Insert company logo
STRATEGIC MARKETING PLAN
FOR VIRGIN
THE COLA PRODUCT LINE
January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013
Prepared by:
Date:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2
CONTENTS
Executive summary
Introduction
Situation analysis
Business definition and scope
External environment: Remote environment
Economic forces
Sociocultural forces
Political-legal forces
Technological forces
Natural environment forces
External environment: Near environment
Market review
Competitive review
Distribution channels and buyers (intermediary customers)
End user customers
Supply
Critical success factors
Summary of opportunities
Summary of threats
Situation analysis – Company internal capabilities
Marketing capabilities – Marketing strategies and performance
Non-marketing capabilities
Marketing capabilities – Management
Problems and opportunities statement
Recommendations
3
INTRODUCTION – Jayne to read over
The Virgin Group was ‘conceived’ by Sir Richard Branson in 1970 and since has created over 300 brands.
The company in 2009 employed over 50,000 people throughout 30 countries and in 2009 the company’s
global revenue exceeded over $18 billion US1. The Virgin Group is taking on another new business
acquisition expanding its product lines into yet another avenue, planning to enter the carbonated soft
drink market. The Virgin Group Empire is built off founder Sir Richard Branson’s attitude towards life and
his constant desire to seek out the thrills in adventure.
The Virgin Group has nineteen brands within its portfolio, many of which exist in non-related markets.
The Virgin Group has brands in financial services, telephones, air travel, lifestyle, health and now the
beverage market. Virgin values money, quality, innovation, fun and competitive challenge, all of such
qualities are communicated throughout their businesses through management styles and company
corporate culture. These cultures perfectly unite with Richard Branson’s personal image. The Virgin
Group likes to think that their multiple business ventures demonstrate their devotion to picking the right
market at the right time2.
The purpose of this strategic marketing plan is to gain extensive knowledge into the Carbonated Soft
Drink market and establish the fundamental actions, which will carve The Virgin Groups beverage into a
successful business venture. New business acquisitions are built off strong and extensive research, the
Virgin Group views the market from both a business perspective but also from an external perspective;
gaining insight into what Virgin can bring to consumers in which their competitors are not. Throughout
this report, untouched areas of the beverage market will be identified, Virgins capabilities to meet and
exceed these unmet consumer demands measured, and he competitiveness of the market place
evaluated3.
Two market leaders; Coca-Cola and Pepsi currently dominate the Australian beverage market. These
companies together share 33.5% of the global beverage market4. The domestic beverage market rivalry
is just as concentrated with the leading three contenders (Coca-Cola Amitil, Pepsi Co and Asahi
Breweries) holding 54.9% of the total market volume5. The initial launch of Virgin Cola was in the 1990’s
and was a partnership acquisition between The Virgin Group and a Canadian soft drink company Cott &
Company. Virgin Cola was released into the UK market in 1994 and gained initial success through the
restaurant and pub channels, through these outlets Virgin Cola managed to 8%market share, before
moving into decline. In 1997 Virgin Cola lost approximately 5 million pounds on revenues of 30 million
1The
Virgin Group 2009, ‘About us’ available; http://www.virgin.com/about-us, accessed 02.04.12
The Virgin Group 2009, ‘About us’ available; http://www.virgin.com/about-us, accessed 02.04.12
3 The Virgin Group 2009, ‘About us’ available; http://www.virgin.com/about-us, accessed 02.04.12
4 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011
5 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011
2
4
pounds. In 1998, The Virgin Group bought out Cotts & Company and launching Virgin Cola with a 25
million backing investment; the goal here to achieve publicity and resulting in sales. Although massive
publicity was earned, The Virgin Group failed to compute this into sales.
SITUATION ANALYSIS
BUSINESS DEFINITION AND SCOPE – jess to read over
HANNAH: please complete by SUNDAY – BUSINESS DEFINITION & SCOPE (see below description)
The important point to note is that business definition and scope is a precise specification of the business
domain of the strategic planning unit. It is essential that it is accompanied with a supporting statement
presenting the arguments as to why this specification is appropriate.
MISSION STATEMENT(S)
“Virgin stands for value for money, quality, innovation, fun and a sense of competitive challenge.”
HANNAH: Is there an SBU statement?? As per project guideline 'Conclude with a brief statement of what
this means in terms of establishing parameters of the product and market scope for the strategic marketing
plan.
PRODUCT DEFINITION
AT THE INDUSTRY LEVEL (TOTAL OF ALL PRODUCT CATEGORIES):
Virgin Group Ltd. engages in the fields of leisure, travel, tourism, mobile, broadband, TV, radio, music,
finance, and health in Asia, Europe, North America, Africa, and Australia. It engages in the fields of
airlines, rail services, vacation and cruise packages, and passenger motorbike transportation services.
The company also operates gym facilities, racing teams, online casino and slots, and balloon flights;
publishes non-fiction books; provides cord blood stem cell banking, home IT and technical support,
health and lifestyle management, employee health program, and NHS services; and offers corporate gift
vouchers, and online gaming and video games, as well as wines online. In addition, it offers
phone/mobile telecommunication, broadband Internet, and TV services; and film and television
development, packaging, and production services. Further, the company operates music and
entertainment stores, radio stations, and music festivals. Furthermore, it offers financial products and
services, such as credit cards, pension products, insurance products, savings, superannuation, and home
loans, as well as online fundraising solutions; and equity for growth capital, management buyouts,
recapitalizations, and corporate spin-outs for renewable energy and resource efficiency sectors. Virgin
Group Ltd. has a strategic partnership with Tribe Mobile.
HANNAH: as per project guideline: 'It is of critical importance that emerging and declining product
categories are identified.'
5
AT EACH PRODUCT CATEGORY LEVEL
The Virgin Drinks line includes:
o
Virgin Cola
o
Virgin Lemonade
o
Virgin Colours (different coloured and flavoured soft drink)
o
Virgin Ice Cool (Iced Tea)
o
Virgin Vines (Wine)
o
Virgin Ooze (RTD pre-mixed alcoholic beverages)
o
Virgin Vodka
o
Vmix (small variation of Virgin soft drinks)
o
Vjuice (small variation of juice, tomato cocktail and orange)
o
Virgin Energy Shot
Table 1: Product categories targeted by our organisation and our products competing in those categories
PRODUCT CATEGORY
OUR PRODUCTS
Lifestyle
Virgin Active Australia
Media and Mobile
Virgin Mobile Australia
Money
Virgin Money Australia
Insurance, credit cards, life insurance
Music
Virgin Radio International
People and planet
Virgin Green fund
Travel
Virgin Atlantic Airways, Virgin Atlantic International
Virginblue Airlines
Table 2: Competitors and their products competing in these product categories:
COMPETITORS
TRAVEL
Qantas
United Airlines
Emirates
LIFESTYLE
Fitnessfirst
MONEY
COMPETING PRODUCTS
Qantas Airways, Jetstar
United, American Airlines
Emirates airlines
Fitness first health clubs
6
Westpac
Commonwealth
Nab
ANZ
MUSIC
Apple Music
JB Hi-Fi
MEDIA AND MOBILE
Telstra
Optus
PEOPLE AND TRAVEL
Bp
Origin energy
Solahart
Car insurance, Credit cards, life insurance, Home and content insurance
Home loans
Apple online music store
JB Hi-Fi Now online music store
Telstra mobile, Telstra internet.
Yes Optus mobile, Optus home and internet services.
BP Solar
Wind farms, Solar cells
Thermosiphon and split system solar. Heat pump water heaters
THE MARKET – CUSTOMERS (END USERS) FOR THE PRODUCT CATEGORIES TARGETED BY OUR
ORGANISATION
JAYNE TO INSERT SUNDAY: State the demographic, socio-economic and relevant psychographic or
lifestyle characteristics of the primary target markets. Define this broadly to encompass all product
categories that are to be targeted.
(market = consumers/people, industry=companies)
State what the opportunity is but instead argue through strategic logic backed with evidence from SWOT analysis.
WHAT AND WHY. Do business conditions change because of regulation?
7
SCOPE
This plan outlines the marketing strategies for the Virgin Cola product line in Australia for the three-year
period from 1 December 2012 to December 1 2015.
EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT: REMOTE ENVIRONMENT
ECONOMIC FORCES
Hannah: please complete (refer to project guideline).
For example I have used what you had in the table: The inflation in price of PepsiCo.’s supplier chain is an
advantage for Virgin Cola as PepsiCo has a concreted supply chain that would cost a huge amount to
change.
How does it impact consumer trends and cost of doing business?
Scenario:
1. The soft drink market is so influenced by the markets top 3 companies’ that any new entrant is
immediately counter attacked.
2. The global financial crisis has had such an effect on the market that consumers’ are more hesitant to
invest in Virgin’s new venture.
3. The global financial crisis has lead consumers to become more spending conscious, reduced spending,
reducing the likelihood of consumers trying a new brand. – reference consumer trends
Implications:
8
Compared to the dominant competitors, our price point will not be as competitive which could influence
consumer purchasing decisions however compared to other healthy alternatives within the product
category. A slip in consumer confidence as a result of the Global Financial Crisis. This threatens entry into
any market and considering the rise in the cost of living which affects the carbonated soft drink market
as it is a luxury.
OPPORTUNITIES
MARKET VALUE:
“The Australian soft drinks market grew by 3.3% in 2010 to reach
a value of $10,953 million.”6
The growing market value of the soft drink industry in Australia is
an opportunity for new entrants.
THREATS
The top 3 players in the soft drink market (Coca-Cola,
Pepsi and Asahi breweries) hold the largest market
share in Australia (54.9%)
“Coca-Cola Company, is the leading player in the
Australian soft drinks market, generating a 39.4%
share of the market’s volume.”7
MARKET VALUE FORECAST:
In 2015, the Australian soft drinks market is forecast to have a
value of $12,721.8 million, an increase of 16.1% since 2010.”8
The increasing market value forecast for the soft drinks market
creates an opportunity for new entrants to enter a market with
an increasing value forecast.
“Consumer confidence has slipped in the last quarter
with more Australians apprehensive about economic
uncertainty, financial security, and rising gas and
electricity prices.”9
“The major economic issue facing PepsiCo is the rising input costs
of their businesses due to structural inflation. Agricultural,
energy, and some metal industries are going through periods of
steady inflation.”10
The soft drinks segment recorded revenues of $4, 463.9 million in
FY2010, an increase of 10.2% over FY2009.11
A 10.2% increase in revenue in 1 year again illustrates that the
soft drinks industry in Australia is a valuable market to enter into.
SOCIO-CULTURAL FORCES
Hannah: please insert analysis summary here (refer to project guideline).
Please include Socioeconomic trends (including demographic trends), what impact is a multicultural
society, where people live and how this impacts industry and strategy, growth of health conscious
consumers etc
6
DATAMONITOR. 2011. Soft Drinks in Australia. Available at: http://360.datamonitor.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/Product?pid=889413C8-178F-43C08BD7-4FD8C32C0B1F. [Accessed 05 March 12]
7 DATAMONITOR. 2011. Soft Drinks in Australia. [ONLINE] Available at: http://360.datamonitor.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/Product?pid=889413C8178F-43C0-8BD7-4FD8C32C0B1F. [Accessed 05 March 12].
8 DATAMONITOR. 2011. Soft Drinks in Australia. [ONLINE] Available at: http://360.datamonitor.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/Product?pid=889413C8178F-43C0-8BD7-4FD8C32C0B1F. [Accessed 05 March 12].
9 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011, www.datamonitor.com,
10 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:C67SCDV7P8IJ:www.aaronksparks.com/portfolio/mktg360pepsireport.pdf++The+major+economic+issue+facing+PepsiCo+and+its+subdivisions+is+the+rising+input+costs+of+their+businesses+due+to+structural+inflation
.+Agricultural,+energy,+and+some+metal+industries+are+going+through+periods+of+steady+inflation.&hl=en&gl=au&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESha
OJyPLjytXxMbioGVhx4wuE4Ag95Fpu9cA2LBhl9OHVV0HDGlt-ajqmPki7zCeQw1NcIBcOHS2IyMGk8zL13k8pkKErSSbK7SmtE0RJSg8ySkIsd5hgpi61R32k5pFIJaiKR&sig=AHIEtbQPGJ83HM7uJSPWnYyRvsQrecWCuA
11 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.11
9
Multicultural society provides opportunity for niche markets as does the increasing amount of health
conscious consumers.
Socioeconomic trends determines the best way to position of our product and product placement
10
Scenario:
1. The top 3 players each introduce brand new flavours to keep up with the health trend, which
expands the market but makes it harder for new entrants to succeed.
2. The ‘healthy’ trend is moving into the later stages of maturity of the product life cycle and
consumers’ become bored/skeptical of it.
3. A further population increase will expand the market and develop more opportunities for a niche
market to be introduced.
4. An increase in the birth rate will increase the amount of children that are present during the late
growth, early maturity stages of a new product.
Implications:
Hannah: please complete (refer to project guideline). Marketing a CSD as a healthy alternative
consumers may be sceptical (vitamin water = sugar)
OPPORTUNITIES
Since 1994, household spend on food and nonalcoholic beverages have increased by 14%, with
the population spending over $16 a week more
on these commodities.12
THREATS
Coke is looking to introduce another product into its
line of cola flavoured soft drinks: “Green Tea Coke”.
This will appeal to women who are health-conscious
and parallels with the increasing market for health
products.13
“Meals out and fast foods” (which are both
sufficient opportunities to purchase a
carbonated beverage such as cola) is the highestranking expenditure for households in 1999. 14
POLTICAL AND LEGAL FORCES – whole section missing???
Hannah: please insert analysis summary here (refer to project guideline).
12
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1999. Household Expenditure Survey, Australia. Available at:
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/6535.0/ Accessed 22 February 12
13 Global Edge. 2009. Viktoriya Ivanova [ONLINE].. http://globaledge.msu.edu/blog/archive/2009/6. Accessed 20 February 12
14 Australian Bureau of Statistics. 1999. Household Expenditure Survey, Australia. Available at:
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/6535.0/. Accessed 22 February 12
11
Please include: Regulations – food packaging labelling how does this affect strategy (particularly
marketing), sweetener is soft drink permitted?
Scenario:
Hannah: please complete (refer to project guideline).
Implications:
Hannah: please complete (refer to project guideline).

OPPORTUNITIES
RATING*
THREATS
RATING*
Regulations are costly to abide by
Labelling as an advantage because
our product is healthy
Gov use of water/raw materials
The rating is based on a double-digit 5-point scale for the degree of significance and for probability of occurrence.
The first number/5 represents the degree of significance rating out of 5, 5= extremely significant and 1 = not very
significant. The second number/5 represents the probability of occurrence, 5= extremely likely and 1 = low
probability.
TECHNOLOGICAL FORCES
Hannah: please insert analysis summary here (refer to project guideline).
Please include: less impact than other sectors and social media technology more relevant
(expand on this)
Scenario:
1. Advanced technology allows companies’ to develop 100% recyclable bottles and cans making
them available to all companies’
Implications:
Hannah: please complete (refer to project guideline).
Competitors with economies of scale are able to invest in sustainable cropping techniques (refer
to competitor pespi section)
12
OPPORTUNITIES
Improved ingredients
Efficient supply chain management
Technology impacts this industry less which
means less capital investment
THREATS
Coke have been researching and planning to
develop the new “PlantBottle” which is aiming at
being 100% recyclable. 15
This technological advancement by Coke is a threat
to other soft drink market holders
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT FORCES
Hannah: please insert analysis summary here (refer to project guideline).
Please include the impact of water availability on the industry
Primary inputs for soft drinks manufacturers include concentrates, a range of natural and synthetic
sweeteners such as corn syrup and refined sugar (sucrose), aspartame, and similar ingredients16.
Scenario:
1. drought
2. natural disasters decreasing efficiency of raw material supply, supply chain efficiency
Implications:
Hannah: please complete (refer to project guideline).
Which makes it a good time for entry to this market so reliant on raw materials.
OPPORTUNITIES
“In the 12 months to 30 June 2010, Australia's
population increased by 377,100 people, reaching
22,342,000. The annual growth rate for the year
ended 30 June 2010 (1.7%) was lower than that
recorded for the year ended 30 June 2009
(2.2%).” 17
THREATS
water availability on the industry
15
Global Edge. 2000. Coca-Cola Amatil. Available at: http://globaledge.msu.edu/blog/post/562/ge-blog-series--go-green--part-4.2---plantingnew-ideas .Accessed 08 February 12
16
Datamonitor 2011. Soft Drinks in Australia, Available: http://360.datamonitor.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/Product?pid=889413C8-178F-43C08BD7-4FD8C32C0B1F. Accessed: 05 March 12.
17 Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2010. Population by Age and Sex. Available at: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3201.0. Accessed
05 March 12
13
EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT: NEAR ENVIRONMENT
INDUSTRY/MARKET REVIEW
The soft drink market consists of the retail sale of bottled water, coconut water, carbonates,
concentrates, functional drinks (including sports drinks), juices, RTD tea and coffee, flavored milk and
smoothies.
The Australian soft drinks market generated total revenues of $11 billion in 2010, a year that proved the
most lucrative for the Australian soft drinks market.
The Australian soft drinks market value grew by 3.3% in 2010 to reach a value of $10,953 million.
The compound annual growth rate of the market in the period 2006–10 was 3.3% (refer Appendix E.1).
The Australian soft drinks market grew by 2.9% in 2010 to reach a volume of 4,649.7 million litres.
The compound annual growth rate of the market in the period 2006–10 was 3.1% (refer Appendix E.2).
Carbonates are the largest segment of the soft drinks market in Australia, accounting for 59.9% of the
market's total value. Comparatively, the juices segment accounts for a further 15.9% of the market (refer
Appendix E.3)
SUNDAY: prepare a product life-cycle chart showing the size of the total market for each of the main
product categories within volume. In analysing the data, review the annual growth rate. Then project the
size of the market and each product category for the next 3–5 years which is the time frame of the strategic
marketing plan (Refer to chapter on forecasting techniques). Product life cycle idea is important: level of
industry sector, product category and even brand level. Identify if you have a balanced portfolio (diff
PLC).
Despite the strong sales growth in the bottled water and functional drinks categories, the Australian soft
drinks market grew at a steady rate during the period 2006-2010 however this is expected to decelerate
in the forthcoming five years due to increasingly health conscious consumers and government
regulations regarding water use and safety of sweeteners. Yet, given the market consumption increase
between 2006 and 2010, market volume is expected to rise over the next five years, deeming it an
attractive market for new business adhering to the new regulations and anticipating changing consumer
trends.
14
15
PORTERS FIVE FORCES – INDUSTRY SPECIFIC
FORCES
TYPE OF FORCE
1
Supermarkets/hypermarket chains
are most significant distribution
channels for soft drinks
Bargaining power
of buyers
2
Most inputs are readily available
commodities
Bargaining power
of suppliers
3
New brands must contend with the
reach and strengths of established
brands
Threat of new
entrants
4
Consumers may chose to drink
coffee, tea, or homemade juices, or
fruit juices
Threat of
substitutes
5
Supermarkets and hypermarkets
account for 48.5% of the total market
volume, followed closely by on-trade
retailers at 32.5%
Bargaining power
of buyer
6
Consumers in this market are likely to
be strongly influenced by brand
Bargaining power
of buyers
7
Retailers are forced to stock brands
popular among consumers
Bargaining power
of buyers
8
Inputs are available from several
sources although they are subject to
price fluctuations
Bargaining power
of suppliers
9
Packaging manufacturers are growing
because of a demand for more
consumer friendly packages
Bargaining power
of suppliers
10 Advertising and marketing agencies
play a significant role in the brand
building process in the soft drinks
market
Threat of
substitutes
Supplier power
11 Brands try to distinguish their
products by stressing health benefits
Threat of new
entrant
12 Setting up a new business would be
fairly capital-intensive
Threat of new
entrants
13 Leading firms have diverse product
offerings
Threat of
substitutes
STRENGTH
5
2
2
2
5
5
2
4
4
4
4
5
3
16
14 The Australian soft drinks market is
fairly concentrated and top three
firms have more than 50% volume
Threat of new
entrants
4
5 = strong, 1 = weak
MAREE: I just rated according to the data but would you mind to look over?
FIVE FORCES ANALYSIS
The Australian soft drinks market is fairly concentrated, with the top three players holding 54.9% of the
total market volume. The market has the presence of leading players such as The Coca-Cola Company,
Asahi Breweries and PepsiCo. Switching costs for retailers are not prohibitive, which boosts rivalry.
Overall, there is a moderate degree of rivalry in the soft drinks market (refer appendix E.10).
Although major players are fighting for the dominant position, there is scope for growth in niche
categories (refer to appendix E.5).
Leading players tend to have a diverse product offering, which reduces the threat posed by substitutes.
Overall, there is not a great threat imposed by the soft drinks' substitutes except from traditional coffee
and tea or homemade juices, along with the tendency of consumers switching towards the fruit juices
(refer appendix E.9).
Supermarkets and hypermarkets form the most significant distribution channel in the Australian market,
followed closely by on-trade retailers. The presence of big supermarket chains increases buyer power
however this remains moderate, as consumers in this market are likely to be strongly influenced by
brand and retailers are forced to stock popular brands. Many players have managed to develop strong
brands, which will tend to decrease buyer power, as buyers feel obliged to stock certain products to
meet their customer's preferences. Overall, buyer power in the Australian soft drinks market is moderate
(refer to appendix E.6). Advertising and marketing agencies also play a significant role in the brand
building process in the soft drinks market (refer to appendix E.7).
Supplier power is not great, as most inputs are readily available commodities. Most revenue is generated
from the production of concentrates, which are sold to bottling companies and here the buyer power is
relatively weak. Some of the primary inputs for the soft drinks manufacturer, although available from
several sources, they are subject to price fluctuations. The power of packaging manufacturers is growing
since there is a growing demand for more consumer friendly packages.
Entry to the market will generally be fairly capital-intensive, restricting market entry to players however;
new entrants can exploit niche categories. Overall, there is a moderate likelihood of new entrants (refer
appendix E.8).
17
Description:
Although the industry is predicted to decline (refer A.2, A.4, A.6), opportunity exists for new entrants
appealing to the changing consumer trends, increasingly conscious of their health and packaging
sustainability. A popular company entering the market would be at an advantage as a new entrant if the
corporate brand value resonates with consumers. Market share would increase, in this otherwise
homogenous product category, as consumers would be drawn to a brand they know, like and delivers on
their evolving values. It is the strongly brand influenced consumers that the new entrant must satisfy as
these consumers dictate buyer purchasing choices. The degree of exposure Australian consumer’s have
to advertising strengthens supplier power to an extent, providing they have the capacity or existing
brand image.
It remains an attractive market for entry despite the predicted decline due cola’s dominance of the CSD
category, despite the availability of alternatives however this must be taken into consideration and new
entrants should provide a range of alternative products if they want to survive. This presents an
opportunity for new business considering the emerging consumer health concerns when planning
strategy, research and development and product innovation. The recent decrease in market share is the
cause of the shift in consumption patterns due to growing health issues such as obesity suggesting
possible long-term shifts for the market further increasing attractiveness of market as dominate brands
may be viewed as the unhealthy options.18
Maree - Should this be a description of our findings (including the below table?). Should we relate the
threats/opportunities specifically to new entrants into the industry? Should we also make suggestions of
how to overcome implications?
18
Yoffie D. & Kim R. 2011, ‘Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010 ‘,Harvard Business School, 9-7-11-46, pp. 1 - 22
18
Implications:
A large amount of capital is required to compete in this industry due to the economies of scale enjoyed
by competitors and also the dominance of competitors regarding supply chain and distribution also
presents implications for new entrants. However, this can be overcome by way of acquisitions, strategic
partnerships and utilisation of core competences.
Although the role of advertising can be leveraged to build consumer awareness of a new entrant, the
advertising capabilities of competitors are great enough to attack new entrant efforts to the market.
Although supplier power is not great this could be an advantage rather than an implication for a new
entrant, providing an opportunity to gain market share despite the size and dominance of the key
competitors.
OPPORTUNITIES
RATING*
Switching costs for retailers are not
prohibitive
4/5 - na
THREATS
Supplier power is not great
RATING*
5/5 – 5/5
Scope for growth in niche
categories
5/5 – 5/5
Primary inputs for the soft drinks
manufacturer are subject to price
fluctuations
5/5 – 4/5
Advertising plays significant role
4/5 – 4/5
Increasing packaging power
5/5 – 5/5
Established brands may be
regarded as unhealthy options,
5/5 – 3/5
Strong, established competitor
brands
5/5 – 5/5
Retailers are forced to stock brands
popular among consumers
5/5 – 4/5
The rating is based on a double-digit 5-point scale for the degree of significance and for probability of occurrence.
The first number/5 represents the degree of significance rating out of 5, 5= extremely significant and 1 = not very
significant. The second number/5 represents the probability of occurrence, 5= extremely likely and 1 = low
probability.
COMPETITIVE REVIEW
The Coca-Cola Company holds the largest market share and is the leading player in the Australian soft
drinks market, generating a 39.4% share of the market's volume.
19
Asahi Breweries, Ltd. accounts for a further 8.1% of the market (refer to Appendix E.4).
COCA-COLA AMATIL (CCA)
The company is headquartered in Sydney and manufactures, distributes and markets carbonated soft
drinks, still and mineral waters, fruit juices, coffee and other alcohol-free beverages. The company also
distributes alcohol-based beverages through its joint venture company Pacific Beverages. It is also
involved in the processing and marketing of fruits, vegetables and other food products.
The beverage business consists of non-alcoholic and alcoholic businesses. The company, through its nonalcoholic beverage business, manufactures, distributes and markets carbonated soft drinks.19
The company ‘strives to refresh the world, inspire moments of optimism and happiness, create value and
make a difference’.20
Major products and services include alcoholic beverages and food as well as logistics business and
restaurants. Non- alcoholic beverages include: coffee, carbonated beverages, tea-based drinks, water,
fruit and vegetable drinks, chilled beverages. 21 Brands offered within the CSD category include CocaCola, Diet Coke, Coca-Cola Zero, Sprite, Sprite Zero, Fanta, Lift, Deep Spring Natural Mineral Water,
Appletiser, Grapetiser, Kirks, and Bisleri. The company enjoys the continued growth of Coke Zero which
now holds over 40% share of the diet cola category in the immediate consumption channel. Mother
energy drink grew volume by 6% as a result of new flavour and pack variants and now has 24% of the
total energy drink market.22
The business recovered cost of goods sold through a pricing and mix strategy and CCA’s beverage market
leadership position continues to dominant volume and value share across all channels despite more
aggressive competitor pricing. 23
The synergies enjoyed are the exceptional capacity and capabilities throughout the by the company span
entire supply chain and distribution. CCA’s major capital investment program reduced operating costs
and delivered effective customer service 24 however the company continues to focus on efficiency,
service and revenue gains right across the business. This will be achieved through the effective balancing
of pricing, volume growth and market share. Competitive position will be further strengthened via
capacity expansion, increased operational efficiency and introduction of cold drink coolers, as well as
19
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.5
The Coca-Cola Company, ‘Our Company’, available at: http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/ourcompany/index.html accessed: 2nd March
2012
21
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.9
22 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.18
23 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.17
24 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.19
20
20
successful new product and package innovation.25
The competitive intent of the company is to increase capability and capacity expansion, diversifying
business ventures with the rollout of cold drink coolers. CCA will continue to focus on executing its
organic growth strategy in conjunction with the acquisition of Fijian brewery, spirits and soft-drinks
assets, creating synergies from CSD sector, which includes brands such as Fiji Water, Cascade and Hi-C.
Other possible strategies include a distribution deal with Adelaide-based family-owned Coopers
Brewery.26
Resources, similar to growth strategies, include acquisitions such as Neverfail Springwater. Such an
acquisition considerably strengthens the company's core competencies and competitive position. CCA
also owns an established plant at Richlands in Brisbane, Australia and automated materials handling
facility in Mentone, Victoria, Crusta Fruit Juices and its subsidiary, Quenchy Crusta Sales, a cold chain
distribution company, Quirk's Refrigeration27 and the Northern Territory soft drink sales, distribution and
production assets. The company dominance throughout the entire supply chain positions the company in
an extremely sustainably competitive position. This engagement of major supply chain partners is part of
CCA’s strategy to strengthen their competitive position, which they have done so through the
development of collaborative capabilities and engaging supply chain partners.28
However the company's source of competitive advantage extends further to innovative packaging and
advertising, the coke trademark (patent?), the three-year agreement with the National Rugby League
Partnership (NRL) from March 2010 and Project Zero. 29
STRENGTHS

Supply chain, market and natural resources dominance

Well known, market leading brand

Innovative advertising, branding and packaging
WEAKNESSES

Consumer perception of Coke and the associated health risks

Limited product innovation
25
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.17
Ferguson, A 2012, ‘Fiji drinks deal only sets first round on the bar for Coke growth strategy’, The Age, Melbourne, available at: Australia/New
Zealand Reference Centre
27
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.6
28 Dunne, AJ 2008 ‘The impact of an organization's collaborative capacity on its ability to engage its supply chain partners’, British Food Journal,
Volume 110, Issue 4/5, pp. 361 - 375
29 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.7
26
21

Limited growth options
THREATS
 Major competitors: National Beverage Corp. PepsiCo, Inc. Just Water International Limited30
 Changing consumer habits
 Industry decline
ASAHI GROUP HOLDINGS (SCHWEPPES AUSTRALIA)
Asahi Group are engaged in beer brewing but also produces and markets soft drinks.31
The four segments the company operates through include alcoholic beverages, soft drinks, food and
others. Asahi acquired Australian beverage business owned and operated by Cadbury (Schweeps
Australia) later entering into a binding share purchase agreement to acquire 100% of the issued shares of
P&N Beverages Australia, the third largest soft drink company by volume in Australia. 32The company
enjoys a powerful position in the beverage market through a strong product portfolio and dominates a
significant share of the market in the snack and beverage industry with worldwide brands.

Cottee's (includes cordial drinks, Schweppes Australia)

Solo – lemon-flavoured drink, owned by Schweppes Australia. Passiona (passionfruit-flavoured
soft drink available previously from Cadbury-Schweppes, now Schweppes Australia)
The company's mission is:
“Asahi aims to satisfy its customers with the highest levels of quality and integrity, while contributing to
the promotion of healthy living and the enrichment of society worldwide.”33
Major products and services include alcoholic beverages and food as well as logistics business and
restaurants. Non- alcoholic beverages include: coffee, carbonated beverages, tea-based drinks, water,
fruit and vegetable drinks, chilled beverages. Schweppes Australia (under license) manufactures and
distributes Pepsi, Pepsi Max, Pepsi Light and Pepsi Light Caffeine Free within Australia.34
30
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.16
31
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.4
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.7
33
Schweppes Australia 2012, Schweppes Australia, Viewed 14 March 2012,
<http://www.schweppesaustralia.com.au/Home.aspx#.T2BzAZztrlw.mailto>
34 Schweppes Australia 2012, Schweppes Australia, Viewed 14 March 2012,
<http://www.schweppesaustralia.com.au/Home.aspx#.T2BzAZztrlw.mailto>
32
22
The company has ownership interest in food manufacturing, processing and bottling plants35 with the
successful launch of product extensions creating additional revenue streams and growth avenues.36
Company resources include the strategic acquisitions two large bottlers and the relationship shared with
large retail and wholesalers through a customer warehouse channel that delivers products directly from
manufacturing plants/warehouses to customer warehouses/retail stores.37
The soft drink segment enjoys the operation and technology synergies of Asahi Soft Drinks Company,
which also manufactures and distributes coffee, carbonated beverages, tea-based drinks, water, fruit
and vegetable drinks, and chilled beverages.38 Due to the manufacturing and selling of leading snack
foods including Lay’s, Doritos, Cheetos the company owns snack manufacturing and processing plants in
Australia.39 The established presence of the company allows the expansion of its markets through the
related synergies of expanded operations, also reducing business risk.40 The complimentary combination
of snack and beverage business imparts unique competitive advantages enabling leverage and efficiency
within an existing distribution system, providing a barrier to entry for new entrants. Such a model is
considered a core competency of the company as such a encompasses diverse Strategic Business Units
(SBUs) and would be costly, timely and difficult for competitors to replicate41 Furthermore, the
diversified product base, multi-channel distribution system and investment in emerging markets act as a
sustainable competitive advantage, protect the company from a downturn specific to a market or
business line or distribution network, and reduce business volatility.42
Current strategies incorporate environmental sustainability with recent consideration in sustainable crop
farming technology. Current strategies also include the evolving health conscious consumer trends with
investment in coconut water and the decision to ensure the portfolio become more ‘natural ingredient
based’. 43 The formation of joint ventures with complimentary businesses such as Lipton and Sakata
further strengthen the company's competitive position.44
The strengthen such competencies the company heavily invests in corporate social responsibility,
resource and development, brand building, and sustainable growth45 with a particular focus also on
good-for-you portfolio of products.46
35
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.6
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
37 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
38
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.5
39 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.6
40 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
41 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
42 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
43
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.10
44 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.7
45 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.32
46 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.36
36
23
Maree: Should i expand further on
GENERIC LEVEL BUSINESS/COMPETITIVE STRATEGY
CURRENT GROWTH STRATEGIES
CURRENT COMPETITIVE POSITION
STRENGTHS

Supply chain management efficiency47

Distribution influence

Large scale operation units

Established brand name

Economies of scale
WEAKNESSES

Late entry into markets where Coke already had established distributor and consumer space.

PepsiCo also lagged behind in the potential growth market of low or no sugar-based beverages.48
OPPORTUNITIES

An opportunity for the Asahi Group Holding Ltd is the strategic acquisitions to expand business 49

Power to negotiate exclusive supply contracts50
THREATS

Main competitor, Coca-Cola has strong brand recognition across the globe with key brands and
widespread popularity.
THREAT TO VIRGIN
The company launched eco-friendly, recyclable and compostable cups in the US.51
Threat to industry or Virgin??
Maree: should I include competitive strategies (e.g. Low cost defender’s for both) in this section
accompanied with brief description (p.68)?
MINOR COMPETITORS
 Bickford's (includes juices, sodas, teas, sparkling water with fruit flavor, energy drinks, bottled
47
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.14
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.29
49 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.14
50 Cadbury Schweppes: sour grapes or genuine fear? 2001, Datamonitor 360, accessed 14 March 2012, p. 2
51 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.11
48
24
water)

Bundaberg (includes diet varieties, flavored CSD includes lemon lime bitters and ginger beer)

Cascade (includes fruit juices, ginger beer, flavored CSD including sparkling apple juice and
sparkling blackcurrant)

Golden Circle Company (includes fruit juices, cordials and CSD)

Kirks (line of sodas marketed by Coca-Cola Amatil) marketing core competency

LA Ice Cola (includes cola available in four varieties including sugar free and diet variety)

Leed (includes carbonated lemonade) – distributed by coke

Lido (includes lemonade)

Leed (includes carbonated lemonade) Kirks (line of sodas marketed by Coca-Cola Amatil)
Description:
The key competitors in the Australian CSD industry are extremely efficient and dominant
throughout the supply chain. While consumers determine retailer purchases, it is the key
competitors that have formed strategic partnerships, own plants and warehouses, determine
the degree of new entrant access to raw materials and solely contract bottlers.
Implications:
These players have the resources, capabilities and budgets to defend their market position and
employ attack strategies if required.
OPPORTUNITIES
RATING*
Changing consumer trends
4/5 – 5/5
Limited product innovation
5/5 – 1/5
THREATS
Competitor dominance
Competitor synergies in supply &
distribution channels
RATING*
5/5 – 5/5
4/5 – 4/5
The rating is based on a double-digit 5-point scale for the degree of significance and for probability of occurrence.
The first number/5 represents the degree of significance rating out of 5, 5= extremely significant and 1 = not very
significant. The second number/5 represents the probability of occurrence, 5= extremely likely and 1 = low
probability.
25
DISTRIBUTION CHANNELS AND BUYERS (INTERMEDIARY CUSTOMERS)
Supermarkets / hypermarkets form the leading distribution channel in the Australian soft drinks market,
accounting for a 48.5% share of the total market's volume. On-trade accounts for a further 32.5% of the
market.
Analysis of distribution structure (number and type of distributors serving the total market including a
break down of sales by the various intermediary types)
Historical trends and future development for distribution channels
The power base of the buyers
Trends concerning physical distribution
MOST importantly info concerning the wants/needs of the intermediaries in particular the margins
applied by the various intermediaries, promotional requirements, policies concerning new line fees,
stock delivery and inventory management requirements
THE KEY PLAYERS IN THE DISTRIBUTION CHAIN:

Coca-Cola

Pepsi Co

Asahi Breweries
DISTRIBUTION STRUCTURE
In Australia Major Chain retailers have large national store networks covering all inner city, suburban and
regional centres. Smaller chains or independent banner groups have less comprehensive coverage of the
market.
The distribution of Soft drinks in Australia embedded in the food distribution channels. The key feature
of the channel structure is the means by which retailers manage direct supply logistics on national or
regional bases through national (NDC) and regional distribution centres (RDC).
STRUCTURE OF INDEPENDENT AND CONVENIENCE RETAIL CHANNELS
Independent grocery and convenience store channels have a minority share of retail sales in most food
and beverages categories and offer a limited range of products based on servicing the convenience
26
needs of passing consumers. This channel includes specialist discount food stores, which offer a limited
range of food and drinks at often deeply discounted prices to attract shoppers.
SPECIALTY RETAIL CHANNELS
This channel encompasses a range of specialist retailers that focus on single or limited fresh food or
otherwise niche food category. These outlets are typically independently owned and, accordingly, unable
to avail themselves of group buying or distribution arrangements.
QUICK SERVICE RESTAURANT CHANNELS
This channel encompasses large integrated chains of quick service restaurants (QSR) or takeaway food
outlets. It represents a significant share in the takeaway retail food market, across burgers, chicken, pizza
and salad meals. These outlets are typically franchised, and their meal and product ingredients are
centrally purchased and supplied, according to tight specifications, through sophisticated logistics
management practices.
INDEPENDENT TAKE AWAY CHANNELS
This channel encompasses many independent takeaway food outlets covering different food groups or
offerings, or both. These outlets are typically independently owned and accordingly unable to avail
themselves of group buying or distribution arrangements.
DINING OUT CHANNELS
This channel encompasses many independent dining and function venues. The outlets are typically
independently owned and accordingly serviced by specialist fresh product and food service wholesalers
and distributors offering services to meet the frequency, cold-chain and specification requirements of
these retailers.
EVENTS AND LEISURE CHANNELS
This channel encompasses many sporting and major event venues, and involves a large range
Of meal formats and price/value. Travel catering includes the food and drinks supply to airline
Companies and to a large percentage of food outlets located in airport terminals.
INSTITUTIONAL HEALTHCARE CHANNELS
This channel encompasses the supply of meals to many government and independent healthcare
institutions, which provide beds.
OTHER INSTITUTIONAL FOOD CHANNELS
This channel generally encompasses contract catering services to kitchen and dining venues.
27
Commercial caterers are the largest provider of meal and kitchen management solutions to this
segment, with the service package varying according to industrial practices, cost constraints and the size
and location of the institution
Description:
Jerome: please complete (refer to project guideline).
Implications:
Jerome: please complete (refer to project guideline).
*
OPPORTUNITIES
RATING*
THREATS
RATING*
The rating is based on a double-digit 5-point scale for the degree of significance and for probability of occurrence.
The first number/5 represents the degree of significance rating out of 5, 5= extremely significant and 1 = not very
significant. The second number/5 represents the probability of occurrence, 5= extremely likely and 1 = low
probability.
28
END-USER CUSTOMERS
Jerome: please complete summary for this section (refer project guideline)
Health conscious
Retailers (buyers) users (customers)  customers influence retailers
Supply and buyer relatively low compared to that of consumers
Initiators’ are well known Australian sports people who can comment and influence
Gyms, health foods stores, health supplement stores (GNC, ASN)
There are unmet needs in the product category total natural, low carb and low sugar ingredients
free of artificial sweeteners.
Description:
Jerome: please complete (refer to project guideline).
Implications:
Jerome: please complete (refer to project guideline).
*
OPPORTUNITIES
RATING*
THREATS
RATING*
The rating is based on a double-digit 5-point scale for the degree of significance and for probability of occurrence.
The first number/5 represents the degree of significance rating out of 5, 5= extremely significant and 1 = not very
significant. The second number/5 represents the probability of occurrence, 5= extremely likely and 1 = low
probability.
SUPPLY
29
Some bottlers are independent, while others are owned by the big-name manufacturers described
usually as 'partners' and 'customers'. The bottlers are licensed to convert purchased raw materials into
packaged soft drinks with the manufacturers' branding, and distribute the ready for sale commodities to
buyers within a particular sales territory. Although the majority of bottlers are free to make their own
business decisions, the close ties between manufacturers and bottlers’ means that food & beverage
retailers are arguably the more significant buyers from the point of view of market players52.
Industry level supply is important to strategic marketing planning. Shortage or excess can have industry
wide effect in supplies of raw materials, for example crop failures, diseases labour disputes. In order for
manufactures and distributes to maintain competitive advantage they need to ensure supply of their raw
materials and also maintain excess.
Soft drink Industry has a very intense competitive rivalry, a slight increase of in capacity of supplies can
trigger price wars, hence reduction in profitability.
Porters competitive forces identifies areas that could potential affect supply at the industry level and
marketing planners need to be aware of the following:
Description:
Jerome: please complete (refer to project guideline).
Implications:
Jerome: please complete (refer to project guideline).
*
OPPORTUNITIES
RATING*
THREATS
RATING*
Competitor dominance in the supply
Utilisation of existing supply
channels for different product
categories
chain
The rating is based on a double-digit 5-point scale for the degree of significance and for probability of occurrence.
The first number/5 represents the degree of significance rating out of 5, 5= extremely significant and 1 = not very
significant. The second number/5 represents the probability of occurrence, 5= extremely likely and 1 = low
probability.
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS (CSFS)
Would you mind checking these Maree? Thank you
52
Datamonitor 2011. Soft Drinks in Australia, Available: http://360.datamonitor.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/Product?pid=889413C8-178F-43C0-8BD74FD8C32C0B1F. Accessed: 05 March 12.
30
For successful operation in the Australian CSD industry, the following factors are critical for success:

PRODUCT ATTRIBUTES INCLUDING A POPULAR BRAND, WITH CONSISTENT QUALITY AND
PACKAGING
Consumers have greater influencing power than that of suppliers or buyers, ultimately dictating
market share. Therefore, a brand wishing to compete in this industry must resonate among
consumers, by delivering on their desires and at competitive prices. Furthermore, consumers are
strongly and often influenced by brand so a favourable brand is critical in this competitive market.
As the product category is relatively homogenous it is product packaging that differentiates brands.
(Hannah/Jess: please comment of the strength and value of the virgin brand and cross reference
with your section)

RESOURCES INCLUDING DISTRIBUTION CAPABILITIES AND ACCESS TO INPUTS
Due to the high capital required for entry to such a market it is imperative that companies wishing to
compete in such an industry have prior knowledge or affiliations organisations with not only
experience with the distribution channels for beverages in Australia, but relationships with retailers,
distributors and bottlers. Furthermore, it is critical that new entrants have access to the raw
materials required for production as these are limited in Australia (Hannah: do you reference water
restrictions in your section? Please add here once you do)

COMPETENCIES INCLUDE PRODUCT & PACKAGING INNOVATION, SUPPLY CHAIN EFFICIENCY AND
DISTRIBUTION MANAGEMENT
As industry decline is predicted, those wishing to compete must be innovative with product offerings
and packaging as to appeal to the evolving consumer trends, which are causing market decline.
Additionally, successful companies in this industry are extremely efficient in the extremely complex
and costly supply chains. To secure a strong and sustainable competitive position in the market, new
entrants must have a wide distribution reach, be able to be secure favourable space on retailer
shelves and be in available in convenient locations thus deeming distribution management a critical
factor of success.
SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS
Jess to amend according to Maree notes
31
Virgin Cola exits in a highly competitive market, not only against direct competitors such as Pepsi Co.,
Coca-Cola Amatil and Asahi but also against their competitors brand extensions and their substitutes
such as bottled water, sports drinks and juices.
The carbonated soft drink market is hostile with the three big players occupying XX% of the overall
market share.
Social trends prompted by obesity concerns also add the ‘health factor’ aspect opening another
competitive platform for carbonated soft drink product offerings to meet consumer expectations and
attain their market share.
Virgin Cola faces many opportunities and threats as both a brand and a product offering in the day-today competitive consumer environment.
OPPORTUNITY
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
OPPORTUNITY:

To take advantage of the health
conscious social trend and
expand product line into low
calorie or healthier substitute
SFD goods (Retail world, AC
Nielsen Special report, 19th July
2010, p.20).

Strengthen geographical reach
with international expansion (if
they aren’t launching
internationally) – growth could
provide long-term growth
opportunities.
OPPORTUNITY:
Take advantage of GFC and rocky
economic conditions with the use of
coupons and discount vouchers.
LOW
* To produce mimic brand extensions like Virgin
Cherry Cola and Virgin Vanilla Cola for a
competitive price.
*Branching into the ‘organic’ sector in response
to heath trends.
* Horizontal axis = significance of opportunity, Vertical axis = probability of occurrence
THREAT
HIGH
LOW
32
HIGH
COMPETITORS:
ASAHI GROUP HOLDINGS (Schweppes
Aus), PepsiCo, Coca-Cola – High
competitive environment against
already established companies, who
already offer line extensions appealing
to social trends. Coke has a strong
international brand presence.
THREAT:
Majority of consumers curbing their household
expenditure (saving on gas, electricity, TA meals
and new clothes), need to make CSD as a market
offering be perceived as a necessity rather then
a luxury or specialty good.
LOW
THREAT:
Sluggish growth performance in the
grocery channel overall in AUS.
MINOR COMPETITORS:
 Bickford's (includes juices, sodas,
teas, sparkling water with fruit
flavor, energy drinks, bottled
water)
 Bundaberg (includes diet varieties,
flavored CSD includes lemon lime
bitters and ginger beer)
 Cascade (includes fruit juices,
ginger beer, flavored CSD
including sparkling apple juice and
sparkling blackcurrant)
 Golden Circle Company (includes
fruit juices, cordials and CSD)
 Kirks (line of sodas marketed by
Coca-Cola Amatil)
 LA Ice Cola (includes cola available
in four varieties including sugar
free and diet variety)
 Leed (includes carbonated
lemonade)
 Lido (includes lemonade)
*Alcoholic substitutes in the beverage industry,
this threat is scaled reasonably low as alcoholic
beverages are un-attainable for consumers
under the age of 18 and for those of the legal
drinking age contributing factors such as RBT
and social standards
* Problematic distribution channels as
retailers ma not want to take the risk of
carrying a new product
*Horizontal axis = significance of threat, Vertical axis = probability of threat
SITUATION ANALYSIS – INTERNAL CAPABILITIES
Jayne to read over
33
Virgin Cola has decided to brand its carbonated soft drink as an Organic Soft Drink to be distributed
through specialty stores such as Thomas Dux, Harris Farm, Fratelli Fresh and other niche delicatessen
styled stores. This branding strategy will help distinguish Virgin Cola as a brand, giving it a point-ofdifference and setting it aside from the major players Pepsi and Coca-Cola.
The Virgin Group’s on a company level is one of great power as its products range across several industry
sectors. The Virgin Group’s brand name is one of its biggest assets, this is partly due to the strong
association the brand has with Director, Sir Richard Branson. Sir Richard Branson acts as an unofficial
endorsee for the company’s brand, values and business approach. The Virgin Group has products in
Lifestyle, Media and Mobile, Money, Music, People and Planet as well as travel; this diverse portfolio
strengthens the overall brand recognition of the company as the company is exposed to a plethora of
consumers across these different segments.
The re-launch of Virgin Cola in Australia will align with the Virgin Groups pre-existing values and cultures
established through the brands other product lines. The carbonated soft drink beverage is going to align
especially with the People/Planet values of the company. Virgin Pepsi is going to be an organic cola
produced with fair trade ingredients and the product will be bottled in recycled materials. These aspects
of the product not only reinforce the Virgin Groups mission and culture but it also acts as a point-ofdifference and aligns with current trends stimulating an influx in health concern and societal search for
healthier substitutes for the household goods in which consumers love.
In order for Virgin Group to name Virgin Cola as a ‘Fair Trade’ product, it needs to meet certain
requirements set out by the Fair Trade Body. These requirements include:

Pay a price to producers that aim to cover the costs of sustainable production: the Fair Trade
Minimum Price53.

Pay an additional sum that producers can invest in development: the Fair Trade Premium54.

Partially pay in advance, when producers ask for it55.

Sign contracts that allow for long-term planning and sustainable production practices56.
The meeting of these requirements and the attainment of the Fair Trade title/logo not only will be a
distinguishing factor which can be used in advertising but it will also enforce the ethics of the company
behind it (The Virgin Group). This will give Virgin Cola a competitive advantage over the market leaders
Pepsi and Coca-Cola as they do not attain such certification and because movements like Fair Trade are
becoming increasingly popular in today’s societal environment. This movement into Fair Trade will earn
53
http://www.fairtrade.net/generic_trade_standards00.html
http://www.fairtrade.net/generic_trade_standards00.html
55 http://www.fairtrade.net/generic_trade_standards00.html
56 http://www.fairtrade.net/generic_trade_standards00.html
54
34
Virgin Cola first mover advantage and will lead to Virgin Cola being a market leader in the
environmentally sustainable products for carbonated soft drinks.
On a competitive scale, the marketing of the Virgin Cola as being a product with superior environmental
sustainability status will stimulate attention from major competition Coca-Cola. Virgins positioning
strategy to publicizing the brand Virgin will trigger this focus and it’s product as being a market leader for
environmental sustainability innovation. This is because Coca-Cola is currently in the stages of
developing a ‘PlantBottle’ of it’s own with a similar branding strategy. Coca-Cola is a global brand that
also draws from its strong brand recognition as a main driver in the competitive dominance in the
marketplace. Coca-Cola as a brand as an extremely high level of consumer recognition with branding
strategies aimed at evoking fun ‘summer-time’ memories and experience with friends. This branding
strategy is successful because it appeals to consumer’s emotive stimuli, evoking memories of fun and
then associating Coca-Cola as a brand to such memories.
Coca-Cola’s ‘PlantBottle’ will be made of a material known as PET plastic, the bottle will contain 30%
materials from Brazilian sugar cane and molasses. The goal is to make the PlantBottle 100% recyclable57.
Virgin Cola’s market entry will beat Coca-Cola into the market and therefore enjoy the first mover
advantage and access to economies of sale. However this move does bear some risk, Coca-Cola is now
given the opportunity to watch Virgin Cola and analyze the overall consumer response to the product,
and build features into their ‘PlantBottle’ which will better satisfy unmet consumer expectations and to
build/learn off Virgins mistakes.
A the main capability in which this branding strategy gives The Virgin Group to other competitors is it
separates them from immediately competing against the markets larger players Coca-Cola and Pepsi,
placing it in a sub-category niche within the carbonated soft drink category. This niche provides a less
volatile market place, which will be easier to dominate off the brand name alone. Once the niche market
is dominated by Virgin Cola the company can then decide to start defusing the beverage out into the
mass-market.
Another capability in which The Virgin Group will enjoy includes tax concessions, these concessions can
be granted to make up for loss of potential income incurred through adopting sustainable production
methods and avoiding mass production. Partnerships or alliances set up with recycling companies will
also grant the Virgin Group additional capabilities as distribution of raw materials and finished goods will
be maintained at little or no cost.
57
Global Edge. 2000. Coca-Cola Amatil. [ONLINE] Available at: http://globaledge.msu.edu/blog/post/562/ge-blog-series--go-green--part-4.2--planting-new-ideas [Accessed 08 February 12].
35
Apart from the production capabilities in which The Virgin Group will enjoy on the production side of
operations, the sales/retail side will also inherit capabilities vital to growing market share. The ‘natural’
and organic attribute of the product will enable the beverage to move across product lines and allow it
to be kept in the consideration group for healthier substitutes such as performance drinks, juices and
bottled water. Another capability on Virgins sales side of the business is that the Virgin Cola beverage will
be competition in a much less volatile market. Avoiding in the first instance direct competition with both
Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
Jess: I did not have time to thoroughly read through this section so please have someone do it before
Sunday for errors etc.
Review:
Jess: please complete (refer to project guideline).
Implications:
Jess: please complete (refer to project guideline).
*

OPPORTUNITIES
RATING*
THREATS
RATING*
The rating is based on a double-digit 5-point scale for the degree of significance and for probability of occurrence.
The first number/5 represents the degree of significance rating out of 5, 5= extremely significant and 1 = not very
significant. The second number/5 represents the probability of occurrence, 5= extremely likely and 1 = low
probability.
PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES STATEMENT
Jess: If you are unable to do this tomorrow I can do it either with you or myself on Sunday. The delay
with the final document and CSFs was due to formatting, email communication, inserting others work
and cross referencing with the project guideline. I also needed to complete the summary for the
presentation so Hannah was able to get started on slides.
1. THE BUSINESS UNIT’S CAPABILITIES COMPARED TO CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
CSF




Our capabilities/competencies




36
2. OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE BUSINESS UNIT TO EXPLOIT WITH EXISTING CAPABILITIES
3. OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE BUSINESS UNIT TO EXPLOIT WITH IMPROVED CAPABILITIES
4. THREATS THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED
RECOMMENDATIONS AND RATIONALE:
MARKETING OBJECTIVES: (See Exhibit 2.4 for examples)
PRODUCT-MARKET GROWTH STRATEGIES
YEAR 1
OBJECTIVES
YEAR 2
OBJECTIVES
YEAR 3
OBJECTIVES
Existing products in existing markets (Market
penetration)
Existing products in new markets (Market
development)
New products in existing markets
(NPD)
EXAMPLE OF MARKETING STRATEGIES:
MARKET SEGMENT 1
MARKET SEGMENT 2
MARKET SEGMENT 3
Segment description
Segment description
Segment description
Products/brands serving this
segment
Product/Brand positioning
Products/brands serving this
segment
Brand positioning
Products/brands serving this
segment
Brand positioning
Product strategy
Product strategy
Product strategy
Pricing strategy
Pricing strategy
Pricing strategy
Distribution strategy
Distribution strategy
Distribution strategy
IMC strategy*
IMC strategy*
IMC strategy*
37
Team needs to discus and include the below:
38
Is this an attractive indusry ? Is it an
opportunity ? Can the firm find and hold a
competitive position in this industry ? How
?
Identify and describe each of the five forces
for the industry.
Which are strong forces and why ?
These forces limits profitability of the
industry. Possible threat.
How many strong forces ? Is it an
attractive industry or opportunity ?
Which forces are weaker and why ?
Industry is more profitable. Possible
opportunity.
How many weak forces ? Is it an
attractive industry or opportunity ?
What are the critical success factors in this industry ?
Does the firm need to weaken a strong force
? Why ? Why not ? Is there a strong force
that a firm can weaken ? How can a firm reshape a strong force in their favour ? Is
there a viable blue ocean strategy ?
Does the firm need to strengthen a weak
force ? Why or why not ? Is there a weak
force that a firm can exploit to their
advantage ? How might a firm re-shape a
force in their favour ? Is there a viable blue
ocean strategy ?
Do the firm’s internal capabilities fit with or stretch the firm in a realistic way ?
39
EXAMPLES OF STRATEGIES FOR EACH FORCE. Is there a blue ocean strategy in any element of any force ?
1: REDUCING THE BARGAINING POWER OF SUPPLIERS
a. Partnering
b. Supply chain management
c. Supply chain training
d. Increase dependency
e. Build knowledge of supplier costs and methods
f. Take over a supplier
2: REDUCING THE BARGAINING POWER OF CUSTOMERS
a. Partnering
b. Supply chain management
c. Increase loyalty
d. Increase incentives and value added
e. Move purchase decision away from price
f. Cut put powerful intermediaries (go directly to customer)
3: REDUCING THE TREAT OF NEW ENTRANTS
a. Increase minimum efficient scales of operations
b. Create a marketing / brand image (loyalty as a barrier)
c. Patents, protection of intellectual property
d. Alliances with linked products / services
e. Tie up with suppliers
f. Tie up with distributors
g. Retaliation tactics
4: REDUCING THE THREAT OF SUBSTITUTES
a. Legal actions
b. Increase switching costs
c. Alliances
d. Customer surveys to learn about their preferences
e. Enter substitute market and influence from within
f. Accentuate differences (real or perceived)
5: REDUCING THE COMPETITIVE RIVALRY BETWEEN EXISTING PLAYERS
a. Avoid price competition
b. Differentiate your product
c. Buy out competition
d. Reduce industry over-capacity
e. Focus on different segments
f. Communicate with competitors
40
APPENDIX
APPENDIX A
Yoffie D. & Kim R. 2011, Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010
Harvard Business School, 9-7-11-46, pp. 1 - 22
A.1
For more then a centaury Coca-Cola and Pepsi vied for ‘throat share’ of the worlds beverage market.
A.2
Most competitive time spanned from 1975 – mid 1990’s, and was fought over the $74 billion carbonated
soft drink (CSD) industry. Both coke and Pepsi achieved average annual revenue growth of around 10%,
as both US and worldwide consumption rose steadily year after year.
A.3
The competition between Pepsi and Coke fed each companies success, the more successful coke was the
sharper Pepsi had to be and visa versa.
A.4
Competitive relationship started to fray in 2000s, however as the US consumption started to decline 
by 2009 the average American drank 46gallos of CSD a year (lowest CSD consumption since 1989)
A.5
Heading into 21st centaury coke and Pepsi faced new challenges:

Could they boost CSD sales

Could they compete against non-CSD beverages that demanded different bottling, pricing and
brand strategies?
A.6
ECONOMICS OF THE US CSD INSUSTRY
Americans consumed 23 gallons of CSDs annually in 1970, and consumption grew by an average of 3% a
year over the net three decades. Fuelling this growth inc. increased availability of CSD and the
introduction of flavoured and diet varieties
Alternatives to CSDs including beer, milk, bottled water, juice, tea, powdered drinks, wine, sports drinks,
distilled spirits and tap water.
Within the CSD category the cola segment maintained its dominance, although its market share dropped
from 71% in 1990 to 55% in 2009.
A.7
CONCENTRATE PRODUCERS
Concentrate producers blend the raw ingredients, package the mixture in plastic canisters and ship
canisters to be to the bottler.
41
Most significant costs of the concentrate producers Inc: advertising, promotion, market research and
bottler support.
A.8
BOTTLERS
Purchase the concentrate, add carbonated water and high fructose corn syrup bottle or can the CSD
product and delivers it to consumer accounts.
Franchise agreements  both coke and Pepsi allow bottler to handle non-cola brands of other
concentrate producers. Bottlers could choose whether to market new beverages introduced by a
concentrate producer.
Bottlers couldn’t carry directly competing brands
A.9
RETAIL CHANNELS
In 2009 the distribution of CSD in the United States took place through supermarkets (29%), fountain
outlets (23.1%), vending machines (12.5%), mass merchandise (16.7%), convince stores and gas stations
(10%) and other outlets (7.8%).
Costs and profitability in each channel varied by delivery method and frequency, drop size advertising
and marketing.
CSDs accounted for $12 billion or 4% total store sales in the US and were also a big traffic draw for
supermarkets.
Historically Pepsi dominated sales through retail outlets, while coke commanded the lead in retail sales.
In the 1990s competition for fountain accounts = intense, in 1999 burger king franchises believed to pay
$6.20 per gallon of coke syrup (received substantial rebate on each gallon).
After Pepsi entered the fast food restaurant business acquiring Pizza Hut (1978), Taco Bell (1986) and
KFC (1986), coke perused competing chains such as Wendy’s and Burger King to switch to coke
In the vending channel bottlers took charge of buying, installing and servicing machines (also negotiating
contracts with the property owners typically received a sales commission in exchange for
accommodating their machine)
A.10
THE EVOLUTION OF US SDI (SOFT DRINK INDUSTRY)
Coke was formulated in 1886, Pepsi invented in 1893.
The cola war begins
1950 Alfred Steele, former Coke marketing executive became the CEO of Pepsi and made “beat coke” his
motto. Pepsi growth began to follow the post-war growth in a number of supermarkets and convenience
stores in the united states: there was about 10,000 supermarkets in 1945, 15,000 in 1955 and 32,000 in
1962 at the peak of its growth curve.
The Pepsi Challenge
42
1974 Pepsi launched “the Pepsi challenge” in Dallas, Texas. Coke was the dominant branding that city
and Pepsi ran a distant third behind Dr Pepper. Blind taste tests which where conducted by Pepsi’s small
bottler, the company tried to demonstrate how consumers liked the taste of Pepsi better then that of
Coke; after this it rolled out Nation wide.
Coke countered with rebates, retail price cuts and a series of advertisements questioning the tests
reliability/validity.
Pepsi challenge successfully eroded the cokes market share, in 1994 Pepsi past coke in food store sales
for the first time, opening up a 1.4 share lead.
Cola war heats up
1985 coke announced it was changing its 99-year old formula, the radical break with tradition cited a
sharp depreciation in the value of coca-cola as a brand/trademark. On that day Pepsi declared a holiday
for its employees.
Three months later the company brought back the original formula under the name of coca-cola classic.
New CSD products proliferated in the 1980s; coke introduced 11 new products including caffeine free
and cherry coke. Pepsi introduced 13 producers inc. lemon line slice and canine free Pepsi cola.
1980s the growth of Pepsi and coke put the squeeze on smaller concentrate prodycers as their shelf
space declined, smaller products where shuffled from one owner to another.
ADAPTING WITH THE TIMES
Starting late 1990s the soft drink industry (STI) encountered new challenges  suggested possible longterm shift in the market place.
Americans still drank CSDs (more then any other beverage) at US consumption started to fizzle that
stood contrast to annual growth rates of 3% to 7% during the 1980s and early 1990s.
The shift in consumption patterns evolved the linkage to growing health issues such as obesity.
A.11
THE QUEST FOR ALTERNATIVES:
Expanding the product mix offered other avenues for growth diet sodas rose to capture 30% of the CSD
market in 2009 compared to 24% a decade ago. Coke zero became a successful new product.
Both coke and Pepsi intensified their efforts to use alternative sweeteners. Despite some success of diet
drinks, coke and Pepsi realised that growth lied in ‘non crabs’, this category included juices, sport drinks,
energy drinks and tea based drinks also bottled water.
Initially Pepsi was more aggressive in shifting into non-CSD products that outsold cokes rival products in
several key categories including Lipton iced tea and Gatorade sports drink.
In 2007 77% of Pepsi’s new products released in the US where non carb, compared to Coke 56%
A.12
EVOLVING STRUCTURES AND STRATEGIES
Increasing popularity of CSD alternatives was brewing complications for CSD maker’s tradition
production and distribution practices.
43
Concentrate companies become more directly involved with the manufacturing of non-CSD beverages
such as Gatorade and Lipton iced tea. These finished goods required a smaller but specialized
production process that was challenging for the bottlers to accommodate with the existing
infrastructure.
Bottlers were becoming frustrated that they where not fully participating in the new growth businesses.
Pepsi and Coke sold the finished goods to their bottlers, who distributed them alongside their own
bottled products at a parentage mark-up.
In addition, coke and Pepsi distributed some non-CSD directly to retailer warehouses bypassing bottlers.
All CSD companies faced the challenge of achieving pricing power in the take-home channels. In
particular the rapid growth of the mass-merchandisers, led by wall mart and other club stores which
posed a threat to the profitability of Coke and Pepsi.
In addition bottlers had to manage an ever-rising number of stock-keeping units (SKU). Many non-CSD
sold at a relatively low volume leading to an increase use of split pallets.
Bottlers incurred higher distribution and sales costs; some of Cokes biggest bottlers saw their costs of
goods sold (inc operating expenses) reach 90% of their sales.
Not surprisingly bottlers complained over Coke’s charging a flat rate for its concentrate in the US market,
cokes profits were tied to volume growth whilst the bottlers profits were drive by package types and
where the drinks were sold.
A.13
FUTURE OF COLA WARS
Declining CSD sales, declining cola sales, rapid emergence of non-carbonated drinks appeared to be
changing the game.
44
APPENDIX B
S. Vignali, Virgin Cola,
Manchester, UK, pp: 133-143.
Available: http://www.emerald-library.com/ft
Global position of Virgin Cola within soft drinks industry
Virgin brand successful for virgin cold regarding competitors
Service divisions operate autonomously
Brand is emotional association, with Branson as the brand’s most effective PR weapon
Virgin cola adopted strategy to culturally suit different markets
Soft drinks industry = promotion, brand image, packaging (even more so than actual product particularly
in USA and UK)  promo type depends on target market, package for differentiation
Leading brands hold onto market via promo strategies and product diversification, innovation and brand
image
Disadvantage = 2 market leaders (Pepsi and coke)  decrease market share and increase market growth
= new product (requires increased funding through promo to increase market)
Launch of existing product in existing market requires increased recognition of brand and improved
productivity
Constantly innovate to remain competitive (?)
Virgin cola must be competitively priced. Media and selling through distribution channels = virgin cola
promo. Difficult to secure retail outlets
Advertising: coke focuses on product, Pepsi focuses on user, virgin focus on….???
Consumers are interested in brand name and image portrayed by drinking a brand. Pepsi and coke have
merged to other snack food industries enabling them to achieve economies of scale in advertising,
marketing and distribution
Important to continuously establish/implement strategic changes as means of creating competitive
advantage in such a competitive industry
Product is less important compared to the importance of advertising/brand recognition. Create promo
technique that appeals to the global consumer
Merge with complimentary business (diversify into new products in existing markets ) = cost
saving/synergy
Coke and Pepsi have strong distribution (overcome by merging with a well established branded product)
= ENABLE PRICE DISCOUNTING
Strengths = Virgin is branding and quality Brand, promo, innovative image and packaging. Product,
package and tastes the same across competitors, it is brand recognition that is significant = virgin
advantage with established brand
45
Weakness = global brand recognition and appeal to older generations (Richard as a brand), placing too
much emphasis on brand name as promo weapon however he is a unique world wide image. WANT=
image that a brand brings to consumer, quality and competitive price
Brand name dependence, incongruence between strategic/tactical levels, too reliant on to few
distribution channels
Opportunities = diversification of range, increase soft drink consumption, ability to gain more market
Threats = intense competition, saturated market failure = domino effect
APPENDIX C
Datamonitor 2011. Soft Drinks in Australia
Available: http://360.datamonitor.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/Product?pid=889413C8-178F-43C0-8BD74FD8C32C0B1F.
Accessed: 05 March 12.
46
MARKET VALUE
The Australian Soft drink market grew by 3.3% in 2010 to reach a valye of $10,953 million
Market value forecast
In 2015, the Australian soft drinks market is forecast to have a value of $12,721.8 million, an increase of
16.1% since 2010
MARKET SHARE
Coke is the leading player in the Australian soft drinks market, generating a 39.4% share of the markets
volume
FIVE FORCES ANALYSIS
The soft drinks market will be analyzed taking manufacturers of soft drinks as player. The key buys will be
taken as distributors and retailers of soft drinks, and producers of packaging, soft drinks ingredients and
other raw materials as the key suppliers.
The top 3 players (Pepsi Co., Coca-Cola company and Asahi breweries) hold 54.9% of the total market
volume. The buyer power of retailers in this market is moderate. Supplier power is not great, as most
inputs are readily available commodities. New entrants must contend with the reach and strong brands
of incumbents, although niche catergories such as smoothes present opportunities to new entrants. Not
a great threat imposed by the soft drink substitues except from traditional coffee and tea or homemade
juices, along with the tendancy of consumers switching towards the fruit juices. Although major players
are fighting for the dominant position, the rivalty level is moderate and there is scope for growth in niche
catergories.
Buyer power: in Aus, the main distribution channels for the soft drinks market are supermarkets, which
account for 48.5% of the total market volume, followed closely by on-trade retailers (32.5%) the leading
players generate most of their revenue from the production of concentrates, which are sold to bottling
companies.
New entrants: players in the Australian soft drinks market try to distinguish their products to some
extent by stressing their health benefits and taste. Although it would be difficult for a new entrant to
compete with the brand strength and reach of existing players it may be possible to achieve small-scale
success stressing a unique production method or nutritional benefits. However, niche catergories can be
exploited by new entrants.
COCA-COLA
The Coca-Cola Company (TCCC) engages in the manufacture, distribution and marketing of non- alcoholic
beverage concentrates and syrups. The company owns the world’s most valuable brand: Coca- Cola.
Furthermore, TCCC markets four of the world's top five non-alcoholic sparkling brands, including Diet
Coke, Fanta and Sprite. The company's finished beverage products are sold in more than 200 countries
worldwide. TCCC is headquartered in Atlanta, US and employs around 139,600 people.
Most of TCCC's products are manufactured and sold by bottling partners, who convert them into finished
packaged products for sale to distributors and other customers. The company sells the concentrates and
syrups for bottled and canned beverages to authorized bottling and canning operations. Authorized
bottlers and canners either combine syrups with sparkling water or combine concentrates with
sweeteners (depending on the product), still water and sparkling water to produce finished sparkling
beverages. These sparkling beverages are packaged in cans, glass and plastic bottles, and sold to
wholesalers and retailers.
47
Coca-Cola is the biggest-selling soft drink of TCCC. Other popular soft drinks brands marketed by the
company includes Beat, Canada Dry, Canning’s, Cheers, Cherry Coke, Citra, Diet Barq’s, Diet Coke, Fanta,
Limca, Sprite and Vault. In addition, TCCC produces, distributes and markets a broad portfolio of energy
drinks and sports drinks across the globe. Its energy drinks are marketed under brands such as Burn,
Buzz, Full Throttle, Full Throttle Blue Demon, Full Throttle Fury, Full Throttle Sugar Free, glaceau
vitaminenergy, Powerplay, Rehab, Samurai and TaB energy. TCCC’s sports drinks portfolio include brands
such as Aquana, Aquarius, Aquarius Active Diet, Aquarius Freestyle, Powerade, Powerade aqua+,
Powerade balance, Powerade Option and Powerade Zero.
KEY METRICS
The Coca-Cola Company generated revenues of $35.1 billion in the financial year (FY) ended December
2010, an increase of 13.3% over 2009. The company's net income totaled $11.8 billion in FY2010, an
increase of 73.1% over FY2009.
PEPSICO.
PepsiCo is one of the leading global beverage, snack and food companies. It manufactures, markets, and
sells a variety of salty, sweet and grain-based snacks; and carbonated and non-carbonated beverages in
approximately 200 countries across the world. The company has its largest operation in North America
(the US and Canada), Mexico and the UK.
PepsiCo operates through four business units: PepsiCo Americas Foods (PAF); PepsiCo Americas
Beverages (PAB); PepsiCo Europe, which includes all beverage, food and snack businesses in Europe; and
PepsiCo Asia, Middle East and Africa (AMEA), which includes all beverage, food and snack businesses in
AMEA. The company's four business units are further divided into six reportable segments: Frito-Lay
North America (FLNA), Quaker Foods North America (QFNA), Latin America Foods (LAF), PepsiCo
Americas Beverages (PAB), Europe, and Asia, Middle East and Africa (AMEA).
PepsiCo AMEA manufactures and markets salty and sweet snack brands including Lay's, Kurkure, Chipsy,
Red Rock Deli, Cheetos, Doritos, Ruffles and Smith’s. The division also manufactures, markets, and sells
beverage concentrates, fountain syrups and finished goods under the brands Pepsi, 7UP, Mirinda and
Mountain Dew. These brands are sold to authorized bottlers, independent distributors and retailers.
PepsiCo AMEA owns or leases approximately 80 plants and 1,175 warehouses, distribution centers and
offices. It also utilizes approximately 40 properties owned by contract manufacturers or co- packers.
KEY METRICS
PepsiCo generated revenues of $57.8 billion in the financial year (FY) ended December 2010, an increase
of 33.8% as compared to 2009. The company's net income totaled $6.3 billion in FY2010, an increase of
6.3% over 2009.
MARKET DISTRIBUTION
Supermarkets / hypermarkets form the leading distribution channel in the Australian soft drinks market,
accounting for a 48.5% share of the total market's volume.
On-trade accounts for a further 32.5% of the market.
MARKET FORECASTS
MARKET VALUE FORECAST
48
In 2015, the Australian soft drinks market is forecast to have a value of $12,721.8 million, an increase of
16.1% since 2010.
The compound annual growth rate of the market in the period 2010–15 is predicted to be 3%.
MARKET VOLUME FORECAST
In 2015, the Australian soft drinks market is forecast to have a volume of 5,308.1 million liters, an
increase of 14.2% since 2010. The compound annual growth rate of the market in the period 2010–15 is
predicted to be 2.7%.
APPENDIX D
JEROME: add article reference here
Add summary here
APPENDIX E
Datamonitor 2011. Soft Drinks in Australia
Available: http://360.datamonitor.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/Product?pid=889413C8-178F-43C0-8BD74FD8C32C0B1F.
Accessed: 05 March 12.
E.1
49
E.2
E.3
50
E.4
51
E.5
E.6
52
E.7
E.8
53
E.9
E.10
APPENDIX F
CONSUMERS
Typical buyers within this industry are large retailers who hold a great amount of financial muscle which
allows them to make large purchases and enter into long term contracts with market players. The loss of
one retailer could significantly impact upon a manufacturer’s revenue and switching costs are usually
low. This boosts buyer power somewhat. Industry consumption volumes; increased with a CAGR of 2.2%
between 2006 and 2010, to reach a total of 245.2 billion Kg in 2010. The industry's volume is expected to
rise to 262.3 billion Kg by the end of 2015, representing a CAGR of 1.4% for the 2010-2015 period58.
58
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011, www.datamonitor.com,
54
The age demographic of Ready To Drinks (RTDs) such as Breezers, UDLs and Cruisers has matured59.
(Might mean that this segment reduces the amount of Cola products purchased as a ‘mixer’ as they
consume pre-mixed drinks).
The presence of big supermarket chains increase buyer power60.
Consumer confidence has slipped in the last quarter with more Australians apprehensive about
economic uncertainty, financial security, and rising gas and electricity prices. The latest results for the
Nielsen Global Online Consumer Survey undertaken in June, shows that Australian consumer confidence
has slipped three points to 108 in the second quarter of 2010 compared to the previous three months;
with 36 per cent of consumers having a pessimistic view of the state of their personal finances over the
next 12 months (up six points from Quarter 1); and only half (50 per cent) saying the next 12 months is a
good/excellent time to buy what they want and need – the lowest this score has been over the past four
quarters.
Increasing utility bills was by far the biggest concern among Australian consumers, with 30 per cent citing
it as a major concern over the next six months – up 10 per cent compared to a year ago. In addition, twoin-three consumers (65 per cent) said they had already taken action to try and save on gas and electricity
over the past year, and even when economic conditions improve, saving on gas and electricity was the
number one action cited to reduce household spending61.
Shoppers are increasingly using coupons and visiting more stores during their shopping trips as they
search for the best value.
This behaviour has been observed in Australia with shoppers increasing their store repertoire.
Furthermore, 30 per cent of Australian shoppers claim ‘they will still look for cheaper grocery brands
even though the GFC is over’ (Nielsen Global Consumer Confidence Survey, June 2010)62.
Rising confidence in Australia in 2010 defied the trend of other developed markets and reflected the
strongest outlook Australia has had in more than two years for job prospects, personal finances, and the
ability to buy things over the next 12 months. Australia was the third most confident market globally,
boasting a Consumer Confidence Index score of 115 which was 25 points above the global average of 90.
An over- whelming 74% of Australians said their perception of local job prospects over the next 12
months was excellent or good; 70% believed that the state of their personal finances was positive; and
59% (the highest score globally) claimed the next 12 months was an excellent or good time to buy the
things they wanted and needed. Despite the positive outlook among Australians, we are still seeing
evidence of cautionary behaviour, with almost half of all consumers channeling their spare cash into
savings (47%), and 40% using surplus cash to pay off debts, credit cards and loans. Plus, the majority of
consumers are curbing their household expenditure by trying to save on gas and electricity; cut- ting back on take-away meals, new clothes
purchases and out-of-home entertainment, and making the switch to cheap- er grocery brands63.
A strong labour market and perceived financial position may be driving up our confidence, but in reality,
while we are also seeing a return in business confidence among grocery manufacturers – it has been
tempered somewhat by the sluggish growth performance of the grocery channel overall (value sales
growth for total grocery excluding tobacco dropped from a healthy 7.8% for the Moving Annual Total
(MAT) 16 August 2009, to just 3.6% for the same period this year).
This was driven by a combination of continued deep discounting by the retailers, a 5% fall in value for
59
Research in Focus - Ready To Drink Finally Comes of Age
http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3D
Course%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D&
60 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011
61
NIELSEN SPECIAL REPORT– JULY 2010, Insights into the shopper of today and the future; Economic concern and rising utility costs keeping
aussies up at night. By Chris Per cy
62 NIELSEN SPECIAL REPORT– JULY 2010, Insights into the shopper of today and the future; Economic concern and rising utility costs keeping
aussies up at night; When Promotions ain’t promotions. By Richard Reeves.
63 AdNews 14 January 2011, 2010 review
55
grocery baskets compared to a year ago, and the rise of the savvier shopper who is continuously on the
hunt for “value for money”. Private label perception in the eyes of the shopper has come a long way over
the past five years, with many seeing the benefits it can offer in terms of “value for money”, and as a
good quality alternative to name brands64.
Online Shopping: As Australians demand better deals on everything they purchase, online trading is also
playing a larger role in the shopping channel mix, with the key drivers being the availability of a broader
range of products and services and the ability to get products and services at a cheaper price than they
are available through traditional retail channels. Among Australia’s internet population, the vast majority
(96%) have made an online purchase65.
Australian Soft drinks market.
Australian soft drinks market value between 1996 – 2001 has grown by $128.9 Mn
CONSUMER TRENDS.
The latest results for the Nielsen Global Online Consumer Survey undertaken in June, shows that
Australian consumer confidence has slipped three points to 108 in the second quarter of 2010 compared
to the previous three months; with 36 per cent of consumers having a pessimistic view of the state of
their personal finances over the next 12 months (up six points from Quarter 1); and only half 50 per cent)
saying the next 12 months is a good/excellent time to buy what they want and need – the lowest this
score has been over the past four quarters. Increasing utility bills was by far the biggest concern among
Australian consumers, with 30 per cent citing it as a major concern over the next six months – up 10 per
cent compared to a year ago. In addition, two-in-three consumers (65 per cent) said they had already
taken action to try and save on gas and electricity over the past year, and even when economic
conditions improve.66 Saving on gas and electricity was the number one action cited to reduce household
spending. The economy was ranked the second biggest major concern with 21 per cent of respondents –
up four points in just three months – a reflection of the widespread voter dissatisfaction we have seen
over the past few months. Not surprisingly, restraint and vigilance continues to be a key theme among
Aussie consumers with around two-in five channelling their spare cash into savings (41 per cent), and 38
per cent of consumers channelling any surplus cash into paying off debts, credit cards and loans.67
Furthermore, more than half of Australian consumers cited they were actively cutting down on takeaway meals, out-of-home entertainment, and new clothes.68
The key to success of retail sector lies in responding to needs of the shopper of today and the future.69
Population.
Australian population will embark in significant changes including cultural diversity,ageing population
and general population growth, understanding the impact of these changes will have on shoppers and
their purchasing behaviour is critical in capitalising opportunities these trends will offer to retail sector.70
64
AdNews 14 January 2011, 2010 review
AdNews 14 January 2011, 2010 review
66 Retail world, Ac Nielsen Special report, 19th July 2010. P.20
67 Retail world, Ac Nielsen Special report, 19th July 2010. P.20
68
Retail world, Ac Nielsen Special report, 19th July 2010. P.20
69 Retail world, Ac Nielsen Special report, 19th July 2010. P.20
65
70
Retail world, Ac Nielsen Special report, 19th July 2010. P.23
56
The Shopper.
Global financial crisis(GFC) caused the shoppers to reassess how they spend and shop. There has been a
fundamental shift in shopper sentiment from the spend thrift ,debt driven early noughties to a greater
sense of caution and restraint post GFC.71
 The shopper has become savvy
 The shopper buys private labels in one category and premium price brand in another
 Private label products have been launched successfully into more and more categories .
 Shoppers stick with brands as long as they perceived to be good enough. 72
The confident yet Cautious consumer
Rising confidence in Australia in 2010 defied the trend of other developed markets and reflected the
strongest outlook Australia has had in more than two years for job prospects, personal finances, and the
ability to buy things over the next 12 months. Australia was the third most confident market globally,
boasting a Consumer Confidence Index score of 115 which was 25 points above the global average of 90.
An overwhelming 74% of Australians said their perception of local job prospects over the next 12 months
was excellent or good; 70% believed that the state of their personal finances was positive; and 59% (the
highest score globally) claimed the next 12 months was an excellent or good time to buy the things they
wanted and needed.
The results are consistent, with the continued rise in Australia’s employment growth fuelling a strong
labour market and underpinning household income. Our economy also benefited from expansion over
the first half of 2010 with Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth forecast to be around 3.25% for the year
– a result of rising commodity prices, increased public investment and a growing population.73
The Demanding Consumer
“Hard times have a way of transforming consumers and the past couple of years have been harder than
most. While the Australian economy emerged in 2010 relatively unscathed from the GFC, the downturn
has left an indelible impression on consumers’ attitudes and purchasing behaviours.
During the economic downturn, consumers shopped around for specials to cut costs, and this has
created a new, savvy consumer who is more demanding than ever. Despite the positive outlook among
Australians, we are still seeing evidence of f cautionary behaviour, with almost half of all consumers
channeling their spare cash into savings (47%), and 40% using surplus cash to pay off debts, credit cards
and loans.
Plus, the majority of consumers are curbing their household expenditure by trying to save on gas and
electricity; cutting back on take-away meals, new clothes purchases and out-of-home entertainment,
and making the switch to cheaper grocery brands. A strong labour market and perceived financial
position may be driving up our confidence, but in reality, while we are also seeing a return in business
confidence among grocery manufacturers – it has been tempered somewhat by the
sluggish growth performance of the grocery channel overall (value sales growth for total grocery
excluding tobacco dropped from a healthy 7.8% for the Moving Annual Total (MAT) 16 August 2009, to
just 3.6% for the same period this year).
This was driven by a combination of continued deep discounting by the retailers, a 5% fall in value for
grocery baskets compared to a year ago, and the rise of the savvier shopper who is continuously on the
71
72
73
2010 Review,Ac Nielsen adNews,14th January 2011. p.14
2010 Review,Ac Nielsen adNews,14th January 2011. p.15
2010 Review,Ac Nielsen adNews,14th January 2011. p.15
57
hunt for “value for money”.
Australian shoppers are prepared to shop around for the best deal. The average shopper repertoire now
includes about four different stores in a week. In fact, it’s estimated that more than
30% of all Australian grocery purchases are made on promotion. Aside from heavy retailer promotional
activity, we are seeing a decline in the amount spent per shopping trip – from $49.80 in 2009 to $48.40
this year; and each of these trips have become more rational with a 5% increase in the purchase of items
costing less than $5, while the purchase of items priced between $10-15 has declined by 4%.”74
Private label perception in the eyes of the shopper has come a long way over the past five years, with
many seeing the benefits it can offer in terms of “value for money”, and as a good quality alternative to
name brands. Private label continues to steadily gain traction with its representation in all of the major
grocery retailers, recording an increase in value share for the quarter to 2 October 2010, to just under a
quarter (23.9%) of total supermarket sales. Nielsen Homescan indicates that everybody buys private
label products (100% household penetration), with the average household spend reaching over $200 for
the first time ever in the latest quarter – up $3.48 on the previous quarter.
Online Shopping
“As Australians demand better deals on everything they purchase, online trading is also playing a larger
role in the shopping channel mix, with the key drivers being the availability of a broader range of
products and services and the ability to get products and services at a cheaper price than they are
available through traditional retail channels. Among Australia’s internet population, the vast majority
(96%) have made an online purchase.”75
The diversifying consumer
“Cultural diversity from changing immigration, population growth and ageing consumers is set to impact
Australian retailing in the next four decades. Key insights from the 2010 Nielsen ShopperTrends Report
reveal that the Australian shopper is evolving, and to succeed in the future, retailers and manufacturers
will need to develop strategies that accommodate growing ethnicity, population increases and an ageing
society. Nielsen research shows that among Australian households in 2010, Thai cuisine was the second
most popular eaten out-of-home (after traditional Australian); followed by Italian, Chinese and Japanese.
Asian food items in Australian family pantries has grown by 268,000 households since 2007. This
represents an opportunity for grocery marketers to provide simple and convenient Asian meal solutions.
From a marketers perspective, it is
important to understand how ethnicity impacts on how people shop and demand for products and
brands – which products and brands consumers are looking for and where they expect to find them.
Over the past 50 years Australian households have been adopting Mediterranean cuisine as part of their
everyday menu, with ingredients available in both supermarkets and specialist retailers. Now, as migrant
ion shifts from European count rise towards Asian countries, there is a need to understand how these
influences will change the way Australians shop, what they buy, where they buy it from and what they
eat.”76
Australian Population
“In the 12 months to 30 June 2010, Australia's population increased by 377,100 people, reaching
22,342,000. The annual growth rate for the year ended 30 June 2010 (1.7%) was lower than that
recorded for the year ended 30 June 2009 (2.2%).”77
74
2010 Review,Ac Nielsen adNews,14th January 2011. p.14 PRIVATE LABEL
2010 Review,Ac Nielsen adNews,14th January 2011. p.14
76
2010 Review,Ac Nielsen adNews,14th January 2011. p.14
77 Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2010. Population by Age and Sex. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/3201.0.
[Accessed 05 March 12].
75
58
Table: 1
Median Age
“At June 2010, the median age of the Australian population (the age at which half the population is
older, and half is younger) was 36.9 years, up from 36.5 years in 2005. The median age of males
increased from 35.7 to 36.0 years and the median age of females increased from 37.3 to 37.8 years over
this period.
The median age of all states and territories increased between 2005 and 2010. In 2005, South Australia
and Tasmania had the equal oldest median age, both at 38.6 years. However, between 2005 and 2010,
the median age of Tasmania increased more than any other to become the oldest state or territory at
39.9 years in 2010. The Northern Territory remained the youngest state or territory with a median age of
31.2 years, up from 30.7 in 2005.
The SD with the lowest median age at June 2010 was Northern Territory - Bal (29.4 years), followed by
North West in Queensland (29.9) and Kimberley in Western Australia (30.7). The highest median ages
were recorded in Yorke and Lower North in South Australia (46.5 years), Mid-North Coast in New South
Wales (44.6) and Southern in Tasmania (44.2).”78
Working Age Population (AGED 15-64 YEARS)
“At June 2010, there were 15.09 million people of working age (15 to 64 years), an increase of 1.36
million or 9.9% since June 2005. The proportion of the total population in this age group increased
marginally from 67.3% to 67.6% over this five-year period.
The Northern Territory had the highest proportion of people of working age at June 2010 (71.4%),
overtaking the Australian Capital Territory (71.2%) for the first time in over 20 years. Tasmania continued
to have the lowest proportion (65.2%).
Between June 2005 and June 2010, Victoria had the largest growth of people aged 15 to 64 years
(361,000), followed by Queensland (350,900) and New South Wales (339,300). Western Australia had the
fastest growth of people of working age (14.1% over this five-year period), followed by Queensland
(13.0%).
The SDs with the highest proportions of working age people at June 2010 were Pilbara in Western
Australia (72.7%), Darwin (72.7%) and Canberra (71.2%). The SDs with the lowest proportions were Yorke
and Lower North in South Australia (61.0%), Mid-North Coast in New South Wales (61.5%) and Wimmera
in Victoria (61.9%).”2
Adults aged 19 years and over
Food intake
Non-alcoholic and alcoholic beverages accounted for over 60% of total food and beverage intake, by
weight, for adult Australians (2,460 g for men and 2,020 g for women). The contribution of beverages to
the total weight of food and beverage intake may have been influenced by climate and was highest in
the Northern Territory (74% for men) and one of the lowest in Tasmania (59% for men). The contribution
78
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2010. Population by Age and Sex, Regions of Australia. [ONLINE] Available at:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/3235.0~2010~Main+Features~Main+Features?OpenDocument#PARALINK12. [Accessed 05
March 12].
59
of alcoholic beverages to food and beverage intake was higher for men (10%) than women (3%) (see
tables 2 and 3) 79
Datamonitor Consumer research:
Italics are my own words and don’t require referencing
Descriptions of the graphs are below the graph
There are approximately 2,721,000 people in the target profile group, in Australia.80
81
More female population allowing Virgin to penetrate the market with Low sugar/calorie drinks aimed at
that demographic.
79Australian
Bureau of Statistics. 2008. ABS. [ONLINE]. http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4802.0. [Accessed 08 Feburary 12]
80
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.10 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
81 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.11 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
60
These charts show the index of the target profile group compared to the average Australian in terms of
Gender and Age.82
This table shows the Education Level of the target profile group.83
82
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.12 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
83 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
61
Does this influence the way they consume? 8% at uni we can market to them as well as the 30% qith
diploma or degree if marketed correctly – aee red bull video Maree showed in week 3 lecture on methods
to educate the consumer. We could utilize the benefits of late markt entry as well as the benefits of
educating consumers
This table shows the Work Status of the target profile group.84
The average incomes of the target profile group85
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.15 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
84 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.17 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
85 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.20 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
62
This table shows the Occupation of the target profile group86
Discretionary Expenditure* of the target profile group87
86
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.21 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
87 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.25 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
63
These
tables show the Life-Cycle Segments and Number of Children of the target profile group
88
This table shows the Generations* of the target profile group89
88
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.27 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
89 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.29 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
64
This table shows the Roy Morgan Values Segments* of the target profile group90
This table
shows the target profile group's attitudes to a range of Health and Fitness Statements91
90
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.31 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
91 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.33 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
65
Profile group's attitudes to a range of Environmental Statements.92
This table
shows the target profile group's attitudes to a range of Shopping and Product Statements93
92
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.37 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
93 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
66
This table
shows the target profile group's attitudes to a range of Food Statements94
This table
shows the target profile group's attitudes to a range of Advertising and Media Statements95
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.41 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
94 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.43 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
95 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.45 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
67
target profile group's attitudes to a range of Finance Statements96
Eating Out/
Fast Food activities of the target profile group in the last 3 months97
96
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.49 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
97 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
68
Leisure
activities of the the target profile group in the last 3 months.
98
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.53 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
98 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.55 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
69
Entertainment activities of the target profile group in the last 3 months.99
Summary of
Media Usage for the target profile group.100
99
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.57 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
100 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.67 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
70
Newspaper
and Magazine Readership of the target profile group.101
Weekday
Commercial TV Viewing and Radio Listening of the target profile group.102
101
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.69 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
102 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.71 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
71
Internet
103
Usage and Cinema Attendance of the target profile group.
Additional media usage available in document such as newspaper and magazine readership and type of
tv shows watched.
Additional
Insights for a range of Industries for the target profile group.
104
ARTICLE SUMMARIES
JESS: Article Reference: Yoffie D. & Kim R. 2011, 'Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2010' Harvard
Business School, 9-7-11-46, pp. 1 - 22
For more then a centaury Coca-Cola and Pepsi vied for ‘throat share’ of the worlds beverage market.
103
XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.73 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
104 XYZ Customer Profile 2011,
July 2010 - June 2011 Australia, ‘This profile is based on responses to 'Stores purchased from in the last 4 weeks, p.83 Roy Morgan available:
<www.roymorganonlinestore.com>
72
Most competitive time spanned from 1975 – mid 1990’s, and was fought over the $74 billion carbonated
soft drink (CSD) industry. Both coke and Pepsi achieved average annual revenue growth of around 10%,
as both US and worldwide consumption rose steadily year after year.
The competition between Pepsi and Coke fed each companies success, the more successful coke was the
sharper Pepsi had to be and visa versa.
Competitive relationship started to fray in 2000s, however as the US consumption started t decline  by
2009 the average American drank 46gallos of CSD a year (lowest CSD consumption since 1989)
Heading into 21st centaury coke and Pepsi faced new challenges:
- Could they boost CSD sales
- Could they compete against non-CSD beverages that demanded different bottling, pricing and
brand strategies?
ECONOMICS OF THE US CSD INSUSTRY
Americans consumed 23 gallons of CSDs annually in 1970, and consumption grew by an average of 3% a
year over the net three decades. Fuelling this growth inc. increased availability of CSD and the
introduction of flavoured and diet varieties
Alternatives to CSDs Inc beer, milk, bottled water, juice, tea, powdered drinks, wine, sports drinks,
distilled spirits and tap water.
Within the CSD category the cola segment maintained its dominance, although its market share dropped
from 71% in 1990 to 55% in 2009.
CONCENTRATE PRODUCERS
Concentrate producers blend the raw ingredients, package the mixture in plastic canisters and ship
canisters to be to the bottler.
Most significant costs of the concentrate producers Inc: advertising, promotion, market research and
bottler support.
BOTTLERS
Purchase the concentrate, add carbonated water and high fructose corn syrup bottle or can the CSD
product and delivers it to consumer accounts.
Franchise agreements  both coke and Pepsi allow bottler to handle non-cola brands of other
concentrate producers. Bottlers could choose whether to market new beverages introduced by a
concentrate producer.
Bottlers couldn’t carry directly competing brands
RETAIL CHANNELS
In 2009 the distribution of CSD in the United States took place through supermarkets (29%), fountain
outlets (23.1%), vending machines (12.5%), mass merchandise (16.7%), convince stores and gas stations
(10%) and other outlets (7.8%).
Costs and profitability in each channel varied by delivery method and frequency, drop size advertising
and marketing.
CSDs accounted for $12 billion or 4% total store sales in the US and were also a big traffic draw for
supermarkets.
Historically Pepsi dominated sales through retail outlets, while coke commanded the lead in retail sales.
In the 1990s competition for fountain accounts = intense, in 1999 burger king franchises believed to pay
$6.20 per gallon of coke syrup (received substantial rebate on each gallon).
After Pepsi entered the fast food restaurant business acquiring Pizza Hut (1978), Taco Bell (1986) and
KFC (1986), coke perused competing chains such as Wendy’s and Burger King to switch to coke
In the vending channel bottlers took charge of buying, installing and servicing machines (also negotiating
contracts with the property owners typically received a sales commission in exchange for
accommodating their machine)
THE EVOLUTION OF US SDI (SOFT DRINK INDUSTRY)
Coke was formulated in 1886, Pepsi invented in 1893.
73
The cola war begins
1950 Alfred Steele, former Coke marketing executive became the CEO of Pepsi and made “beat coke” his
motto. Pepsi growth began to follow the post-war growth in a number of supermarkets and convenience
stores in the united states: there was about 10,000 supermarkets in 1945, 15,000 in 1955 and 32,000 in
1962 at the peak of its growth curve.
The Pepsi Challenge
1974 Pepsi launched “the Pepsi challenge” in Dallas, Texas. Coke was the dominant branding that city
and Pepsi ran a distant third behind Dr Pepper. Blind taste tests which where conducted by Pepsi’s small
bottler, the company tried to demonstrate how consumers liked the taste of Pepsi better then that of
Coke; after this it rolled out Nation wide.
Coke countered with rebates, retail price cuts and a series of advertisements questioning the tests
reliability/validity.
Pepsi challenge successfully eroded the cokes market share, in 1994 Pepsi past coke in food store sales
for the first time, opening up a 1.4 share lead.
Cola war heats up
1985 coke announced it was changing its 99-year old formula, the radical break with tradition cited a
sharp depreciation in the value of coca-cola as a brand/trademark. On that day Pepsi declared a holiday
for its employees.
Three months later the company brought back the original formula under the name of coca-cola classic.
New CSD products proliferated in the 1980s; coke introduced 11 new products including caffeine free
and cherry coke. Pepsi introduced 13 producers inc. lemon line slice and canine free Pepsi cola.
1980s the growth of Pepsi and coke put the squeeze on smaller concentrate prodycers as their shelf
space declined, smaller products where shuffled from one owner to another.
ADAPTING WITH THE TIMES
Starting late 1990w the soft drink industry (STI) encountered new challenges  suggested possible longterm shift in the market place.
Americans still drank CSDs (more then any other beverage) at US consumption started to fizzle that
stood contrast to annual growth rates of 3% to 7% during the 1980s and early 1990s.
The shift in consumption patterns evolved the linkage to growing health issues such as obesity.
THE QUEST FOR ALTERNATIVES:
Expanding the product mix offered other avenues for growth diet sodas rose to capture 30% of the CSD
market in 2009 compared to 24% a decade ago. Coke zero became a successful new product.
Both coke and Pepsi intensified their efforts to use alternative sweeteners. Despite some success of diet
drinks, coke and Pepsi realised that growth lied in ‘non crabs’, this category included juices, sport drinks,
energy drinks and tea based drinks also bottled water.
Initially Pepsi was more aggressive in shifting into non-CSD products that outsold cokes rival products in
several key categories including Lipton iced tea and Gatorade sports drink.
In 2007 77% of Pepsi’s new products released in the US where non carb, compared to Coke 56%
EVOLVING STRUCTURES AND STRATEGIES
Increasing popularity of CSD alternatives was brewing complications for CSD maker’s tradition
production and distribution practices.
Concentrate companies become more directly involved with the manufacturing of non-CSD beverages
such as Gatorade and Lipton iced tea. These finished goods required a smaller but specialized
production process that was challenging for the bottlers to accommodate with the existing
infrastructure.
Bottlers were becoming frustrated that they where not fully participating in the new growth businesses.
Pepsi and Coke sold the finished goods to their bottlers, who distributed them alongside their own
bottled products at a parentage mark-up.
In addition, coke and Pepsi distributed some non-CSD directly to retailer warehouses bypassing bottlers.
All CSD companies faced the challenge of achieving pricing power in the take-hoe cannels. In particular
the rapid growth of the mass-merchandisers, led by wall mart and other club stores which posed a threat
to the profitability of Coke and Pepsi.
74
In addition bottlers had to manage an ever-rising number of stock-keeping units (SKU). Many non-CSD
sold at a relatively low volume leading to an increase use of split pallets.
Bottlers incurred higher distribution and sales costs; some of Cokes biggest bottlers saw their costs of
goods sold (inc operating expenses) reach 90% of their sales.
Not surprisingly bottlers complained over Coke’s charging a flat rate for its concentrate in the US market,
cokes profits were tied to volume growth whilst the bottlers profits were drive by package types and
where the drinks were sold.
FUTURE OF COLA WARS
Declining CSD sales, declining cola sales, rapid emergence of non-carbonated drinks appeared to be
changing the game.
JAYNE: S Vignali, C ‘Virgin Cola’, Manchester, UK, pp: 133-143 available: http://www.emeraldlibrary.com/ft
Global position of Virgin Cola within soft drinks industry
Virgin brand successful for virgin cold regarding competitors
Service divisions operate autonomously
Brand is emotional association, with Branson as the brand’s most effective PR weapon
Virgin cola adopted strategy to culturally suit different markets
Soft drinks industry = promotion, brand image, packaging (even more so than actual product particularly
in USA and UK)  promo type depends on target market, package for differentiation
Leading brands hold onto market via promo strategies and product diversification, innovation and brand
image
Disadvantage = 2 market leaders (Pepsi and coke)  decrease market share and increase market growth
= new product (requires increased funding through promo to increase market)
Launch of existing product in existing market requires increased recognition of brand and improved
productivity
Constantly innovate to remain competitive (?)
Virgin cola must be competitively priced. Media and selling through distribution channels = virgin cola
promo. Difficult to secure retail outlets
Advertising: coke focuses on product, Pepsi focuses on user, virgin focus on….???
Consumers are interested in brand name and image portrayed by drinking a brand. Pepsi and coke have
merged to other snack food industries enabling them to achieve economies of scale in advertising,
marketing and distribution
Important to continuously establish/implement strategic changes as means of creating competitive
advantage in such a competitive industry
Product is less important compared to the importance of advertising/brand recognition. Create promo
technique that appeals to the global consumer
Merge with complimentary business (diversify into new products in existing markets ) = cost
saving/synergy
Coke and Pepsi have strong distribution (overcome by merging with a well established branded product)
= ENABLE PRICE DISCOUNTING
Strengths = Virgin is branding and quality Brand, promo, innovative image and packaging. Product,
package and tastes the same across competitors, it is brand recognition that is significant = virgin
advantage with established brand
75
Weakness = global brand recognition and appeal to older generations (Richard as a brand), placing too
much emphasis on brand name as promo weapon however he is a unique world wide image. WANT=
image that a brand brings to consumer, quality and competitive price
Brand name dependence, incongruence between strategic/tactical levels, too reliant on to few
distribution channels
Opportunities = diversification of range, increase soft drink consumption, ability to gain more market
Threats = intense competition, saturated market failure = domino effect
HANNAH: Soft drinks in Australia
Article Reference: DATAMONITOR. 2011. Soft Drinks in Australia. [ONLINE] Available at:
http://360.datamonitor.com.ipacez.nd.edu.au/Product?pid=889413C8-178F-43C0-8BD7-4FD8C32C0B1F.
[Accessed 05 March 12].
Market Value:
The Australian Soft drink market grew by 3.3% in 2010 to reach a valye of $10,953 million
Market value forecast
In 2015, the Australian soft drinks market is forecast to have a value of $12,721.8 million, an increase of
16.1% since 2010
Market share
Coke is the leading player in the Australian soft drinks market, generating a 39.4% share of the markets
volume
Five forces analysis
The soft drinks market will be analyzed taking manufacturers of soft drinks as player. The key buys will be
taken as distributors and retailers of soft drinks, and producers of packaging, soft drinks ingredients and
other raw materials as the key suppliers.
The top 3 players (Pepsi Co., Coca-Cola company and Asahi breweries) hold 54.9% of the total market
volume. The buyer power of retailers in this market is moderate. Supplier power is not great, as most
inputs are readily available commodities. New entrants must contend with the reach and strong brands
of incumbents, although niche catergories such as smoothes present opportunities to new entrants. Not
a great threat imposed by the soft drink substitues except from traditional coffee and tea or homemade
juices, along with the tendancy of consumers switching towards the fruit juices. Although major players
are fighting for the dominant position, the rivalty level is moderate and there is scope for growth in niche
catergories.
Buyer power: in Aus, the main distribution channels for the soft drinks market are supermarkets, which
account for 48.5% of the total market volume, followed closely by on-trade retailers (32.5%) the leading
players generate most of their revenue from the production of concentrates, which are sold to bottling
companies.
New entrants: players in the Australian soft drinks market try to distinguish their products to some
extent by stressing their health benefits and taste. Although it would be difficult for a new entrant to
compete with the brand strength and reach of existing players it may be possible to achieve small-scale
success stressing a unique production method or nutritional benefits. However, niche catergories can be
exploited by new entrants.
COCA-COLA
The Coca-Cola Company (TCCC) engages in the manufacture, distribution and marketing of non- alcoholic
beverage concentrates and syrups. The company owns the world’s most valuable brand: Coca- Cola.
Furthermore, TCCC markets four of the world's top five non-alcoholic sparkling brands, including Diet
Coke, Fanta and Sprite. The company's finished beverage products are sold in more than 200 countries
worldwide. TCCC is headquartered in Atlanta, US and employs around 139,600 people.
Most of TCCC's products are manufactured and sold by bottling partners, who convert them into finished
76
packaged products for sale to distributors and other customers. The company sells the concentrates and
syrups for bottled and canned beverages to authorized bottling and canning operations. Authorized
bottlers and canners either combine syrups with sparkling water or combine concentrates with
sweeteners (depending on the product), still water and sparkling water to produce finished sparkling
beverages. These sparkling beverages are packaged in cans, glass and plastic bottles, and sold to
wholesalers and retailers.
Coca-Cola is the biggest-selling soft drink of TCCC. Other popular soft drinks brands marketed by the
company includes Beat, Canada Dry, Canning’s, Cheers, Cherry Coke, Citra, Diet Barq’s, Diet Coke, Fanta,
Limca, Sprite and Vault. In addition, TCCC produces, distributes and markets a broad portfolio of energy
drinks and sports drinks across the globe. Its energy drinks are marketed under brands such as Burn,
Buzz, Full Throttle, Full Throttle Blue Demon, Full Throttle Fury, Full Throttle Sugar Free, glaceau
vitaminenergy, Powerplay, Rehab, Samurai and TaB energy. TCCC’s sports drinks portfolio include brands
such as Aquana, Aquarius, Aquarius Active Diet, Aquarius Freestyle, Powerade, Powerade aqua+,
Powerade balance, Powerade Option and Powerade Zero.
Key Metrics
The Coca-Cola Company generated revenues of $35.1 billion in the financial year (FY) ended December
2010, an increase of 13.3% over 2009. The company's net income totaled $11.8 billion in FY2010, an
increase of 73.1% over FY2009.
PEPSICO.
PepsiCo is one of the leading global beverage, snack and food companies. It manufactures, markets, and
sells a variety of salty, sweet and grain-based snacks; and carbonated and non-carbonated beverages in
approximately 200 countries across the world. The company has its largest operation in North America
(the US and Canada), Mexico and the UK.
PepsiCo operates through four business units: PepsiCo Americas Foods (PAF); PepsiCo Americas
Beverages (PAB); PepsiCo Europe, which includes all beverage, food and snack businesses in Europe; and
PepsiCo Asia, Middle East and Africa (AMEA), which includes all beverage, food and snack businesses in
AMEA. The company's four business units are further divided into six reportable segments: Frito-Lay
North America (FLNA), Quaker Foods North America (QFNA), Latin America Foods (LAF), PepsiCo
Americas Beverages (PAB), Europe, and Asia, Middle East and Africa (AMEA).
PepsiCo AMEA manufactures and markets salty and sweet snack brands including Lay's, Kurkure, Chipsy,
Red Rock Deli, Cheetos, Doritos, Ruffles and Smith’s. The division also manufactures, markets, and sells
beverage concentrates, fountain syrups and finished goods under the brands Pepsi, 7UP, Mirinda and
Mountain Dew. These brands are sold to authorized bottlers, independent distributors and retailers.
PepsiCo AMEA owns or leases approximately 80 plants and 1,175 warehouses, distribution centers and
offices. It also utilizes approximately 40 properties owned by contract manufacturers or co- packers.
Key Metrics
PepsiCo generated revenues of $57.8 billion in the financial year (FY) ended December 2010, an increase
of 33.8% as compared to 2009. The company's net income totaled $6.3 billion in FY2010, an increase of
6.3% over 2009.
MARKET DISTRIBUTION
Supermarkets / hypermarkets form the leading distribution channel in the Australian soft drinks market,
accounting for a 48.5% share of the total market's volume.
On-trade accounts for a further 32.5% of the market.
MARKET FORECASTS
Market value forecast
In 2015, the Australian soft drinks market is forecast to have a value of $12,721.8 million, an increase of
16.1% since 2010.
The compound annual growth rate of the market in the period 2010–15 is predicted to be 3%.
77
Market volume forecast
In 2015, the Australian soft drinks market is forecast to have a volume of 5,308.1 million liters, an
increase of 14.2% since 2010.
The compound annual growth rate of the market in the period 2010–15 is predicted to be 2.7%.
JEROME: add article reference here
Add summary here
COMPETITORS
Asahi Group Holdings (Schweppes Australia):
“Asahi Group Holdings is engaged in the beer brewing business. It also produces and markets soft drinks
and nutritional supplements.”105 Japanese company with a net profit of 587.6 million in FY2010. 106
Company operates primarily in Japan with operations spread across China, Europe, US and Asia. The four
segments the company operates through: alcoholic beverages, soft drinks, food and others. The soft
drink segment operates through Asahi Soft Drinks Company (includes manufacture and sale of coffee,
carbonated beverages, tea-based drinks, water, fruit and vegetable drinks, and chilled beverages. 107
In 2009 Asahi acquired Australian beverage business owned and operated by Cadbury (Schweeps
Australia). In July 2011, Asahi entered into a binding share purchase agreement to acquire 100% of the
issued shares of P&N Beverages Australia, the third largest soft drink company by volume in Australia.
108
. This acquisition will enhance Asahi’s position within the Australian beverage market by strengthening
its product portfolio and providing efficiencies in supply chain management.109
Increasing health consciousness among the consumers would boost the sales of the company’s health
and nutritional foods business.110
Major products and services include alcoholic beverages and food as well as logistics business and
restaurants. Non- alcoholic beverages include: coffee, carbonated beverages, tea-based drinks, water,
fruit and vegetable drinks, chilled beverages. 111
The company generates revenue through its four business segments, with soft drinks making up 26.3% of
total revenues during FY2010. 112
The soft drinks segment recorded revenues of $4, 463.9 million in FY2010, an increase of 10.2% over
FY2009.113
An opportunity for the Asahi Group Holding Ltd is the strategic acquisitions to expand business. 114
Companies vision: becoming a trusted company with global quality. To pursue customer satisfaction by
leveraging our strong manufacturing capabilities that utilize natural ingredients, and to earn the trust of
customers by striving to upgrade the quality of all products and activities to a world class level.115
105
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.4
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.4
107
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.5
108 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.7
109 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.14
110 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.14
111 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.9
112
Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.11
113 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.11
114 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.14
115 Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd, Datamonitor, 26 Aug 2011, p.17
106
78
Asahi aims to satisfy its customers with the highest levels of quality and integrity, while contributing to
the promotion of healthy living and the enrichment of society worldwide.116
-
Strengths:
-
current strategies:
-
SCA:
-
Intent:
-
Coca-Cola engages in the manufacture, distribution and marketing of non-alcoholic beverages,
concentrates and syrups. Coca-cola (TCCC) markets 4 of the worklds top 5 non-alcoholic sparkling
brands (Diet coke, fanta and sprite) The companies finished beveraged is sold in more then 200
countries and the TCCC is headquartered in Atlanta, US and employs around 139,600 people.
Most of TCCC products are manufactured and sold by bottling partners. Coca-Cola is the biggest
selling product of TCCC other popular drinks include Beat, Canada Dry, Cherry Coke, Diet Coke,
Fanta, Sprite etc. In 2011 (January) Coca-Cola Amatil (AUS) launched Nestea range of ice tea in
pear and honey variety. Asahi Breweries primarily is focused on beer rewing. Company operates
through 4 business divisions: alcoholic beverags, soft drinks, food and pharmacetucals and
others. Soft drinks division manufactures and sells various drinks such as PepsiCo – one of world
leading global beverage, snack and food companies. Pepsi operates through business units (same
as mentioned in doc1). PAB sells beverage concentrates, pepsi, Gatorade, Tropicana pure
premium, lipton, sierra mist, Tropicana juice, naked juice, etc. PAB also manufacturers or
contracts manufacturers to sell ready-to-drink tea, coffee and water products through Unilever
(under the lipton brand name) and Starbucks. PAB division accounted for 35.3% of total revenues
in FY2010. Revenues from PAB division reached $20.4 billion in FY2010, as compared to 10.1
billion FY2009.
Top 3 players in the AUS market – Coca-Cola, Asahi Brewery and PepsiCo. These 3 hold 54.9% of
the total soft drink market. 117
-
(23) Coca-Cola is dominant in the carbonated soft drinks market in Australia, the product, CocaCola alone accounted for more than 75% of the sales value in 2001. PepsiCo is the second most
successful company in the Australian carbonated drinks market. PepsiCo experienced a faintly
rise of 0.5% for the year 2001 in its share value. However, it is a long way from PepsiCo,
commanding only one-tenth of the carbonated market. Cadbury Schweppes also makes a
notable impact on the market with their Schweppes lemonade. Solo control only small sections
of the market. Leading companies: Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Cadbury Schweppes, Solo.
- Australia - Carbonated Soft Drinks, Market Profile, www.datamonitor.com
PepsiCo Inc:
PepsiCo, Inc, is a global snack and beverage company. 118It manufacturers, markets and sells a variety of
salty, sweet and grain-based snacks as well as carbonated and non-carbonated beverages.119
The company has 19 brands in in its portfolio, which generate over $1,000 million each in annual retail
sales. Some of these include Pepsi-Cola, mountain dew, diet pepsi, Gatorade, Lay’s and Tropicana.
The company recorded revenue of $57, 838 million during the financial year ending Dec 2010120
PepsiCo operates in over 200 countries and has large-scale operations in North America (Canada and the
116
Schweppes Australia 2012, Schweppes Australia, Viewed 14 March 2012,
<http://www.schweppesaustralia.com.au/Home.aspx#.T2BzAZztrlw.mailto>
117 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011,
118
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.5
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.4
120 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.4
119
79
US), Mexico and the UK.121A segment of the PepsiCo business unit; FLNA, uses its own as well as third
party manufacturing facilities to produce its snack products (including Lay’s potato chips, Dorito’s etc)
which are then sold to independent distributors and retailers.122 Schweppes Australia was formed on 3
April 2009, when we became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd.123 Under license,
Schweppes Australia manufactures and distributes Pepsi, Pepsi Max, Pepsi Light and Pepsi Light Caffeine
Free within Australia.124
The company has ownership interest in food manufacturing, processing and bottling plants. 125 The
AMEA segment manufacturers and sells a number of leading snack foods including Lay’s, Doritos,
Cheetos with snack manufacturing and processing plants in Australia.126
PepsiCo introduced the first caffeine-free colas in 1982 and was later restructured to focus on soft
drinks, snack foods and restaurants.127 The company went global through joint ventures and later
merged with Quaker Oats to create a $25 billion food and beverage company.128 The move not only
expanded PepsiCo's position in the market but enhanced its distribution influence, giving it greater
power to negotiate exclusive supply contracts.129 Cadbury Schweppes, the UK's chocolate and soft drinks
group, has kept a low profile, but it voiced its concern when required to comment by the FTC.130
The company also formed a joint venture with Lipton to expand the marketing and distribution of
Lipton’s range in select markets.131 Key acquisitions include Sakata, the Australian rice snacks
manufacturer.132
2006: PepsiCo and the National Hockey League (NHL) signed a multiyear deal, under which PepsiCo was
given exclusive North American rights, as well as select marketing and promotional rights in the
beverage, sports beverage, bottled water and snack categories. PepsiCo replaced Coca-Cola, which had a
similar deal with the NHL for 17 years. As part of the deal, Gatorade became the official sports drink of
the NHL, replacing Coke’s Powerade, and Aquafina became the bottled water.133
The joint venture between PepsiCo and starbucks allowed Starbucks access to PepsiCo’s established
distribution channels.134
2006 PepsiCo Australia acquired Bluebird Foods, New Zealand’s snack maker for NZ$245 million.135
Brand of PepsiCo; Aquafina launched a low calorie, vitimin enhanced water beverage in different flavour
combinations. 136 PepsiCo made official plan to invest $1 billion in China as part of the company’s
strategy to expand in emerging markets and broaden its portfolio of locally-relevant products. 137 2010:
PepsiCo completed the strategic acquisitions of its two largest bottlers and invested heavily in CSR and
R&D. 138 The company begins to consider the environment with sustainable crop farming technology,
and the health conscious consumer with investment in coconut water and decision to ensure their
portfolio become more ‘natural ingredient based’. 139
2011: PepsiCo and Burger King signed multi-year agreement ensuring PepsiCo is the exclusive soft drink
supplier.140 The company also launched eco-friendly, recyclable and compostable cups in the US.141
121
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.5
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.5
123 Schweppes Australia 2012, Schweppes Australia, Viewed 14 March 2012,
<http://www.schweppesaustralia.com.au/Home.aspx#.T2BzAZztrlw.mailto>
124 Schweppes Australia 2012, Schweppes Australia, Viewed 14 March 2012,
<http://www.schweppesaustralia.com.au/Home.aspx#.T2BzAZztrlw.mailto>
125 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.6
126 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.6
127 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.7
128 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.7
129 Cadbury Schweppes: sour grapes or genuine fear? 2001, Datamonitor 360, accessed 14 March 2012, p. 2
130 Cadbury Schweppes: sour grapes or genuine fear? 2001, Datamonitor 360, accessed 14 March 2012, p. 2
131 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.7
132 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.7
133
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.8
134 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.9
135 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.8
136 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.8
137 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.9
138
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.10
139 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.10
140 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.11
141 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.11
122
80
Beverages include: bottled water, carbonated soft drinks, chilled juices and juice drinks, powder drinks,
ready-to-use tea, sports drinks.142
Brands include: Alegro, Amp Energy, Aquatina, Aunt Jemima, Cheetos, Cracker Jack, Pepsi, Doritos,
Duyvis, Frito-Lay, Fritos, Fruktovy Sad, Frustyle, Gamesa, Gatorade, Izze, Lay’s, Life, Mirinda, Mountain
Dew, Mug, Near East, Pasta Roni, Propel, Quaker, Rice-A-Roni, Rold Gold, Ruffles, Sabritas, Sakata, Sierra
Mist, Simba, Smith’s, Snack a Jacks, SoBe, Sonric’s, Stacy’s, SunChips, Tonus, Tostitos, Tropicana, V
Water, Walkers, Ya. 143
The company recorded revenues of $57, 838 million during financial year ended Dec 2010, an increase
of 33.8% over 2009.144All other countries (including Australia) accounted for 27.4% of total revenues in
FY2010. Revenues from these countries totalled $15, 830 million, an increase of 24.2% over 2009.145
PepsiCo holds significant market share in the snack and beverage industry with worldwide brands. The
complimentary combination of snack and beverage business imparts unique competitive advantages to
PepsiCo. However, the carbonated drinks market in the US has witnessed a slow but steady switching
trend to low sugar and sodium products, thereby signalling a negative growth trend of carbonated soft
drinks product.146
SWOT147
Strengths:
1.
2. Combination imparts unique competitive advantage allowing PepsiCo to leverage existing distribution
system with the size of its infrastructure providing a barrier to entry for new entrants and competitors
since such a model is costly to replicate148
3. Successful launch of product extensions creating additional revenue streams and growth avenues149
4. Reaches bigger retail and wholesalers through customer warehouse channel by delivering its products
directly from manufacturing plants and warehouses to customer warehouses/retail stores.150 The
diversified product base and multi-channel distribution system protect it from a downturn specific to a
market or business line or distribution network, thus reducing business volatility.151
5. PepsiCo has established presence in both developed and emerging markets, internationally and
domestic. Large international presence allows the company to expand its markets to high growth
economies, derive the related synergies of expanded operations and also reduce the business risk.152
142
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.21
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.22
144
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.23
145 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.24
146 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.25
147 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.25
148 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
149
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
150 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
151 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
152 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.26
143
81
Opportunities
Acquisitions broaden the company portfolio and also strengthen its geographical reach with
international expansion likely to provide long term growth opportunities.153
Datamonitor estimates, the soft drinks market in Asia-Pacific grew by 4.1% in 2010 reaching a value of
$111, 023.6 million. In 2015 the Asia Pacific soft drinks market is forecast to have a value of $143, 597.2
million, an increase of 29.3% since 2010.154
Threats
Coca-Cola has strong brand recognition across the globe with key brands such as Diet Coke, Sprite and
Fanta. Coke has a wide geographical reach and widespread popularity. One of the contributing factors
for PepsiCo’s decline in beverage industry post 90’s has been its late entry in international markets
where Coke already had established distributor and consumer space. PepsiCo also lagged behind in the
potential growth market of low or no sugar based beverages.155 Company focus on brand building,
increasing global presence, R&D, emerging markets infrastructure, sustainable growth.156 Focus also on
good-for-you portfolio of products.157
- Strengths:
-
current strategies:
-
SCA:
-
Intent:
Coca-Cola Amatil:
Coca-Cola Amatil (CCA) manufactures, distributes and markets carbonated soft drinks, still and mineral
waters, fruit juices, coffee and other alcohol-free beverages. The company also distributes alcohol-based
beverages through its joint venture company Pacific Beverages. It is also involved in processing and
marketing of fruits, vegetables and other food products. The company operates in Australia, New
Zealand, Fiji, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. It is headquartered in Sydney.158
The beverage business consists of non-alcoholic and alcoholic businesses. The company, through its nonalcoholic beverage business, manufactures, distributes and markets carbonated soft drinks.159
The company’s sparkling beverages brands include: Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Coca-Cola Zero, Sprite, Sprite
Zero, Fanta, Lift, Deep Spring Natural Mineral Water, Appletiser, Grapetiser, Kirks, and Bisleri. Its still
beverages brands include: Mount Frankling Lightly Sparkling Water, Pump, Pumped, Vitamin water,
PowerAde Light, PowerAde Isotonic, Nestea, Neverfail Spring Water, Goulburn Valley, Goulburn Valley
dairy co., Goulburn Valley fruity drink, Fruitbox, Grinders, and Peats Ridge Springs. The company's
alcoholic beverages brands are Peroni Italy, Bluetongue, Miller, Russian standard vodka, Grolsch, Pisner
Urgwell, Peroni Leggera, The Macallan, Canadian Club, Maker’s Mark, The Famous Grouse, Souza,
Highland Park, Bols Amsterdam, Cockburns, Harveys Bristol cream, Basil Haydens, Oldcrow, Galliano,
Bbakers, Millerchill, Bookers, and Tamdhu. Its food (SPC Ardmona) brands include: SPC, Goulburn valley,
Ardmona, IXL, and Taylors.160
153
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.28
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.28
155 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.29
156 PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.32
157
PepsiCo, Inc. Datamonitor, 11 Jul 2011, p.36
158 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.4
159 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.5
160 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.5
154
82
The company recorded revenues of A$4,609.4 million (approximately $4,240.4 million) in the fiscal year
ended December 2010, an increase of 1.1% over 2009. The company's operating profit was A$844.9
million (approximately $777.3 million) in fiscal 2010, an increase of 7.3% over 2009. Its net profit was
A$497.3 million (approximately $457.5 million) in fiscal 2010, an increase of 10.8% over 2009.161
Coca-Cola was introduced to Australia in the 1930s. In 1964, British Tobacco Company (Australia)
purchased a controlling interest in Coca-Cola Bottlers (Perth).162
AMATIL changed its name to Coca-Cola Amatil (CCA) in 1989, and the Coca-Cola Company became CCA's
major shareholder.163
CCA expanded in South East Asia with the formation of joint ventures with the Indonesian Tirtalina
Group and the Indonesian Pan Java Group in 1991. In the following year, the company sold its Snack
Foods Division to United Biscuits of the UK. The company opened its new plant at Richlands in Brisbane,
Australia in 1994.164
CCA acquired Rio Beverages in New Zealand in order to increase its exposure to the juice and lifestyle
beverages segments in New Zealand and Australia, in 2002. In the same year, the company acquired
Pacific Beverages; and CCA sold its PET manufacturing assets for approximately $157 million.165
In 2003, CCA acquired Neverfail Springwater, a specialist in the delivery of bulk water to Australian
homes and offices; and Peats Ridge Springs.166
CCA opened an automated materials handling facility in Mentone, Victoria and also purchased Crusta
Fruit Juices in Australia along with its subsidiary, Quenchy Crusta Sales, a cold chain distribution
company, in 2004. In the same year, CCA acquired Quirk's Refrigeration.167
The company purchased the Northern Territory soft drink sales, distribution and production assets from
Parmalat Australia in 2005. This acquisition made CCA the sole licensee of Coca-Cola products in
Australia.168
The company signed a new three-year agreement with the National Rugby League Partnership (NRL) in
March 2010.169
Brands - Sparkling beverages: Coca-Cola Diet Coke Coca-Cola Zero Sprite, Sprite Zero, Fanta Lift Deep
Spring Natural Mineral Water Appletiser, Grapetiser Bisleri170
Still beverages - Mount Frankling Lightly Sparkling Water Pump Pumped Vitamin water, PowerAde Light
PowerAde Isotonic Nestea Neverfail Spring Water Goulburn Valley, Goulburn Valley Dairy Goulburn
Valley fruity drink Fruitbox Grinders Peats Ridge Springs171
Major competitors of Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd: National Beverage Corp. PepsiCo, Inc. Just Water
161
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.4
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.6
163
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.6
164 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.6
165 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.6
166 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.6
167 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.6
168
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.7
169 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.7
170 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.14
171 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.14
162
83
International Limited172
According to Group Managing Director statement the Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd is focused on: effectively
balancing pricing, volume growth and market share to improve our profitability and market position as
well as infrastructure programs in expanding capacity, operational efficiency and cold drink coolers, as
well as successful new product and package innovation.173
CCA will continue to focus on executing its organic growth strategy. Company focus will be on efficiency,
service and revenue gains right across the business. Investment in capacity and capability improvements,
capacity expansion and the accelerated rollout of cold drink coolers. CCA’s major capital investment
program continued to reduce operating costs and materially improve customer service levels in 2010,
leading to higher returns for CCA’s shareholders.174
CCA’s beverage market leadership position continued to strengthen in 2010 with increases in both
volume and value share across all channels despite more aggressive competitor pricing in the second
half. The business also fully recovered cost of goods sold increases through a combination of pricing and
mix management.175
Continued growth of Coke Zero which grew volumes by 7%. Coke Zero now holds over 40% share of the
diet cola category in the immediate consumption channel, a 3% share gain over the past 12 months.
Mother energy drink grew volume by 6% as a result of new flavour and pack variants and now has 24% of
the total energy drink market.176
CCA has been successfully executing an organic growth strategy for a number of years and will continue
to do so in 2011. The key strategic focus for the business will be to:
Continue to grow the core Australasian business through further new product and package innovation,
acceleration of our cooler placement programme and delivery of efficiency gains from Project Zero;
Accelerate the growth of our Indonesian business with increased investment in one-way-pack production
capacity and rollout of cold drink coolers into the market place; and continue to grow our share of the
alcoholic beverages market in Australia and New Zealand.177
-
Strengths:
-
current strategies:
-
SCA:
-
Intent:
- 10) MARKET DEFINITION: global beverages industry consists of total revenue generated through
sales of beers, ciders, winesflavoured alcohol food beverages and spirits and also softdrinks.
- Market value(11) Beverage manufacturers usually differentiate their products, meaning they can
occupy different areas of the beverage industry at the same time, reducing their reliance on
revenues from one product.
- INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011,
www.datamonitor.com,
Company Profile – PepsiCo: global snack and beverage company (carbonated/non carbonated,
swwet, salty, wholegrain). PepsiCo operates in 200 countries and has large scale operations in north
America, mexico and the UK. PepsiCo operates through business units; PAF, PAB, PI, the business
units are further divided into six reportable segments FLNA, QFNA, LAF, PAB, Europe and Asia and
AMEA (p 26-7).Coke-Cola Company engages in the manufacturing, distribution and marketing of non172
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.16
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.17
174
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.19
175 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.17
176 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.18
177 Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd, Company Profile 2011, Datamonitor, p.19 - 20
173
84
alcoholic beverages consentrates and syrups. The company okwns the worlds most valuable brand:
Coke Cola. Coke Cola primarily produces sparkling beverages. Most of the products are
manufacturered and sold by bottling partners (convert them into finished packaged products). Cokacola bottles beverages either in plastic, glss or cans. (P 30 -4). ANHEUSER-BUSCH INBEV – engaged I
the production, distribution and sale of beer and soft drinks. Company sells lagers, premium beers ad
specialty brews in over 23 countries, The companies offer a portfolio of over 200 brands, that
includes global flagship brands Budwiser, Stella Artois and Becks178.
-
Top 3 players in the AUS market – Coca-Cola, Asahi Brewery and PepsiCo. These 3 hold 54.9% of
the total soft drink market Companies may choose one of two distribution channels; (1)
intergrated buiness approach – selling reaty-tooncume drinks to retailers or adopt a business
model where they sell raw materials to a network of bottling companies179.
- Australia’s resources boom boosted advertising spend- ing in 2010 to the pre-GFC levels of 2008.
The strenght- ened economy helped Australia out-do markets globally and a market boom in
August, with significant ad spend- ing during the federal election, ensured the Australian media
market was surging180.
- Compared to 2009, the media market last year ampli- fied by an estimated 13% and remained
strong, albeit at lowering percentage increases after mid-year.
- Improved performances was key as the market started lifting in the second half and particularly in
the last quar- ter of 2009181.
- On a year-to-date basis to November 2010 - adjusted to reflect equal numbers of weeks to 2009 only five of the 39 major categories decreased182.
- Among the top 20, which combined represented 89% of all media ad spending, only the Media
category recorded a marginal 1% decline183
COMPANY
- Strengths:
-
current strategies:
-
SCA:
-
Intent:
INDUSTRY
It is imperative for manufacturers to shorten the time to market so they can build their initial market
share. Redbull's stranglehold in energy drinks is a prominent example of the benefits of first mover
advantages. In the drinks industry, it is often the early bird that catches the worm.184
Traditional cola was the baby-boomers' drink of choice when they were young. As obesity and other
health concerns become more of an issue among aging boomers, manufacturers are racing to court and
understand today's youth.185
…a number of manufacturers have introduced new stevia products, including Coca Cola and PepsiCo.186
178
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011, www.datamonitor.com,
179
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011,
AdNews 14 January 2011, 2010 review
181 AdNews 14 January 2011, 2010 review
182
AdNews 14 January 2011, 2010 review
183 AdNews 14 January 2011, 2010 review
184 Pepsi: adding flavor to the cola war, 2003, Datamonitor, p.2
185 Pepsi: colourful soda, 2002, ‘Best Practices in Drinks 2002’, Datamonitor, p.2
180
85
[INTERNATIONAL/GLOBAL MARKET] The global beverages industry grew by 15% in 2010 to reach a value
of $1,749,350.9 million. In 2015 the global beverages industry is forecast to have a value of
$1,909,008.8mil. The compound annual growth rate of the industry period 2010-15 is forecast to be
1.8%. Market volume The global beverages industry grew by 13% in 2010 to reach a volume of 245,177.3
million Kg187.
The compound annual growth rate of the industry in the period 2006–10 was 2.2%. Market volume
forecast In 2015, the global beverages industry is forecast to have a volume of 262,286.5 million Kg, an
increase of 7% since 2010. Market segmentation I - Beer, cider & FABs is the largest segment of the
global beverages industry, accounting for 33.5% of the industry's total value188.
Market segmentation II - Europe accounts for 46% of the global beverages industry value.
Industry Performance; The performance of the industry is forecast to decelerate, with an anticipated
CAGR of 1.8% for the five- year period 2010-2015, which is expected to drive the industry to a value of
$1,909 billion by the end of 2015189.
Since the economic downturn, manufacturers have sought cost-effective packaging, which also helps
differentiate products. There has been expansion in the use of newer substrates (such as RPET, PLA and
other biodegradable plastics, barrier films and pouches). Innovative packaging shapes and designs are
aimed at specific target consumers. Value added functional features have been introduced (i.e. reclosable can ends and pouches designed for vending applications), which are used to attract more
customers190.
Entrance to the industry could prove problematic when the large scale of leading incumbents and brand
loyalty is taken into account, however substitutes are cheaper and just as popular with consumers,
providing new entrants with an avenue to entrance. All of these factors increase rivalry between players.
Entrance to this industry can be achieved by starting up a new company, an existing company
diversifying operations or by the acquisition of an existing company. There is growing opportunity to
enter the industry on a small scale by occupying a niche. In order to compete with leading incumbents,
new entrants must operate on a large scale. This requires significant capital outlay, which poses a barrier
to entry for some. Furthermore, leading incumbents have strong brands already present within the
industry. Brand loyalty is key in this industry and can therefore provide increased competition191.
SWITCHING COSTS aren’t high, leading companies such as Nestle have diversified operationse e.g Nestle
producing tea and coffee as well as soft drink. Overall there is a moderate threat from alternatives!
Industry Competition: The global beverage industry is fragmented with leading incumbents such as
Coca-Cola, Pepsi Co, Nestle and Anheuser Busch holding. Moderate industry growth over recent years
does little to reduce the level of rivalry, however developing markets in the middle east provide market
players with viable expansion opportunities. Overall, there is a moderate degree of rivalry in this
industry. 35.1% of the total industry value. The large number of industry players serves to increase
rivalry. The main substitutes to soft drinks and alcoholic beverages are other beverages such as tea,
coffee or milk. Products are easily differentiated with brand loyalty having key influence192.
Market share - The Coca-Cola Company is the leading player in the global beverages industry, generating
a 16.3% share of the industry's value193.
Market rivalry
The global beverage industry is highly fragmented. The presence leading incumbents and lare numbers
of market players boosts rivalry.
The global beverage industry is characterized by the presence of large companies such as PepsiCo and
Coca-Cola.
Market Growth: The global beverages industry is forecasted to experience decelerated revenue and
volumes growth during 2010-2015. Industry Growth and Decline; In comparison, the European industry
declined with a compound annual rate of change (CARC) of less than 0.1%, and the Asia-Pacific industry
increased with a CAGR of 6.1%, over the same period, to reach respective values of $805.5 billion and
186
New drinks review: stevia gaining ground as the new sweetener of choice, 2009, Datamonitor, p.2
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011
188 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011
189 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011
190
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011
191 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011
192 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011
193 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011
187
86
$400.7 billion in 2010194.
Aus softdrinks generated tot revenues of $11 billion in 2010 representing compound annual growth rate
(CAGR) of 3.3% for the period spanning 2006 – 2010. Carbonate sales are the most lucrative for the
Australian soft drinks market in 2010 – generating total revenues of 6.6billion, equivilent to 59.9% of the
overall market value. To reduce the threat of substitutes, big players offen have diverse product
offerings e.g PepsiCo offers breakfast cereals and a range of soft drinks. Overall there is a moderate
threat for substitutes195.
Market Value The Australian Carbonated Soft Drinks market grew by 3.7% in 2001, to reach a value of
$1,446 million. The compound annual growth rate of the market in the period 1996-2002 was 3.8%. The
strongest growth was in 1997, when the market grew by 6.9%.The largest fall in the market was
recorded in 2000, when the market shrank by (1.1%).
Market Segmentation I Cola is the largest sector of the Australian Carbonated Soft Drinks market,
representing 72.3% of the market in value terms. Mixers is the smallest sector of the Australian
Carbonated Soft Drinks market, representing 4.8% of the market in value terms. Market Share I CocaCola products account for the largest share of the Australian Carbonated Soft Drinks market, with 41.2%
of the market in value terms. The top three brands in the Australian Carbonated Soft Drinks market
(Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi) account for 64.7% of the market between them196.
Market Distribution Off-trade accounts for the largest share of distribution in the Australian Carbonated
Soft Drinks market, with 56.2% of the market in volume terms.
Market Forecast In 2006 the Australian Carbonated Soft Drinks market is forecast to reach a value of
$1,703 million, an increase of 13.8% since 2002. The compound annual growth rate of the market in the
period 2002-2006 is predicted to be 3.3%197.
AUSTRALIAN CARBONATED SOFT DRINKS MARKET SEGMENTATION % BY VALUE DIAGRAM
AUSTRALIAN CARBONATED SOFT DRINKS MARKET SHARES % BY VALUE DIAGRAM
AUSTRALIAN CARBONATED SOFT DRINKS MARKET DISTRIBUTION % BY VALUE DIAGRAM
AUSTRALIAN CARBONATED SOFT DRINKS MARKET VALUE FORECASTS % BY VALUE DIAGRAM
MACRO
What does macro include?
AUS BEVERAGE MARKET:
In Brief: Market value in Aus soft drinks grew by 3.3% in 2010 to reach value of $10,953 million. Market
value forecast: In 2015 Aus soft drinks forecasted to vale $12,721.8mil. Market Volume: Aus soft drink
market grew by 2.9% in 2010 to reach a volume of 4,649.7 million litres. Market volume forecast n 2015
for the Aus market = volume of 5,308.1 litres (increase of 14.2% since 2010). Market segmentation:
carbonates is the largest segment of the soft drinks market in Aus accounting for 59.9% of the markets
total value. Aus counts for 85% of the Asia Pacific soft drinks market value. Market Share: Coca-Cola
Company is the leading player in the Australian soft drinks market, generating 39.4% share of the
markets volume. Market Rivalry: Aus soft drink market = concentrated, top 3 players holding 54.9% of
the total market volume. The market has the presence of leading players such as the coca-cola company,
Asahi Breweries and PepsiCo198.
While Australia continues to be one of the most optimistic developed markets globally; there is still
pessimism clouding the year ahead as we juggle the good with rising interest rates, escalating debt
levels, increasing utility costs and economic uncertainty with the recent change in leadership so close to
the upcoming Federal Election199.
194
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011
196 Australia - Carbonated Soft Drinks, Market Profile, www.datamonitor.com
197
Australia - Carbonated Soft Drinks, Market Profile, www.datamonitor.com
198 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011,
199 NIELSEN SPECIAL REPORT– JULY 2010, Insights into the shopper of today and the future; Economic concern and rising utility costs keeping
aussies up at night. By Chris Per cy
195
87
ENVIRO FORCES
Threats to the industry may be reduced consumer spending in natural disaster states??
Commentators, including Princeton University’s Alan Blinder, estimate 40 million jobs could be at risk of
being offshored over the next 20 years and suggest American workers should specialize in services that
can be delivered face-to-face. In contrast, Jensen and Kletzer expect the process of globalization in
services will proceed much as it has in manufacturing: They estimate only 15–20 million jobs are at risk of
being offshored to low-wage, labor-abundant countries; approximately 40 percent of these jobs will be
in the manufacturing sector, long considered “at risk”?200.
http://www.iie.com/publications/interstitial.cfm?ResearchID=880
LEGAL
TECHNICAL
Pepsi has announced plans to produce its own vanilla-flavored cola, following the success of Coca-Cola's
Vanilla Coke. Copycat competition is coming from own brand colas as well. Soft drinks makers need to
shorten the time it takes to get new products to market so they can make the most of any first mover
advantage. Pepsi is launching a vanilla-flavored cola drink to challenge Coca-Cola's rival product. The two
companies are renowned for going head to head in the cola drink market where product imitations are
commonplace and competition is aggressive. Coca-Cola launched Vanilla Coke in May last year. The
product has proved successful - it has sold over 90 million cases in the US. These new developments in
the soft drink market highlight the increasing threat of own label brands taking market share.201
Marketing practitioners are now faced with growing demands to show greater awareness and speed in
planning product launches to reduce the threat of being pre-empted.202
“Coca-Cola is a brand that is recognized world wide. It is sold in over 200 countries and has been a leader
in globalization. In the past few months Coke has made strides toward the production of their new
‘PlantBottle’. The PlantBottle will be made of PET plastic. This bottle will also contain 30% materials from
Brazilian sugar cane and molasses. The goal is to make the PlantBottle 100% recyclable. The first bottles
will be introduced in Denmark, then Vancouver (for the winter Olympics) and the US, with eventual
launches in Japan, Mexico and Brazil as well. Coke is certainly not the first company to attempt to
achieve a fully recyclable container. Starbucks slaved for 10 years to produce their fully recyclable cup. In
2008 they saved over 100,000 trees simply by putting their delicious drinks in these recyclable cups. If all
companies would make such strides, the environment would certainly benefit. But it is not just
companies that need to help out the environment. Even if every beverage container used was 100%
recyclable, still thousands of pounds of plastic end up in landfills every year. Everyone needs to do their
part to ensure that the PlantBottle, and other products like it, achieve its green goals.”203
Macro/Technical In result of inadequate programs new technological advancements and efforts to
expand economic liberalization are receiving significant political backlash204.
New entrants need to access distribution channels, such as retailers. This can prove problematic as
retailers are likely to stock brands popular with consumers, thus may be less willing to give any shelf
space to new products until they are well established205.
200
Policy Brief 08-1
"Fear" and Offshoring: The Scope and Potential Impact of Imports and Exports of Services by J. Bradford Jensen, Peterson Institute for
International Economics
and Lori G. Kletzer, Peterson Institute for International Economics, January 2008
201
Pepsi: adding flavor to the cola war, 2003, Datamonitor, p.2
Pepsi: adding flavor to the cola war, 2003, Datamonitor, p.2
203 Global Edge. 2000. Coca-Cola Amatil. [ONLINE] Available at: http://globaledge.msu.edu/blog/post/562/ge-blog-series--go-green--part-4.2--planting-new-ideas [Accessed 08 February 12].
202
204
Designing a National Strategy for Responding to Economic Dislocation by Howard F. Rosen, Peterson Institute for International Economics
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Investigation and Oversight House Science and Technology Committee
June 24, 2008
205 ) INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011,
88
Supermarkets and Hypermarkets (48.5%) are the most significant distribution channel in the AUS market.
Followed closely by on-trade retailers (32.5%) .
The buyer power of retailers is moderate. Supplier power isn’t great, as most inputs are readily available
commodities. Would be difficult for new entrant to compete with brand strength and reach existing
players – may be possible to achieve small scale success stressing unique production method or
nutritional benefits. Even if new entrants opted for business model employing use of bottoling partners
(eliminating much of the production process) there is still need to invest in manufacturing capacity in
order to produce the concentrates206.
SOCIAL
…advertainment is very costly and for smaller companies there are cheaper alternatives with proven
success rates such as guerilla marketing.207
“For decades, Coca-Cola’s main competitor has been Pepsi. However, in recent years Coca-Cola has faced
increasing competition from non-carbonated drinks such as tea, coffee, and fruit juices. This has been
especially true in Japan. In response to this growing trend, Coca-Cola has developed a new product –
green tea-flavored Coke. The product targets mainly health concious women in their 20s and 30s. In
response to this product, Pepsi is planning on launching basil-flvaored Pepsi. As of right now these new
products are going to be sold in Japan only, however if Coca-Cola’s new bevarage is met well by
customers, it will be marketed in other countries such as the United States and countries in Western
Europe.
Is it possible that the global bevarage market could see a major shift in the next decade? More
consumers are becoming concious about the health threats that some carbonated drinks pose, and
about the benefits from drinks such as green tea. Coca-Cola and Pepsi are taking steps to make some of
their carbonated products more appealing to this segment of consumers. But will this trend be
concentrated mostly in Asia, or will it be a truly global phenomenon?”208
(5) Costs to workers, families, firms and communities are exacerbated by the lack of national
comprehensive strategy to deal with these economic disruptions. The collection of out-of-date/
inadequate programs provide too little assistance for those in need.
Workers are the first to feel negative consequences of economic restructuring due to increased domestic
and international competition.
Designing a National Strategy for Responding to Economic Dislocation by Howard F. Rosen, Peterson
Institute for International Economics Testimony before the Subcommittee on Investigation (pto)
and
Oversight House Science and Technology Committee
June 24, 2008
http://www.iie.com/publications/testimony/t
(16) There has been increased demand for organic products, including organic wines, spirits and beers.
These specialty products can often be sold at a higher price.
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011,
www.datamonitor.com,
(19) Players in the Australian soft drink market need to distinguish their products to some extent by
stressing the health benefits (esp’ juices and functional drinks) as well as taste.
206
207
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011
Pepsi: that’s advertainment, 2003, Soft Drinks in the USA to 2006, Datamonitor, (DMCM0237), p.2
208 80
Global Edge. 2009. Viktoriya Ivanova [ONLINE].. http://globaledge.msu.edu/blog/archive/2009/6.[Accessed 08 Feburary 12].
89
Trend moving away from soft drinks and moving towards healthier healthier fruit juice and bottled
water.
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011,
(29) Key insights from the 2010 Nielsen ShopperTrends
Report reveal that the profile of the Australian shopper
is evolving, and in order to succeed in the future, retailers and manufacturers will need to develop
strategies that accommodate growing ethnicity, population increases and an ageing society. “From both
a supplier and retailer point of view, it is important to understand how ethnicity impacts shopping
patterns.”
ECONOMIC
Costs to workers, families, firms and communities are exacerbated by the lack of national comprehensive
strategy to deal with these economic disruptions. The collection of out-of-date/ inadequate programs
provide too little assistance for those in need.
Workers are the first to feel negative consequences of economic restructuring due to increased domestic
and international competition209.
There has been increased demand for organic products, including organic wines, spirits and beers. These
specialty products can often be sold at a higher price210.
Players in the Australian soft drink market need to distinguish their products to some extent by stressing
the health benefits (esp’ juices and functional drinks) as well as taste.Trend moving away from soft drinks
and moving towards healthier healthier fruit juice and bottled water211.
Key insights from the 2010 Nielsen ShopperTrends
Report reveal that the profile of the Australian shopper
is evolving, and in order to succeed in the future, retailers and manufacturers will need to develop
strategies that accommodate growing ethnicity, population increases and an ageing society. “From both
a supplier and retailer point of view, it is important to understand how ethnicity impacts shopping
patterns.”212
ECONOMIC
The Peterson Institute calculates that the US economy is approximately $1 trillion richer each year owing
to past globalization—the payoff both from technological innovation and from policy liberalization—and
could gain another $500 billion annually from future liberalization (Bradford, Grieco, and Hufbauer 2005
[pdf])213.
Speeches and Papers, Answering the Critics: Why Large American Gains from Globalization Are
They expect these losses to be offset by job gains in high-wage activities from services exporting. The
United States will retain its comparative advantage in high-skill, high-wage production and increase these
activities in tradable service industries as trade barriers diminish. While the loss of low-wage activities
that are offshored and the gain from high-wage service exports will cause dislocation, the globalization
of services production is likely to have productivity-enhancing effects similar to the impact of
209
Designing a National Strategy for Responding to Economic Dislocation by Howard F. Rosen, Peterson Institute for International Economics
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Investigation (pto) and Oversight House Science and Technology Committee
June 24, 2008
210
INDUSTRY PROFILE, Global Beverages, Reference Code: 0199-2014 Publication Date: May 2011,
211 INDUSTRY PROFILE, Soft Drinks in Australia, Reference Code: 0125-0802, Publication Date: May 2011
212 "Fear" and Offshoring: The Scope and Potential Impact of Imports and Exports of Services by J. Bradford Jensen, Peterson Institute for
International Economics
and Lori G. Kletzer, Peterson Institute for International Economics, January 2008
213
Speeches and Papers, Answering the Critiques: Why Large American Gains from Globalization Are Plausible by Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Peterson
Institute for International Economics, May 2008, © Peterson Institute for International Economics. P.3
90
globalization in the manufacturing sector, offering significant potential to improve living standards in the
United States and around the world214
Competitors/Economic - US Economy faces intense competition both domestically and internationally.
Increased competition may benefit the economy though access to more, less expensive and better
products and services it also places significant costs on American workers and their families, firms and
communities215.
(4) Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) - TAA provides workers 78 weeks of income maintenance
payments, in addition to the traditional 26 weeks of UI, for as long as they participate in training. In
addition, the program includes a 65 percent HCTC, a limited wage insurance program, and job search and
relocation assistance. Under wage insurance, otherwise known as Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA), workers above the age of 50, earning less than $50,000, can receive half of the
difference between their old and new wages, for up to 2 years, subject to a maximum of $10,000. This
program is designed to assist the large number of workers who experience earnings losses after
reemployment. In order to be eligible for TAA, workers must have been laid off from a plant for which at
least one of the following 3 criteria "contributed importantly" to its decline in employment and sales:
- an increase in imports
- aid off
from an upstream or downstream producer a shift in production to another country216
The 2009 update of TAA addressed both of these major shortcomings (that the bill originally only
covered workers in the production of goods not services and that it focused primarily onof the program
and updated it in many small but important ways. Though it did not receive the attention it deserved,
the 2009 TAA bill was one of the most important revisions of US worker adjustment legislation in
decades217.
Obama Administration extension of the TAA (Trade Adjustment Assistance) program due to a largely
eclipsed debt-limit rancor. TAA provides training and other assistance to workers who lose their jobs due
to foreign competition218.
214
Policy Brief 08-1"Fear" and Offshoring: The Scope and Potential Impact of Imports and Exports of Servicesby J. Bradford Jensen, Peterson
Institute for International Economics
and Lori G. Kletzer, Peterson Institute for International Economics, January 2008. P.3
215 Designing a National Strategy for Responding to Economic Dislocation by Howard F. Rosen, Peterson Institute for International Economics
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Investigation and Oversight House Science and Technology Committee
June 24, 2008
216
Designing a National Strategy for Responding to Economic Dislocation by Howard F. Rosen, Peterson Institute for International Economics
Testimony before the Subcommittee on Investigation and Oversight House Science and Technology Committee
June 24, 2008
217 Op-ed, Trade Adjustment Assistance: Lost in the Shuffle by Greg Mastel, Dutko Worldwide
and Howard F. Rosen, Peterson Institute for
International Economics, Op-ed in the Hill
November 5, 2010
218
TAA Reauthorization: Necessary and Appropriate by Greg Mastel, Dutko Worldwide
and Howard F. Rosen, (Peterson Institute for
International Economics) Op-ed in the Hill
July 21, 2011
91
BS350 Strategic Marketing - Group Assignment RESEARCH
Competitor analysis research MASTER
Virgin Group: Jerome (Virgin Group)
Data from connect4:
Data from data monitor:
Data from google scholar:
Data from datamonitor360:
Data from annual reports:
Virgin Australia: Hannah (Virgin Cola)
Data from google scholar:
The Virgin Cola Company was a joint venture with the Canadian soft drink company Cott & Company, the
world’s largest supplier of retailer own-brand soda drinks. Virgin Cola was introduced in the UK in 1994
and achieved
318
GCT15 10/26/2004 4:34 PM Page 318RICHARD BRANSON AND THE VIRGIN GROUP OF COMPANIES IN
2004
initial success in the pub and restaurant trade. The drink was packaged in a “Pammy” bottle based upon
the body of Pamela Anderson. After gaining a peak of 8 percent share of the UK market, sales declined.
In 1997, Virgin Cola lost about £5 million on revenues of £30 million. In 1998, Virgin acquired Cott’s share
of the business and launched Virgin Cola with a $25 million investment and the goal, according to
Branson, of “driving Coke out of the States.”11 Despite gaining massive publicity, there was little
evidence of Virgin being able to convert media coverage into sales. By 2002, Virgin Drinks Company was
still marketing Virgin Cola in the UK, Continental Europe, and Asia, but no sales figures were available.
https://www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk/grant/docs/15Virgin.pdf
PepsiCo: Jess
Data from connect4:
http://www.connect4.com.au.ipacez.nd.edu.au/products/ar/index.html
Constellation Brands Inc (CBR)
Performance Graph
Performance Graph
Set forth below is a line graph comparing, for the fiscal years ended the last day of February 2006,
2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, the cumulative total stockholder return of the Company’s Class A Common
Stock and Class B Common Stock, with the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 Index and a peer group
index comprised of companies in the beverage industry (the “Peer Group Index”) (see footnote (1) to the
graph). The graph assumes the investment of $100.00 on February 28, 2005 in the Company’s Class A
Common Stock, the Company’s Class B Common Stock, the S&P 500 Index and the Peer Group Index, and
also assumes the reinvestment of all dividends.
Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Return
92
(1) The Peer Group Index is weighted according to the respective issuer’s stock market capitalization and
is comprised of the following companies: The Boston Beer Company, Inc.; Brown-Forman Corporation
(Class A and Class B Shares); Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated; The Coca-Cola Company; Coca-Cola
Enterprises Inc.; Diageo plc; LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton; Molson Coors Brewing Company (Class
B Shares); PepsiCo, Inc.; and PepsiAmericas, Inc.
The stock price performance included in this graph is not necessarily indicative of future stock price
performance. The Company neither makes nor endorses any predictions as to future stock performance.
Data from datamonitor360:(Already included in research document [diagrams and tables etc]).ß
PepsiCo, Inc.
Company Profile
Publication Date: 11 Jul 2011
www.datamonitor.com
COMPANY:
Has 19 brands in its portfolio, which generate over a million each in annual retail sales.
The company’s headquaters employs 294,000 people.
Data
The company recorded revenues of $57,838 million during the financial year ended December 2010
(FY2010), an increase of 33.8% over 2009. The operating profit of the company was $8,332 million
in FY2010, an increase of 3.6% over 2009. The net profit was $6,320 million in FY2010, an increase
of 6.3% over 2009.
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer: Indra K. Nooyi (executive board)
Data from google scholar: most of the data on scholar needed to be bought however the International
Marketing Exemplar Firm Report was one I thought would be good.
 Pepsi has 41 brand names

Is constantly struggling with there leading competitior Coke-cola

Epsi holds a 37.5% share in the carbonated drinks market (Coke 42.9%)
93

Founded as a bottling company in the 1800’s.

PepsiCo’s long-term success has been attributed to their domination of the market and superior
reputation for being a stable, quality brand name.

Advertising efforts first marketed Pepsi-Cola as a bargain brand

After changing hands four times and declaring bankruptcy twice in the first part of the 20th
century, Pepsi shifted its focus from bargain brand promotions to advertising geared toward
young people—this is where the “Pepsi Generation” marketing plan originated from.

PEST ANALYSIS
-
POLITICAL:
New regulatory pressures regarding health concerns and other global concerns have forced
companies in the food/beverage industry to take on new challenges and reevaluate their
products to meet new consumer demands,
-
PepsiCo has developed a Blue Ribbon Advisory Board, made up of leading health and
wellness experts and third-party advisors from across the globe in order to help the
corporation face these newly strengthened consumer demands. Furthermore, PepsiCo has
recently worked alongside the Clinton Foundation, American Heart Association, and the
North American beverage industry in order to set policies regarding placement of the correct
products in the correct areas.
-
ECONOMIC:
The major economic issue facing PepsiCo and its subdivisions is the rising input costs of their
businesses due to structural inflation. Agricultural, energy, and some metal industries are
going through periods of steady inflation.
-
Because PepsiCo relies on these industries, inflation costs must be factored into their cost
equations. The corporation acknowledges its fortunate ability to navigate through tough
economic times in the past.
-
SOCIAL:
Social environment of food service markets are changing significantly. A new demand for
healthy food and beverages coupled with a push towards green operations and
environmentally-friendly company management has changed the social playing field within
most markets.
-
PepsiCo and PBNA have successfully adopted new goals and produced new products in order
to follow these growing trends. Not only has PBNA recently began to offer new products
such as Diet Pepsi Max, a cola with zero calories, sugars, carbohydrates, or Total Fat, but it
has also added new lines of product in order to meet this more health-conscious market.
-
TECHNOLOGY:
-
PepsiCo and its subdivisions utilize technology in order to sustain company growth, keep up
with the demands of its sustained growth, and perform efficiently.
94
-
PepsiCo’s delivery systems provide a strong competitive advantage. In particular, their most
powerful distribution system, Directstore-delivery (DSD) allows them to supply all of their
retailers and customerdistributors with up-to-date stock. “Directstore-delivery allows us to
create maximum appeal and visibility for our brands and support in-store promotions. DSD
works well for popular 7 products we restock often, because it allows us to distribute new
products quickly. Our DSD system reaches hundreds of thousands of retail outlets this way,
from neighborhood convenience stores to large-format supermarkets” (Annual Report, 11).
Data from Data monitor: think the same as Data Monitor360
Data from PepsiCo.com/Annual Report 2012
http://www.pepsico.com/Company/Our-Mission-and-Vision.html
At PepsiCo, we believe being a responsible corporate citizen is not only the right thing to do, but the
right thing to do for our business.
Our Mission
Our mission is to be the world's premier consumer products company focused on convenient foods and
beverages. We seek to produce financial rewards to investors as we provide opportunities for growth
and enrichment to our employees, our business partners and the communities in which we operate. And
in everything we do, we strive for honesty, fairness and integrity.
Our Vision
"PepsiCo's responsibility is to continually improve all aspects of the world in which we operate environment, social, economic - creating a better tomorrow than today."
Our vision is put into action through programs and a focus on environmental stewardship, activities to
benefit society, and a commitment to build shareholder value by making PepsiCo a truly sustainable
company. Data from PepsiCo.com/Annual Report 2012
http://www.pepsico.com/Company/Our-Mission-and-Vision.html
Performance with Purpose
At PepsiCo, we're committed to achieving business and financial success while leaving a positive imprint
on society - delivering what we call Performance with Purpose.
Our approach to superior financial performance is straightforward - drive shareholder value. By
addressing social and environmental issues, we also deliver on our purpose agenda, which consists of
human, environmental, and talent sustainability.
Learn more about Perfor
Data from annual reports:
http://www.pepsico.com/Download/PepsiCo_Annual_Report_2010_Full_Annual_Report.pdf
“Good for all… is good for business”
At PepsiCo, Performance with Purpose means delivering sustainable growth by investing in a healthier
future for people and our planet. As a global food and beverage company with brands that stand for
quality and are respected household names — Pepsi-Cola, Lay’s, Quaker Oats, Tropicana and Gatorade,
to name but a few — we will continue to build a portfolio of enjoyable and healthier foods and
beverages, find innovative ways to reduce the use of energy, water and packaging, and provide a great
workplace for our associates. Additionally, we respect, support and invest in the local communities
95
where we operate, by hiring local people, creating products designed for local tastes and partnering with
local farmers, governments and community groups. Because a healthier future for all people and our
planet means a more successful future for PepsiCo. This is our promise.
Other subhadings of the report inc:
“Providing people with choices… is good for business.”
“Supporting our planet… is good for business.”
“Investing in our people… is good for business.”
“And good business… Is good for all.”
 +33% Net revenue grew 33 percent on a constant currency basis.1
 + 7% Raised the annual dividend by 7 percent.
 + 23% core division operating profit rose 23% on a constant currency basis
 +12% core ESP grew 12 percent on a constant currency basis (Core earnings per share; 2008 -
$3.68, 2009 - $3.71, 2010 - $4.13).
 +23% management operating cashflow, excluding certain items, reached $8.9billion, up 23
percent. (Management operating cash flow, excluding certain items [in millions]: 2008 - $4,831,
2009 - $5,583, 2010 - $6,892).
 $119 billion estimated worldwide retail sales.
2010 Snapshot
Net Revenue1
+33%
Division Op. Profit1
+23%
EPS2 +12%
Mgmt OCF1 +23%
Annual Dividend
+7%
=
96
97
Values of PepsiCo include:
 Human Sustainability
Some performance targets include:
- increase the amount of whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds and low-fat dairy in our
global product portfolio,
-
reduce the average amount of saturated fat per serving in key global food brands, in key
countries, by 15% by 2010, compared to 2006 as a baseline,

display calorie count and key nutrients on our food and beverage packaging by 2012.
Performance
Some performance targets include:
- sustain and improve brand equity scores for PepsiCo’s 19 billin-dollar brands in the top 10
markets
-
rank in the top two suppliers in customer (retail partner)surveys where third party measures
exist
98

-
continue to expand division operating margins
-
increase cash flow in proportion to net income growth over three-year windows.
Environmental sustainability
Some key performance targets include:
- to improve our their water use efficiency by 20% per unit of production by 2015,
-
Provide access to safe water to three million people in developing countries by the end of
2015,
-
Reduce packaging weight by 350 million pounds – avoiding the creation of one billion pounds
of landfill waste by 2012,

Work to eliminate all solid waste to landfills from our production facilities.
Talent sustainability
Some key performance targets include:
- Ensure high levels of associate engagement and satisfaction as compared with other fortune
500 companies,
-
Foster diversity and inclusion by developing a workforce that reflects local communities,
-
Encourage our associates to lead healthier lives by offering workplace wellness programs
globally.
Our Customers
 Our primary customers include wholesale distributors, grocery stores, convenience stores, mass
merchandisers, member- ship stores, authorized independent bottlers and foodservice
distributors, including hotels and restaurants.

We normally grant our independent bottlers exclusive contracts to sell and manufacture certain
beverage products bearing our trademarks within a specific geographic area.

These arrangements provide us with the right to charge our independent bottlers for concentrate, finished goods and Aquafina royalties and specify the manufacturing process required
for product quality.
Our Related Party Bottlers
Prior to our acquisitions of PBG and PAS on February 26, 2010, we had noncontrolling interests in these
bottlers. Because our ownership was less than 50%, and since we did not control these bottlers, we did
not consolidate their results. Instead, we included our share of their net income based on our
percentage of economic ownership in our income statement as bottling equity income. On February 26,
2010, in connection with our acquisi- tions of PBG and PAS, we began to consolidate the results of these
bottlers. Our share of the net income of Pepsi Bottling Ventures LLC (PBV) is reflected in bottling equity
income. Our share of income or loss from other noncontrolled affiliates is recorded as
a component of selling, general and administrative expenses. See Note 8 for additional information on
these related parties and related party commitments and guarantees.
Our Distribution Network
Our products are brought to market through DSD, customer warehouse and foodservice and vending
distribution networks. The distribution system used depends on customer needs, prod- uct
characteristics and local trade practices.
Our Competition
Our businesses operate in highly competitive markets. We compete against global, regional, local and
99
private label manu- facturers on the basis of price, quality, product variety and distribution. In U.S.
measured channels, our chief beverage competitor, The Coca-Cola Company, has a larger share of CSD
consumption, while we have a larger share of liquid refreshment beverages consumption. In addition,
The Coca-Cola Company has a significant CSD share advantage in many markets outside the United
States. Further, our snack brands hold significant leadership positions in the snack industry worldwide.
Our snack brands face local, regional and private label competitors, as well as national and global snack
competitors, and compete on the basis of price, quality, product variety and distribution. Success in this
competitive environment is dependent on effective pro- motion of existing products, the introduction of
new products and the effectiveness of our advertising campaigns, marketing programs and product
packaging. We believe that the strength of our brands, innovation and marketing, coupled with the
quality of our products and flexibility of our distribution network, allow us to compete effectively.
Other Relationships
Certain members of our Board of Directors also serve on the boards of certain vendors and customers.
Those Board members do not participate in our vendor selection and negotiations nor in our customer
negotiations. Our transactions with these vendors and customers are in the normal course of business
and are con- sistent with terms negotiated with other vendors and customers. In addition, certain of our
employees serve on the boards of PBV and other affiliated companies and do not receive incremental
compensation for their Board services.
Changes in the legal and regulatory environment could limit our business activities, increase our
operating costs, reduce demand for our products or result in litigation.
The conduct of our businesses, and the production, distribu- tion, sale, advertising, labeling, safety,
transportation and use of many of our products, are subject to various laws and regulations administered
by federal, state and local governmental agencies in the United States, as well as to foreign laws and
regulations administered by government entities and agencies in markets
in which we operate. These laws and regulations and interpre- tations thereof may change, sometimes
dramatically, as a result of political, economic or social events. Such regulatory envi- ronment changes
may include changes in: food and drug laws; laws related to advertising and deceptive marketing
practices; accounting standards; taxation requirements, including taxes specifically targeting the
consumption of our products; competi- tion laws; privacy laws; and environmental laws, including laws
relating to the regulation of water rights and treatment. Changes in laws, regulations or governmental
policy and the related interpretations may alter the environment in which we do busi- ness and,
therefore, may impact our results or increase our costs or liabilities.
Governmental entities or agencies in jurisdictions where we operate may also impose new labeling,
product or production requirements, or other restrictions. For example, studies are underway by various
regulatory authorities and others to assess the effect on humans due to acrylamide in the diet.
Acrylamide is a chemical compound naturally formed in a wide variety of foods when they are cooked
(whether commercially or at home), including french fries, potato chips, cereal, bread and coffee.
It is believed that acrylamide may cause cancer in laboratory animals when consumed in significant
amounts. Studies are also underway by third parties to assess the health implications of carbonated soft
drink consumption. If consumer concerns about acrylamide or carbonated soft drinks increase as a result
of these studies, other new scientific evidence, or for any other reason, whether or not valid, demand for
our products could
decline and we could be subject to lawsuits or new regulations that could affect sales of our products,
any of which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
We are also subject to Proposition 65 in California, a law which requires that a specific warning appear
on any product sold in California that contains a substance listed by that State as having been found to
cause cancer or birth defects. If we were required to add warning labels to any of our products or place
warnings in certain locations where our products are sold, sales of those products could suffer not only
in those locations but elsewhere.
In many jurisdictions, compliance with competition laws is of special importance to us due to our
competitive position in those jurisdictions. Regulatory authorities under whose laws we operate may
also have enforcement powers that can subject us to actions such as product recall, seizure of products
or other sanc- tions, which could have an adverse effect on our sales or damage our reputation.
In addition, we and our subsidiaries are party to a variety of legal and environmental remediation
obligations arising in the normal course of business, as well as environmental remedia- tion, product
100
liability, toxic tort and related indemnification proceedings in connection with certain historical activities
and contractual obligations of businesses acquired by our subsidiar- ies. Due to regulatory complexities,
uncertainties inherent in litigation and the risk of unidentified contaminants on current and former
properties of ours and our subsidiaries, the potential exists for remediation, liability and indemnification
costs to differ materially from the costs we have estimated. We cannot assure you that our costs in
relation to these matters will not exceed our established liabilities or otherwise have an adverse effect
on our results of operations.
Coca-Cola: Jayne
Company website: CCA’s product portfolio consists of: Coca-Cola, diet Coke, Coke Zero , Fanta , Sprite,
Powerade, Glacéau and Pump, as well as other trademark beverages of The Coca-Cola Company. CCA
bottles and distributes these brands in its territories under license from The Coca-Cola Company.219
Beverage brands owned, manufactured and distributed by CCA including Mount Franklin, Deep Spring
and Kirks.220
The premium spirits portfolio of Beam Global Spirits & Wines including Jim Beam, Canadian Club, Makers
Mark and The Famous Grouse.221
Coca-Cola Amatil Australia uses water from metropolitan supplies from natural groundwater sources.222
Their Environmental Management System continues to improve efficiency in water production facilities
while maintaining open dialogue with governments, non-government organizations and local
219
Coca-Cola Amatil, viewed 10 March 2012,
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
220
Coca-Cola Amatil, viewed 10 March 2012,
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
221 Coca-Cola Amatil, viewed 10 March 2012,
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
222 White, W 2006, Coca-Cola Amatil, Water Policy – Australia,
http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3D
Course%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D
101
communities regarding water resource management.223
Coca-Cola Amatil (CCA) is one of the largest bottlers of non-alcoholic ready-to-drink beverages in the
Asia-Pacific region and one of the major Coca-Cola bottlers in the world.224
CCA’s diversified product portfolio includes carbonated soft drinks, water, sports and energy drinks, fruit
juice, coffee, flavored milk and ready-to-eat fruit and vegetable products and snack foods.225 Pacific
Beverages, CCA’s 50/50 joint venture with SABMiller, manufactures and markets a range of premium
beers in Australia and New Zealand and sells and distributes premium spirits. CCA has access to over 270
million consumers through over 600,000 active customers.226
227
223
White, W 2006, Coca-Cola Amatil, Water Policy – Australia,
http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3D
Course%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D
224 Coca-Cola Amatil 2010, Factbook, accessed:
http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3D
Course%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D, p.2
225
Coca-Cola Amatil 2010, Factbook, accessed:
http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3D
Course%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D, p.2
226 Coca-Cola Amatil 2010, Factbook, accessed:
http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3D
Course%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D, p.2
227 Coca-Cola Amatil 2010, Factbook, accessed:
http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3D
Course%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D, p.5
102
228
229
To improve its portfolio in the noncarbonated drinks segment, Coca-Cola acquired Mad River Traders
(tea, juices, and sodas) and Odwalla (juices and smoothies) in 2001. Also signed a licensing deal with
Danone to promote Evian brand in the US.230
228
Coca-Cola Amatil 2010, Factbook, accessed:
http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3D
Course%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D, p.7
229
Coca-Cola Company Financials 2010, accessed: 9 March 2012,
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
230 The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.7, Accessed: 8 March 2012
103
Coca-Cola introduced new products, such as Coca-Cola C2, in Japan and the US during 2004. In the UK
and 19 other countries, the company began selling its Dasani bottled water.231
In 2005, Coca-Cola introduced a new product called 'Coca-Cola with Lime' in the US.232 Coca-Cola
replaced Pepsi as the primary beverage served on University of Arizona campus, as part of the exclusive
10-year deal products from Coca-Cola would be offered in every vending machine and fountain outlet
across every University-operated dining location on the University of Arizona's main campus.233 In the
same year, Coca-Cola entered into a partnership agreement with six US restaurant chains owned by
affiliates of Sun Capital Partners to promote its products in more than 1,750 restaurant locations across
28 states.234
Coca-Cola Company and H.J. Heinz Company announced a strategic partnership in February 2011 that
enables Heinz to produce its ketchup bottles using Coca-Cola's PlantBottle packaging.235
236
The company’s products are made available to consumers throughout the world through a network of
bottling partners, distributors, wholesalers and retailers - the world’s largest beverage distribution
system. The company’s vast distribution network spans the globe and allows the company to sell
products in some of the most remote markets in the world. This distribution model is costly for
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
231
The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.7, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
232
The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.7, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
233
The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.8, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
234
The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.9, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
235 The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.10, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
236 The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.22, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
104
competitors to replicate, and has acted as a sturdy barrier to entry in the industry.237
The company's large scale of operation allows it to cater to demands in upcoming markets with relative
ease and enhances its revenue generation capacity.238 Growing nonalcoholic ready-to-drink (NARTD)
beverage industry.239
Globally the nonalcoholic ready-to-drink (NARTD) market is growing at a significant pace. The NARTD
beverage industry is expected to continue growing retail sales approximately 6% per year for the next 12
years (2008-20).240 This projected growth is being fueled by increase in middle-class consumers and fastgrowing urban societies expected to form in the future. These trends indicate that there will be more
people with more disposable income who potentially will tap into refreshment and convenience. This
growth opens up a new world of opportunity for Coca-Cola. The company can capture this growth with
innovative products and targeted go-to-market strategies, which will continue to drive its global
beverage leadership.241
Threats - Evolving consumer preferences
Increasing concern among consumers, public health professionals and government agencies of the
potential health problems associated with obesity and inactive lifestyles represents a significant
challenge to Coca-Cola’s industry. In addition, some researchers, health advocates and dietary guidelines
are encouraging consumers to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, including those
sweetened with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), a form of sugar, or other nutritive sweeteners.
Furthermore, there has been an increase in the number of regulations regarding carbonated soft drinks
in the US in response to the heightened desire for healthy food consumption. Many state public school
systems banned the sale of soft drinks on their campuses. The Center for Science and Public Interest
proposed that a warning label be placed on all beverages containing more than 13g of sugar per 12-oz
serving. This proposal would affect all non-diet, full calorie drinks produced by the company. These
factors have driven a shift in consumption away from carbonated soft drinks to healthier alternatives,
such as tea, juices, and water. An increased consumer preference for healthier drinks has resulted in
slowing growth rates for sales of carbonated soft drinks, which constitutes 77% of company’s sales.
Although Coca-Cola responded to the changing preferences by developing a range of diet and light
beverages, evolving customer preferences will adversely impact the sales of its carbonated beverages
which will in turn impact its overall profitability.242
Water scarcity and poor quality would impact production costs and capacity
Water is the main ingredient in substantially all of Coca-Cola’s products. Rapid population growth and
continued pollution of existing freshwater sources have created water shortages in nearly every country.
Global consumption of water is doubling every 20 years, more than twice the rate of human population
growth. According to the UN, more than one billion people already lack access to fresh drink water. By
2025, the demand for freshwater is expected to rise by 56% from the amount that is currently available.
237
The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.22, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
238 The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.23, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
239 The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.25, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
240
The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.25, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
241 The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.25, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
242 The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.26, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
105
As a result, Coca-Cola may incur increasing production costs or face capacity constraints which could
adversely affect its profitability in the long run.243
The Australian beverage business delivered a solid result with earnings before interest and tax (EBIt)
increasing by 3.0% to $281.0 million. The business has had to deal with the impact on volumes and a
short-term increase in costs caused by the destructive floods in Queensland and Victoria and Cyclone
yasi which occurred during the peak summer trading season.244 As well, the generally softer consumer
spending environment experienced in 2010 continued into 2011, limiting category growth.245
Notwithstanding the difficult conditions, mix improvements, Project Zero efficiency gains and cost out
initiatives underpinned the growth in margins from 19.9% to 20.2%. The business has maintained its
strong market share position despite a high level of competitor discounting activity in the grocery
channel during May and June. New product development for the half was focused on the rollout of new
packages and flavor extensions. The frozen beverage portfolio continues to grow strongly with volume
growth of over 20% as a result of the expansion of the customer base combined with the introduction of
new flavors.246
The successful execution of our infrastructure programs in expanding manufacturing capacity and
improving operational efficiency has again delivered a reduction in operating costs and further
improvements in our customer servicing capability. Combined with the restructuring of the spc ardmona
(spca) business, I believe these initiatives will continue to widen the operating capability lead on our
competitors.247
Looking forward, cca will continue to focus on executing its organic growth strategy.248
There have been an unprecedented number of natural disasters across our major markets over the last
six months. The floods in Queensland, Victoria and NSW, Cyclone Yasi and the Christchurch
Earthquakes.249
CCA has deployed teams to provide assistance to those affected and provided customers with extended
terms and special offers for re- stocking CCA product. In addition, CCA has donated beverage and food
products to communities and emergency services in need and we are matching all employee donations
to the flood relief program.250
Dividends up 11.5% in 2010251
Improve our profitability and market position.252
Weaker consumer demand253
Cadbury has entered into a conditional agreement to sell its Schweppes beverages business in Australia
243
The Coca-Cola Company, History, Datamonitor, p.26, Accessed: 8 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
244 Coca-Cola Amatil 2011, Shareholder News- Interim Reports,
http://ccamatil.com/InvestorRelations/AnnualReports/2011/2011%20CCA%20Shareholder%20News%20-%20Interim%20Report.pdf
245 Coca-Cola Amatil 2011, Shareholder News- Interim Reports,
http://ccamatil.com/InvestorRelations/AnnualReports/2011/2011%20CCA%20Shareholder%20News%20-%20Interim%20Report.pdf
246 Coca-Cola Amatil 2011, Shareholder News- Interim Reports,
http://ccamatil.com/InvestorRelations/AnnualReports/2011/2011%20CCA%20Shareholder%20News%20-%20Interim%20Report.pdf
247 Coca-Cola Amatil 2011, Shareholder News- Interim Reports,
http://ccamatil.com/InvestorRelations/AnnualReports/2011/2011%20CCA%20Shareholder%20News%20-%20Interim%20Report.pdf
248 Coca-Cola Amatil 2011, Shareholder News- Interim Reports,
http://ccamatil.com/InvestorRelations/AnnualReports/2011/2011%20CCA%20Shareholder%20News%20-%20Interim%20Report.pdf
249 Coca-cola Amatil limited 2010, annual report , accessed
http://ccamatil.com/investorrelations/annualreports/2010/2010%20Annual%20Report.pdf
250
Coca-cola Amatil limited 2010, annual report , accessed
http://ccamatil.com/investorrelations/annualreports/2010/2010%20Annual%20Report.pdf
251 Coca-cola Amatil limited 2010, annual report , accessed
http://ccamatil.com/investorrelations/annualreports/2010/2010%20Annual%20Report.pdf
252
Coca-cola Amatil limited 2010, annual report , accessed
http://ccamatil.com/investorrelations/annualreports/2010/2010%20Annual%20Report.pdf
253 Coca-cola Amatil limited 2010, annual report , accessed
http://ccamatil.com/investorrelations/annualreports/2010/2010%20Annual%20Report.pdf
106
to Asahi Breweries for a total cash consideration of approximately GBP550 million.254
m P&N Beverages Australia Pty., Ltd., a manufacturer and distributor of non-alcoholic and non-dairy
beverage products. Both the companies are based in Australia.255
Coca-Cola Amatil Ltd. (CCA), a beverage and food company, has discontinued discussions with Golden
Circle Limited (GCL), a grower-owned fruit and vegetable processing company, in relation to the planned
acquisition of GCL after its AUD195 million ($173 million) offer was rejected in favour of a private equity
deal.256
254
Cadbury sells Australian Schweppes business to Asahi Breweries 2009, Financial Datamonitor, accessed: 21 March 2012
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
255 Tru Blu Beverages acquires carbonated soft drinks and cordial businesses from P&N Beverages 2011,Financial Deal Datamonitor, Accessed: 21
March 2012, accessed
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
256
Coca-Cola Amatil not to acquire Golden Circle 2007,Datamonitor, accessed: 21 March 2012, Available
<http://blackboard.nd.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3
DCourse%26id%3D_3155_1%26url%3D>
107
108
109