up to Red Bull to decide exactly with which consumers its
new product would achieve the most success. As Sabine Buchholz states in When a Brand Gets
Wings: Red Bull’s Secret of Marketing Success, “Whereas soft drinks were commonly considered
to be for teenagers only, and their benefits could be found in taste and refreshment … Red Bull
has successfully challenged this by targeting adults and young adults, offering the benefits of
well-being and energy” (2005). Thus, while Red Bull’s main target market is teenagers, its reach
extends to all people in search of an energy boost.
Seeing as Red Bull basically defined the target for its competitors as well, it has had to
develop a sustainable competitive advantage in order to remain the leader of the energy drink
industry. Rather than come up with baseless guarantees and exaggerated claims, Red Bull has
developed five key components to stabilize and further develop its competitive advantage.
According to its web site, “Numerous scientific studies on the product and the individual
ingredients prove that Red Bull Energy Drink: increases performance, increases concentration
and reaction speed, improves vigilance, stimulates metabolism, and makes you feel more
energetic and thus improves your overall well-being” (Red Bull, 2011).
Rather than take a traditional approach to promotion and advertising, Red Bull boldly took
the road less traveled. In other words, “In the antithesis of any major’s marketing plan, Red Bull
buys traditional advertising last” (Hein, 2001). Instead, Red Bull has determined that the
teenagers in its target market only pay attention to promotions that involve “individual profit” for
the consumers (Rodgers, 2001). The end promotional result is a “mixture of fun and danger,”
with Red Bull finding “its embodiment in the extreme sports the company subsidizes so
generously” (Seiser, 2004). The brand’s advertising and promotions, which include nightclub
parties and musical and sporting events, are not geared toward informing the audience of
potential consumers, but rather meant to entertain them (Rodgers, 2001). Consequently, Red Bull
is seen as a “’social welfare’ operator of cool events” that draws massive amounts of teenagers to
associate with and purchase the product (Buchholz, 2005). In addition to the “social welfare”
events, Red Bull has also partaken in more large-scale efforts, such as owning its own sports
teams in Formula One’s Red Bull Racing and Major League Soccer’s New York Red Bulls, as
well as the creation of its own record label, Red Bull Records.
Red Bull is available in 8-, 12-, 16-, and 20-ounce cans and can be found individually or
in packs of 4, 12, and 24 in stores all over the country, with prices varying. The most common
price found on the Internet for an individual can ranges between $2.00 and $2.50, with a 24-pack
of 8-ounce cans available for about $48 on Amazon.com. The product can be found in nearly
every super market and grocery store in the United States, as well as in many social gatherings,
such as fundraisers and concerts, in which “Red Bull Promo Girls” pass out free samples of the
energy drink to anyone willing to take them.
Aesthetically speaking, Red Bull is not particularly spectacular, but given the brand’s
success, the product’s design has become easily recognizable. The can’s primary colors are silver
and blue, and it features a “picture of two muscled red bulls at loggerheads” and the slogan,
“Vitalizes Body and Mind” (Zen, 2007). Though the can’s structure is quite similar to that of a
regular beverage can, it is a bit thinner and sleeker, giving it a more edgy and rebellious look.
About two and a half decades after Red Bull took the world by storm, Jamey Kirby,
founder and president of Redux Beverages LLC, introduced Cocaine to the energy drink market
in September of 2006. Upon its release, the Las Vegas-based company promoted Cocaine as the
"’legal alternative’ to the illegal drug in form of an energy drink” (Sowry, 2006). The product
appears to have enjoyed a fair amount of success early on, as Kirby stated in late 2006, “… more
than 200,000 additional cases of the drink have been ordered and are in production” (Mason,
2006). Since then, however, the product has been the target of much criticism from a variety of
different sources, none more powerful than the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which
declared Cocaine’s marketing campaign illegal in May of 2007 (Nizza, 2007).
Cocaine has since undergone several alterations, including a few name and slogan
changes, and the same basic product is once again being sold in stores. Still, though “U.S. sales of
non-alcoholic energy drinks are expected to hit $9 billion” in 2011 (Joelving, 2011), Cocaine did
not rank within the top 15 energy drinks in Bevnet’s 2008 annual review (Energy Fiend, 2011).
Thus, though it has cleaned up its image slightly, in its early stages, Cocaine’s marketing was a
complete disaster that nearly resulted in the FDA completely banning the product’s distribution
and sale in the United States.
Cocaine was mainly targeted at teens and young adults, or as Kirby described them,
“jaded 16- to 28-year-olds clamoring for extreme refreshment” (Mason, 2006). Moreover,
Cocaine was rather blatant in its purpose to draw the attention of a young crowd. After originally
wanting to name the product “Reboot” and discovering that name was already taken, Kirby came
up with the concept of Cocaine. As Kirby’s wife, Hannah, said of the decision, “We knew we
would get noticed against a thousand other energy drinks. We knew kids would find it cool…”
(CityNews, 2007).
As suggested by its name, Cocaine’s strongest sustainable competitive advantage, at least
in the eyes of its creators, is the amount of “energy” packed into each can. “Each 8.4-ounce can
of Cocaine contains 280 milligrams of caffeine, more than twice the amount in a cup of coffee,
and a throat-numbing blend of fiery spices” (Mason, 2006). As if that was not telling enough of
what Cocaine has to offer over its competitors, Kirby has put it in more simple terms, claiming,
“Cocaine is ‘350 percent stronger than Red Bull’ but people do not experience the ‘sugar crash’
or jitters that he says some of the other energy drinks can produce” (ibid.). Additionally, slogans
such as “Speed in a Can” and sarcastic warning labels stating, “This beverage should be
consumed by responsible adults. Failure to adhere to this warning may result in excess
excitement, stamina, . . . and possible feeling of euphoria” further establish Cocaine’s desire to be
seen as “The Legal Alternative” to the actual drug (FDA, 2007).
Kirby attributed the aforementioned early success of Cocaine to “the can’s simple design
and product promotion.” The most easily recognizable proponent of the product’s promotion is its
name, of which Kirby said, “It's an energy drink, and it's a fun name. As soon as people look at
the can, they smile" (Sowry, 2006). Moreover, its promotion as “The Legal Alternative” to actual
cocaine was also vital in generating controversy and gaining attention from the public, as Kirby
can attest to, saying, “It was always the plan to let negative publicity move us forward. There is
an enormous amount of competition out there” (Mason, 2006). Meanwhile, the brand has also
partaken in more traditional forms of promotion, sponsoring “numerous concert tours, regional
festivals, and local bands throughout the world” (Redux, 2008) and hiring attractive girls to
distribute Cocaine at social events (Perkins, 2008).
Cocaine is available in only one individual size, that being the previously mentioned 8.4ounce can, and one case size of 24 cans. The product comes in two different flavors, “Mild” and
“Spicy,” and can easily be found online or in super markets under the product name “Insert Name
Here:” (PR Newswire, 2007). According to Google Shopping, individual 8.4-ounce cans of
Cocaine are available for $1.99, while 24-packs are being offered for about $40. Aside from
purchasing the product, Cocaine is also distributed by the aforementioned promotional girls at
events it sponsors.
Just as with its other attributes, Cocaine’s aesthetic elements were chosen to help
consumers make a psychological connection with the actual drug. As the FDA’s letter to Kirby
states, “The letters in the product name appear to be spelled out in a white granular substance that
resembles cocaine powder” (FDA, 2007). Aside from that, as previously alluded to, the can has a
“simple design,” with “Mild” having a blue color base and “Spicy’s” being red.
Section II. Evaluation
Based on my understanding of Red Bull and Cocaine, I believe it is fairly simple to
realize why Red Bull has been far more successful than Cocaine in the energy drink market. First
and foremost, Dietrich Mateschitz recognized an opportunity for a new product market before
creating Red Bull. Thus, rather than enter a competitive field and struggle to establish his new
product, Mateschitz was able to determine Red Bull’s target market and engineer a promotional
plan toward that market without any real competition. In other words, Red Bull exploited “a
really fertile gap in the market” (Buchholz, 2005). Moreover, in doing so, Red Bull had the
advantage of having time to figure out what exactly its consumers desired. Consequently, rather
than join the overly-crowded traditional advertising realm, the brand was able to tailor its
promotions toward young teens’ and adults’ wants and desires through sponsoring concerts,
sporting events, and parties that truly gave the consumers a sense of benefit. Lastly, Red Bull has
established itself as more than just a typical brand; it has become engrained in mainstream society
through its sponsorships, purchasing of sports teams, and celebrity endorsements. Ultimately, Red
Bull has become ubiquitous within not solely US consumer culture, but society in general,
making it the unequivocal leader of the energy drink market that Mateschitz created almost three
decades ago.
On the other hand, Cocaine’s situation was quite different and, as such, so too were its
results. Rather than attempting to capitalize on a new market, Cocaine joined the energy drink
market created by Red Bull and saturated with other competitors. Understandably, Kirby desired
a means by which to differentiate his product, ultimately deciding to do so through its name and
the amount of caffeine it contained. However, in a society where drugs such as cocaine are
extremely taboo and the protection of young people is paramount, an energy drink that is aimed at
teens and young adults and claims to be “The Legal Alternative” to cocaine is bound to fail.
Aside from the FDA threatening to ban Cocaine based on its opinion that the product was
“intended as an alternative to an illicit street drug,” among other things, it also drew harsh
criticism from doctors and parents alike. While Kirby believed boasting that his product was 350
percent stronger than Red Bull would lead to increased sales, he failed to recognize that it would
also draw plenty of concern and warning from the medical field, which would be passed on to
parents, who then would attempt to keep their children from the product. Lastly, though Kirby
may have succeeded in penetrating the market and creating a “buzz” about his product in the
short-term, he has since failed to capitalize on such success or further develop the brand, as
evidenced by its aforementioned lack of a presence within the top 15 energy drink brands in
2008. Thus, it seems that Kirby was more interested in generating hype around the product’s
gimmicky name and making some quick money than he was in developing some brand loyalty.
If I were to relaunch Cocaine, there are a few dramatic changes I would make to the
product’s marketing strategy. First, and most importantly, I would completely abandon the entire
“Cocaine” concept, including the name, the product’s promotion as “Liquid Cocaine,” and any
other drug-associated comparisons. In other words, I would not relaunch Cocaine, but rather
rebrand it, so as to attempt to establish a better reputation and acceptance within the energy drink
market. Unlike Kirby’s “rebranding” of Cocaine into “Insert Name Here:,” which I believe was
disrespectfully mocking the FDA’s warnings, my brand repositioning would focus more on the
content being offered to the consumer.
Since the brand’s main competitive advantage is its comparative caffeine dosage, though
unhealthy, I would continue to emphasize that attribute. However, rather than compare it to the
rush from a narcotic drug, I would promote the euphoric feeling and energy-boost that supposedly
results from its consumption and market it as a week-day energy drink rather than a partyassociated one. Consequently, the brand would be renamed “Giddy-Up!” to promote a “Let’s get
this done!”-type of attitude. I believe all of these methods would erase the negativity that
surrounded Cocaine and attract young people, especially college students, who are searching for a
product to help them grind through a day of classes or complete a daunting assignment, ultimately
making “Giddy-Up!” the go-to week-day choice for young target market consumers.
Appendix
Red Bull
Cocaine
Red Bull courtesy of: http://www.infobarrel.com/media/image/176.jpg
Cocaine courtesy of: http://klat.com/sites/default/files/styles/medium/public/legacy/cocaine_energy_drink_deal.png
Sources
Buchholz, S. (2005). When a brand gets wings: Red bull's secret of marketing success.
(pp. 1-8).
CityNews. (2007, January 12). Doctors warn against "cocaine" energy drink. Retrieved
from http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/life/health/article/25628--doctorswarn-against-cocaine-energy-drink
Energy Fiend. (2011, October 05). The top 15 energy drink brands. Retrieved from
http://www.energyfiend.com/the-15-top-energy-drink-brands
FDA. (2007, April 04). Fda bans cocaine energy drink?. Retrieved from http://cocainedrink.com/cocainedrink-ban.html
Funding Universe. (2004). Red bull gmbh. Retrieved from
http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Red-Bull-GmbH-CompanyHistory.html
Joelving, F. (2011). As sales soar, experts warn about energy drinks. Reuters, Retrieved
from http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/14/us-energy-drinksidUSTRE71D1K520110214
Lord, J. (2007). Energy drinks' sales explode despite concerns. News and Tribune,
Retrieved from http://newsandtribune.com/x519361428/Energy-drinks-salesexplode-despite-concerns?keyword=leadpicturestory
Mason, M. (2006, December 12). The energy-drink buzz is unmistakable. The health
impact is unknown. ABC News. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/12/health/12cons.html
NCFS. (2011). Youth and energy drinks. Retrieved from
http://www.ncsf.org/enew/articles/articles-youthenergydrinks.aspx
Nizza, M. (2007, May 07). The end of cocaine the beverage. The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/07/the-end-of-cocainethe-beverage/
Perkins, D. (2008). [Web log message]. Retrieved from
http://www.redbubble.com/people/deanperkins/works/3463087-cocaine-energydrink-promotional-girls
PR Newswire. (2007, June 12). Redux's cocaine energy drink to go nameless. Retrieved
from http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/reduxs-cocaine-energy-drink-togo-nameless-58012467.html
Red Bull. (2011). Red bull. Retrieved from
http://www.redbull.com/cs/Satellite/en_INT/Red-Bull.com/001242745950125
Redux (2008). Redux beverages products. Retrieved from
http://www.drinkredux.com/products.aspx
Sowry, M. (2006, September 18). The ultimate energy drink: Cocaine?. ABC News.
Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2459718&page=1
Wong, C. (2006, June 06). Energy drinks. Retrieved from
http://altmedicine.about.com/od/completeazindex/a/energy_drinks.htm
Yahoo! Finance. (2011). Red bull gmbh. Retrieved from
http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/101/101316.html
Zen, B. (2007). Red bull the art of the can. Retrieved from
http://designtaxi.com/article/374/Red-Bull-The-Art-of-Can/