The Coca-cola Wars between two market giants Skol Company and PepsiCo proceeds today following over a century of rivalry. The competitive strategies of Skol and PepsiCo have been evaluated, and even though they are really different, both seemed to have been completely successful for being the 1st and second companies in the soft drink sector. Coca-Cola with effective advertising, and Pepsi with effective young era market goal, have developed their particular marketing strategies and began to alter their prices, bottling and brand tactics. Both businesses entered foreign markets, nevertheless Coca-Cola were more effective and lead the financial markets in most countries.
In the twenty first centuries, with increasing require in healthier products both companies expanded their brand portfolios and diversified to look for new causes of revenues.
The five causes that travel competition were analysed to define the industry framework of the carbonate beverage sector. The rivalry among existing firms, menace of new entrants and alternative products, and bargaining power of buyers and suppliers showed that Pepsi and Pespi have tiny risks from this industry and shows positive economic rewards for both the leading brands.
As a result this is a comfortable industry intended for the two cola giants to get in.
The corporate missions, key competencies and competitive benefits, competitive tactics and a SWOT examination were discovered for both the Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo. Tips to their foreseeable future strategies, with potential fallouts, are given to Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. Both companies should constantly execute market research to understand what buyers want, continue innovation, creativeness and adaptability to handle the fast changes in consumer demands. Finally, both companies should continueto diversify inside the products and businesses, and admittance the quickly growing better drink and food markets to become the brand new leader through this industry.
I. Identify the corporate missionThe most recognisable coca-cola brands throughout the world are undeniably Coca-Cola and Pepsi, equally with an American origin and with on the century of history. Coca-Cola and Pepsi would be the leaders in the cola sector, with a similar product, nonetheless they have quite different competitive tactics in terms of framework, marketing, creation and delivery.
The corporate objective of the Coca-Cola Company can be: To renew the World¦ in body system, mind and spirit.
To Inspire Moments of Optimism¦ through the brands and our activities.
To Create Value and Make a Difference¦ everywhere in the world. Coca-Cola has a eyesight for lasting growth simply by: Maximizing come back to shareowners whilst being informed of our total responsibilities.
Like a great place to work in which people are inspired to be the ideal they can be.
Bringing to the universe a stock portfolio of refreshments that anticipate and satisfy peoples’ needs and needs.
Nurturing a winning network of associates and building mutual dedication.
Being a dependable global resident that makes a positive change [1]. If we were to ask a Coca-Cola company’s CEO what their firm is about they can reply something such as “we [Coca-Cola] are the leading brand in carbonated sodas worldwide, by always rewarding our customers’ desires and needs in a lasting way, while maximising the shareholders’ profits.
The corporate quest of the PepsiCo is: To be the world’s leading consumer item company focused about convenient foods and drinks.
To produce healthful financial returns to shareholders as we offer opportunities intended for growth and enrichment to our employees, the business lovers and the residential areas and which will we operate.
To step for trustworthiness, fairness and integrity in everything we do. PepsiCo’s vision can be: To be considered a responsible company citizen and contribute to the quality of life in our communities.
Have a responsibility to continually improve all areas of the world in which we operate ” environmental, social, monetary ” setting up a better down the road than today.
To put in to action programs and a focus on environmental stewardship, activities to gain society, and a commitment to build aktionär value by making Pepsi a really sustainable company [2]. A powerful PepsiCo’s CEO would certainly say that “we will be the world’s leading consumer item company focused in convenient foods and beverages, to satisfy our customers constantly, and create healthy comes back to shareowners, while centering on the environment to make a better worldII. Industry structureThe five causes that drive industry competition are analysed to determine the industry structure from the carbonate refreshment industry.
Inside the soft drink market, there are two main parts: the focus producers (CP) and the bottlers. These two are closely similar to their activities, such as sharing costs in production, advertising delivery with their products. They even handle same suppliers and consumers. Coca-Cola possibly passes on contracts with sugar suppliers to their bottlers.
Both the CP and the bottlers are rewarding in this sector. In 2k, CPs received 35% pre-tax profits on the sales, while bottlers showering lower revenue with just 9% obtained on their product sales (Table 1).
Table 1 . Comparative Costs of a typical US concentrate manufacturer and bottler.
Concentrate ProducerBottler$ per case% of sales$ per case% of salesNet sales0. 711005. 80100Cost of sales0. 12173. 7765Gross profit0. 59832. 0335Selling and delivery0. 0121. 2221Advertisement and marketing0. 28390. 122General and administration0. 0680. 234Pre-tax profit0. 25350. 529(Source: Yoffie, 2004[8])The sector ” rivalry among existing firms: The industry is mainly shared between Coca-Cola and PepsiCo with almost 73% of the world’s soft drink market in 2005 (with 43. 1% and 31. 7% respectively), and followed by Cadbury-Schweppes, the industry’s number several player with 14. five per cent market share [3]. Collectively these 3 companies are the cause of over 90% of the industry sales. This industry could possibly be hence defined as an oligopoly ” an industry with a few large companies producing related products ” resulting in confident profits intended for the large businesses. Therefore there is a lot of rivalry among Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, typically referred to as the ‘Cola Wars’ to differentiate their particular product and gain market share.
Today, with new health-conscience customers, Pepsi and PepsiCo had to enhance their product collection to suit consumer wants and needs. Both businesses have invested in other non-carbonated products including juices, green teas, energy/sport refreshments and even bottled water. As one of the Pepsi’s CEO when said “if people are likely to drink tap water, they should beverage Pepsi tap water.
The rivalry among Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, does not only consist of price battles (to gain market share by low brand loyalty customers, and to build barriers of entry to other replacement products), but it also involved flavor contests (The Pepsi Challenge), and huge bills in powerful marketing campaigns. Marketing plans, such as powerful advertisement (TV and a radio station commercials, billboards¦), sponsoring main sporting events (The World Cup), and preparing exclusive advertising agreements with TV superstars such as Britney Spears (Pepsi) and Harry Potter (Coca-Cola). Both corporations have efficiently sold many despite several selling tactics used in terms of advertising on tv. The Pepsi Company effectively uses specific moments, such as Christmas, that appeal to each generation and relates their particular product to catchy devise like “always Coca-cola and “Enjoy, placing them at the top of the soft drink industry. Pepsi uses other good strategies, such as celebrity performances, to generally target youngsters. Even though they both us different marketing strategies, both companies are successfully publicized their products worldwide.
Both equally firms with mastery in marketing skills even modified their bottling, packaging, pricing and brand strategies to gain even more market share. Price cuts can be and quickly matched by competitors, and when they are coordinated they generally decrease the income for the industry, especially with low flexibility of require such as while using soft drinks. Marketing battles, however, may well expand demand and expand the degree of product differentiation in the industry to get the benefit of the firms [4], nevertheless they concur high capital bills. As the world wide get married popularity increases, Coca-Cola and Pepsi continue to make efforts to produce effective websites to advertise their products. Pepsi should lure the young and enthusiastic, with their trendy website simply by including take music and great prices to get, whereas the Coca-Cola web page is more formal and charm to any era. Finally, both attempt to be a responsible corporate citizen when you are present in regional social activities around the world and produce goods in a lasting fashion.
Potential entrants ” threat of recent entrants: It could be very difficult for a new entrant to succeed in this industry. Due to the market share, capital and marketing power, and brand acknowledgement of Skol and Soft drink, the barriers of admittance are very excessive. Even though there exists little capital expenditure to generate concentrate (CP), through selling price discounting, law suits and other retaliation tactics coming from Coca-Cola and PepsiCo might run them out of business.
In the Middle-East a lot of local drinks such as Mecca-Cola have moved into the market employing anti-American slogans directed at Pepsi, but these add not present a real menace to Coca-Cola other than lose most of the Saudi Arabian soda market to Pepsi.
Potential buyers ” negotiating power of consumers: The main releasing channels ofCoca-Cola and Pepsi are through food stores (35%), fountain outlets (23%) vending equipment (14%), grocery stores (9%) and other outlets such as mass merchandisers (20%).
Grocery stores are the main distribution stations. Coca-Cola and Pepsi battled for price tag shelf space to ensure perfect visibility and accessibility, providing the grocery stores some bargaining power. Additionally supermarkets carry out buy equally, and consumers expect to spend less through this funnel, giving the supermarkets a lot of power. Almost certainly buyers have got a greater power over Pepsi, since Pepsi was discovered a more crucial consumer brand for stores.
Fountain revenue were minimal effective rewarding channel and were considered “paid sampling with pre-tax earnings of 2%. Junk food restaurants could actually make distinctive contract rights with Coca-Cola and Pepsi, giving them a strong customer electrical power and in a position to buy their product in bargain rates.
Vending devices had the best returns simply because have no buyer bargain, so the prices are higher. Convenience stores also revealed the large returns of $0. 69 per case in 2150 (TABLE two ” Display 7? ), explaining that a majority of probably that they had little buyer power over the cola giants.
Table installment payments on your US CSD Retail Outlets, 2000Food StoresConvenience StoresFountainVendingOtherTotal% industry volume34. 8%8. 5%23. 1%13. 5%20. 1%100%Coca-Cola36. 1%35. 7%65%50%35. 5%44. 1%Pepsi32. 2%41. 5%21%40%33. 3%31. 4%Other brands31. 7%22. 9%14%10%31. 2%24. 5%Net Price$3. 53$5. 35$3. 18$8. 48$3. 42$4. 24NOPBT$0. 23$0. 69$0. 09$0. 97$0. 33$0. 36(Source: Yoffie, 2004[8])Suppliers ” bargaining power of suppliers: The inputs to create Coca-cola and Pepsi consist of ingredients (mainly sugar, but also meals acid, caramel colouring and caffeine) and packaging. Glucose can be easily found in the open market, as there are various sugar makers and sugars substitutes (corn syrup). For that reason sugar suppliers have not very much power on Coca-Cola and Pepsi, mainly because they can easily transform supplier or substitute that by hammer toe syrup or perhaps artificial sweeteners (aspartame).
Aluminum cans today are very inexpensive and there are a large number of supplierscompeting pertaining to contracts together with the cola bottlers, therefore their very own power is likewise small. Plastic containers and especially goblet bottles can also be inexpensive numerous suppliers, once again both manufacturers with a low supplier electrical power. Furthermore, with Coca-Cola and Pepsi making contracts on behalf of their bottlers, they are able to volume buy minimizing the prices and the power of suppliers.
Substitutes ” threat of substitute merchandise: During the nineties there was an increase in the demand intended for no-carbs drinks and other carbonated drinks such as green teas, juices, sport drinks and bottled water, and so Coca-Cola and PepsiCo needed to increase their manufacturer portfolios through innovation, obtain and units. The non-carbs or more healthy drinks sales ” and particularly bottled water ” have quickly increased in the last 5 years. By getting in early in to the healthier beverages, these alternatives became less of a threat.
Other diet coke substitutes such as local common brands also exist although with different strategies (eg: me-too items, little advertising, lower price) [5]. And even though they take a little slide of the soft drink industry that they pose zero real menace to Skol and Soft drink.
In conclusion, the five pushes analysis revealed that there is small risk inside the soft drink sector and this shows great economic benefits for both the leading brands Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
3. SWOT analysisCoca-cola SWOTStrengths: – Brand acknowledgement and the planet’s famous hallmark. The Skol brand name is definitely widely regarded as the planet’s most valuable manufacturer with approximately value of $70million [6].
” World’s leading soft drink maker. They are the #1 firm in the soft drink market, with over 1 billion dollars drinks sold daily causing healthy profits.
” Strong and powerful marketing campaigns. They may have mastery by marketing, advertising, production design that reaches all generations worldwide.
” Wide non-alcoholic beverage profile. Coca-Cola extended their wide array of products with goods such as Aquarius, Burn, Dasani, Fresca, Cappy, Coke Absolutely no, Minute Cleaning service, Powerade, Bonaqua, Simple Orange, Diet Cola, Nestea plus more [1].
” Really efficient merchandise supply and delivery to customers. Genuine strength in direct-store delivery and assisting retailers promote those products to customers.
Weaknesses: – Never found Pepsi like a threat. At this point Coca-Cola is continually reacting to Pepsi’s becomes the rules in the soft drink market.
” Frequent negotiations with bottlers. Additionally, they purchased various bottlers, however the industry has not been very lucrative for bottlers in previous years.
Possibilities: – Growing to other markets other than soft-drinks. They have already started, nonetheless they should increase their non-carbs business. For example the juice Minute House maid Company is continually growing, and it is able to get or ally with other leading non-carbs drink producers. This is an excellent opportunity to transfer to the near future wherever consumers are becoming more health conscious.
” Expanding to new quickly growing markets such as Asia-Pacific (in particular China and India), European countries, and Africa/Middle East.
” Make distinctive contracts with new ‘healthier’ fast food restaurants such as Subway to sell all their non-carbs drinks.
” Become involved in local events worldwide and “think local.
Threats: – The new craze of consuming healthier goods. Consumers are progressively more health mind and the with regard to healthier drinks is swiftly increasing.
” An all American icon, the American lifestyle. Lose customer preference
ie Saudi Arabia (this is not about whether American foreign policy is right or wrong, it’s about the fact that Coke loses customer preference) [7].
PepsiCo SWOTStrengths:- Brand recognition and worldwide known trademark.
” The world’s second soft drink producer. High market share, with high revenues. The PepsiCo is very wealthy with high capital.
” Effective marketing. Innovative advertisement that targets the younger generation and attacks the ‘old-fashioned’ Coca-Cola.
” Early entrance to substitute products (juices, teas, sport drinks, bottled water) and snack food complements (FritoLay).
” Posses an innovative and creative team. The goals set are challenging yet achievable (“Beat Coke) and they have a clear mission.
” Wide nonalcoholic beverage portfolio. Coca-Cola extended their product range with products such as Pepsi (Twist, One, Lime, Vanilla, Cherry¦), Aquafina, Lipton Tea, Mountain Dew, Amp Energy, Mirinda, Starbucks Double Shot, Milk Chillers and more [2].
Weaknesses:- Pepsi is the second choice cola, and it seems to be a ‘lower’ quality soft drink.
” Pepsi must compete with the most powerful cola brand: Coca-Cola.
Opportunities:- Expand to growing International markets such as Asia-Pacific (in particular China and India), Europe, and Africa/Middle East. The high market share in Saudi Arabia can become the gateway to gain the Middle East soft drink industry.
” Expand to a healthier product market by increasing their non-carbs portfolio. Continue to supply non-cars drinks to the market, where consumers are becoming more health conscious.
” Merging with small growing local fast food restaurants.
” Use “The Challenger theme to appeal to the young generation, instead of the ‘olde-fashioned’ Coca-Cola. Continue to lure the younger generation through cool pop music, music starts and clever advertisement.
” The use of new packaging with lighter, ecologic materials. To get involved in and encourage recycling, conservation and programs for sustainable production.
Threats:- The major threat is Coca-Cola. Always be prepared that every strategic move Pepsi makes, there will be retaliation from Coca-Cola.
” The new trend of consuming healthier products. Consumers are becoming more health conscience and the demand for healthier drinks is rapidly increasing.
IV. Core competencies and competitive advantageCoca-Cola and PepsiCo offer a similar range of products and are very successful at marketing, selling and delivering them, however both have different core competencies and competitive advantages.
Coca-Cola:- The main core competency is their bran building ability to gives them a competitive advantage. A competitive advantage of Coca-Cola is their unique secret recipe which cannot be matched by any other producer concentrate. Their product is the ‘original’, ‘the real one’ which they have been able to get stuck in the head of many people worldwide through mastery in marketing.
Another core competency of Coca-Cola as well as their unparalleled brand-building experience is their unique geographic knowledge and fast transfer of knowledge among operating units [5]. Their commitment to effective marketing and innovation in creating brands and products is extremely important for this company. Coca-Cola have creatively integrated their all-American product into the lives of people everywhere, even incountries which are very traditional such as India, patriotic such as China or even primitive such as Papua New Guinea.
A very important competitive advantage is their brand recognition and their financial strength. This gives some security to Coca-Cola and a psychological advantage over other soft drink firms.
PepsiCo:PepsiCo has a core competency of producing and supplying beverages and snack foods. They are very experienced and effective, becoming USA’s leader in snack food producers and second in the soft drink industry. They have a strong brand recognition and financial strength. This can be used to further market their drink, for differentiation and brand recognition.
PepsiCo has a head start in diversification of their core product (Pepsicola) to snack foods (FritoLay and Quaker Foods) and healthier soft drinks. They have the knowledge in diversification of products, and even of business type, giving them a competitive advantage.
Another core competency and competitive advantage is their knowledge of innovative advertisement that captures the minds of the younger generations. The use of pop music and music stars gives an advantage to Pepsi when it comes to the youth soft drink industry.
Finally since PepsiCo is a smaller company than Coca-Cola, this gives them a competitive advantage as they are can adapt to changes quicker in the soft drink industry.
Therefore the Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo should concentrate on their core competencies to build competitive advantages and broaden their opportunities for business.
V. Strategy recommendationsThere are some strategy recommendations to sustain the profits of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo with a flattening demand and the growing popularity of non-carbonated drinks. Throughout history, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have been battling to sell their cola drinks, with differentstrategies, which eventually lead them to the two major soft drink companies they are today.
The Coca-Cola Company has such a brand recognition that they should definitely use it in their strategy to further develop their core cola product as well as other beverage products. Coca-Cola learned from PepsiCo, and hired marketing executives with good track records, implemented cross-training of managers and started to take more risks, act more rapidly and develop new production and marketing ideas. Therefore Coca-Cola should continue their effective marketing, which focuses on special moments in life that appeal to all generations at once, and show the world they provide a life-style rather than just a drink. Their strategy has been to primarily rely on their classic cola product and target all generations in the market.
The following two recommendations are given to Coca-Cola:1) Remain loyal to their classic Coca-Cola product.
Coca-Cola should remain loyal to the classic Coca-Cola ” the ‘real thing’ ” closest to the original recipe as possible. The so much talked about secret recipe, gives an advantage to Coca-Cola because nobody, not even Pepsi, can bring out the same taste. With the financial strength of Coca-Cola, they can invest in modern technological advances to develop a sweetener that contains no sugars and which is all natural (not unhealthy), but without losing the real taste. They can then market the ‘new’ drink to the more health conscience consumers.
They should even bring back their classic glass Coca-Cola bottle that we all love. By investing in developing a type of glass for their bottles which is light, thin and strong, this would represent the classic Coca-Cola in the modern world. They should also phase out drinks with low returns such as Lime Coke or Vanilla Coke.
They should show their customers that they believe their Coca-Cola is better than any other cola available. This will cause a gain in market share from Pepsi and other substitutes, due to the brand recognition, competitiveprices and quality.
2) Expand in the non-carbs (healthy) drink industry.
As it is observed, there is a growing popularity for non-carbs drinks such as teas, juices, sport/energy drinks, milk drinks and bottled water, and it seems to continue in the future. Coca-Cola must know exactly what the customers want (consumer surveys and feedback systems) and broaden and develop their product portfolio to satisfy the customers. They should do this at a local scale due to taste differences (for example in Indonesia they have very sweet diet diets), to ensure they supply all customers with what they really want. They should be more creative, flexible and innovative than PepsiCo and be the one to make the first move and change the rules of the game.
They should definitively change their image to a healthier beverage image, by providing non-carbs drinks internationally, and try to gain market share and recognition in this industry. By continuously innovating their products, they are able to learn and change. They should change their target market from an ‘everyone’ audience to a more specific target of health conscious consumers.
PepsiCo have been much better at providing what consumers want (by even modifying their products), and have created products for the more health conscience consumers long before Coca-Cola. Their strategy has been to bring to the market new innovative beverages, provide what the consumer wants, and target the young markets to take over Coca-Cola’s market share.
The following two recommendations are given to PepsiCo:1) Extend their diversification strategy in the beverage industry.
In the beverage sector, PepsiCo should further increase their brand portfolio, and especially in the increasingly demanded healthier drinks. They must exactly know what the consumer’s wants, needs and future expectations are, and supply them. They should merge or acquire with othergrowing healthy companies (for example Boost Juice in Australia), such as they did with Lipton Tea, a well known tea producer company. This way they can gain the healthier drinks market. They should also constantly innovate their beverages and supply gaps in the beverage industry, such as their new product DMX which is in between a soda and an energy drink. To market the new innovative drinks they should continue to use their creative and aggressive advertisement to target the young generation for the carbonated drinks, and target the health conscience consumers for the healthier drinks.
2) Extend their diversification in snack food and restaurants.
They must continue to develop this sector of the company (FritoLay and Quacker Foods which bring 33% and 5% of the total PepsiCo 2004 revenues respectively), and expand to ‘smart’ choices (healthy products). Maybe even develop a new healthy fast-food restaurant chain (with their knowledge in fast food restaurants), and flood it with their own healthier drinks exclusive to PepsiCo. They should also perform constant market research to know what consumers in this market want, and then supply it.
Finally, PepsiCos international business strategy must be changed as they have not much global market share when compared to Coca-Cola. So they should always use innovative ways to expand in the global market, this will increase brand awareness and maximise their opportunities.
VI. Potential falloutWith every strategy there is potential fallout or problems. Here are some solutions to possible issues while executing their recommended strategies for Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
Coca-Cola Company:1) Remain loyal to their classic Coca-Cola product.
The potential fallout of remaining loyal to the original cola beverage is that customers may eventually switch to healthy drinks altogether, minimizing the soda consumption and industry. It is unlikely that all sodas will disappear from the markets as they are and have been such popular drinks, however it is likely that the soda consumption is decreased as thehealthy drink consumption increases. For this purpose, Coca-Cola should know if their soda sales are profitable and have an exit strategy in case of low returns. If this is the case, Coca-Cola’s exit strategy should be to focus on their healthier drinks production, while all structures and delivery systems for sodas can be changed to healthier beverage alternatives such as juices, sport/energy drinks, teas and bottled water.
2) Expand in the non-carbs (healthy) drink industry.
The non-carbs or healthy drink industry has been rapidly increasing and this trend should continue in the future. This coupled with the new ‘being healthy’ fad which is currently being observed in most developed countries, where consumers do not want carbonated and sweet drinks and switch to products such as teas, juices and bottled water. Therefore when comparing the slow growth of carbonated drinks (3-4% p.a.) with the fast growing market for healthier drinks (>13% s. a. ), it is logical that Coca-Cola market many effectively and floods industry with their healthier alternatives to achieve and control the healthful beverage markets. Their important knowledge in delivery and supply can be placed on the healthful drinks to ensure their products are found everywhere pertaining to consumers.
PepsiCo: 1) Extend their diversity strategy inside the beverage industry.
PepsiCo should continue to present all types of beverages; however they ought to focus on the healthier alternatives such as tea, juices, sport/energy drinks, milk drinks and bottled water. Given that they have a variety of alternatives, they will don’t have these kinds of a high risk like creating a single product. In the event of a market loss of one type of beverage, such as sodas, PepsiCo can receive revenues from option drink resources. Their powerful advertisement and delivery devices should be also applied to their new healthier drinks.
They should also regularly research the beverage marketplaces at neighborhood and international levels and learn what the buyer preferences have to be the first one to provide them. Just for this they must stay creative, ground breaking, and flexible, to adapt to these rapid changes in their environment. In the worst case situation, if thebeverage market disappears (which is extremely unlikely), PepsiCo can exit this sector and give attention to their munch and cafe businesses, while looking for further opportunities for progress.
2) Expand their diversification in desserts and eating places.
Diversity in business and goods offered to customers is very important. It was a smart push by PepsiCo to invest in snack foods and fast food restaurants, which are obviously matches of their core product the cola drink. Another advantage is the fact if there is a crash in the soft drink industry, PepsiCo would have alternate revenue streams. However , with increase require of better products, given that that both carbonated soda industry plus the snack food/fast food restaurant market displays a fall, while the better drink and food marketplaces will grow. If this is the situation, PepsiCo can focus on producing their more healthy drink to strengthen their healthy and balanced brands.
Also they should do the same with their particular food industry and change to become a healthy food supplier though innovative measures, joining or acquiring a fast growing establish company. PepsiCo should certainly continually check out the environment, to search for fast growing industries by which to invest to advertise further business growth.
Referrals[1].
The Coca-Cola Company (www.coca-cola..com)[2]. The PepsiCo. (www.pepsico.com)[3]. Bathnagar, P. (2005). “Coke, Pepsi losing the fizz. CNN Funds (http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/07/news/fortune500/cokepepsi_sales/)[4]. Note on the Structural Analysis of Companies. Harvard Business School. Rev. June 30, 1983.
[5]. Lessard, D. (2003). Frameworks of worldwide strategy examination. J. of strategic supervision education, 1(1): 81-92.
[6]. Dube, JP. (2004). Product difference and mergers in the carbonated soft drink sector. University of Chicago Graduate student School of Business.
1
