Re: Coke vs. Pepsi Question #1: Distinguish Financial Statements BALANCE SHEET | COCA COLA | PEPSI CO | ASSETS | 19‚145 | 22‚660 | LIABILITIES | 10‚742 | 12‚936 | OWNERS EQUITY | 8‚403 | 6‚401 | CASH | 1‚648 | 311 | INVENTORIES | 890 | 1‚016 | ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE | 1‚666 | 2‚453 | PRE PAID EXPENSES | 2‚017 | 499 | INVESTMENTS AND OTHER ASSETS | 8‚549 | 1‚396 | PROPERTY PLANT EQUIPMENT | 5‚685 | 7‚318 | ACCOUNTS PAYABLE | 3‚141 | 3‚870 | LOANS PAYABLE/SHORT TERM BORROWING
Premium Balance sheet Investment Coca-Cola
to compare and contrast the Coke a Cola and Pepsi Cola websites. I found that these two companies have been fighting to bring customers to their side since the birth of the two companies. If you ask anyone who drinks soda‚ they have a favorite‚ wether it being Coke or Pepsi. A major factor in getting a customer to buy your product is marketing. If a company appears to the public as an inviting company‚ people will flock to them. This is especially important in a case such as this where the two products
Premium Coca-Cola Pepsi Britney Spears
were there first before Coca-Cola. The reentry of coca-cola in the market had its disadvantages and of course that was Pepsi co was there first their applications was approved and coke was turned down. 3- Coca-cola made special promotions during the summer season such as ”buy one- get one free” and lucky draws. Coca –cola used a strategy of “building a connect” by using local idioms. They also reduced prices by 15% to 25% in order to encourage consumption. Pepsi co participated through massive
Premium Coca-Cola Pepsi Cola
The political environment in India proved to be very problematic for both PepsiCo and Coca-Cola when they entered the market. The government has long enforced a protectionist stance on its economy in order to safeguard the interests of its people. Even with the New Industrial Policy in 1991 (Pathak 2007)‚ that loosened the grip on foreign businesses entering the country‚ PepsiCo and Coca-Cola still had to jump through many hurdles before they could operate. For example‚ PepsiCo was limited to selling
Premium Coca-Cola
between Coke and Pepsi affected the industry’s profits? Their competition for greater market share led to the evolution of both companies into dominant companies that left little room for other competitors for the vast majority of their history. This increased growth in profit‚ however‚ meant a lot more advertising and capital investment‚ which it’s profitability began to reach its peak in the late 1970’s as most other small bottlers were forced out of the market. Thus‚ as Coke and Pepsi pulled
Premium Coca-Cola Profit Investment
While Pepsico and Coca-Cola are both multinational corporations (MNCs) with extensive experience in international operations‚ their business dealings in India are not their most long held nor the least problematic. Pepsico has the most longevity in Indian operations having started there in 1988. This allowed Pepsico to establish a stronghold in the Indian market prior to Coca-Cola’s entry in 1993. Both of these MNCs experienced difficulty in establishing their companies‚ and while they have made
Premium Stakeholder analysis Stakeholder Multinational corporation
consumers and it is unique. Coke and Pepsi’s powerful brands are inimitable‚ so not really many substitutes were on the market. The entry barriers are pretty high. There are significant costs to enter the industry of soft drinks producers which automatically eliminates small players. The loyalty for the brand is also an issue. Consumers seemed to be pretty loyal over the years - it makes it very hard for a new enterer to compete with the major players Coke and Pepsi and right after Cadbury.
Premium Soft drink Coca-Cola
October 15‚ 2014 Case Analysis – Case#16 Coke and Pepsi in India: Issues‚ Ethics‚ and Crisis Management Introduction This case delves into whether or not Pepsi and Coke are equal targets in India. It questions whether the companies are doing their ethical duties‚ as well as whether they are managing crises and stakeholders well. The Real Problem The real problem is whether or not these companies are doing their duties to their stakeholders and to the host countries (in this case India) based on
Premium Pepsi Coca-Cola Corporation
through 3 contain the company’s recent financial statements. PepsiCo’s major subsidiaries were the Pepsi-Cola Company‚ which was the world’s second largest refreshment beverage company‚ Frito-Lay‚ Inc.‚ the world’s largest manufacturer and distributor of snack chips‚ and Tropicana Products‚ the largest marketer of branded juices. PepsiCo’s leading brands included carbonated soft drinks (Pepsi‚ Diet Pepsi and Mountain Dew)‚ AquaFina bottled water‚ Tropicana juices and juice-based drinks‚ Lipton tea-based
Premium Gatorade
Internal Analysis of Coke and Pepsi (Appendix A) In this session‚ we would analyze Coke and Pepsi internally using SWOT analysis. SWOT is the short form of Strengths‚ Weaknesses‚ Opportunities and Threats. In Appendix A‚ we can see that the major strength for Coke is its name value. Coke is the World’s leading brand for CSD. Marketing and advertising is the major battleground for the CSD industry‚ from the SWOT analysis‚ we can see Coke did a great job for that. Being the market leader is definitely
Premium Coca-Cola Caffeine