Preview

Porter 5 Forces- Cola Wars Continue

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1046 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Porter 5 Forces- Cola Wars Continue
Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in 2006 Written by Alyona Kuzmina.
Soft drink industry Shares of beverage companies have always been ranked high among other industries. Although, when consumer incomes decrease, sales of beer and soda don't drop that much. Additionally, it is cheap to produce those and drinks are so popular so companies can sell them for a large price. Actually, it is a very unique case, that such a product, which is in the group of basic commodities, is profitable. Both concentrate and bottling businesses are interrelated, because they create one product, but at different stages, they have the same consumers, however, there is a big difference in the structure and most significant is gaining profitability. 5 forces structure of both businesses would help to explain the phenomenon:
The power of suppliers: Concentrate and bottling producers would need sugar and corn syrup, flavors, sweeteners, packages and some other additives suppliers. However, they are not unique and rare products, so in case if one supplier offers goods for unreasonable price, concentrate producer would always have a chance to switch to the other. For example, Coca Cola and Pepsi are biggest customers in can industry and they have relations with multiple suppliers, giving them with that less bargaining power because of availability of different suppliers. So due to the reason that those commodities are basic and widely spread, the suppliers of those products do not have power on pricing.
The power of buyers: Buyers get power because of competition for brand shelf space in retailing distribution. The Act of 1980 gives a right of CPS to award defined territories for bottlers, which in its turn gives bargaining power to bottlers/ buyers, because of the absence of alternative supplier. Bottlers are connected to CPs in respect of setting up prices and other conditions of the trade. Major channels for bottlers are food stores, fast food fountains, and

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Moreover, the case also mentioned about the unequal responsibility in terms of expenses for the bottlers and the concentrate producers. Concentrate producers, like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, requires relatively small investment to build a plant compared to the bottlers, and concentrate producers’ major costs were only for advertising, promotion, and market research. In contrast, bottlers’ factories require a more substantial amount of investment, as it needed more modern and high-tech machinery. In addition, bottlers also have a total responsibility for the selling and delivery,…

    • 487 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    1) Franchise agreements between bottlers (buyers) and concentrate producers locked bottlers into exclusive deals and made switching costs high, compelling bottlers to accept pricing and promotion schema.…

    • 990 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Cola Wars

    • 1161 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Coke & Pepsi have chosen to operate primarily on the production of soft drinks syrup,while leaving independent bottlers with more competitive segment of the industry.The purpose of this report is to gain insight into the possible strategies that can be applied, in order to expand the overall throat share in the future. History revealed that a highly competitive strategy that was utilized in the past by both companies resulted in cannibalization. Because of this, the report is described from the perspective of both Coca-Cola and Pepsi. This report focuses on increasing the overall share and finding new opportunities in the unrevealed markets.…

    • 1161 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Memo 1

    • 874 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Power of suppliers is medium because negotiation between suppliers and buyers do take place; but in the end thy have more power because food prices are fluctuating they have to charge more sometimes…

    • 874 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The soft drink industry is profitable as these drinks can be easily produced and that to with very less cost, so they followed a low cost strategy and by doing so they were able to earn huge profit margins and more quantity means more profit. They were also huge dealers for food chains like KFC, MCD etc and several other gas stations.…

    • 373 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Cola War

    • 9264 Words
    • 38 Pages

    For over a century, carbonated drink was introduced to mankind. Two major contenders in the industry stand Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. The two soar in the industry as they compete with each other. There were amazing monopolistic behaviors found in their doings. Have you ever wondered why such drink without any redeeming health benefits, but rather sublimely known as one of the causes to sugar and fat related diseases, can be so profitable? By setting the health benefits aside, have you ever wondered why such drinks are so popular yet a lot of competitors are unable to imitate and stand up to beat them? The secret lies…

    • 9264 Words
    • 38 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Best Essays

    The supplier power is regulated by control particular agreements with each supplier, in order to keep loyalty. The buyer power must be addressed and contractually bind large purchases order to a certain set cost. Competitive Rivalry is limited due to controlling 75% of the sodium bicarbonate in the United States. The threat of substitution is limited due to there not being any other product similar to baking soda. Last, the threat of new entry is limited once again because of the strong hold onto the production of sodium…

    • 3078 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Cola Wars Case

    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Using Porter’s Five Forces analysis for the CPs industry, we determined that the Bargaining Power of Buyers was low. In 1987, Coke’s Master Bottler Contract granted Coke the right to determine the concentrate price based on a pricing formula that adjusted quarterly and stated a maximum price for the sweetener used in the production. Pepsi’s Master Bottling Agreement required that top bottler purchased its raw materials from Pepsi on terms and conditions determined by Pepsi. These agreements limited the opportunity for price negotiations between the buyers and the CPs.…

    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    cola wars continue

    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The bargaining power of buyers – the bottlers - was relatively low. The main costs components of bottlers are concentrate and syrup. However, ever since the concentrate producers such as Coke and Pepsi built a nationwide franchised bottling network, the bottlers were put under their control. Also, after the 1987 Master Bottler Contract, the concentrate industry had the right to determine concentrate price and other terms of sale. As the concentrate companies of CSD expanded into different categories, the concentrate producers bottled some products on their own.…

    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    ①There are two kinds of buyers, one is the bottler, and the other is the retailor. The power of bottler is huge cause they have large numbers of products, while the bargaining power of retailor can be different among the channels. Among the 7 channels, Super-markets and Fountain& Vending have more power, while Mass retailers and Drug stores have relative low power considering the low share.②The suppliers are numerous, such as caramel coloring, phosphoric or citric acid. Coke and Pepsi are mature companies, so the suppliers have little budgeting power. Sweeteners are suppliers to bottlers, and they have low power.…

    • 504 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The retailers have a low to moderate buyer power over the consumer soft drink industry, due to the producer’s ability to forward integrate, the sheer number of buyers, and the buyer’s ability to forward integrate. Buyer power is the degree of influence customers have on the producing agent. Soft drink companies such as Coca Cola and Pepsi have used forward integration to take over their channels of distribution. They created contracts that gave them the ability to set concentrate prices for their bottlers; in turn bottlers would respond to price fulgurations by adjusting retail pricing. In 2000, when Coca Cola raised concentrate prices by 7.6%, bottlers raised the retail prices by 6 to 7%. This demonstrates that buyers have limited control over the price changes. Coca Cola has also made great efforts to take over the bottling of their product, by establishing the independent subsidiary Coca Cola Enterprises. They began by acquiring bottlers to produce one third of their volume during 1986 which increased to 80% in 2004. This gave Coca Cola more control over retail pricing, and distribution of their products to retail stores. Since there are so many retail stores that carry products that consumer soft drink, CSD, companies make, it is hard for buyers to create a collaborative effort to resist price increases.…

    • 1842 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Cola War

    • 586 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Soft drinks are profitable because it is a $60 billion industry in the United States alone. Not only is it profitable in the United States, but both Pepsi and Coca-Cola have expanded their franchises internationally and both have become competitive brands. It is estimated that the average American can consume about 53 gallons of carbonated soft drinks a year. According to the article, Americans drink more soda than any other beverages on the market today, such as sports drinks, juices, and beers. This makes carbonated soft drinks more profitable than the other beverages because it has a higher consumption rate. Another reason why carbonated soft drinks are profitable is that it is easy to make since it is made up of a flavor base with added sweetener and carbonated water. These main ingredients are relatively cheap compared to the bottling process. Since 1970, the growth of carbonated soft drinks continues to rise 3% per year for the next 30 years because of diet carbonated soft drinks and other flavored drinks. Soft drinks are also found in supermarkets, convenient stores, vending machines, and restaraunts. This makes the soft drinks more accessible to their customers. Soft drinks are also consumed by cans, plastic bottles, glass bottles, and fountain drinks.…

    • 586 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Cola Cola Wars

    • 1778 Words
    • 8 Pages

    other beverage. Within the CSD category, the cola segment maintained its dominance, alihough its market share dropped from 71% n 1990 to 60% in 2004.5 Non-cola CSDs included lemon/lime, citrus, pepper-type, olange, root beer, and other flavors. CSDs consisted of a flavor base (called…

    • 1778 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Coke and Pepsi Case

    • 707 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Moreover, both businesses have developed different cost structures, and as we can see in Exhibit 1, Cost of Goods Sold, for starters, just account for 22% of net sales for concentrate producers, whereas it increases to an astonishing 58% for bottlers. We can also observe a surprising 0% expense in selling and delivery for concentrate producers (18% for bottlers), which can be due to the fact that bottlers incur in delivery costs to all retail establishments.…

    • 707 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Porter`s 5 forces

    • 1119 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The bargaining power of suppliers (how strong is the position of sellers, are there many or only few potential suppliers, is there a monopoly)…

    • 1119 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics