Market Entry Strategies of PepsiCo and Coca-Cola in India

Categories: India

Essay, Pages 3 (591 words)

Views

1186

When analyzing the timing of entry into the Indian market by PepsiCo and Coca-Cola India, it is evident that the decisions made by each company brought about different results. The benefits and disadvantages accrued as a result of earlier or later market entry have shaped the strategies and outcomes for both companies in the Indian market.

Starting with Coca-Cola's entry in 1990, the company enjoyed several benefits as an early follower in the market. One advantage was the ability to utilize existing reliable market information, allowing them to make informed decisions based on data that was already available.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get your custom essay on

“ Market Entry Strategies of PepsiCo and Coca-Cola in India ”

Get custom paper

NEW! smart matching with writer

Additionally, Coca-Cola was able to take over established standards in the market and solidify its position as an international market leader. However, there were also disadvantages to entering the market later, such as the need to catch up on expert knowledge of competitors and the challenge of gaining the trust of new customers as yet another foreign company.

On the other hand, PepsiCo entered the Indian market in 1986, earlier than Coca-Cola.

This early entry allowed PepsiCo to establish a presence in the market while it was still developing, giving them a head start in achieving a good market position. PepsiCo also focused on enforcing product standards and had an early impact on local producers, capturing a significant market share for Pepsi Food. However, there were drawbacks to this early entry, including high costs associated with tapping into a new market and the fact that local demand for carbonated drinks was relatively low at that time.

Considering the sheer scale of operations in India, both companies have responded with tailored product policies, promotional activities, pricing strategies, and distribution arrangements to cater to the diverse Indian market.

For Coca-Cola, their product policies have focused on a variety of non-carbonated beverages, including the Kinley brand of bottled water. They have introduced new brands and sizes to appeal to different consumer segments. In terms of promotional activities, Coca-Cola has engaged in various initiatives to connect with the youth market, such as lucky draws, TV campaigns, and partnerships with local festivals and sports events. Their pricing policies have involved offering low prices and price bundles to attract customers, while their distribution arrangements have focused on regions like Southern India.

On the other hand, PepsiCo has bolstered its non-cola portfolio in India by introducing fruit juices, juice-based drinks, and water products. Their promotional activities have included sponsorships of cultural events, sports events, and collaborations with Bollywood stars. PepsiCo has adopted an aggressive pricing policy to compete in the market, impacting local producers like Parle. Their distribution arrangements have concentrated on the northern and western parts of India.

When considering the long-term prospects for success in India, PepsiCo appears to have an advantage over Coca-Cola. This is due to their earlier market entry, diverse non-cola portfolio, and significant presence in the packaged water market. PepsiCo's alignment with consumer lifestyles, particularly in sports and exercise, through fitting advertisements has also contributed to their success. Additionally, PepsiCo has managed to avoid major controversies like Coca-Cola's involvement in pesticide accusations, which has helped maintain consumer trust.

As both companies contemplate entry into other big emerging markets, there are valuable lessons to be learned from their Indian experiences. It is crucial to understand the cultural and governmental specifics of each market to tailor marketing strategies effectively. Communication policies should be adapted to local norms, as seen in India where silence can be interpreted as guilt. Companies must also conduct thorough market research to understand pricing, competition, and consumer preferences in each new market.