资源描述
提供英語論文代寫服務, , EMBA, MBA英文論文代寫, essays, case study, assignments, MBA course work , thesis and dissertationEMAIL:IM: emailcustomerservicechinadoll/emailPepsiCo: External ConsiderationsOverviewPepsiCo is popularly associated with its flagship product Pepsi Cola. While Pepsi Cola is a sizable portion of PepsiCos revenue stream, PepsiCo actually has significant revenue generated from a slew of other products and divisions such as PepsiCo Beverages North America, PepsiCo International, Frito-Lay and Quaker Foods North America (Overview, 2005). PepsiCos Pepsi Cola has long been second in market share to Coca-Cola and the competition between Pepsi and Coke has been the stuff of business school legend for many years. However, thanks to a series of strategic acquisitions and market entry moves internationally, PepsiCo as a company has finally overtaken Coke in overall market share and performance: “PEPSICO.has raced ahead of.Coke in overall growth rates. PepsiCo earnings last year surged 18% to $4.2 billion on revenues of $29.3 billion, up 8.5%.Cokes 11.5% earnings growth to.4.4% revenue growth to $22 billion for 2004” (Steiner, 2005, para.2). It could be said that PepsiCo has lost the cola battle but won the overall war with its archrival Coca-Cola Company. PepsiCo has done this by becoming a snack food and beverage Company with operations in more than 200 countries worldwide, over 143,000 employees both national and international and over $4 billion in revenues (PepsiCo, 2004, p.4). Increasingly, PepsiCo, as most other large MNCs have done, is relying on overseas expansion to fuel its future growth and earnings. External FactorsPepsiCos strategic sights are set on international expansion. Steiner points out that Pepsi International became Pepsis largest division in 2004 and this trend is likely to continue (2005, para.3). Although the United States and more broadly, North America, is the worlds largest snack market, its growth is relatively flat (Flannery, 2004, para.4). These two strategic observations certainly lend much credence to an outward focusing strategy of growth and expansion. In fact, this appears to be the driving force behind PepsiCos overall strategic plan: international expansion. Even more specifically, PepsiCo seems intent on establishing dominance in the two major markets of China and India: “China is a big prize, says PepsiCos Asia president.As the Chinese have opened up in the past ten years, theres been an inherent demand for foreign products.”(Flannery, 2004, para.5). This global strategic orientation is reflected by the opportunities available in the marketplace and is one readily accessible to any company, such as PepsiCo, that is well-funded and has the research and marketing capabilities to manage a unified market entry campaign. External Factor EvaluationWEIGHTRATINGWEIGHTED SCOREOpportunities1. International and emerging markets hold much potential.151.152. There is a growing demand for better and faster convenience type foods.053.153. Bottled water industry is in demand in all markets.051.054. Demand for health oriented products is increasing in established and mature markets.154.605. Sports and performance beverage industry is a hot growth market.103.30Threats1. Some global backlash against American products.102.202. Competitive pressure from both Coca-Cola and some local market mainstays in China and India.053.153. Consolidation in the retail industry is having some effect on distribution networks and marketing agreements.052.104. Exchange rate fluctuations .102.206. Raw material and transportation costs are increasing.201.20TOTAL1.002.10Competitive ForcesPorters Five Forces model is an effective strategic evaluation tool to measure the effect certain competitive dimensions are having, and may have in the future, on a companys main line of business (LOB). Proctor lists the five forces as being comprised of buyer power, supplier power, barriers to entry and threat of substitute products or services all in flux around an intangible, but very real competitive dynamic: .identification of an organizations competitors may not be as simple.as it might.appear. The most obvious competitors are those which offer identical products or services to the same customers.substitute products and services highlight the nature of indirect competition. Five levels of competition have been suggested: direct competition, close competition, products of a similar nature, substitute products and indirect competition. (2000, p.103)For PepsiCo it is important to note that though the degree of rivalry it exhibits with Coca-Cola would be classified as high by even the most casual observer, on paper, because of the low market fragmentation in cola products in the major developed markets and the relatively few major companies, the degree of rivalry should be low. However, because PepsiCo has branched off into other LOBs and product lines, it has sought competitive rivalry across many market segments and this has increased the degree of competitive rivalry by geometric proportions.Porters threat of substitutes is probably one of PepsiCos largest competitive dangers because as more products become available they exert continuous price pressure on the major companies, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola, to lower prices. Such price elasticity effects the growth models that PepsiCo has developed to satisfy shareholders: “.we know that our shareholders care most about our future. Given PepsiCos consistent record of growth.were asked is: How will you sustain growth? By taking our competitive strengths, and investing in them to create.value”(Sustainable, 2004, p.4). PepsiCo has made it a mandate to build its shareholder value based on ever-increasing global expansion. It actually intends to accomplish much of this growth in emerging markets and on the introduction of new products outside of its flagship Pepsi Cola product. One of the areas that PepsiCo has relied on to relieve some of this competitive pressure from substitute products are juice type beverages which it has long wielded as a premium, tough to enter segment: “.PepsiCos Tropicana brand a 14-year head start in sewing up the premium market” (Sweney, 2005, para.3). Sweney points out that PepsiCo had the foresight to expand into such, at that time, niche markets which are only now becoming broad product categories with only a few real players. But, in keeping with Porters five forces model, entering the premium juice beverage market presents some barriers to entry that are not present in the cola market. These include, among others, access to fresh fruit products for raw material, higher risk of spoilage and shorter shelf life. Further, since these products are marketed as a premium product, competing on price is not much of an advantage. Finally, one of Porters other competitive force that bears much relevance to PepsiCo and the cola industry in general, is buyer power. Because there are few relatively large, international companies with the breadth and depth of PepsiCo and Coca-Cola, these two companies can truly demand that their suppliers accept the lowest conceivable margins possible. Competitor ProfilesCompetitor Profile MatrixPepsiCoCoca-Cola CompanyKraft FoodsCRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORSWEIGHTRATINGSCORERATINGSCORERATINGSCOREAdvertising0.2010.2040.8030.60Product Quality0.1040.4040.4030.30Price Competitiveness0.1030.3030.3040.40Management0.1040.4030.3030.30Financial Position0.1540.6030.4530.45Customer Loyalty0.1040.4040.4020.20Global Expansion0.2040.8020.4020.40Market Share0.0510.0540.2030.15TOTAL1.003.153.252.80The ratings in the Competitor Profile Matrix above are based on several market circumstances that are relevant to how PepsiCo is rated. Though PepsiCo is larger in volume than Coca-Cola, it lags Coca-Cola Company in their flagship cola product market share overall, and outside of the beverage division, PepsiCo is smaller than its chief snack and food product rival, Kraft Foods. Yet, as PepsiCos 2004 financial statement, Sustainable Advantage, states, PepsiCo is the worlds 3rd largest food and beverage company (2004, p.6).PepsiCo: Strategic ConsiderationsCurrent Strategic ProfileBecause of Cokes success at marketing partnerships and fountain drink agreements it has a huge advantage in this product category: “Coke.fountain sales, controlling nearly 70% of the segment.buoyed by the addition of the 16,000-unit Subway Restaurants chain. Fountain and institutional sales account for roughly a quarter of total soft drink volume” (MacArthur, 2004, para.3), PepsiCo has been forced to find other strategic measures to expand its market presence. It has done so largely by increasing its product offering, entering emerging markets and new product research. Currently, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola are battling for market share in almost every major emerging market. For example, beginning in 2003 Pepsi and Coke began going toe to toe in Thailand with opposing strategies to establish market dominance: Coke began championing its Fanta product as the beverage of choice for the young and old alike, while PepsiCo gambled on a new marketing campaign to expand Pepsi Cola (Mulchand, 2003). On the global front, Coke has earmarked $300 million for its international marketing efforts which follows the $160 million it spent the previous year (Hein, 2005). This new emphasis on global marketing campaigns has increased the degree of rivalry between these two major competitors to heights not seen before. Pepsi has answered by announcing in 2004 a new “mid-calorie product” that it intends to revolutionize the cola industry with: “The rumours that Coke and Pepsi.were developing mid-calorie colas had reached the level of dull roars by the time Pepsi announced.that it would be bringing out its version this summer under the brand name Pepsi Edge” (Elliot, 2004, para.3). Clearly, PepsiCo intends to compete on new product differentiation, increased marketing dollars and emerging markets. Yet, PepsiCo and its archrival Coca-Cola Company realize their days of competing on one product alone are over:Neither company has much to brag about. Both continue to see sales of their flagship soft drinks weaken. Pepsi-Cola and Coke Classic shares dropped 0.6% and 0.5%, respectively. Volume for the two brands fell 6.9% and 6.4%, as consumers turned to diet drinks, waters and non-carbonated beverages. (MacArthur, 2004, para.10)In this case, because of the foresight PepsiCo had in diversifying its product base early on, it is better positioned to incorporate the market reality of smaller revenues being generated by Pepsi Cola. For its part, Coca-Cola has turned to nutraceutical products as a possible way to offset flagging interest in its core product, Coke (Coca-Cola, 2005, p.6). This is a strategic response due almost solely to the market initiatives made by PepsiCo. PepsiCo Internal FactorsKey Internal FactorsWeightRatingWeighted ScoreInternal Strengths1.Sound leadership with a long-term vision.104.402.Strong product portfolio.104.403.Advantages of operational scale.153.454.Recent market successes.154.605.Strong financial performance and ratios.203.60Internal Weaknesses1. Some low margins in certain product categories.101.102.Some poor performances by some of its divisions (Quaker).052.103.Some seasonal performance concerns.052.104.Dependence on foreign markets for growth.101.10TOTAL1.002.85Strategic RecommendationsPepsiCos strategic options can be derived from an equation of its internal strength factors with its external strength factors. The observations resulting from this type of examination can provide the insight necessary to develop a strategy that is not only beneficial from a shareholders perspective but also operationally because it, presumably, is based on the strengths and core competencies attributed to the company.Key Internal FactorKey External FactorResultant StrategySound Leadership & Strong Vision+International & Emerging Markets hold potential=Acquire Local Competitors in Emerging MarketsStrong Product Portfolio+Demand for Health Oriented Product is Growing =Increase Research & Development BudgetRecent Positive Market Performance+Sports and Performance Beverage is a Hot Growth Market=Funnel Revenue into this Product Marketing PlanStrategic OutlineSince most of PepsiCos growth is already projected to originate from international markets in the years ahead, PepsiCo should develop a 5 year growth plan for the Asia Pacific Rim spearheaded by the China market. Considering PepsiCo already has a mammoth presence in China: “PepsiCo has since invested more than $1 billion in 40 joint ventures, some state connected, a few of them troubled. Today China is among the five fastest-growing markets for Pepsi”(Flannery, 2004, para.6); by maximizing this market presence, PepsiCo could use this momentum to capitalize on markets currently underperforming around the Asia Pacific Rim. This strategy is further enhanced by several major international events scheduled to take place in China in the coming years: the 2008 Summer Olympics and the 2010 World Expo. By increasing its profile in China and throughout the region, PepsiCo would be well-positioned to capitalize on its increased brand equity and marketing cachet to re-launch its product lineup in the all-important North American market. PepsiCos recent strong financial performances, illustrated below, have given it the resources requisite to introduce such an expansive regional and country marketing campaign:(Sustainable, 2004, p.2)A successful Asian campaign built around the China market should have the following effect on PepsiCos financial profile:Categories *revenue given in millions2004 Financial Performance2010 Financial Performance (pro forma)Total Net Revenue$29,261$36,000Total Operating Profit$5,259$12,000Net Income$4,004$6,800Earnings Per Share$2.32$3.89Capital Spending$1,387$2,950A five year project plan would contain the following major milestones:Strategic Asia PlanMajor Strategic Partnership with Olympic EntityExpanded Olympic Themed Product Packaging (all products)International Marketing Campaign Highlighting PepsiCos Olympic SponsorshipAsia-wide Marketing Campaign Illustrating PepsiCos Expo Sponsorship 11/30/200511/30/200606/30/200711/30/200711/30/2009The marketing plan itself would be themed after China and highlight the depth of influence that that culture has had all across Asia and would tie in to the major international spectacles of the Olympics and the World Expo. The major Asian consumer societies: South Korea, Japan and Taiwan would all be highly marketed to showcasing their relationship with China and a new and highly individual Asian identity would emerge, introduced by PepsiCo. Finally, PepsiCo could take advantage of the Olympics to introduce an original sports-drink designed for the Asian but with Western tastes in mind. GMAT Reading1. 4种文章类型一、新老观点对比（重点在后）先是老观点：many, most, common, frequently, usually, traditionally, once, old, recently, until recently 再是新观点：强转折（1段中/2段首）主题句：明确的新观点。二、现象解释型（重点在后）-为什么？先是现象：自然科学：自然现象 社会科学：史实再是解释：解释原因+提出多个理论+强调主体+评价主题句： 正确的解释三、问题解决型：（重点在后）-该怎么去做？问题：疑问-question, puzzle任务-difficulty, task, problem, challenge解决/回答：多个理论+提出主题+作者评价。主题句： 正确的解决方案/答案四、结论解释型（开门见山）-有哪些内容特点：判断句-主题句恰恰是判断句；解释：内容的详细展开2. 主题题型一、 对文章的中心思想、写作目的等提问的题目1. 明确主题句TS2. 无TS-关键词、细节、新内容A关键词：主体动词Presentation：present，describe, explain, illustrate, point out, etc.Argumentation: evaluate, criticize, refute, challenge, counter, correct, etc.（非常实用）3. 含作者态度（少数服从多数）二、 结构套路1. organization: 既问文章/段落的结构、套路，注意顺序！2. 特别套路：专门评述某人理论、著作，多属于结构解释型，少属于现象解释（为什么）。3. 注意：A. 先入为主型（从前不从后）：前面部分结构已经很完整，但后面部分说了一大段和前面无关的离题内容，不能受后面影响B. 少数服从多数（从大不从小）：TS提出正态度，却在末尾作出转折说一些缺点、毛病，只是为了避免极端而作出的暖和语气。3. 态度题就作者对某事件、某理论的态度评价提问的题目。一边倒评价：正评价、负评价混合评价：大正小负、 大负小正文中判断评价的依据：判断句系动词、情态动词、自由褒贬词（adj ，adv） 1、引号：负评价 2、表示评价的实义动词：主要用于研究类文章（1）负评价： fail (to), ignore, overlook, neglect, 忽略，忽视，前一个为主观，后两个为客观 overestimate, underestimate,高估，低估 exaggerate,夸张，夸大 misrepresent, misinterpret错误表达，错误表述，错误解释（2）正评价： show, prove, demonstrate证明 find, discover, 发现 determine, confirm，确信，确认 3、让步语气让步语气的三种写法： 前半句（1）it is true/it is correct/ of course（2）no doubt/without doubt/undoubtedly （3）do/ may/ seem/appear 后半句：强转折 以后半句为主要评价。 4、从大不从小 文章开头或主题句中的评价是大评价，其他是小评价。让步和转折除外。4. 细节题一、 四种主要类型1. 罗马数字题2. in order to题型3. 强对比取非题4. 其他二、 几种常见的错误方式三、 细节定位（1）有定位的信息题： of, about, concerning, regarding-关于同义变换（2）无定位的信息题： 只能根据对全文的整体把握来逐个判断选项。5. 类比题典型问法： which of the following is most similar to the situation in the sentence? Similar to, analogous to, parallel做法：抓住本质特征客观题做题要求：题型、定位、同义变换做题注意事项1、 4种错误选项：混、偏、反、无混：张冠李戴：A说成B ；偏：以偏盖全；反：与原文相反；无：原文没说/无法判断2、 慎重对待含有最高级、唯一性和比较句的选项3、 不要用非出题段落的内容来解答这个题例外：问某段结尾，可用下段开头；问某段开头，可用上段结尾。4、 长选项竖读法纵向比较所有选项，尤其是开头，找到其中相同的语言部分，如果某几个选项中相同的语言部分对这个题有用，那么先看这几个选项或者这几个选项的差异部分。5、文字定位基本操作：读文章的时候找出主题词和评价；文：主题题干：主题 特殊情况： （1）如果题干主题在文中多处出现，一般定位在其首次出现之处。 （2）如果题干主题与文章主题有关，定位在主题句。6. 逻辑题：（反对+支持题）（1）反对题：weaken, undermine, call into question, cast doubt on 4种作法： A、反对原因 反对A-B时可说A不成立。 B、反证法 假设结论成立，推出矛盾、谬误，与现实不符的情况。 C、直接反对结论 欲反对A-B，直接说B不成立。 D、存在其他原因 欲反对A-B，可说C-B。（2）支持题：support, strengthen 3种作法： A、补充所缺的条件。 欲支持A-B，补上C，得C-A-B。 B、把B再强调一遍。 C、具体事例法：举文中没有讲过的例子作为正面论据。 （3） IF TRUE原则：不要怀疑5个选项的成立性，一切以他们的成立为前提。7. 出题点一、总结1. 主题：几乎必考；2. 混合评价；3. 强对比；4. 强因果；5. 比较句；6. 举例+列举二、 补充重要语言点三、 1、强转折（做记号） 虽然：(al)though, while 但是：but yet however 同义词：in fact和actually，nevertheless和nonetheless, rather和instead，despite和in spite of 实际上. 然而. 尽管.却. 不是.而是. 极端转折： 多重转折：出现多重转折以最后一重为准，前面的千万不要当真！2、强因果因为： because(of), since, for, 冒号（：） 所以： thus, hence, therefore短语： lead to, result in, result from, lie in家族：conclude, conclusion, conclusive, consequent(ly), consequence*3、强对比 传统对比词：unlike, contrast, on the contrary, on the other hand 文章开头的时间状语：before, prior to, in, (until) recently 取非题：A is unlike B（把文章的内容反过来）*4、强调词 A 最高级：-est, most, least顺序最高级（first, last）频率最高级（always, never）程度最高级（foremost, uttermost/utmost） B 唯一性：only, sole(ly), unique(ly),exclusive(ly), alone example: theory A alone (right) alone theory A (error)比较句：more/less.than（与其.不如说.）, as.as/the same as*5、专有名词：人，物种等， 只需要划出取首字母简称6、三种标点符号 A引号：（1）引用某人原话（2）强调（3）负评价-protecting B括号 破折号：插入补充解释7、判断句 A 系动词：be, remain 情态动词：can, can not, may, might B 自由褒贬词：adj, adv.（词性） 即：当我们把它移开不会改变文章的语法和结构 例：His view changed our attitude. His view successfully（正）changed our attitude. His view curiously（负） changed our attitude. His brazen（负） view changed our attitude. His penetrating（正） view changed our attitude.
展开阅读全文