...CASE #1 DR. PEPPER SNAPPLE GROUP, INC. ENERGY BEVERAGES DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM: Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. is a major integrated brand owner, bottler, and distributor of non-alcoholic beverages in the United States, Mexico and Canada. Recently, Andrew Baker, brand manager for the company, has been tasked with formulating a marketing strategy to determine whether or not launching a new energy beverage would be profitable in 2008. To date, Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. is the only major domestic non-alcoholic beverage company in the U.S. that did not have an energy drink of its own. The decision to explore the energy beverage market is based on a business strategy that focused on the opportunities in high-growth and high-margin areas of opportunity. A primary concern facing this decision lies in the fact that the energy beverage industry is already established. The problem lies in whether or not it is worth their time and funds to explore a new product and venture into the energy beverage market. Alternatives Essentially, there are two basic alternatives to consider when evaluating this decision: (1) continue business as usual and don’t get involved with the energy beverage industry or (2) enter the energy beverage market. Evaluation of Alternatives In the first alternative, they’d continue to ride their juggernauts. Stick with their established brands and stay the course. It’s important to note...
Words: 1078 - Pages: 5
...Practice Case 1: Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc: Energy Beverages 1. How would you characterise the energy beverage category, competitors, consumers, channels, and DPSG’s category participation in late 2007? Energy Beverage Category: Energy drinks provide consumers with a boost of energy and they fall under the category of functional drinks. Functional drinks are non-alcoholic drinks which include ingredients such as herbs, vitamins, minerals, amino acids or other nutritional ingredients. Other functional drinks include sport drinks, teas, fruit drinks and enhanced water drink. DPSG participation → In the US and Canada, Dr Pepper Snapple Group participated primarily in the flavoured carbonated soft drink (CSD) market segment Competitor: The largest non-alcoholic beverage category, after carbonated soft drinks, sport drinks, and bottled water, but the fastest growing one. DPSG participation → their major competitors include Red Bull, Monster Energy, and Coca Cola. Consumers: Average US per capita consumption of energy beverage drinkers increased by 14% since 2004. Predominantly consumed by males aged between 12- 34 during the afternoon or morning. The reasons for consumption include energy boost, mental alertness and taste. Most limit their options to 1.4 different brands which sheds light on strong brand loyalty. DPSG participation → DPSG have an attractive positioning within a large, growing, and profitable market. Channels: Distribution channels include convenience...
Words: 864 - Pages: 4
...MKT750 MARKETING MANAGEMENT CASE STUDY DR PEPPER SNAPPLE GROUP, INC. ENERGY BEVERAGE PREPARED BY: RAMSIS ANAK WILLIAM AGIM 2012402536 Strategic Issues and Problems Being the consultant of Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. (DPSG), I am charged to assess whether or not a profitable market opportunity existed for a new energy beverage brand to be produced, marketed, and distributed by the company. The decision to explore a new energy beverage was made by senior company management of DPSG as part of a corporate business strategy to focus on opportunities in (1) High Growth and (2) High Margin beverage businesses. My tasks involve a number of important factors. I must assess the likelihood that DPSG Competitive environment will be liberal or conservative in its marketing of the new energy beverage. An important consideration is DPSG role in affecting this environment, given its strong presence in the CSD market and utilizing that strength to push the new energy beverage. Ultimately I must make a “go-no go” decision. A “go” decision requires a recommendation in the form of the new energy beverage, its target market, its price, and promotion. A “no go” decision must take into consideration Dr Pepper’s profit and growth position without the new energy beverage and measures to minimize their impact. The problem facing Dr Pepper’s is how to retain its present competitive position given an environmental threat (other energy beverage) while at the same time preserving...
Words: 2416 - Pages: 10
...in the Soft Drink Industry: Case Study of Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and Dr. Pepper Krisadee Rungsatcha MBA 500: Essentials of Business Management June 23, 2013 Larry Frazier Abstract The beverage industry nowadays is very competitive. Each brand pushes all strategies to be the number one in the market and try to win more consumers and achieve their goals. The main competitors in these industries are Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, Inc., and Dr. Pepper Snapple Group. Coca-Cola is the largest beverage company in this market and provides the most market share that PepsiCo, Inc. PepsiCo is the second leading company, and Dr. Pepper Snapple Group is the third leading company in soft drink beverage industry. This paper presents three main competitors and focuses on competitive strategies, market strategies, and overall strength of the companies. Also, it discusses a recommendation to improve the Coca-Cola Company’s competitive position. Company Summaries Coca-Cola Company. The Coca-Cola Company is the largest beverage company in the world. The Coca-Cola Company is the leader in the market of nonalcoholic beverages and owns market shares than 500 beverage brands, including sparkling drinks, juice drinks, ready to drink, teas, coffees, and energy drinks, such as vitamin water and Powerade. The Coca-Cola Company also owns the leading brands of the diet and light beverage market, such as Diet Coke and the top five soft drinks: Fanta and...
Words: 5869 - Pages: 24
...TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY CORPUS CHRISTI MARKETING MANAGEMENT - MKT 5320 CASE STUDY ANALYSIS: Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc: Energy Beverages OLUSUBOMI Y. ADETUNJI STUDENT ID: A03936869 PROBLEM DEFINITION. Dr Pepper Snapple Group Inc., a non-alcoholic beverage producing company decided to enter into the market with a new product (energy drink) and they were faced with some problems along the line. They decided to introduce an energy beverage brand to the market (existing market) which already has competitors. With this as focus, it was important to choose best market and distribution channels and some other business strategies for the product in order for it to be a success. The problem faced includes retainment of its present competitive position in the market with other energy drink companies and at the same time preserving profitability and customer base. In order to maintain the market competition, the business strategy to launch the new products into the market was very vital. Some of the factors that has to be considered before the product launch is considered are: * Industry Experience * Customer base * Profitablity growth * Favorable market condition * Core competencies * Management Team Decision. ALTERNATIVES PROVISIONS FOR PRODUCT SUCCESS The company could carefully select the strategy to launch the new product into the market to understand both the strength of their current competitive position and the strength of the...
Words: 701 - Pages: 3
...Practice Case 1: Discussion Seminar 2 - Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc: Energy Beverages– Kerin & Peterson page 105. Case Questions: How would you characterise the energy beverage category, competitors, consumers, channels, and DPSG’s category participation in late 2007? Beverage category: the energy beverage market produced estimated retail dollar sales of $6.2 billion in 2006. Off premise sales through convenience stores, supermarkets and mass merchandisers accounted for 71% of total retail sales in 2006. On premise retailers, such as restaurants and nightclubs, accounted for 29% of total retail sales. From 2001-2006, total energy beverage retail sales grew at an average annual rate 42.5% Industry analysts were projecting an average annual growth rate of 10.5% from 2007-2011. The slower growth rate was attributed to market maturity, increased price and package competition, and the entrance of hybrid energy beverages such as energy water, energy fruit drinks, ready to drink energy teas, and energy colas. Intense competition Competitors: 5 competitors dominate the US beverage market: Redbull (market leader), North America, Hansen Natural Corporation, Pepsi Cola, Rockstar, Inc. and Coca Cola. Consumers: Males between ages of 12 and 34 as they are the heaviest users, most consumed in the afternoon followed by morning consumption. Most consumers drink energy beverages at home, in the car, and at work/school. Channels: convenience stores and off premise...
Words: 1005 - Pages: 5
...Introduction Lipton is famous for its various aspects. For instance it focuses strongly on innovation and has become a dominant tea brand. This point is proved by launching the varieties of products ranging from leaf tea to ready-to-drink tea products. Secondly it targets the mass market. Thirdly, due to its size, Lipton is seen as dominant player in the tea market as its size and quantity vary according to the buying behavior of the consumers. Lastly, the Lipton tea company employs professionals in tea growing, Research &Development teams, testing, blending as well as marketing. So to fulfill the criteria of the report, we have chosen Lipton tea as health and wee-being product. The report highlights different marketing theories applied in the case of Lipton. The report also clarifies the position of it in the market. Furthermore it describes where and how the consumers want this product. The report is separated into four parts incorporating primary as well as secondary sources of data. The questionnaire approach is used as primary source of data. Books, journals and online materials are used as secondary sources of data. This report gives some insights on Lipton as a brand of tea. So it can be referred in future for the further research. Most of the information is used based on the past events which can be seen as shortcoming of the report. PART A 1. Introduction to major macro environment forces Macro environment forces can be explained as external environment...
Words: 4465 - Pages: 18
...for your line of reasoning and applications rather than listing of what is already found in the book or slides. Question 1: Do you think this company is following the differentiation or cost leadership strategy? Why? Which growth strategy (market development, product development, diversification and market penetration) did they follow to improve their product portfolio sales? Reviewing Dr. Pepper Snapple Group Inc. case and assessing the situation to dr. Michael Porter generic strategies of achieving and maintaining competitive advantage, we may see that the company mostly was following the differentiation strategy as it is offering differentiated products from its competitors in many terms including the packing and pricing [pic] As for part two ,and regarding the Ansoff's product/market Expansion Grid [pic] Some may be puzzled and think that the company was applying a Diversification strategy as it was introducing new branded product(Venom ) into a new beverage market to the company (Energy beverage market), but that's flawed as the company did not leave its current product lines(beverages) to new...
Words: 1783 - Pages: 8
...Breaking Down the Chain: A Guide to the soft drink industry aCknowleDgments this report was developed to provide a detailed understanding of how the soft drink industry works, outlining the steps involved in producing, distributing, and marketing soft drinks and exploring how the industry has responded to recent efforts to impose taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages in particular. the report was prepared by sierra services, inc., in collaboration with the supply Chain Management Center (sCMC) at rutgers university – newark and new Brunswick. the authors wish to thank kristen Condrat for her outstanding support in all phases of preparing this report, including literature review and identifying source documents, writing, data analysis, editing, and final review. special thanks also goes to susanne Viscarra, who provided copyediting services. Christine fry, Carrie spector, kim Arroyo Williamson, and Ayela Mujeeb of ChangeLab solutions prepared the report for publication. ChangeLab solutions would like to thank roberta friedman of the yale rudd Center for food Policy and obesity for expert review. for questions or comments regarding this report, please contact the supervising professors: Jerome D. Williams, PhD Prudential Chair in Business and research director – the Center for urban entrepreneurship & economic development (Cueed), rutgers Business school – newark and new Brunswick, Management and Global Business department 1 Washington Park – room 1040 newark, nJ 07102 Phone: 973-353-3682...
Words: 40786 - Pages: 164
...throughout this case study: Whether or not a profitable market opportunity exists for a new energy beverage brand to be produced, marketed and distributed by the Dr. Pepper Snapple Group. In order to effectively answer the above question, there are a number of secondary questions that need to be answered to get the full picture. They are as follows: Who would the target market be? What would be the full product line and how would it be positioned within the market place? What marketing channels would be used? How would it be advertised and promoted? What would be the RSP and within which margins can it operate to remain profitable? Before answering these questions, it is important to highlight some of the external challenges that would face the company were they to go ahead and introduce a new energy drink. Firstly, there has been significant price erosion within the energy drink market, with energy drink prices declining by 30% between the years 2001 and 2006. This has been attributed to larger package sizes, the introduction of multi-packs, and the increasing availability in supermarkets, which operate with lower retail gross margins. Secondly, the market has also experienced product proliferation due to line extensions, new packaging and sizes, and market segmentation. Thirdly, DPSG needs to be aware of the changing attitudes of the consumer. The consumer is becoming more and more health conscious and while energy drinks are not perceived as unhealthy as other soft drinks, there...
Words: 2686 - Pages: 11
...COCA-COLA CASE STUDY Presentation Identifier Goes Here 1 STATISTICS AND FACTS ON LIQUID REFRESHMENT BEVERAGE BRANDS The liquid refreshment beverage (LRB) market encompasses CSDs, bottled water, ready-to-drink (RTD) coffee and tea, fruit beverages, energy drinks and sports beverages. Based on sales, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Mountain Dew, Dr Pepper and Gatorade were the leading liquid refreshment beverage (LRB) brands in the United States in 2013. All five brands combined, held a market share of over 42 percent in the U.S. in 2013. Especially to be emphasized is the performance of the carbonated soft drink CocaCola, which accounted for a U.S. market share of 18.1 percent alone. Coca-Cola is owned by The Coca-Cola Company, which is headquartered in Atlanta, GA. The brands’ outstanding performance is more than present among all regions and channels. Coca-Cola is not only listed as the leading LRB in the U.S., it also topped the list of soft drinks brands worldwide in 2014, based on brand value. Additionally, the soft drink brand had the second highest number of fans on its Facebook site. A big competitor of the Coca-Cola Company in the liquid refreshment beverage business is undoubtedly PepsiCo, Inc., which is based in Purchase, NY. The company owns, among others, the soft drink brands Pepsi and Mountain Dew and the sports drink Gatorade, which were ranked second, third and fifth in the market share ranking of LRB. SoftSrinks Off-Trade RTD Volume 534.8 Billion...
Words: 5343 - Pages: 22
...Coca-Cola: International Business Strategy For Globalization Dr. Michael Ba Banutu-Gomez, Professor, Management and Entrepreneurship, William G. Rohrer College of Business Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ ABSTRACT The purpose of this research was to analyze the efficiency of global strategies. This paper identified six key strategies necessary for firms to be successful when expanding globally. These strategies include differentiation, marketing, distribution, collaborative strategies, labor and management strategies, and diversification. Within this analysis, we chose to focus on the Coca-Cola Company because they have proven successful in their international operations and are one of the most recognized brands in the world. We performed an in-depth review of how effectively or ineffectively Coca-Cola has used each of the six strategies. The paper focused on Coca-Cola's operations in the United States, China, Belarus, Peru, and Morocco. The author used electronic journals from the various countries to determine how effective Coca-Cola was in these countries. The paper revealed that Coca-Cola was very successful in implementing strategies regardless of the country. However, the author learned that CocaCola did not effectively utilize all of the strategies in each country. Key Words: Coca-Cola, International Business, Strategy, Globalization, International Marketing, Labor Relations, Distribution, Diversification, Management, Channels, Costs, Gains and Collaboration. INTRODUCTION...
Words: 9970 - Pages: 40
...9-502-040 OCTOBER 5, 2001 DOUGLAS B. HOLT Mountain Dew: Selecting New Creative Standing at the front of a PepsiCo conference room, Bill Bruce gestured enthusiastically, pointing to the sketches at his side. Bruce, a copywriter and Executive Creative Director, headed up the creative team on the Mountain Dew account for PepsiCo’s advertising agency, BBDO New York. In fact, it was Bruce who devised the famous “Do the Dew” campaign that had catapulted Mountain Dew to the number three position in its category. With his partner, art director Doris Cassar, Bruce had developed ten new creative concepts for Mountain Dew’s 2000 advertising to present to PepsiCo management. Gathered in the room to support Bruce and Cassar were BBDO senior executives Jeff Mordos (Chief Operating Officer), Cathy Israelevitz (Senior Account Director), and Ted Sann (Chief Creative Officer). Each of the three executives had over a decade of experience working on Mountain Dew. Representing PepsiCo were Scott Moffitt (Marketing Director, Mountain Dew), Dawn Hudson (Chief Marketing Officer, and a former senior ad agency executive), and Gary Rodkin (Chief Executive Officer, Pepsi Cola North America). Scott Moffitt scribbled notes as he listened to Bruce speak. Moffitt and the brand managers under him were charged with day-to-day oversight of Mountain Dew marketing. These responsibilities included brand strategy, consumer and sales promotions, packaging, line extensions, product changes, and sponsorships....
Words: 8280 - Pages: 34
...International Trade & Academic Research Conference (ITARC ), 7 – 8th November, 2012, London.UK. COCA-COLA: International Business Strategy for Globalization Michael Ba Banutu-Gomez William G. Rohrer College of Business, Rowan University, USA Key Words International Differentiation Strategy, Global Strategy, International Marketing Strategy, Culture in International Marketing Strategy, Coca-Cola Strategy, International Distribution Strategy, Choosing Distributors and Channels, The Challenge of Distribution, Hidden Costs And Gains In Distribution, International Collaborative Strategy, International Labor Relations and Management Strategy, and International Diversification Strategy. Abstract The purpose of this research was to analysis the efficiency of global strategies. This paper identified six key strategies necessary for firms to be successful when expanding globally. These strategies include differentiation, marketing, distribution, collaborative strategies, labor and management strategies, and diversification. Within this analysis, we chose to focus on the Coca-Cola Company because they have proven successful in their international operations and are one of the most recognized brands in the world. We performed an in-depth review of how effectively or ineffectively Coca-Cola has used each of the six strategies. The paper focused on Coca-Cola's operations in the United States, China, Belarus, Peru, and Morocco. The author used electronic journals from...
Words: 10141 - Pages: 41
...I. Case Title: PepsiCo 2005 Case Analysis 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.” 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.” PepsiCo: Products * Pepsi-Cola * Pepsi, Mountain Dew, Mug Root Beer, Sierra Mist, Slice, Aquafina, SOBE, Lipton… * Gatorade * Gatorade Thirst Quencher, Propel Fitness Water, Tiger Woods...
Words: 2619 - Pages: 11
