exercice strategic marketing
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

exercice strategic marketing

on

  • 664 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
664
Views on SlideShare
664
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
25
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

exercice strategic marketing exercice strategic marketing Presentation Transcript

  • Formation Marketing Strategicand PlanningGrenoble Management SchoolApril 2012 er cis es Ex
  • Vittel positioningSchneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 2
  • FOR Natural Drinking Water in Bottle TA POD Active people concerned Clean water from clean earth by their health and their Shape (Une vie saine sur une terre saine) BPS Keep people in good Health with clean water coming from clean earthSchneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 3
  • Schneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 4
  • Study case,CokeSummarise your company’s position (Coke), in absolute terms and relative to the other.For 2006, what would be the top 3 marketing priorities priorities in your marketing plan and why?Finally, in 2012, what would be your strategic priorities for your company and why ?Key marketing actions to support that strategy ?Schneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 5
  • CokeIn 2004, the average American drank a little more than 52 Bottlers gallons of CSDs per year. At the same time, the two Coke was the first concentrate producer to build a companies experienced their own distinct ups and downs, as Coke suffered several operational setbacks nationwide franchised bottling network, and Pepsi and and as Pepsi charted a new, aggressive course in Cadbury Schweppes followed suit. The typical alternative beverages. Although their paths diverged, franchised bottler owned a manufacturing and sales however, both companies began to modify their bottling, operation in an exclusive geographic territory, with rights pricing, and brand strategies. granted in perpetuity by the franchiser. In the case of Coke, territorial rights did not extend to national fountainConcentrate producers accounts, which the company handled directly. TheOnce a fragmented business that featured hundreds of original Coca-Cola franchise agreement, written in 1899, local manufacturers, the U.S. soft drink industry had was a fixed-price contract that did not provide for changed dramatically over time. Among national renegotiation, even if ingredient costs changed. After concentrate producers, Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola (the considerable negotiation, often accompanied by bitter soft drink unit of PepsiCo) claimed a combined 74.8% of legal disputes, Coca-Cola amended the contract in 1921, the U.S. CSD market in sales volume in 2004, followed 1978, and 1987. By 2003, more than 88% of Coke’s U.S. by Cadbury Schweppes and Cott Corporation. volume was covered by its 1987 Master Bottler Contract, which granted Coke the right to determine concentrateBottlers price and other terms of sale.14 Under this contract,Coke and Pepsi bottlers offered “direct store door” (DSD) Coke had no legal obligation to assist bottlers with delivery, an arrangement whereby route delivery advertising or marketing. Nonetheless, to ensure quality salespeople managed the CSD brand in stores by and to match Pepsi, Coke made huge investments to securing shelf space, stacking CSD products, positioning support its bottling network.15 In 2002, for example, the brand’s trademarked label, and setting up point-of- Coke contributed $600 million in marketing support purchase or end-of-aisle displays. payments to its top bottler alone.Schneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 6
  • CokeRetails channels After Pepsi entered the fast-food restaurant business byIn 2004, the distribution of CSDs in the United States took acquiring Pizza Hut (1978), Taco Bell (1986), and place through supermarkets (32.9%), fountain outlets Kentucky Fried Chicken (1986), (23.4%), vending machines (14.5%), mass Coca-Cola persuaded competing chains such as Wendyís merchandisers (11.8%), convenience stores and gas stations (7.9%), and other outlets (9.5%) and Burger King to switch to Coke. In 1997, Coke retained exclusivity deals with Burger KingHistorically, Pepsi had focused on sales through retail and McDonald (the largest national account in terms of outlets, while Coke had dominated fountain sales. (The sales). term fountain, which originally referred to drug store In 2004, Coke won the Subway account away from Pepsi, soda fountains, covered restaurants, cafeterias, and any while Pepsi grabbed the Quiznos account from Coke. other outlet that served soft drinks by the glass using (Subway was the largest account as measured by fountain-type dispensers.) number of outlets.) And Coke continued to dominate the channel, with a 68% share of national pouring rights,Local fountain accounts, which bottlers handled in most against 22% for Pepsi and 10% for Cadbury Schweppes. cases, were considerably more profitable than national In the vending channel, bottlers took charge of buying, accounts. Overall, according to a prominent industry observer, operating margins were 10 percentage points installing, and servicing machines, and for negotiating lower in fountain sales than in bottle and can sales.22 To contracts with property owners, who typically received a support the fountain channel, Coke and Pepsi invested sales commission in exchange for accommodating those in the development of service dispensers and other machines. But concentrate makers offered bottlers equipment, and provided fountain customers with cups, financial incentives to encourage investment in point-of-sale advertising, and other in-store promotional machines, and also played a large role in the material development of vending technology. Coke and Pepsi were by far the largest suppliers of CSDs to this channel.Schneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 7
  • Concentrate producers required few inputs: the concentrate 2004, Coke had the most consolidated system, with its top for most regular colas consisted of caramel coloring, 10 bottlers producing 94.7% of domestic volume. phosphoric or citric acid, natural flavors, and caffeine. Pepsi and Cadbury Schweppes top 10 bottlers producedBottlers purchased two major inputs: packaging (including 87.2% and 72.9% of the domestic volume of their cans, plastic bottles, and glass bottles), and sweeteners (including high-fructose corn syrup and sugar, as well as respective franchisors. artificial sweeteners such as aspartame).The majority of U.S. CSDs were packaged in metal cans U.S. sales volume grew at a rate of 1% or less in the years (56%), with plastic bottles (42%) and glass bottles (2%) 1998 to 2004. Total U.S. volume topped 10 billion cases accounting for the remainder. in 2001, but had risen to only 10.2 billion cases in 2004.Cans were an attractive packaging material because they were easily handled and displayed, weighed little, and were durable and recyclable. Plastic packaging, Toward that end, they focused on addressing challenges introduced in 1978, allowed for larger and more varied related to performance and execution, on providing bottle sizes. In 2005, they represented 36.7% of CSD alternative beverages to increasingly health-conscious volume (and 56.7% of CSD revenues) in convenience consumers, on adjusting key strategic relationships, and stores.28 on cultivating international markets.The concentrate producers strategy toward can manufacturers was typical of their supplier relationships. Coke and Pepsi negotiated on behalf of their bottling In 2004, Coke/Danone had an overall market share of networks, and were among the metal can industry ís 21.9%, behind market leader NestlÈ Waters (42.1%) and largest customers. In 2005, major can producers ahead of Pepsi (13.6%). Coke bought out Danone share included Ball, Rexam (through its American National Can of the venture in 2005. subsidiary), and Crown Cork & Seal.29 Metal cans were essentially a commodity, and often two or three can manufacturers competed for a single contract.Schneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 8
  • In 2005, Coke combined authority for all of its marketing and product development in a new position that became the companyís ìde facto No. 2 spot. It also launched a major advertising campaign, built around a new tag line: The Coke Side of Life. While the launching of new products and packages brought clear benefits, it also increased costs for bottlers, which had to produce and manage an ever- rising number of stock-keeping units (SKUs). In addition, Coke and Pepsi distributed some non- carbs (such as Gatorade) through food brokers and wholesalers, rather than through DSD delivery,In 2004, the United States remained by far the largest market, accounting for about one-third of worldwide CSD volume. The next largest markets were, in order, Mexico, Brazil, Germany, China, and the United Kingdom.Schneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 9
  • SWOTStrengths Weaknesses ● Well-recognized, ● Ignores non-traditional advertising ● trusted fit with brand values; ●Does not effectively reach 13-24 ● Established company19 ties years olds ● Consistent product ●Declining sales ● Easily accessible product ThreatsOpportunities ●“old” brand” ● Many tangible product benefits ●Positioning based on Health smart ● Non-traditional media avail trend intangibles erodes market share ●Potential for more negative media coverage ● Popularity of functional drinks persists Background ●Increasing new competition in the marketSchneider Electric - Division - Name – Date 10