Coca-Cola vs Pepsi: A Century of Marketing War for Market Domination - Essay Sample

Introduction

Marketing is one key strategy used in business. Where there is no innovation, there is a doom of failure awaiting (Force, 1703-1711). Coca-Cola is one brand that has ensures all efforts are enforced to sustain effective market penetration. Throughout history, the beverage giant has been at 'war' with Pepsi. In the food, beverage, and soft drink market, the two companies have dominated and are in serious competition. Through finding the competitor's weaknesses and taking advantage of it, marketing strategies have been utilized in the quest to attain dominance (D'Aveni, 127). Also, the aspect of changing product quality through investigating the market preferences in accordance with research work finds huge investments as this process is the basis of innovation. In every fight, there must be a winner when no party does not seem to give in. The war elongates when giants fight, and with this reason, new practices to ensure there is survival of the fittest are assimilated. This essay seeks to analyze a case of a product change in the Coca-Cola company as a form of marketing strategy.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Although 1984 dawned to become a period for the change in the perception of people on Cocacola, the attempt to change their minds became vain. The marketing strategy, which seemed to be lucrative, sparked after the formulation of a newer recipe that had preference over the old. The deal brought a bright aspiration to the management, and with no hesitation, massive investment on social and media platforms became inevitable.

When the Deal Is Too Good, Think Twice

It is usually said that when the deal is too good, think twice. The new Coke's launch turned out to become a nightmare for the company since the expected results became sore. The mistake was that the product did not suit the entire market. Also, the objective of turning the consumer's mind into liking the new product fell terribly. Considering the market absorption of both products has a tremendously vast portion of the market share, it was not wise to change the products, and thus improving it would be an option to undertake.

There is positivity in the fall of the new Coke, which was a tactical maneuver that turned out sore, thus a mistake. Businesses progress through innovation, the mastery of research, and the development of ideas come when there is a need. There was a need, and thus a way to overcome became crucial. Through the development of the new product, the company has learned a lot in product development and research, marketing strategy, and promotional strategy.

Coming up with a different strategy in such a time of desperation would be inevitable for an individual in the same shoes. The same path would suit many since it was needful, and an opportunity arose. It could be unwise for someone not to seize such a life-transforming option, better to try.

Although the public did not come up with ethical complaints, the market culture suggests that it was unexpected for the company to switch to the new Coke. Also, changing the formula of the products without the consent of the consumers is unethical.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the old Englishmen were right to say that old is gold (Pellegrini, 1). Also, switching products and assimilating newer ones that are out of the vision and mission of the founder diverts the company's objective, thus making it more vulnerable. Market research should be carried out with much precision and care to ensure that both individual and group samples are involved. The store of Cocacola is a testimony of a failed market research program that learned a hefty lot from its mistake. It is essential to understand the effective market research procedure to avoid such a scenario.

References

Force Task. "The 2012 ESC guidelines on heart failure." European heart journal 33 (2012): 1703-1711. http://gy-cardio.gr/UsersFiles/Documents/1703.full.pdf

D'Aveni, Richard A. "Strategic supremacy through disruption and dominance." MIT Sloan Management Review 40.3 (1999): 127. http://search.proquest.com/openview/61e80365d297e0d8a1f3c0dc19ef57b2/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=26142

Pellegrini, Gianni. "Old is Gold!" Madhusudana Sarasvati's Way of Referring to Earlier Textual Tradition." Journal of Indian Philosophy 43.2-3 (2015): 277-334. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%252Fs10781-014-9240-9