Coca-Cola Company Marketing Plan [pic] Vanessa Lyle April 4th, 2010 Executive Summary The following marketing plan forms the basis for the introduction of an innovative new product by the Coca-Cola Company. The analysis allows us to outline the best strategies to follow for the achievement of the company’s strategic goals. “Bubble Buzz” will be marketed as a unique functional drink while striving to reinforce the company’s status as the leader in innovation and successful product launches.
The marketing strategies will enable to reach a market size of an estimated 8,688,300 people (targeted) with a forecasted sales growth prospect of 7. 3% over the next 4 years ($243,029. 47 profits), while satisfying the needs of the still-unserved market for ready-to-drink bubble tea. Success will be reflected by a sizeable capture of market shares within this market, while strategically carrying the company up to the top spot as the market leader in the functional drinks segment of soft drinks. Export potential will be considered in China.
Mission Statement/Objective The Coca-Cola Company’s core undertaking is to benefit and refresh everyone it reaches. The objectives of the marketing plan are strategically centered around 3 criteria: to create a strong consumer awareness towards a completely new bubble tea product from Coca-Cola, to establish a wide brand recognition through the capture of market shares in the functional drinks segment, and to become the top market leader in that particular segment within the forecasted sales figures. Introduction Bubble Buzz” will be a bottled beverage and will be positioned as the only ready-to-drink Bubble Tea product available on the market. The beverage will have a green tea base with enhanced fruit flavors (passion fruit, strawberry and lime) as well as tapioca pearls. It will bring an entirely unique drinking experience to its consumers. It will present itself as a funky and unusual alternative to traditional tea while providing the great taste of authentic fruit juice in an attractive and convenient packaging.
Objectives The objectives for the first three years of operation include: 1. To create a service-based company whose primary goal is to exceed customer’s expectations 2. To increase the number of clients served by at least 20% per year through superior performance and word-of-mouth referrals. 3. To develop a sustainable financial management company that generates value for their customers. 4. To stay at the forefront as the market leader in innovative product introductions and successful product launches 5.
To strengthen and satisfy the needs of the more adventurous Generation Y consumers with a new eye-catching and FUNctional product. 6. To become the market leader in the functional drinks segment with increased market Situation Analysis Industry Analysis Consumption: The sales volume for the functional drinks segment (ref. D2) in Canada has reached $342. 2 million in 2004 for a volume of 125. 9 million liters (ref. 2). This product segment has shown a steady growth since 1999: an increase of 13. 5% over a period of 6 years. The consumption rate per capita in 2004 has reached 3. 4 liters, which represents a 4. 0% increase compared to 1999 (ref. 3). The growth of this particular market is largely due to a slow shift in consumer trends. Trends: Through the early 1960s, soft drinks were synonymous with “colas” in the mind of consumers. In the 1980s and 1990s, however, other beverages (from bottled water to tea) became more popular. Coca-Cola and Pepsi responded by expanding their offerings through alliances (e. g. Coke & Nestea) and acquisitions (e. g. Coke & Minute Maid), but also by focusing efforts on portfolio diversification.
Today, while the soft drink industry’s value has increased in 2004, the volume sales of carbonated soft drinks has declined due to a large proportion of consumers who are opting for the trend towards healthier alternatives in the functional drink segment (energy drinks, smoothies, milk & juice drinks, sports drinks) as well as bottled juices and water (ref. 5). Companies have been actively engaged in new product developments in order to counter the growing concerns about negative health impacts of high-fructose drinks, but also to increase the demand in a market where product offerings are quickly maturing (ref. ). New flavor introductions and health-conscious formulations have been launched in an attempt to offset the decline in carbonated soft drink sales (ref. 6). The functional market is expected to show sustained growth and consumer interest in the future years as consumption shifts to trendier, healthier and more sophisticated products (ref. 7). Profitability & future growth potential: In 1993, Concentrate Producers earned 29% pretax profits on their sales, while bottlers earned 9% profits on their sales, for a total industry profitability of 14%.
While the functional drinks sector only accounts for 3. 7% of the total soft drinks sales in 2004 (Appendix B), estimates are forecasting a growth of 7. 3% in sales and 11. 0% in volume consumption by 2009 (ref. 4). Social and cultural factors Since the Coca-Cola Company extends to over 200 countries (with headquarters located in Atlanta, Georgia), they have an immense need to diversify their products and create a marketing plan that meets the socio-cultural interests of all their customers (vendors) and consumers (drinkers) around the world.
The Coca- Cola trademark is recognized worldwide, no matter what language is printed on the bottle. However, the Coca-Cola Company must continue to tailor their marketing plan and product development to respect each consumer’s unique values, beliefs and cultures. An example of the Coca-Cola Company adapting to the external socio-cultural environment is in 2007, the Coca-Cola Company received a silver award at the Iberoamerican Advertising Festival for their “Levate la Mano” (Raise Your Hand) commercial that was aired in Latin
America (2007 Annual Report: Marketing Highlights). Coca-Cola has also created a unique formulation for Sprite sold in Japan to meet the cultural preferences (p. 114). Social factors have been carefully considered in the company’s marketing plan. The Coca-Cola Company has successfully developed products to please the 21st century’s health-conscious consumer with brands like Coca-Cola Zero (their best selling brand in over 25 years), sports drinks, and bottled water.
Coca-Cola must continue to adapt to the external environmental threat of the healthy lifestyle movement through product development and marketing of healthy options available. Demographics The primary target market of the Coca-Cola Company is all consumers of all nations that have a thirst for a high-quality beverage from a reputable brand that cares about small communities and saving the environment. The Coca-Cola Company is well known for advertising to persons of all ages, genders, incomes, ethnicity and lifestyles.
Nevertheless, more specifically, over the last decade the Coca-Cola Company has focused on a secondary target market, based on specific psycho-graphic characteristics, of consumers that are health conscious and interested in buying products to support their overall wellness. The Coca-Cola Company has reached this market through many product lines, and has customized their website to provide healthy resources and marketing of products that are considered smart choices. Economic and business conditions The United States is currently experiencing an economic recession.
This period of negative growth includes higher unemployment, inflation, and cost of living expenses while consumers are experiencing lower disposable income and purchasing power (p. 641). The Coca-Cola Company contracts with numerous bottling companies around the world to create and distribute their beverages. The weakened economy could have a negative impact on any of the bottling companies, which would threaten the stability of the Coca-Cola Company due to the dependent relationship. The Coca-Cola Company must be profitable in order to sustain their investment in communities around the world.
Furthermore, small communities depend on large businesses like the Coca-Cola Company to strengthen their own economy and help create social and environmental programs. The Coca-Cola Company has been very successful in helping other nations grow and become economically stable by investing millions of dollars back into the countries in which they are operating. State of Technology In today’s marketplace, technology is a key player in helping a business stay profitable. Large businesses, like the Coca-Cola Company, must invest in technological research to find ways to become more efficient, and ultimately better competitors.
The Coca-Cola Company should address external technological threats by investing directly in applied research to improve recording and monitoring of the sales, production and delivery process between the Coca-Cola Company and the bottling companies (p. 90). Politics There are not any legal factors affecting the marketing of this product. Laws and Regulations Legal factors that could pose an environmental threat to the Coca-Cola Company include new legislation or regulation of food and beverage products. Activists are trying to push for more government involvement in product advertising and labeling.
While many laws have already been passed in this regard, expanded or new laws could threaten the company by creating more overhead expenses and decreasing the profit margin. Neutral Environment Financial Environment The United States is currently experiencing an economic recession. This period of negative growth includes higher unemployment, inflation, and cost of living expenses while consumers are experiencing lower disposable income and purchasing power (p. 641). The Coca-Cola Company contracts with numerous bottling companies around the world to create and distribute their beverages.
The weakened economy could have a negative impact on any of the bottling companies, which would threaten the stability of the Coca-Cola Company due to the dependent relationship. The Coca-Cola Company must be profitable in order to sustain their investment in communities around the world. Furthermore, small communities depend on large businesses like the Coca-Cola Company to strengthen their own economy and help create social and environmental programs. Government Environment The state and federal legislature are affecting marketing of this product.
The fight of obesity has been an ongoing battle for years. Since President Barack Obama took office, that fight has come to a head more than ever before. Schools are starting to not serve soft drinks to their students and consumers are starting to become more health conscious. The sales in soft drinks have not been affected significantly, but with time, Coca-Cola and other soft drink corporations could feel the pinch from the “get healthy” movement. Media Environment Current media publicity for Coca-Cola is indeed mixed.
Most commercials for Coca-Cola are cute, fun, and market the product to be a social party starter or a family conversation piece. There are a number of business articles that discuss how much of a positive affect the Coca-Cola Corporation helps the environment, whether that is giving money to environmentally friendly charities, encouraging recycling, or having a company fundraiser. Some of the negative attention comes from the government being concerned with the amount of carbonated soft drinks that are being consumed by not only children but adults as well.
The obesity rate is unsettling and Coca-Cola, along with many other soft drink companies, is taking some of the blame. Special Interest Environment Consumer tastes and needs are ever changing. With the new focus on health and nutrition and concerns with obesity, many consumers are changing their behaviors and product choices. Tea products, bottled water and energy drinks have become favored as opposed to the typical soft drink. This is an external threat to the Coca-Cola Company, as these changes in preferences have increased the number of competitors in the industry.
The Coca-Cola Company is not only in competition with soft drink companies, like PepsiCo, Inc. , but with other unassuming companies like Unilever, Kraft Foods, and Nestle. The Coca-Cola Company must continue aggressive efforts in responsible marketing, community investment and product development to hold the No. 1 place in sales of juice, ready-to-drink coffees, and teas. Competitor Environment Coca-Cola’s main competitors are PepsiCo, Inc and Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. ”PepsiCo, Inc. manufactures, markets, and sells various snacks, carbonated and non-carbonated beverages, and foods worldwide.
Its PepsiCo Americas Foods unit offers salty and sweet snacks comprising Lays potato chips, Doritos tortilla chips, Cheetos cheese flavored snacks, Tostitos tortilla chips, branded dips, Fritos corn chips, Ruffles potato chips, Quaker Chewy granola bars, SunChips multigrain snacks, Rold Gold pretzels, Santitas tortilla chips, Frito-Lay nuts, Grandma’s cookies, Gamesa cookies, Munchies snack mix, Funyuns onion flavored rings, Quaker Quakes corn and rice snacks, Sabritas snacks, Miss Vickie’s potato chips, Stacy’s pita chips, Smartfood popcorn, Chester’s fries, and branded crackers.
This unit also provides cereals, rice, pasta, and other branded products, including Quaker oatmeal, Aunt Jemima mixes and syrups, Quaker grits, Cap’n Crunch cereal, Life cereal, Rice-A-Roni, Pasta Roni, and Near East side dishes. The company’s PepsiCo Americas Beverages unit sells beverage concentrates, fountain syrups, and finished goods under the Pepsi, Mountain Dew, Gatorade, 7UP, Tropicana Pure Premium, Sierra Mist, Mirinda, Tropicana juice drinks, Propel, Dole, Amp Energy, SoBe Lifewater, Naked juice, and Izze beverage names.
This unit also offers ready-to-drink tea, coffee, and water products through joint ventures with Unilever and Starbucks, as well as licenses the Aquafina water brand to its bottlers. The company’s PepsiCo International unit offers salty and sweet snack brands, including Lay’s, Walkers, Doritos, Cheetos, Ruffles, and Smith’s; Quaker brand cereals and snacks; and beverage concentrates, fountain syrups, and finished goods under the Pepsi, Mirinda, Mountain Dew, 7UP, and Tropicana names. PepsiCo, Inc. istributes its products through direct-store-delivery, customer warehouse, and food service and vending distribution networks. ” (PepsiCo, Inc 2009) “PepsiCo’s mission is to be the world’s premier consumer Products Company focused on convenient foods and beverages. They seek to produce financial rewards to investors as they provide opportunities for growth and enrichment to employees, business partners and the communities in which they operate. “PepsiCo’s responsibility is to continually improve all aspects of the world in which they operate – environment, social, economic – creating a better tomorrow than today.
Their 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. They are also committed to achieving business and financial success while leaving a positive imprint on society. “(PepsiCo, Inc 2010) “Dr Pepper Snapple Group is the third-largest refreshment beverage business in North America, headquartered in Plano, Texas. The company manufactures markets and istributes more than 50 brands of carbonated soft drinks, juices; ready to drink teas, mixers and other premium beverages across the United States, Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean. With a brand heritage pning more than 200 years, the DPS portfolio includes some of the most recognized beverages in the Americas. In addition to its flagship Dr Pepper and Snapple brands, the DPS portfolio includes 7UP, Mott’s, A, Sunkist soda, Hawaiian Punch, Canada Dry, Schweppes, RC Cola, Diet Rite, Squirt, Penafiel, Yoo-hoo, Rose’s, Clamato, Mr. & Mrs.
T and other well-known consumer favorites. Dr Pepper Snapple Group was established in 2008 following the spin-off of Cadbury Schweppes Americas Beverages (CSAB) from Cadbury Schweppes plc. CSAB had formed in 2003 by bringing together Cadbury Schweppes’ four North American beverages businesses, Dr Pepper/Seven Up Inc. , Snapple Beverage Group, Mott’s LLP, and Bebidas Mexico, unifying these businesses under a common vision, strategy and management structure and cementing the company’s position as the third-largest refreshment beverage business in North America.
In 2006, the company reached another milestone with the acquisition of Dr Pepper/Seven-Up Bottling Group, the largest independent bottler in the United States. These moves, and several subsequent bottling business acquisitions, have made Dr Pepper Snapple Group what it is today: an integrated beverage business with nearly $6 billion in annual revenues, approximately 20,000 employees, 24 manufacturing facilities and more than 200 distribution centers across North America. ” (Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, 2010). Our competitors market through the same channels as Coca-Cola.
Through commercials, print ads, billboards, sporting events, facebook, MySpace, and various other networking groups. Some of our strengths as a company are we have brand strength, effective stride in new markets, results of operations, and strong existing distribution channels. Some of our weaknesses are we are reliant upon line extensions, reliant upon particular carbonated drinks, brand dilution, and saturation of carbonated soft drink segments. The Company Environment The products of Coca-Cola are carbonated soft drinks that are sold in stores, vending machines, and restaurants.
The Coca-Cola Company has, on occasion, introduced other cola drinks under the Coke brand name. The most common of these is Diet Coke, with others including Caffeine-Free Coca-Cola, Diet Coke Caffeine-Free, Coca-Cola Cherry, Coca-Cola Zero, Coca-Cola Vanilla, and special editions with lemon, lime or coffee. One of Coca-Cola’s strength’s is that it is the number one soft drink company in the world. It is sold in over 200 countries around the globe. Its logo is one the most recognized company logos, and their advertising campaigns, especially their Christmas campaigns, are very successful for the company.
They have been operating for over a century; However, Coca-Cola has had its fair share of controversy. One of the bigger controversies, and definitely a weakness, would be that Coca-Cola has been criticized for alleged adverse health effects and its aggressive marketing to children. In response to consumer insistence on a more natural product, the company is in the process of phasing out E211, or sodium benzoate, the controversial additive used in Diet Coke and linked to DNA damage in yeast cells and hyperactivity in children.
The company has stated that it plans to remove E211 from its other products, including Sprite and Oasis, as soon as a satisfactory alternative is found. The Target Market When it comes to the consumer market, Coca-Cola has a very broad market base. The company focuses its efforts on many different people. Coke’s core business, which has been carbonated beverages, has been targeting a large audience of soft drink consumers. Throughout history, the company has targeted many generations of people. The ages of these people has ranged from young to old.
Coke has always been known as a classic, which has appealed to the older audience. Lately the company has tried a fresher new image to reach to the younger generation Y group. For the Coke Company, there is a need for them to focus on certain demographical characteristics of the population. The characteristics they must consider include: age, income, and family. The other demographic considerations such as, education and ethnicity are not as large of a concern. When we look at age, the company tries to keep their image hip and ool to appeal to younger generation Y people, but also target the older generations by keeping the classic coca-cola image. Since age has a large impact on income, it would be expected that this would be an issue for the company. This is not necessarily true. The products they offer are affordable for most people, even young teens with out a job relying on parents. This brings us to the idea of targeting different family types. Since age is not necessarily prohibiting, family differences should not hurt the sales of their products, but only help it because of the appeal to most people.
It does not matter if you are single, married with no children, or even married with children. Their products are suited for all people. In Coca-Cola news they tell us that they are working on efforts to, “develop new drinks and to market juices, coffees, and teas…” (Coke, 2001) By implementing these changes, they are targeting parents of children for their juices, older people with coffees, and people who want a healthier alternative to carbonated beverages, with their teas. “While Coke’s core business will remain carbonated beverages…”according to Mr. Heyer, “we don’t want to be limited. (McKay) They are introducing the new drink products in this year and their main focus in on a, “unique new vitamin-fortified juice drink targeted to kids. ” (Coca-Cola, 2001) By doing this, the company is reaching parents on the benefits sought level by including healthy vitamins for their children. Also included in deciding a market for a product are geographical considerations, psychographic details, situation, and behavior/usage. Coke targets people throughout the world and of many different cultures. Because of this, their scope for geographical area is very broad.
Although they do advertise Coke as a refreshing beverage, which would be needed more in warmer climates. It would be unwise of me to assume that advertising is different in other, warmer, climates, but it would only make sense. They would need to target someone wanting to quench their thirst rather than just enjoy a beverage. The next consideration is psychographic detail such as attitude. This is brought about in many of their advertisements. The slogan, “Always Coca-Cola,” is used to take people back to the good old days when things were great.
With that memory in mind, people will purchase the beverage for the connection. This is not the only attitude the company wants to portray. Their recent commercials show young people having a good time and making new memories. The product is displayed as hip and fun. This brings me to the situation a person may go through to purchase a Coke. There are many different situations that purchasing a Coke would be appropriate. It may be one for yourself on a lunch break, or purchasing a large amount to accommodate the needs of guests you may have. Finally, there are behavior/usage characteristics to consider.
This is deciding if a person will purchase a Coke one time or many times. To keep the people purchasing many times, Coke must produce a quality product that someone will want the next time s/he is thirsty. Segment identification: RTD (Ready-to-drink) bottled Bubble Tea, to be established within the Functional Drinks sector Segment needs: The product will cater to both physiological needs (hydrating and nutritional value) and social needs (perception of a social, fun drink with a sense of belonging within peer consumer groups) – (ref. 11, p. 127).
Segment trends: The current trends include a shift away from junk foods and carbonated drinks, a growing interest for healthier / beneficial products for the “mind and body” (ref. 10), the trend towards the availability of on-the-go products for those with an active lifestyle, as well as the trend for personalization through customization (or for beverages, through variety-seeking in a wide introduction of flavors – ref. 6). Segment growth potential: Statistical reports anticipate a segment growth of 1. 72% over the next 9 years (2015) for the 10-29 years old subsets (ref. 12).
Positioning strategy: The only RTD bottled bubble tea available. Funky & eye-catching bottle, functional packaging, premium-priced, cool, new and unusual, unique drinking experience, aspects of play (tapioca pearls, oversized colored straw), variety of flavors, sweet, refreshing, for hip & young people, healthier alternative to heavy-sugar drinks. Problems and Opportunities Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses Coca-Cola has a strong brand name and brand portfolio. Business-Week and interbred, a branding consultancy, recognize Coca-Cola as one of the leading brands in their top 100 global brands ranking in 2006.
The Business-Week Interbred valued Coca-Cola at $67,000 million in 2006. Coca-Cola ranks well ahead of its close competitor Pepsi, which has a ranking of 22, has a brand value of $12,690 million. The company’s strong brand value facilitates customer recall and allows Coca-Cola to penetrate markets. However, the company is threatened by intense competition which could have an adverse impact on the company’s market share. Strengths World’s Leading Brand A major strength of Coca-Cola is that it is the largest manufacturer, distributor, and marketer of nonalcoholic beverage concentrates and syrups in the world.
Coca-Cola is selling trademarked beverage products since the year of 1886 in the United States. The company currently sells its products in more than 200 countries. It owns or has interest in 37 operations with 95 principle beverage bottling and canning plants located outside the US. The company also owns bottled water production and still beverage facilities as well as a facility that manufactures juice concentrates. Large Revenue Growth in three segments Coca-Cola’s revenues recorded a double digit growth, in three operating segments. These three segments are Latin America, East, South Asia, and Pacific Rim and Bottling investments.
Revenues from Latin America grew by 20. 4% during fiscal 2009. During the same period, revenues from the bottling investments segment grew by 19. 9%. Together, the three segments of Latin America, East, South Asia, and Pacific Rim bottling investments, accounted for 34. 8% of total revenues during fiscal 2009. Weaknesses Negative Publicity The company received negative publicity in India during September 2006. The company was accused by the Center of Science and Environment of selling products containing pesticide residues. Coca-Cola products sold in and around the Indian national capital region contained a hazardous pesticide residue.
These pesticides included chemicals which could cause cancers, damage the nervous system and reproductive systems and reduce bone mineral density. Such negative publicity could adversely impact the company’s brand image and the demand for Coke products. This could also have an adverse impact on the company’s growth prospects in the international markets. Sluggish Performance in North America Coca-Cola’s performance in North America was far from robust. North America is Coca-Cola’s main market generating about 30% of total revenues during fiscal 2009.
Therefore, a strong performance in North America is important for the company. In North America, the sale of unit cases did not record any growth. Unit case retail volume in North America decreased 1% primarily due to weak sparkling beverage trends in the second half of 2009 and decline in the warehouse-delivered water and juice businesses. Moreover, the company also expects performance in North America to be weak during 2010. Sluggish performance in North America could impact the company’s growth prospects and prevent Coca-Cola from recording more robust top-line growth.
Decline in Cash from Operating Activities The company’s cash flow from operating activities declined during fiscal 2008. Cash flows from operating activities decreased 7% in 2008 compared to 2007. Net cash provided by operating activities reached $5,957 million in 2008, from $6,423 million in 2007. Coca-Cola’s cash flows from operating activities also decreased compared with 2007 as a result of a contribution of approximately $216 million to a tax-qualified trust to fund retiree medical benefits. The decrease was also the result of certain marketing accruals recorded in 2006. Opportunities Acquisitions
For the past year, Coca-Cola has been aggressively adopting the inorganic growth path. During 2006, acquisitions included Kerry Beverages, which was subsequently, reappointed Coca-Cola China Industries. Coca-Cola acquired a controlling shareholding in KGL. The acquisition extended Coca-Cola’s control over manufacturing and distribution joint ventures in the nine Chinese provinces. In Germany, the company acquired Apollinaris which sells sparkling and still mineral water. Coca-Cola also made acquisitions of TJC Holdings, a bottling company in South Africa along with several deals in Australia and New Zealand.
This will give Coca-Cola an opportunity for growth through new product launches and greater penetration of existing markets. Growing Water Bottle Market Also, bottled water is one of the fastest-growing segments in the world’s food and beverage market owing to increasing health concerns. The market for bottled water in the US generated revenues of about $15. 6 billion in 2008. Market consumption volumes were estimated to be 30 billion liters in 2008. The market’s consumption volume is expected to rise to 38. 6 billion units by the end of 2010. This represents a CAGR of 6. % during 2005-2010. In terms of value, the bottled water market is forecast to reach $19. 3 billion by the end of 2010. In the bottled water market, the revenue of flavored water segment is growing by about $10 billion annually. The company’s Dasani brand water is the third best-selling bottled water in the US. Coca-Cola could leverage its strong position in the bottled water segment to take advantage of growing demand for flavored water. Threats Intense Competition Coca-Cola competes in the non-alcoholic beverages segment of the commercial beverages industry.
The company faces intense competition in various markets from regional as well as global players. Also, the company faces competition from various nonalcoholic sparkling beverages including juices and nectars and fruit drinks. In many of the countries in which Coca-Cola operates, including the US, PepsiCo is one of the company’s primary competitors. Other significant competitors include Nestle, Cadbury Schweppes, and Kraft Foods. Competitive factors impacting the company’s business include pricing, advertising, sales promotion programs, product innovation, and brand and trademark development and protection.
Intense competition could impact Coca-Cola’s market share and revenue growth rates. Dependence on bottling partners Coca-Cola generates most of its revenues by selling concentrates and syrups to bottlers in whom it doesn’t have any ownership interest or in which it has no controlling ownership interest. In 2008, approximately 83% of its worldwide unit case volumes were produced and distributed by bottling partners in which the company did not have any controlling interests. As independent companies, its bottling partners, some of whom are publicly traded companies, make their own usiness decisions that may not always be in line with the company’s interests. In addition, many of its bottling partners have the right to manufacture or distribute their own products or certain products of other beverage companies. If Coca-Cola is unable to provide an appropriate mix of incentives to its bottling partners, then the partners may take actions that, while maximizing their own short-term profits, may be detrimental to Coca-Cola. These bottlers may devote more resources to business opportunities or products other than those beneficial for Coca-Cola.
Such actions could, in the long run, have an adverse effect on Coca-Cola’s profitability. In addition, loss of one or more of its major customers by any one of its major bottling partners could indirectly affect Coca-Cola’s business results. Such dependence on third parties is a weak link in Coca-Cola’s operations and increases the company’s business risks. Sluggish growth of carbonated beverages US consumers have started to look for greater variety in their drinks and are becoming increasingly health conscious.
This has led to a decrease in the consumption of carbonated and other sweetened beverages in the US. The US carbonated soft drinks market generated total revenues of $63. 9 billion in 2008, this representing a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of only 0. 2% for the five-year period pning 2004-2009. The performance of the market is forecast to decelerate, with an anticipated compound annual rate of change (CAGR) of -0. 3% for the five-year period 2004-2009 expected to drive the market to a value of $62. 9 billion by the end of 2010.
Moreover in the recent years, beverage companies such as Coca-Cola have been criticized for selling carbonated beverages with high amounts of sugar and unacceptable levels of dangerous chemical content, and have been implicated for facilitating poor diet and increasing childhood obesity. Moreover, the US is the company’s core market. Coca-Cola already expects its performance in the region to be sluggish during 2007. Coca-Cola’s revenues could be adversely affected by a slowdown in the US carbonated beverage market. Solutions Intense Competition
There is not much that can be done about the competition that plagues Coca-Cola. One way that I suggest for Coca-Cola to stand out is to continue to lend their brand image to such shows as American Idol and such companies as AMC Theatre. Also, continue to have the already successful Christmas Polar Bear Commercial Campaign. Dependence on Bottling Companies I was quite surprised to read that Coca-Cola still relies on other bottling companies to help create their product. By being such a world-wide, well known company, you would think that Coca-Cola would have their own manufacturing plants.
This may be something that Coca-Cola may want to look it. It would cut down the cost of production because then instead of paying another company to bottle your product and ship it out, Coca-Cola themselves could have the control and this could save millions of dollars a year. Sluggish Growth of Carbonated Beverages Instead of just being a well known soft drink company, Coca-Cola could expand their products. They do already have teas, water, and flavored water as products but they are not as widely advertised as the Coke itself.
Spending more money to advertise Snapple to be a great tasting and healthy tea or Dasani to be great calorie free water that comes in such flavors as Lemon and Raspberry could be a great way to also increase profit. Marketing Objectives and Goals Coca-Cola will produce a new product called “Bubble Buzz”. It will be a bottled beverage and will be positioned as the only ready-to-drink Bubble Tea product available on the market. The beverage will have a green tea base with enhanced fruit flavors (passion fruit, strawberry and lime) as well as tapioca pearls.
It will bring an entirely unique drinking experience to its consumers. It will present itself as a funky and unusual alternative to traditional tea while providing the great taste of authentic fruit juice in an attractive and convenient packaging. The strategic role of Bubble Buzz for The Coca-Cola Company is centered on three objectives: • To stay at the forefront as the market leader in innovative product introductions and successful product launches; • To become the market leader in the functional drinks segment with increased market shares. To strengthen and satisfy the needs of the more adventurous Generation Y consumers with a new eye-catching and FUNctional product. Product Strategy The Core: Bubble Tea beverage in a pre-bottled, ready-to-drink format. Branding: Colorful, aspect of play, round shaped, prominent Bubble Buzz logo written in modern font, catchphrases such as “Think outside the Bubble” and “Get Your Buzz”. Trade name: Bubble Buzz™, a Coca-Cola product Brand personality: energy, funky, cool, functional, original, funny, healthy, etc. Brand equity: Coca-Cola provides a quality, consistent, innovative and accessible soft drink reputation.
Augmented product: Nutritional information, Status (social drink), Features promoting the website, Health benefit of a green tea base (ref. 17) Marketing considerations Product life cycle: Bubble Buzz is a low-learning product. With a strong marketing campaign, “sales [will] begin immediately and the benefits of the purchase are readily understood” (ref. 11, p. 301). Since Bubble Buzz is prone to product imitation, Coca- Cola’s strategy is to broaden distribution quickly, which is currently feasible thanks to the company’s high manufacturing capacity. Product class: Food & beverage, Soft Drinks, Functional Drinks
Price Strategy The price strategy that will be undertaken should consider the following aspects: 1. Consumer demand 2. The product lifecycle Customer demand Customer demand is a crucial factor which is driven by tastes, income and availability of others similar products at a different price (mentioned later in the potential substitutes section). For a lot of consumers, value and price are highly related: ‘’the higher the price, the higher the value’’. Consequently, Coca-Cola’s intention to position Bubble Buzz as a unique, innovative and attractive product gives it a certain control over Bubble Buzz price.
To be able to implement higher pricing though, the minimization of the non-monetary costs to customers should also be include along with awareness of the product (notably by advertising) and value (benefits). The product life-cycle The company should take advantage also to the fact that the newer the product and the earlier in its lifecycle the higher the price can usually be. It ensures a high profit margin as the early adopters buy the product and the firm seeks to recoup development costs quickly and it also brings a certain prestige to the product.
Promotion Strategy: Objectives: • To initiate strong awareness about the launch of Bubble Buzz throughout Generation Y (10-29 years old) consumers as well as their parents. • To win market shares over our top functional drinks competitor, PepsiCo. Message: The promotional outputs will convey the clear message that “Bubble Buzz is a healthy drink for sporty and young people who simply enjoy taking care of their body and life. ” Concepts: • Think outside the bubble”: Be old, Be Original, Be Different, Be Yourself. • “A good spirit in a good body. • “For the out-of-the-ordinary individuals who like to challenge themselves. ” Media selection: Before choosing the appropriate medias, it is important to note that Generation Y consumers only give partial attention to media. However, they can be reached through integrated programs. They are typically using more than onecommunication media at a time; a behavior that is often called “multitasking”. This group of consumers doesn’t give its full attention to one single message, but rather uses continuous partial attention to scan the media.
Marketers can still communicate with Generation Y by using a variety of targeted promotional tools. Another important tactic to reach our target market is through “Viral” or “Buzz” marketing, which Coca-Cola will heavily use in this campaign (campus, contests). Television:MTV, Much Music, VrakTV, YTV Radio:MIX96, CKOI 96. 9, 94. 7 FM, Universities Magazines for girls: Cosmo, Elle Magazines for boys: Sports Illustrated (or Kids edition) Internet:Banners on select websites (gaming, sports, etc. ) Official promotional website: www. BubbleBuzz. ca
Outdoors:Billboards and prints in select areas including: • Campuses, transportation (bus, metro, stations) • Tourist areas in high seasonal periods • Outskirts of key cities in geographical reach Promotional Mix: Consumer oriented: Contests: “Win another Bubble Buzz flavor”, “Uncover a secret code underneath the bottle cap and win sporting goods and electronics by logging on the website”, “Win a trip for the 2008 Olympics in Beijing”. (Arguments: It will increase consumer purchases and encourage consumer involvement with the product).
Samples: distributed in supermarkets, school/universities. Samples are a way to avoid product resistance since people are not used to find bubbles in their drinks. Arguments: It will encourage new product purchases and it represents low risk for consumers since they get it for free. They have nothing to lose by trying it. Point-of-purchase: in supermarkets (to reach the parents of generation Y). Arguments: It is also a mean to increase product trial and provides a good product visibility. Others: In subsequent years, engage in product placement in TV shows or movies.
Trade oriented: Allowances and discounts: case allowance (Arguments: The “free goods” approach will be used so it can encourage retailers to buy more of the product to get a certain amount for free). Cooperative advertising: to encourage retailers to buy our product and to maintain our high level of advertisement that consumers expect from Coca-Cola. Place (Distribution Strategy): Bubble Buzz will be distributed through these channels: supermarkets, convenience stores, independent food stores, discount stores, multiple grocers, vending machines, direct sales. Financial Projections
Requirement for success analysis: C. M. per bottle = 382,159. 36 / 328,000 = $1. 17 Break-even: (113,453. 56+25,676. 33) / 1. 17 = 118,914 (bottles) Market share: 118,914 / 1,000,000 = 11. 9% In one year, if Coca-cola can sell 118,914 bottles of Bubble Buzz, or in other words achieve 11. 9% of the functional drink market share, it will break even. After this point, every bottle Coca cola sells will generate average $1. 17 towards the profits. The potential profits can up to $1,030,770. 00 based on our target market. Expected Costs: COGS: $597,124 * 36% = $214,964. 64O/H: $597,124* 38% = $226,907. 2 Expected Revenues (total) = $597,124 China is the target country we’re going to expand our product. Reasons: 1. With a total population of 1,313,015,000 in the end of 2008 and 327,714,000 in our target market (age 10 to 25 years old), compared with the total population of Canada—304,453 million, there definitely is a great potential worth to work on. 2. Absolute expenditure on food and non-alcoholic beverages is expected to increase from 1,777 billion in 2005 to 2,154 billion in 2010 (though the proportion of consumer expenditure on this part is decreasing from 28. 39% to 25. 75% ) 3.
Soft drinks industry is one of the fast growing industries in China, especially fruit/vegetable juice, RTD tea, and Asian specialty drinks and bottled water have shown a sharp increase during 1998 to 2003. 4. Bubble tea was originated in Taiwan. Soon after its introduction in China, it became one of the most popular beverages sold in tea stores on the streets due to the similar taste and similar cultural background. So, it is a good chance for us to enter into this market. 5. Since we are the top sponsor for the upcoming Beijing Olympic in 2008. With more opportunities to expose to the public, it is going to benefit our sale there.
Our entry-strategy for entering China is through licensing. Reasons: 1. We have already provided licenses for manufacturing our products in China (licensing the bottlers and supply them with our syrup required for producing). Therefore, added in one or two more products in our production chain would not be that difficult. 2. It is relatively low risk when compared with direct investment there. It is low cost to export our new products there since we can maintain lower labor cost and lower material cost if we produce our products locally, especially in China. Changes to be made: 1.
Price: Price sold in China is going to change to accommodate the local desire. As we set our price sold in Canada $2. 00. Compared to the price sold in the bubble tea store ($ 3. 50), it is about 57. 14%. So, with the information we gathered from the tea store in China, the price sold there would be 57. 14% of what sold in the tea store—$12 Yuen in China currency. Then, it would be around $7 Yuen. 2. Naming the product: In order to be recognized and accepted more easily for the local market, we need not only translate our product name but also make sure there’s not hidden unintended meaning that would damage our product. 3.
Develop other flavors that would attract the local market: Since milk based bubble tea sell better in China, we will add in this product line. Also, we will avoid using too many artificial colors as they are not appreciated as much as in Canada. Moreover, people in China are becoming more and more health concerned, especially the amount of sugar and additives added in the drinks. We will make some changes in the ingredients used to appeal the local market, i. e. less sugary drinks. 3. Promotion: In contrast to the radio ads in Canada, we will use more TV and Web advertisement there due to the highly exposed environment in China.
Also, we will put more emphasis on the ads on the public transportation such as underground/subway system and bus service due to the more frequent use of the public transport service there. Also, since the outdoor display screen is quite popular in big cities, we will also take advantage of it. Implementation Plan [pic] Graph helped prepared by Dr. Thomas Grooms and Jon Shook METHODOLOGY Sample The concept is to find out if the respondents are willing to try a new green tea/fruit juice infusion that is made by the Coca-Cola brand.
As a methodology, it can be applied to deepen a Marketers’ understanding of brand loyalty while explaining the opinions, influences and attitudes that lies behind the respondents’ opinion about a brand, the product and the reason behind the purchase. The specific questions work in conjunction with the background of the typologies to enable a rich understanding of purchasing decisions and explain opinions based on the reason the respondent will continue to purchase a brand. Core Aspects • Focus on the key demographic of 17 years and older Features Surrounding Areas– Killeen, Fort Hood, Cedar Hill, Garland, and Dallas, Texas • A series of both qualitative and quantitative questions • Every respondent can put theory input ideas and research themes into the qualitative topic guides, therefore enabling specific findings from each respondent. The Background and Development The methodology was designed through a combination of vast amounts of qualitative research and quantitative representation across 100 consumers. There is no prearranged plan with how the methodology or typologies would be formed.
The primary philosophy was to find out if consumers were open to try a fruit juice flavored green tea. The idea was to create a method to determine what the respondents feel about green tea drinks in general and how they respond to new drinks on the market. The researchers goal was to map out the best way to reach the precise demographic in such a way that handles the issues of brand loyalty with complexity and fluidity to thoroughly explain the thinking of the respondents. The difficulty was that the respondents do not all think the same when purchasing a product nor do they all prefer to drink green tea.
Depending on the respondents’ beliefs and personal experiences with a brand or product, there are many opinions on the subject, The processes of the research were kept extremely open to all demographics to keep the idea of biased opinions under assumption. The beginning process is to pass out ten of survey instruments. The researcher asked the respondents if the questions were clearly worded and if there were any misspellings. The next stage of the research was to continue passing out the survey instruments to make sure a variety of opinions would be represented in the research.
The researcher also emailed the survey instruments, as well as telephoned different respondents who were willing to participate in the study. As always with quantitative studies, they formulated a series of theories and hypotheses that could be tested through a number of questions. The survey was then conducted across 100 respondents aged 17 or older who lived in the Dallas/Fort Worth area and other areas throughout the state of Texas. The study was then modeled with the data on the key variables of preferred drink of choice, preferred brand choice, health conscious drinks, and price.
Reliability and Validity The reliability and validity of brand loyalty is going to be understood. The reliability with the results will be proven in the findings section. For instances, each respondent wrote their exact opinion or the researcher wrote down word for word the respondents’ response. This provides the reliability of the research. The respondents were strictly voluntary and gave the most honest answers for the survey. The validity will be with the findings of the survey. This will better be exemplified with understanding on how the respondents answered to the survey.
Showing the reliability of the respondents’ answers and how they made the survey into their own. Biased Opinion When conducting the survey there were no biased opinions. To prove that there were no biased opinions the researcher numbered each of the surveys when received from the respondents. Obtaining the research in a non-biased form gives more reliability and validity to the research. The following section will examine the findings of the research about opinions on green tea and brand loyalty. It will be based upon the survey that was conducted and be analyzed.
The information is being tested from the hypotheses that were in the proposal. Findings In this chapter the findings will be introduced. The information is produced from the survey instruments that were given to one-hundred respondents. The information that will be given is to help prove or fault the hypotheses about green tea/fruit juice based drinks and the customer perception of Coca-Cola. The information will also test if there is a market for this new drink. Gender Q1: Are you…? The first question on the survey is the gender of the respondent. Asking are you male or female?
This question was important in conducting the survey because it helps to grasp understanding for the rest of the responses from the respondents. The genders that were surveyed by the researcher ended up being primarily female versus male. The graph below shows the actual percentage of the Male gender that took the survey of 33% and the female gender responding to the survey with 67%. [pic] The table above clearly shows the genders divided. One assumption that one could be speculated is that that there were more women than men surveyed because the women were more open to taking the survey. Age Q2: What is your age?
The reason this question was important in conducting the survey is to determine the age range that is being used. It was also used to determine how each age range differed on the answers that were given. Most respondents that were surveyed were between the ages of thirty six or older. The percentage of that age range is 40%. Even the second runner up was ages twenty six to thirty five and that range was not far behind with 30%. [pic] In the research the ages were for the most part all over the age of eighteen. The research that is concluded from the respondents is that most of them, if not all of them, are out of High School.
Income Q3: What is your total household income? This particular question of household income is vital because a household that makes $0-$10,000 will of course have a different outlook on purchasing a new Coca-Cola tea product versus a household with an income of $46,000 or more. [pic] Most of the respondents had a household income of $46,000 or more. The next highest income was $26,000 to $45,000. The one that had the least was $0 to $10,000. Q4: Have you been affected financially by the recession? This question was important because it gave the researcher an idea if price mattered to the respondent.
If the respondent was not affected by the recession, then the respondent probably would not mind spending the money to try a new product. [pic] The results were 67% of the respondents were not affected by the recession. This is a surprising amount of respondents who were not affected financially by the recession. Q5: Does Advertising influence your choice of brand when shopping? This was a vital question to the researcher because advertising is an important part of today’s society. Many are influenced by advertising and that helps them decide what products to purchase.
The researcher was curious to know if advertising influences the respondents shopping choices. [pic] The results were sixty-seven percent of the respondents were not influenced by advertising when choosing a brand. Only thirty three percent responded yes. Q6: Have you ever purchased a green tea product? This was one of the most vital questions of the survey. If the respondent had never purchased a green tea product then the survey was not as relevant to them as others. [pic] The results for this question were that 70% of the respondents had purchased a green tea product.
An overwhelming amount of the respondents had bought some kind of green tea product. Q7: Did the fact that green tea is advertised as healthy affect your decision to buy? This question is important in the survey because this is one to test the hypothesis. Without asking this question in the survey the hypothesis could not be tested and concluded with the findings. [pic] Participants in this survey prove that the hypothesis is true. The hypothesis stated, customers are swayed more to buy green tea because it is advertised as healthy. The respondents stated that they purchased the green tea because it was healthy for them.
Q8: Do you prefer to drink tea and/or juices over carbonated beverages? This was an important question because it plays a huge role in determining how open the respondent would be to purchasing a green tea product or if the respondent would alternatively look for another drink product to buy all together. [pic] As shown above in the chart, 67% of the respondents stated that they would consider buying the tea and/or juice drinks. 33% of the respondents said they would not consider a tea and/or juice drink. Q9: If you saw a green tea/fruit juice beverage made by Coca-Cola in the store would you be intrigued to buy it?
Question nine is another question that evaluates and tests one hypothesis. The hypothesis stated, the Coca-Cola brand alone would intrigue people to buy the new beverage. Due to the information conducted from the survey respondents felt that the Coca-Cola brand alone was not enough to interest them in buying the new beverage. 67% agreed with that statement. [pic] Respondents concluded through the survey that the Coca-Cola name alone does not make them want to buy the product. The findings in this section prove to be false when looking at the hypotheses. Q10: Do your friends or family influence your decisions on what brands you purchase?
This particular question was vital in the research to determine if purchasing decisions are based upon influence of friends and family. A lot of times a buying decision is made based upon the influence of a friend or family member. [pic] 67% of the respondents felt that their friends and family do not influence what brands they purchase. Q11: If you were sent a coupon to try a free sample of Bubble Fuzz Green tea would you pass up the opportunity? This question was asked to see if Coca-Cola marketed their product through direct mail coupons, would it be successful. pic] The results were 33% answered that they would use the coupon to sample the drink Bubble Fuzz. The 67% that checked no felt that they would just trash the coupon and not even use it. Q12: In today’s society, do you think it is considered “cool” to purchase and drink healthy beverages? Just like question number 11, this was more of an opinionated question to really understand how the respondents felt about how purchases of green tea play into social status. This is the main reason why this particular question was vital in conducting this study. [pic] 7% felt that purchasing a healthy drink does not play into a certain social status. 33% disagreed and felt that purchasing a drink does play into your social status. Q13: Do you think adding fruit juice to flavor the green tea will ruin the taste? This question was put in the survey to discover if the respondents felt that the fruit juice would ruin the authenticity of the green tea flavor. [pic] The findings to the question were 67% no and 33% yes. Most respondents, according to the survey, felt that adding the fruit juice would not ruin the flavor of the tea.
Q14: I believe that Coca-Cola could make a healthy, great tasting drink. The respondents answered the question and picked the number they felt most strong about in the survey. The respondents could choose from the following: 1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-neutral, 4-agree and 5-strongly agree. [pic] The results came to be with a mean (average) of 3. 54. Most respondents felt neutral with the statement that was given. The medium, which is the middle value reported with this statement as 4. The mode in this statement is 3 which gave most used value in this question of the survey.
Q15: I think that green tea is a great way to not only cleanse my body but my mind as well. Out of the one hundred respondents this statement was evaluated in a number order. The choices were: 1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-neutral, 4-agree and 5-strongly agree. The following were analyzed into mean, medium and mode. [pic] The results that were calculated with were the mean 3. 16. The medium resulted in 3, neutral. The mode calculated as a 3, neutral. Q16: Most healthy drinks do not have a great taste. The respondents answered the question and picked the number they felt most strong about in the survey.
The respondents could choose from the following: 1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-neutral, 4-agree and 5-strongly agree. [pic] The results came to be with a mean (average) of 3. 75. Most respondents felt they agreed with the statement that was given. The medium, which is the middle value reported with this statement as 4. The mode in this statement is 5 which gave the value of the most used in this question of the survey. Q17: Do you think that health conscious drinks are overpriced? If yes, why do you think this way? The following results are part of the qualitative section in the survey.
When reported, there were very different opinions that relate with many of the top results but had more elaboration. The results are arranged according to the survey number. If another respondent puts the same opinion or something similar, that survey number will appear next to the opinion stated. 1. Most healthy drinks are disgusting and expensive 2. No (5,7,9,10,11,. 12,13,14,16,17,19,20,21,22,24,25,31,40,42,44,45,47,48,49,51,52,53,54,56,57,58,59,66,67,72,73,77,78,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,97,98,99,100) 3. Yes, Gatorade is great for you and it tastes great. 4. Taste, quality, price, you can’t find that all in one. . No response (26,33,35,36,37) ‘ 8. No, you get what you pay for 15. No, price and quality are number one 18. No – I feel brands change over time so what is used today is different from the same product of yesterday-new, improved remember? 23. No, I buy what I like and get what I want to make me happy. I eat my feelings away. 27. I buy a certain brand because I’ve tried it and I like it. 28. Yes, some brands are better than others. 29. Some brands yes. 30. Yes 32. No, I buy what I like and can afford. 34. Yea 39. Yes 41. No, I buy because I like it 43. No I do not believe that. I enjoy finding good deals and using coupons. 5. Yes, but I don’t change my ways unless something forces me to. 50. Yes 55. Yes 60. I’ve worked out for years so I am used to the price and taste 61. No response (65,69,70,79,80,95) 62. Yes 63. Not really 64. Sometimes 68. Yes 71. I prefer to buy items that are expensive 74. Depends on the brand and the product. Some brands are better quality and value based on the research and work put into them 96. Sometimes depends on the price. Trust the brand name sometimes. Q18: Do you think that a green tea/fruit juice infused beverage would entice the younger crowd to purchase it?
The following results were given by the respondents. The findings or this qualitative question had diverse variety of results. The findings are reported with the first recorded with the highest number of the same result then followed by the rest. The results are arranged according to the survey number. If another respondent puts the same opinion or something similar, that survey number will appear next to the opinion stated. 1. No (1, 2, 8,10,14,19,46,52,55,56,57,66,70,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,92) 2. No, they should not be knocked off for some brands are just as good. It all depends on what it is you are a getting. . In some cases generic products may differ slightly but may still work for intended use. 4. No response (33,36,37,44,54,61,65,69,75,76,80,81,94,95) 5. No absolutely not. Kids drink more soft drink/sugary drinks then teas. 6. Maybe Kids now a days are not interested in being healthy 7. Yes, sounds like it tastes very good. (15, 16-18, 20-32, 45) 8. I think that kids should start drinking more healthy drinks and I think that it would make them buy it. 9. Yes 10. Depends on the price, kids today are broker then ever 11. Yea 12. My son would not even look at green tea just because he knows how green tea tastes. 3. Yes that is possible Findings Conclusion The findings were all resulted in a statistical analysis conducted from all 100 survey instruments. The results were each divided into a graph to give the reader a quick view of the findings. The findings gave the reader a broad understanding of what is people’s true opinion on the proposed drink Bubble Fuzz. Many respondents felt that green tea could be a stretch for advertising purposes, but with the health conscious society that we live in now, it could have a chance of succeeding. APPENDIX A REFERENCES 1. The Coca-Cola Co. (Company Profile).
Global Market Information Database (Euromonitor). Jul 20, 2009. Accessed Jan 08, 2010. 2. Functional Drinks Off-trade Sales in Canada (Country Report). Global Market Information Database (Euromonitor). Oct 03, 2005. Accessed Feb 25, 2010. 3. Functional Drinks, Canada, Retail Volume (Statistics). Global Market Information Database (Euromonitor). Oct 03, 2005. Accessed Feb 25, 2010. 4. Soft Drinks in Canada (Industry Report). Global Market Information Database (Euromonitor). Oct 03, 2005. Accessed Jan 08, 2010. 5. Functional Drinks in the United States. Datamonitor. Dec 2008. Accessed Feb 02, 2010. . COSGROVE, Joanna. The 2008 Soft Drink Report. Beverage Industry. Mar 2008; 96; 3; p. 22. Accessed via ABI/INFORM Global. Feb 02, 2010.. 7. THEODORE, Sarah. RTD coffee, tea creates a buzz. Beverage Industry. Feb 2005; 96; 2; p. 16. Accessed via ABI/INFORM Global. Jan 08, 2010. 8. The Coca-Cola Company. (Company Profile). Datamonitor. Jun 2005. Accessed Jan 08, 2010. 9. HANNAFORD, Steve. Industry Brief, Beverages I. Oligopolywatch. http://www. oligopolywatch. com/2003/04/21. html. Accessed Feb 07, 2010. 10. POPP, Jamie. Leading in a healthy direction. Beverage Industry. Dec 2007; 95; 12; p. 22.
Accessed via ABI/INFORM Global. Feb 01, 2010. 11. BERKOWITZ, Eric N. CRANE, Frederick G. KERIN Roger A. HARTLEY, Steven W. RUDELIUS, William. Marketing, 5th Canadian Edition. McGraw-Hill Ryerson. 2003. 12. Consumer Lifestyles in Canada. Global Market Information Database (Euromonitor). Feb 01, 2007. Accessed Feb 08, 2010. 13. Top 20 Global Brands, Ranked by Brand Value, 2004 & 2005 (in billions and as a % increase/decrease vs. prior year). Business Week; Interbrand. Jul 22, 2006. Accessed via eMarketer. Feb 28, 2010. 14. THEODORE, Sarah. Surprising suggestions from teens. Beverage Industry. Vol. 96, no 7.
Jul 2005. p. 4. 15. Canad
