Final project for Ethics class that includes a look into the cola wars between Pepsi and Coca Cola.

2. THE COLA WARS
The Cola Wars refers to the business
rivalry and competition between the
beverage brands Coca Cola and PepsiCo
that has been going on since the beginning
of competitive market share between the
two. Both companies are widely successful
throughout today’s world consumer
market. However, both struggle to compete
for the number one place and to be known
as the best in the business.

3. THE MAJOR ISSUE THAT ARISES WITH THE COLA
WARS IS THE MARKETING AND ADVERTISING
TACTICS THAT THEY USE. THEIR ADS CAN BE IN
YOUR FACE AND DON’T SEEM TO CARE IF A
COMPETITOR IS HURT BY THEIR COMMERCIALS
AND MESSAGES.

4. CELEBRITY ENDORSEMENTS & PRODUCT PLACEMENT

6. C
A SMALL AD LAUNCHED BY JOHN PEMBERTON STARTED
WHAT WE NOW KNOW AS COCA COLA. PEMBERTON’S
BOOKKEEPER, FRANK ROBINSON, WAS THE MAN WHO CAME
UP WITH THE NAME THAT WE’VE ALL COME TO KNOW. AT
FIRST, LIKE WE’VE ALL HEARD BEFORE, COCA COLA WAS
MADE WITH WINE, CAFFEINE, AND COCAINE. YES, COCAINE
WAS A MAIN INGREDIENT OF COCA COLA WHEN IT WAS FIRST
CREATED. BUT UNLIKE NOW, BACK THEN, COCA COLA WAS
MADE MORE SO FOR MEDICINAL USES.
THROUGHOUT ITS START, COKE WAS KNOWN TO STOP
HEADACHES AND CURE A FEW ILLNESSES.

7. AROUND THE 1920’S, COKE STARTED TO FOCUS MORE ON BEING A SOFT DRINK. BECAUSE
OF PROHIBITION, SODA FOUNTAINS WERE HOPPING WITH BUSINESS. ASA CANDLER ENDED
UP BUYING COCA COLA AND BEGAN AGGRESSIVE ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS WITH THE HELP
OF FRANK ROBINSON. MAIL ADS WERE BEING DELIVERED THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
ALSO AROUND THIS TIME, THE UNIVERSAL BOTTLE WAS DEBUTED. COCA COLA BECAME
KNOWN THROUGHOUT THE WORLD DUE TO ITS TASTE, ADVERTISING AND MARKETING
VENTURES, AND DISTRIBUTION. COCA COLA ENDED UP BEING SOLD TO AN UNLIKEABLE MAN
WOODRUFF, WITH HIS SON ROBERT WOODRUFF RUNNING THE COMPANY.

8. PEPSI!
PEPSI WAS FIRST DISCOVERED IN 1898 IN A SMALL TOWN
IN NORTH CAROLINA BY PHARMACIST CALEB BRADHAM.
UNLIKE COCA COLA, PEPSI WAS MEANT TO BE A SOFT
DRINK FROM THE START OF ITS CREATION. AT FIRST IT
WAS BEING CALLED BRAD’S DRINK, BUT IN 1902, IT WAS
NAMED PEPSI COLA. DURING WORLD WAR 1, SUGAR
PRICES SHOT UP BECAUSE OF THE RATIONING, AND
BRADHAM DECIDED TO TAKE A RISK. HE HAD BOUGHT A
LARGE AMOUNT OF SUGAR THINKING THAT THE PRICE
WOULD JUST AS SURELY GO UP AGAIN SOON. BUT VERY
QUICKLY, SUGAR’S PRICE DROPPED TREMENDOUSLY,
LEAVING PEPSI BANKRUPT.

9. AT A POINT IN PEPSI’S RUN, COCA COLA ACTUALLY HAD THE CHANCE TO BUY THE COMPANY
BUT FIGURED BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY GOING BANKRUPT A SECOND TIME, THAT THERE
WAS NO COMPETITION. OF COURSE, PEPSI BEGAN BOOMING WITH BUSINESS AGAIN WHEN
THEY CAME OUT WITH A NEW MARKETING CAMPAIGN. INSTEAD OF THE SMALL AMOUNT OF
COLA YOU COULD USUALLY GET WITH A NICKEL, THEY DECIDED TO GIVE TWICE AS MUCH.
SO 12 OUNCES OF PEPSI COST A NICKEL. “MORE BOUNCE TO THE OUNCE” WAS A POPULAR
LINE FOR PEPSI, AND THEY QUICKLY WERE BACK IN BUSINESS.

10. c PEPSICO & THE COCA COLA COMPANY
c CONSUMERS
c THE BEVERAGE INDUSTRY
c CHILDREN
c FUTURE ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS

11. These two companies have plenty of routes they can
continue on with the Cola War.
A few are as follows:
CONTINUE THE AGGRESSIVE ADVERTISING
SETTLE DIFFERENCES AND PUT AN END TO
THE COLA WARS
MERGE BRANDS
CREATE NEW PRODUCTS
UP THE ANTE ON ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS

12. IN ORDER TO CLOSELY ANALYZE THE POSSIBLE OPTIONS AND
EFFECTS OF THESE OPTIONS, I’VE APPLIED TWO SEPARATE
THEORIES. THE THEORIES INCLUDE THE CONSEQUENTIAL THEORY
OF RULE UTILITARIANISM AND THE NONCONSEQUENTIAL THEORY OF
CONTRACTARIANISM.

13. RULE UTILITARIANISM
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

14. AFTER APPLYING RULE
UTILITARIANISM, I CAME TO
A SEEMINGLY OBVIOUS
MAIN RULE. THE RULE THAT
HAD THE HIGHEST NET
UTILITY IS:
COMPANIES SHOULD BE
COURTEOUS AND
PLEASANT TO ONE
ANOTHER.
I CAME TO THIS CONCLUSION BECAUSE IF
EVERYBODY DECIDED TO FOLLOW THIS
RULE, MANY OTHER RULES WOULD BE
AFFECTED IN A GOOD WAY AS WELL.
c THE RESPECT BETWEEN COMPANIES WOULD
LESSEN AGGRESSIVE ADVERTISING.
c IT WOULD ALSO BE A GOOD ROLE MODEL
WHEN SEEN BY CHILDREN.
c FUTURE ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN
PROFESSIONALS WOULD THEN SEE THIS
RESPECT AND POLITENESS. THIS WOULD
MAKE THEM FOLLOW IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF
AN ALREADY GOOD SYSTEM OF
COURTEOUSNESS.
c CONSUMERS COULD HAVE BRAND LOYALTY
EASILY BECAUSE THE COMPANIES WOULD
NOT BE TRYING TO SHOVE THEIR BELIEFS
DOWN CONSUMER’S THROATS LIKE THEY’VE
DONE THROUGHOUT HISTORY.

15. CONTRACTARIANISM
•
•

16. WHEN APPLYING
CONTRACTARIANISM, THE
ENDING RESULTS APPEARED
TO ME AS THE BEST CHOICE.
THE PREEMINENT OPTION
THAT WOULD AFFECT THE
MOST STAKEHOLDERS IN A
POSITIVE WAY IS:
SETTLING DIFFERENCES TO
PUT AN END TO THE COLA
WARS
AFTER CONSIDERING THE PROS AND CONS
OF EACH OPTION, THE ONE THAT POSITIVELY
AFFECTED THE MOST STAKEHOLDERS IN THE
BEST WAYS IS FOR THE COMPANIES TO
SETTLE THEIR DIFFERENCES.
c BOTH PEPSICO AND COCA COLA COULD
CREATE MORE TASTEFUL ADVERTISING
CAMPAIGNS THAT WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE
FOR FUTURE ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS.
c CONSUMERS WOULD BE HAPPY TO SEE THE
FEUD OVER.
c CHILDREN WOULD SEE THE HARMONY
RESOLUTION BETWEEN THE TWO AS A GOOD
LESSON NOT TO HOLD GRUDGES AND FIGHT.
c THE ONLY STAKEHOLDER THAT WOULDN’T
GAIN MUCH FROM THIS OPTION IS THE
BEVERAGE INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE, AND
THAT’S NOT EVEN A CERTAINTY. THE
BEVERAGE INDUSTRY COULD GO EITHER WAY
FROM GAINING MORE SALES OR LOSING A
SMALL AMOUNT.

17. After extensive research and
application of theory to the Cola
Wars, I’ve found that the overall
best option is for the companies to
play nice and settle their
disagreements and differences.
This would bring no harm to any
of the stakeholders for the most
part, and would keep their
aggressive advertising tactics
towards one another to a subtle
end.