Coke India Case

In: Business and Management

Submitted By Spantaleo
Words 1962
Pages 8
Coca-Cola India Analysis
In the Coca-Cola India case, President and CEO of Coca-Cola India (Coke India) Sanjiv Gupta is faced with this question: Should he act further on the Center for Science and Environment’s (CSE) allegations that cold drinks contain too much pesticides or should he remain silent and let the information fade from public view?
Section 1: Assumptions and Stakeholder Analysis
The first assumption taken in this case is Coke India is not breaking any laws and telling the truth when it comes to the level of pesticides in its products and its routine testing for chemicals. This case is not about concealing illegal activity or lying to the public, rather, it discusses the question whether or not corporations have a right to influence government to regulate various systems. If the analysis takes lying and cheating into consideration, this interesting discussion would appear convoluted.
The second assumption taken in this case is the definition of “acting further” means for Coke India. Because Coke India and Pepsi already called the study “baseless” in a press conference launched independent marketing campaigns and published open letters referring to fact/myth websites, this analysis assumes acting further means more than public relations (Coke India, 12). Pepsi has already “filed a petition with the high court questioning the credibility of the CSE’s claims” and Coke India has threatened legal recourse meaning acting further means more than legal recourse against the CSE (Coke India, 1). The case also states “the Delhi High Court asked the government to convene an expert committee to test and report on the safety of soft drinks within three weeks and to revise existing standards to include pesticide norms” (Coke India, 12). This analysis assumes acting further means publicly supporting and assisting with the Delhi High Court’s decision in this expert…...

Similar Documents

Case Study: Coke in India

...Case Study – Coke in India Adapted by Lesley Fleischman from: Hills, Jonathan and Welford, Richard. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 12, 168–177 (2005) August 2003 • • • • • October 2003 • • Coke has 44 wholly owned and franchise owned bottling plants in India Indian NGO finds that Coke and Pepsi products bottled in India contain pesticides. Immediate impact on Coke stock price. Coke threatened legal action over allegations. Indian government tests confirm findings. Coke hires PR firm, develops strategy to deflect media attention away Escalating community protests at bottling plants, demonstrations, hunger strikes, etc. December 2003 February 2004 March 2004 • • • • • • • • June 2004 • • • September 2004 • • October 2004 • • • February 2005 • • April 2005 • • May 2005 • • Ordered by Indian court to stop drawing groundwater for its bottling plant in Plachimada, Kerala Judge ruled that no power to allow a private party to extract such a huge quantity of groundwater Protesters claim that Coke water use was reducing agricultural yields Coke cited lack of rainfall, not their operations, as cause of crop declines Parliamentary committee finds high amounts of pesticide residue in Coke and Pepsi products bottled in India Not illegal, Indian safety standards weak Coke application for new bottling plant in Plachimada denied by local......

Words: 922 - Pages: 4

Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete in India.

...Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete In India. Summary of the case The case of Coke and Pepsi in India is a lesson that all marketers can observe, analyze and learn from, since it involves so many marketing aspects that are essential for all marketers to take into consideration. Both companies had many difficulties, especially Coca-Cola, and it's useful to observe how it dealt with the different aspects, stating from the political environment of the Indian market and the trade barriers it faced, going through the market entry and penetration strategies considered and the flexible marketing mix used and how it was placed to increase consumption and market share, ending with the change in the environment and market due to boycott campaigns for different reasons. Discussion Political environment and trade barriers: Until the early 1990s, India was considered unfriendly to foreign investors, especially in consumer goods sector. If an item could be obtained within the country, imports of similar items were forbidden. Due to this environment, Coca-Cola had withdrawn from the Indian market in 1977. Looking back at Coca-Cola's withdrawal we can notice: Coke's refusal to give the formula and withdraw from the market wasn't a clever decision, because as a big company, coke must expect to face many challenges. It should have believed in it marketing capabilities and its ability to position its brand as a unique one, different from others even if they claim they......

Words: 1258 - Pages: 6

Coke Cola in India

...business activities. Politics and leisure are gained more value than work. While in U.S., American dream emphasis on working hard for personal value, business and politics gain the same social respect. (2)India has many political and legal issues with foreign investors. Indian law to some extent is ambiguous when handling the lawsuits with foreign investors,which may have been the reason causing problems for Coke’s operations in India。 (3) Both countries may have different ways of doing businesses. Foreign investors should consider the fact that every culture is different and they need their own practices (polycentric), if Coke still thinks its American style of business operation is better and practices it in India(ethnocentric), the consumers in India will regard those practices as wrong and inappropriate. This could also have been the reason why India blame on the water contamination and shortage caused by Coke. As the Indian people interpret silence as guilt, thus the representatives of Coke should response quickly: firstly, to apologize for the destroying of water resources in India, and then do some compensation for the local people. secondly,find ways independently or Corporate with authoritative NGOS to solve the problem.It is very important for Coke to built good reputation and consumer loyalty in international market. thirdly, learn from what Pepsi does: doing CSR such as digging village wells, trying best to reduce water waste,etc.these measures......

Words: 509 - Pages: 3

Coke vs Pepsi in India

...Case 1-3 Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete in India Tyler McBee MKT 3450- 01 17 September 2013 3. Both Pepsi and Coca-Cola have effectively attempted to accommodate their products to the tastes and preferences of India. As an advertisement and sponsorship method, both companies have partnered with cricket, movies, and music. These three entertainment industries are very popular in India. Something that has set Pepsi and Coca-Cola apart from other companies in the food industry is partnering with religious and other festivities. Serving or sponsoring events like Navratri makes a huge impact on society’s eyes causing them to see Coca-Cola and Pepsi as socially responsible companies. Pricing policies in India is difficult to work with, because of the restrictions by the government. Pepsi has had a leg up on Coca-Cola because of their early entry into the industry. Obviously they have had better reactions from consumers because Pepsi seems to care, simply because it reached to smaller villages and different communities than Coca-Cola; in consumers’ eyes this appears that Pepsi just cares more. 5. An idea to help with their water issues within each company’s plants is to recycle water. If water is needed to run a machine or make a certain ingredient for the finished product and the water isn’t contaminated or altered by any way, why not reuse it? I believe that Coca-Cola approached the retalaliation of the water issue with a bad attitude. A foreign company......

Words: 601 - Pages: 3

Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete in India

...CASE 13 Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete in India THE BEVERAGE BATTLEFIELD In 2007, the President and CEO of Coca-Cola asserted that Coke has had a rather rough run in India; but now it seems to be getting its positioning right. Similarly, PepsiCo’s Asia chief asserted that India is the beverage battlefield for this decade and beyond. Even though the government had opened its doors wide to foreign companies, the experience of the world’s two giant soft drinks companies in India during the 1990s and the beginning of the new millennium was not a happy one. Both companies experienced a range of unexpected problems and difficult situations that led them to recognize that competing in India requires special knowledge, skills, and local expertise. In many ways, Coke and Pepsi managers had to learn the hard way that “what works here” does not always “work there.” “The environment in India is challenging, but we’re learning how to crack it,” says an industry leader. had to resort to using a costly imported substitute, estergum, or they had to finance their own R&D in order to find a substitute ingredient. Many failed and quickly withdrew from the industry. Competing with the segment of carbonated soft drinks is another beverage segment composed of noncarbonated fruit drinks. These are a growth industry because Indian consumers perceive fruit drinks to be natural, healthy, and tasty. The leading brand has traditionally been Parle’s Frooti, a mango-flavored drink, which was also exported......

Words: 5638 - Pages: 23

Coke India

...During the 1960s and 1970s, India’s economy faced many challenges, growing only an average of 3–3.5 percent per year. Numerous obstacles hindered foreign companies from investing in India, and many restrictions on eco- nomic activity caused huge difficulties for Indian firms and a lack of interest among foreign investors. For many years the government had problems with implementing reform and overcoming bureaucratic and political divi- sions. Business activity has traditionally been undervalued in India; leisure is typically given more value than work. Stemming from India’s colonial legacy, Indians are highly suspicious of foreign investors. Indeed, there have been a few well-publicized disputes between the Indian govern- ment and foreign investors. 3 More recently, however, many Western companies are finding an easier time doing business in India. 4 In 1991, political conditions had changed, many restrictions were eased, and economic reforms came into force. With more than 1 billion consumers, India has become an increas- ingly attractive market. 5 From 2003–2006, foreign invest- ment doubled to $6 billion. Imported goods have become a status symbol for the burgeoning middle class. 6 In 2008/09 FDI in India stood at $27.31 billion. 7 In 2009, India was the third highest recipient of FDI and was likely to continue to remain among the top five attractive destinations for international investors during the following two years,......

Words: 669 - Pages: 3

Coke in India

...Coca-Cola India On August 20, 2003 Sanjiv Gupta, President and CEO of Coca-Cola India, sat in his office contemplating the events of the last two weeks and debating his next move. Sales had dropped by 30-40% 1 in only two weeks on the heels of a 75% five-year growth trajectory and 25-30% 2 year-to-date growth. Many leading clubs, retailers, restaurants, and college campuses across the country had stopped selling Coca-Cola 3 and only six weeks into his new role as CEO, Gupta was embroiled in a crisis that threatened the momentum gained from a highly successful two-year marketing campaign that had given Coca-Cola market leadership over Pepsi. On August 5th, The Center for Science and Environment (CSE), an activist group in India focused on environmental sustainability issues (specifically the effects of industrialization and economic growth) issued a press release stating: "12 major cold drink brands sold in and around Delhi contain a deadly cocktail of pesticide residues" (See Exhibit 1). According to tests conducted by the Pollution Monitoring Laboratory (PML) of the CSE from April to August, three samples of twelve PepsiCo and Coca-Cola brands from across the city were found to contain pesticide residues surpassing global standards by 30-36 times including lindane, DDT, malathion and chlorpyrifos (See Exhibit 2). These four pesticides were known to cause cancer, damage to the nervous and reproductive systems, birth defects, and severe disruption of the immune system. 4 In......

Words: 9241 - Pages: 37

Karma Cola - Coke in India

...WORKING PAPER No.186 KARMA COLA - COKE IN INDIA By Y.L.R. Moorthi Kevin Lane Keller April 2002 Please address all correspondence to: Y.L.R. Moorthi (Assoc. Prof. (Marketing) Visiting Professor (Tuck School) Indian Institute of Management Bangalore - 560076, India Email: YLR.Moorthi@.Dartmouth.edu (tUl June 1,2002) or ylrm@iimb.ernet.in Kevin Lane Keller E.B. Osborn Professor of Marketing Amos Tuck School of Business Dartmouth College 100 Tuck Hall Hanover, NH 03755-9011 Ph: 603-646-0393 (o) 603-646-1308 (f) Email: KARMA COLA - COKE IN INDIA ABSTRACT This article is an application of the customer-based brand equity (CBBE) model (Keller, 2001) to Coke in the United States and India, It shows that Coke, the brand, is interpreted differently in US and India. In US, Coke's awareness stretches beyond its immediate consumers. It is usedfunctionally as a substitute for water. Its home consumption is high. It is seen as a brand with heritage ami many customers and non-customers relate to it Hence there is greater bonding between the brand and the customer. In India, by contrast Coke's knowledge and appeal is limited to the urban elite and youth. It is consumed more for aspirational than functional reasons. Home consumption is not as high as it is in the United States, It is a brand to which a limited number of people relate. Loyalty is more to the cola flavor them Coke. In short, Coke is viewed very differently in India as compared to tin United States. This paper......

Words: 986 - Pages: 4

Coke India Study

...Coca-Cola India On August 20, 2003 Sanjiv Gupta, President and CEO of Coca-Cola India, sat in his office contemplating the events of the last two weeks and debating his next move. Sales had dropped by 30-40%1 in only two weeks on the heels of a 75% five-year growth trajectory and 25-30%2 year-to-date growth. Many leading clubs, retailers, restaurants, and college campuses across the country had stopped selling Coca-Cola3 and only six weeks into his new role as CEO, Gupta was embroiled in a crisis that threatened the momentum gained from a highly successful two-year marketing campaign that had given Coca-Cola market leadership over Pepsi. On August 5th, The Center for Science and Environment (CSE), an activist group in India focused on environmental sustainability issues (specifically the effects of industrialization and economic growth) issued a press release stating: "12 major cold drink brands sold in and around Delhi contain a deadly cocktail of pesticide residues" (See Exhibit 1). According to tests conducted by the Pollution Monitoring Laboratory (PML) of the CSE from April to August, three samples of twelve PepsiCo and Coca-Cola brands from across the city were found to contain pesticide residues surpassing global standards by 30-36 times including lindane, DDT, malathion and chlorpyrifos (See Exhibit 2). These four pesticides were known to cause cancer, damage to the nervous and reproductive systems, birth defects, and severe disruption of the immune system.4 In......

Words: 9264 - Pages: 38

Case Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete in India

...“Coke and Pepsi learn to compete in India” case 1. The political environment in India has proven to be critical to company performance for both PepsiCo and Coca- Cola India. What specific aspects of the political environment have played key roles? Could these effects have been anticipated prior to market entry? If not, could developments in the political arena have been handled better by each company? A/ The Indian government was unfriendly to foreign investors, because outside investment was only allowed in high-tech sector and the remaining industries were discriminated. In addition, the “Principle of indigenous available” played a major role in the political environment by forbidding imports of items that could be produced within the country. On the other hand, Indian laws required that Pepsi entered the market under “Lehar Pepsi” name and Coca-cola had to join Parle to became into “Coca-cola India” They could foresee the level of corruption that is present in India, and reduce the difficulties that they faced after entering the market. However, the contamination issue couldn’t have been anticipated, but they shouldn’t have stayed quiet during the legal process because it is taken as a sign of guilt, according to Indian culture. 2. Timing of entry into the Indian market brought different results for PepsiCo and Coca- Cola India. What benefits or disadvantages accrued as a result of earlier or later market entry? A/ Pepsi entered a few years before than...

Words: 1002 - Pages: 5

Coke Case

...1) Why, historically, has the soft drink industry been so profitable? Coca-Cola and Pepsi are 2 common soft drink companies that have been in existence for many years. Coca-Cola was founded in 1886 by a pharmacist, and the company grew from there. During World War II, soldiers were given reduced price Coca-Cola. Similarly, Pepsi (called Pepsi-Cola) was invented by a pharmacist in 1893. During the Great Depression, a 12 ounce bottle of Pepsi cost the same as a 6.5 ounce bottle of Coke, thus keeping it in business. Both companies have since capitalized on the booming industry. In 1970, Americans were drinking 23 gallons of soft drinks a year, on average, and that amount grew by 3% annually for the next 30 years. Soft drinks were the most popular beverage of choice for Americans. They were inexpensive to buy, and this was due in part to Coke and Pepsi’s cost strategies. Making soft drink concentrate required very few ingredients and very little equipment. They also coordinated with their suppliers to get fast delivery and low prices. Both companies offered significant funds to large chain grocery stores to help with marketing and promotion in exchange for shelf space and point-of-purchase displays, in order to boost revenues. Coca-Cola and Pepsi have historically had many of the same strategies, including the introduction of a diet option and a large variety of flavors. This was because having an aggressive and similarly matched competitor forced both companies to be focused,......

Words: 871 - Pages: 4

Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete in India

...CASE 13 Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete in India THE BEVERAGE BATTLEFIELD In 2007, the President and CEO of Coca-Cola asserted that Coke has had a rather rough run in India; but now it seems to be getting its positioning right. Similarly, PepsiCo’s Asia chief asserted that India is the beverage battlefield for this decade and beyond. Even though the government had opened its doors wide to foreign companies, the experience of the world’s two giant soft drinks companies in India during the 1990s and the beginning of the new millennium was not a happy one. Both companies experienced a range of unexpected problems and difficult situations that led them to recognize that competing in India requires special knowledge, skills, and local expertise. In many ways, Coke and Pepsi managers had to learn the hard way that “what works here” does not always “work there.” “The environment in India is challenging, but we’re learning how to crack it,” says an industry leader. THE INDIAN SOFT DRINKS INDUSTRY In India, over 45 percent of the soft drinks industry in 1993 consisted of small manufacturers. Their combined business was worth $3.2 million dollars. Leading producers included Parle Agro (hereafter “Parle”), Pure Drinks, Modern Foods, and McDowells. They offered carbonated orange and lemon-lime beverage drinks. Coca-Cola Corporation (hereafter “Coca-Cola”) was only a distant memory to most Indians at that time. The company had been present in the Indian market from 1958 until its......

Words: 5691 - Pages: 23

Coke India Case Study

...though Coca-Cola was purposefully taking advantage of the less enforced rules and regulations that they had to follow in India, most likely to save a couple of bucks though it was not violating any laws. 3. How well prepared was Coke India to deal with the CSE’s allegations? In terms of the amount of time it took them to respond to the media I think they did a great job. They denied the allegations and also made a promise to show data that proves the safety of their manufacturing and products. Both Coke and Pepsi attacked the CSE by questioning their credibility. Coke India also threatened legal action against the CSE which made it look as if Coke had the upper hand. 4. What is your recommendation for Coke’s communication strategy? Who are the key constituents? If I were Gupta I would continue handling the situation as he did right from the beginning. By questioning the credibility of the CSE and showing the public findings that their products are safe and made in a non-hazardous environment to regain the trust of their customers. Coke needs to assure all of their shareholders by showing them they are in control. The communication functions included were, media relations, nutrition communications, marketing and financial communications. The most important constitutes are the public, media, employees, franchisees, and suppliers. 5. Could Coke India have avoided this crisis? Yes I think so in my opinion, due to the fact that in February of the same year,......

Words: 580 - Pages: 3

Coke and Pepsi Learn to Compete in India

...Summary The case traces the history of the struggles both companies encountered during the start-up phase of their business. During the 1990’s, India’s government opened its door to foreign investors and PepsiCo entered into India and Coca-Cola re-entered four years later. Both companies had many difficult situations to overcome and eventually had to recognize that India’s market was very different and a special knowledge, skills and local expertise was needed to be obtained if both companies wanted to succeed. Along with the adopting to the different culture, the two companies faced bad press over the pesticide content in its soft drinks. Overall, the case highlights the many challenges the two companies faced going overseas to India. 1. The political environment in India has proven to be critical to company performance for both PepsiCo and Coca-Cola India. In Coca-Cola's first entry into this market, they withdrew from India because of the policy of no foreign company could own a majority equity stake greater than 50% and the government wanted them to share their secret recipe. During this time, it is clear there is corruption in the India's government. In 1991 a new government took office which made it easier for foreign companies to do business in India. Coca-Cola re-enter the Indian market in the early 90’s becoming a major competitor of PepsiCo who had entered the Indian market in 1986. Because Coca-Cola had chosen to leave the market than re-enter it cost them time,......

Words: 822 - Pages: 4

Coke Case

...Memorandum To: Dr. Gordon J. Badovick From: BG Date: January 4, 2012 Re: Coca Cola A Case 1-3 Brief Key Marketing Problem/Opportunity Coke is struggling with growth declines. Its performance in comparison to its key competitor, Pepsi, is unacceptable. There is a critical need to consider options for growth as growth has continued to decline for its core brand, Coca Cola. Strategic Question Which corporate growth strategy would offer the BEST opportunity to improve sales in the future for the Coca Cola Company? Strategic Marketing Alternatives 1. Pursue a product development strategy by creating a line extension off of the core brand Coca Cola. The product is called Coke Plus and will be marketed to those who want more out of their carbonated beverage. Coke Plus has the potential to become a best selling new soda and grow sales for the Company. 2. Pursue a concentric diversification strategy by acquiring Monster Energy from Hansen’s Natural Corporation. Monster Energy is an up and coming energy drink that is gaining sales and share from energy captain, Red Bull. Hansen’s is forward thinking and introducing innovative new products to the market like Monster Assault. The company could share synergies in sales and distribution. 3. Pursue a forward integration strategy by reacquiring CCE and breaking up its assets and resale to smaller bottlers. Smaller, independent bottlers may be content to work on lower margins than......

Words: 582 - Pages: 3

Radiant English Subbed | Geostorm (2017) English Movie 720p HDRip 800MB x264 | ワンハンド