Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: Coca-Cola

Decisions Have An Opportunity Cost That Require Tradeoffs

Why do Brazilians drink Coca-Cola?

Our story starts during 1990. Trying to cope with an 80% monthly inflation rate, Brazilian shoppers rushed to supermarkets early in the morning before higher price stickers replaced the old ones. In just one month, a $1 carton of eggs would cost $1.80.

You can imagine what a difference it made when Brazil got its staggering price increases under control. Purchasing power soared, the middle class grew and people bought more soda.

In a paper called, “Grab Them Before They Go Generic,” 2 researchers looked at Brazil’s new spenders. Curious about multinational consumer goods, they wondered whether demand would soar for a famous, heavily advertised brand like Coke as wealth grew in an emerging economy.

The researchers concluded that when the newly affluent started shopping, they had not yet formed a soda buying habit. If they initially bought a generic brand, they stayed with it, even when they could afford more. To get people to form a “premium habit” rather than a “frugal habit,” Coke cut its prices by 20% and according to the researchers, stopped the growth of Brazilian generics.

The paper from these 2 professors, one from Hebrew University and the other from Northwestern, applies far beyond Brazil to China, India, Turkey and Indonesia–to all emerging markets where the middle class is growing. Multinationals, they believe, should recognize the importance of shaping people’s buying habits as they develop.

If you want to listen to more about Brazil’s hyperinflation and how it was controlled, NPR’s Planet Money has a wonderful podcast. And here, The Economist quantifies the growth of the middle class in emerging economies. Finally, econlife looked at how Coca-Cola might have been too late in India for the newly affluent to form a premium habit when they selected Thums Up.

 

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

glass with water isolated

Combine “spirits,” beer, wine, coffee, tea and Coca-Cola and you get some interesting economic history.

Spirits: In 1758, George Washington was elected to Virginia’s House of Burgesses. Some attribute his victory to entertaining his neighbors with 160 gallons of rum, rum punch, wine, beer and cider.  Wondering whether he had demonstrated sufficient largess to a county with 391 voters, Washington said, “My only fear is that you spent with too spare a hand.”

Little did Washington even suspect that “spirits” would become a symbol of the taxing power of his new government when western farmers refused to pay a whiskey tax. Called the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794, the protesters were subdued and the government’s taxing power was established.

Beer: In ancient Egypt, beer was used to pay the workers who built the Egyptian pyramids. Records say their ration was 4 loaves of bread and 8 pints of beer.

Wine: Believing the higher the quality, the stronger its medicinal value, the personal physician to the emperor Marcus Aurelius, prescribed it for colds.

Tea: Catherine, wife of England’s King Charles II, made tea an aspirational drink. Portuguese royalty, she brought a dowry that included trading posts around the world, “a fortune in gold, and a chest of tea.”

Coffee: The 1792 origins of the New York Stock Exchange can be traced back to a Wall Street buttonwood tree under which trading was scheduled. During bad weather they met at Wall and Water Streets at the Tontine Coffeehouse.

Coca-Cola. First sold as a medicinal preparation in Atlanta, its name related to its ingredients: coca (extract) and kola (nuts). An early advertisement said Coke was “…a valuable Brain Tonic, and a cure for all nervous affections–Sick Head-Ache, Neuralgia, Hysteria, Melancholy, etc. …”

Also about fiscal policy, economic growth, innovation, financial markets and world trade, these stories are from Tom Standage’s A History of the World in 6 Glasses and my own book, Econ 101 1/2.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

India...Taj Mahal_000003767794XSmall

In the Indian Cola market, Coke is #3, Pepsi is #2 and Thums Up is #1.

Thums Up?

More orangy and fizzy than Coke, Thums Up was created by local businessmen when Coke left India in 1977.  Coke exited with Pepsi because a new law mandated that they would have to give up 60% ownership to local firms. Also, Coke probably did not want to share its secret formula with a new partner.

Fast forward to the 1990s when India was more welcoming to multinationals. Hoping to re-establish market share, Coca-Cola bought Thums Up and has never been able to surpass its popularity with Coke.

Talking about India, The Economist conveys its contrasts. #4 among the 15 largest retail grocery and food markets when looking at total revenue, India is at the bottom at $324 for annual per capita food spending. (France, at $4740 is at the top.) This takes us to the challenge that a retailer like Coke has when straddling India’s 3-tiered market: the top has European and American tastes, the middle is beginning to demand worldwide brands and the bottom has minimal purchasing power.

For articles about Thums Up, FT and the economic times provide considerable information while The Economist has a lengthy description of the challenges facing retailers Procter & Gamble and Unilever in India. For the ad my source was here and my grocery and food revenue facts came from here. Also, looking at jute, econlife focuses on India’s license raj but the same ideas relate to Coca-Cola’s departure.

 

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Santa hat isolated on white

By Mira Korber, guest blogger.

Imagine Coca-Cola for a moment. Polar Bears, Santa Claus, a time when soda still came in refillable glass bottles…perhaps, for the health-conscious, high fructose corn syrup? And if you live in Singapore, you might even think of a “Hug Me” Coke vending machine.

As part of Coke’s new marketing campaign, it overnight-installed a unique vending machine at the University of Singapore. It gladly dispenses Coca-Cola — but only after the “customer” hugs the machine in a specific way does the drink pop out.  Therefore, Coke has sympathized with (and definitely capitalized on) Singaporean youth and its growing propensity towards public displays of affection, which have been traditionally repressed in Asia. Fuzzy feelings + soda = positive and pleasurable psychological association between the two…well, that’s Coke’s hope for future sales, anyway.

Engaging customers through the “Hug Me” machine is a perfect example of  Coke’s static advertising strategy morphing into interactive cultural experience. And this speaks volumes about a new marketing strategy; two fascinating videos the company produced explain a new “liquid linked” advertising plan and how consumers will largely shape how the Coca-Cola brand evolves. Traditional 30-second TV adverts are phasing out. Social collaboration with customers is moving in.

In the 1930s, the company invented the now iconic image of Santa Claus as rotund, bearded, jolly, and sporting a red and white suit. (Incidentally, he was chugging red-and-white clad soda bottles in every ad.) Now, Coke isn’t presenting its consumers with cheery content, but seeking their help, or hugs, to revamp its image.

The Bottom Line? Through unconventional marketing, such as the “Hug Me” machine or Coke “Happiness” truck and vending machines, Coca-Cola subliminally sparks positive feelings towards its product. By shifting its focus to popular culture infiltration and stimulation of “happy” feelings, Coke has linked a positive consumer reaction with its beverage.

Notes: The “Hug Me” Machine in action. How hugs are “gesture-based” marketing. A failed marketing trope. Coke’s sales are indeed up. Coke’s advertising strategy through the years – interesting.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

16636_3.16_000012166514XSmall

Composed of 6 Democrats and 6 Republicans, the congressional super committee is supposed to create a deficit reduction plan. If they do not propose the plan or if Congress does not approve their plan, then automatic cuts are triggered. The automatic cuts include policies that each party opposes.

As talks unfold, the Republicans could wind up with either:

  1. Continued tax cuts and less spending
  2. Compromise on deficit reduction
  3. Automatic cuts

Meanwhile, the Democrats could wind up with either:

  1. Continued entitlement spending and tax increases
  2. Compromise on deficit reduction
  3. Automatic cuts

#1 is best for each one but tough to achieve. #2 is the compromise. #3 is the disaster.

The Economic Lesson

Sounds like the super committee is facing the prisoners’ dilemma.

Imagine for a moment 2 prisoners who were just arrested. Interrogated by police in separate rooms, each prisoner wants to minimize jail time. The problem is that each one’s fate depends on what the other prisoner does. And, neither knows the other’s strategy.

  1. The best alternative is to confess, incriminate the other prisoner and get a suspended sentence but that works only if the other prisoner remains silent.
  2. Another alternative is to remain silent and get a brief jail term. But then both need to say nothing.
  3. Finally, if both confess, then they each receive a very long jail term.

Like the super committee, #1 is best for each one but tough to achieve. #2 is the compromise. #3 is the disaster.

An example of economic game theory, the prisoners’ dilemma involves strategizing against a second party that has the power to affect the consequences of your decisions.

Game theory has been called the economics of cooperation (or non-cooperation). Whether looking at disarmament negotiations, Pepsi and Coke or Democrats and Republicans, the basic strategic patterns are similar. John Nash won a Nobel Prize for his research about Game Theory.

Here, NPR Planet Money called the super committee negotiations a game of chicken.

An Economic Question: How might Coke’s and Pepsi’s decisions resemble the prisoners’ dilemma?

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment