Dpsg

In: Business and Management

Submitted By gthm007
Words 266
Pages 2
Strengths
• Strong Portfolio: DPSG currently has a uniquely diversified portfolio comprised of many carbonated soft drinks (CSD) and non-carbonated soft drink brands.
• Integrated Business Model: DPSG has a competitive advantage over others in the marketplace due to their integration of brand ownership, bottling, and distribution.
• Strong Customer Relationships: DPSG has long-standing relationships with many of their top customers and products are sold to a wide variety of companies including retailers, fast food chains, and convenience stores.
• Attractive Positioning within a Growing Market: DPSG currently holds the number three position title within Canada, the United States, and Mexican beverage markets. They participate in many growing categories in the liquid refreshment market, such as ready-to-drink teas.
• Broad Geographic Manufacturing and Distribution Coverage: DPSG has 21 manufacturing facilities and approximately 200 distribution centers in the United States. Company warehouses are strategically located at or near bottling plants to ensure products are made in a timely fashion to meet consumer demand. This allows them to better align their operations, including reducing transportation costs, enabling them to coordinate new product launches, and have an upper hand at the overall logistics timing.
• Strong Operating Margins with Significant Cash Flows: DPSG’s high performing product portfolio has enabled the company to have strong operating margins, which have in turn created steady cash flow and strong stockholder value.
• Experienced Executive Management Team: DPSG’s management team has extensive experience in the food and beverage industry. Their skills are the driving forces behind growth within the company through efficient marketing, alignment of manufacturing, bottling and distribution interests, and acquisitions of boutique…...

Similar Documents

Annual Report of Pepsico 2011

...Beverages Either independently or through contract manufacturers, PAB makes, markets, sells and distributes beverage concentrates, fountain syrups and finished goods, under various beverage brands including Pepsi, Gatorade, Mountain Dew, Diet Pepsi, Aquafina, 7UP (outside the U.S.), Diet Mountain Dew, Tropicana Pure Premium, Sierra Mist and Mirinda. PAB also, either independently or through contract manufacturers, makes, markets and sells ready-to-drink tea, coffee and water products through joint ventures with Unilever (under the Lipton brand name) and Starbucks. In addition, PAB licenses the Aquafina water brand to its independent bottlers. Furthermore, PAB manufactures and distributes certain brands licensed from Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. (DPSG), including Dr Pepper and Crush. PAB operates its own bottling plants and distribution facilities. PAB also sells concentrate and finished goods for our brands to authorized bottlers, and some of these branded finished goods are sold directly by us to independent distributors and retailers. We and the independent bottlers sell our brands as finished goods to independent distributors and retailers. PAB’s volume reflects sales to its independent distributors and retailers, as well as the sales of beverages bearing our trademarks that bottlers have reported as sold to independent distributors and retailers. Bottler case sales (BCS) and concentrate shipments and equivalents (CSE) are not necessarily equal during any given period due......

Words: 50347 - Pages: 202

Financial Analysis

...paying $1,375 in interest, a ratio of 4.53:1. In 2005 income was $6,690 while paying $1,818 in interest, a ratio of 3.68:1. PepsiCo, Inc. Like the Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, Inc. openly discusses their competition within their annual reports. Taking the time to read this message from any company would be very helpful to potential investors. PepsiCo, Inc. stated Our businesses operate in highly competitive markets. Our beverage, snack and food brands compete against global, regional, local and private label manufacturers and other value competitors. In many countries in which we do business, The Coca-Cola Company is our primary beverage competitor. Other food and beverage competitors include, but are not limited to Nestlé S.A., Danone, DPSG, Kellogg Company, General Mills, Inc. and Mondelez International, Inc. In many markets, we compete against numerous regional and local companies. Many of our snack and food brands hold significant leadership positions in the snack and food industry worldwide. However, The Coca-Cola Company has significant CSD share advantage in many markets outside of the United States. Vertical Analyses For PepsiCo, Inc. vertical analyses I will be looking at the 2004 and 2005 financial report. During 2004, PepsiCo, Inc. reported $8,639 worth of current assets 31% with $27,987 in total assets, 100%. In 2005 their current assets climbed to $10,454, 33% and total assets were $31,727. Horizontal Analyses When looking at PepsiCo, Inc. and their......

Words: 1999 - Pages: 8

Christian Sects

...God, p. 16., cited in Walter R. Martin, The New Cults (Santa Ana, Ca.: Vision House, 1981), p. 54. 16. DPA, p. 75; cf DPSG, p. 192 and DP, pp.211ff., cited in James Bjornstad, Sun Myung and the Unification Church, p. 29,30. (See bibliography for explanation of the above abbreviations.) 17. Doctrines and Covenants, pp. 472,473 18. Miscellaneous Writing, p. 473, cited in Anthony A. Hoekema, Christian Science, p. 42. 19. Miscellaneous Writing, p.347,361, cited in Anthony A. Hoekema, Christian Science, p. 42. 20. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Let God be True, p.32-33. 21. Jesus Christ is Not God, p. 79, cited in Walter R. Martin, The New Cults, pp. 54,55. 22. Jesus Christ is Not God, p. 30, cited in Walter R. Martin, The New Cults, p. 55. 23. Divine Principle, p. 212; cf. DPSG, pp. 129,194, cited in James Bjornstad, Sun Myung and the Unification Church, p. 30. 24. Anthony A. Hoekema, The Four Major Cults, p. 59, citing Doctrines of Salvation, I, 135. 25. No and Yes, p. 34, 23, 25, cited in Anthony A. Hoekema, Christian Science, p. 49. 26. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Let God be True, p. 38. 27. Wierwille, Jesus Christ is Not God, book jacket, p. 6, cited in Ronald M. Enroth, A Guide To Cults and New Religions, p. 185. 28. DPA, pp. 64-5; Divine Principle, p. 143; cf. DPSG, p. 133), cited in James Bjornstad, Sun Myung and the Unification Church, p. 30. 29. Divine Principle, p. 178, cited......

Words: 4800 - Pages: 20

Case Study on Dr Snapple Group Inc.

...UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA KOTA SAMARAHAN CAMPUS MKT750 MARKETING MANAGEMENT CASE STUDY DR PEPPER SNAPPLE GROUP, INC. ENERGY BEVERAGE PREPARED BY: RAMSIS ANAK WILLIAM AGIM 2012402536 Strategic Issues and Problems Being the consultant of Dr Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. (DPSG), I am charged to assess whether or not a profitable market opportunity existed for a new energy beverage brand to be produced, marketed, and distributed by the company. The decision to explore a new energy beverage was made by senior company management of DPSG as part of a corporate business strategy to focus on opportunities in (1) High Growth and (2) High Margin beverage businesses. My tasks involve a number of important factors. I must assess the likelihood that DPSG Competitive environment will be liberal or conservative in its marketing of the new energy beverage. An important consideration is DPSG role in affecting this environment, given its strong presence in the CSD market and utilizing that strength to push the new energy beverage. Ultimately I must make a “go-no go” decision. A “go” decision requires a recommendation in the form of the new energy beverage, its target market, its price, and promotion. A “no go” decision must take into consideration Dr Pepper’s profit and growth position without the new energy beverage and measures to minimize their impact. The problem facing Dr Pepper’s is how to retain its present competitive position given an environmental......

Words: 2416 - Pages: 10

Pepsico Project

...(GAAP). The auditors provide the opinion by better understanding the internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk (PepsiCo, 2012 Annual Report, p. 102). PepsiCo hired KPMG for the auditing and the auditors came to the conclusion that PepsiCo’s financial statements present the company’s financial position correctly following GAAP. PepsiCo’s most successful and known products/brands are Pepsi-Cola, Mountain Dew, 7 Up, Aquafina, Doritos, Cheetos, Gatorade, and many others. PepsiCo’s main beverage competitor is Coca-Cola Company and the main food competitors are Nestlé S.A., Danone, DPSG, Kellogg Company, General Mills, Inc. and Mondelēz International, Inc. (PepsiCo, 2012 Annual Report, p. 39). The closing price for PepsiCo on Friday, March 1, 2013 was $75.93. Developments relating to the Company PepsiCo has been a well-established company for several years. Their products are all recognized and have a relatively steady demand. They try to increase their demand by creating new products. Surprisingly, over 50% of their revenue is made from the sale of food. They continue to implement new products and try to reach a larger target market. Also, they have expanded their products globally and their market continues to expand. They now have 22 brands that each make over a billion dollars a year. In 2012 PepsiCo added......

Words: 392 - Pages: 2

Case Study - Dr Pepper

...amino acids or other nutritional ingredients. Other functional drinks include sport drinks, teas, fruit drinks and enhanced water drink. DPSG participation → In the US and Canada, Dr Pepper Snapple Group participated primarily in the flavoured carbonated soft drink (CSD) market segment Competitor: The largest non-alcoholic beverage category, after carbonated soft drinks, sport drinks, and bottled water, but the fastest growing one. DPSG participation → their major competitors include Red Bull, Monster Energy, and Coca Cola. Consumers: Average US per capita consumption of energy beverage drinkers increased by 14% since 2004. Predominantly consumed by males aged between 12- 34 during the afternoon or morning. The reasons for consumption include energy boost, mental alertness and taste. Most limit their options to 1.4 different brands which sheds light on strong brand loyalty. DPSG participation → DPSG have an attractive positioning within a large, growing, and profitable market. Channels: Distribution channels include convenience stores and supermarkets, which are the dominant off-premise retail channels for energy beverages. Industry analysts expect continued sales erosion in the convenience channel in the future. Hence, companies in this category should work to broaden their distribution channels in order to gain more exposure. DPSG participation → Broad geographic manufacturing and distribution coverage 2. Does your characterisation bode well for a new energy......

Words: 864 - Pages: 4

Pepsi Co.

...Paso de los Toros, Pasta Roni, Pepsi, Pepsi Max, Pepsi Next, Propel, Quaker, Quaker Chewy, Rice-A-Roni, Rold Gold, Rosquinhas Mabel, Ruffles, Sabritas, Sakata, Saladitas, Sandora, Santitas, 7UP (outside the United States) and 7UP Free (outside the United States), Sierra Mist, Simba, Smartfood, Smith’s, Snack a Jacks, SoBe, SoBeLifewater, SoBe V Water, Sonric’s, Stacy’s, Sting, SunChips, Tonus, Tostitos, Trop 50, Tropicana, Tropicana Farmstand, Tropicana Pure Premium, Tropicana Twister, Vesely Molochnik, Walkers and Ya. We also hold long-term licenses to use valuable trademarks in connection with our products in certain markets, including Dole and Ocean Spray. We also distribute Rockstar Energy drinks, Muscle Milk protein shakes and certain DPSG brands, including Dr Pepper, Crush and Schweppes, in certain markets. Joint ventures in which we have an ownership interest either own or have the right to use certain trademarks, such as Lipton, Müller, Sabra and Starbucks. Trademarks remain valid so long as they are used properly for identification purposes, and we emphasize correct use of our trademarks. 3.0 Foreign market expansion We are organized into four business units, as follows: 1) PepsiCo Americas Foods, which includes Frito-Lay North America (FLNA), Quaker Foods North America (QFNA) and all of our Latin American food and snack businesses (LAF); 2) PepsiCo Americas Beverages (PAB), which includes all of our North American and Latin American beverage businesses; 3)......

Words: 3662 - Pages: 15

Motivation

...comprises of people from various ethnic backgrounds, age, gender, experience and personalities. The resources that have been in the company and with the team from a long time had a little resistance to learning new things, or trying to work at a pace that the younger generation team members are used to. As a mentor, he encouraged the more tenured team members to take responsibilities of tasks and pair them with the younger employees to keep the tasks delivered. The experience and the personal rapport of the tenured employees on the team are used to help clear any roadblocks in getting the tasks accomplished coupled with the fresh and different thinking brought in by the newbie team members. The organization has a rewards program called DPSG Total Rewards program to recognize people with financial benefits for their dedication, team work and other qualities and keep them motivated. The company wide Total Rewards program was used extensively to recognize and reward people for their achievements and collaboration. Resources, who were performing consistently were given additional flexibility like option to work from home and in some cases lead and manage smaller projects to give them the feeling of leadership. This enabled the employees to get recognition in the leadership circles, resulting in promotions in rank and higher merit pay. Learning Team Personalities Analysis The team members have strong ethics and cultural values. Tina is very enthusiastic,......

Words: 1164 - Pages: 5

Pepsico Segment Reporting

...products are sold to independent distributors and retailers. PepsiCo Americas Beverages (PAB): makes, markets, distributes and sells beverage concentrates, fountain syrups and finished goods under various beverage brands including Pepsi, Gatorade, Mountain Dew, Diet Pepsi, Aquafina, 7UP (outside the United States), Diet Mountain Dew, Tropicana Pure Premium, Sierra Mist and Diet 7UP (outside the United States). PAB also, either independently or in conjunction with third parties, makes, markets and sells ready-to-drink tea and coffee products through joint ventures with Unilever (under the Lipton brand name) and Starbucks, respectively. Further, PAB manufactures and distributes certain brands licensed from Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. (DPSG), including Dr Pepper, Crush and Schweppes, and certain juice brands licensed from Dole Food Company, Inc. (Dole) and Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. (Ocean Spray). PAB operates its own bottling plants and distribution facilities and sells branded finished goods directly to independent distributors and retailers. PAB also sells concentrate and finished goods for our brands to authorized and independent bottlers, who in turn sell our branded finished goods to independent distributors and retailers in certain markets. PepsiCo Europe (Europe): makes, markets, distributes and sells a number of leading snack food brands including Lay’s, Walkers, Doritos, Cheetos and Ruffles, as well as many Quaker-branded cereals and snacks, through......

Words: 710 - Pages: 3

Snapple Case

...pg. 88 “posted total retail ….. Gatorade” pg. 89 “…. decide upon a product line.” pg. 90 “…. distribution system supplied both off-premise and on-premise retailers.” 1. How would you characterize the energy beverage category, competitors, consumers, channels, and DPSGs category participation in 2007? * Energy Beverage Numbers 2006 * retail sales * $6.2 Billion * retail product sold * 153 Million cases * past growth * 2001 – 2006: average annual rate of 42.5% * future growth * 2007 – 2011: average annual rate of 10.2% * decrease rate due to * maturity of market * increase competition * hybrid products * price erosion * 2001 – 2006: 30% decline * decrease in price due to * larger packaging sizes that have lower price per ounce * introduction of multi-packs * increased availability in mass merchandisers * Manufacturers with a broad product line and extensive distribution have greatest chance of gaining shelf space with high turnover rates * Competitors * Five dominate with 94% of sales and volume in US market * Red Bull North America * pioneer when it was introduced to the US in 1997 * leader in dollar sales and unit volume * dollar market share * 2000 – 82% * 2006 – 43% * US media expenditures * 2006 – $39.6 million * 2007 – $60.9 million * Hansen Natural Corporation * Monster Energy released in 2002 * distributors aided with......

Words: 747 - Pages: 3

Dr.Pepper Snapple Group Case Study

...What would be the RSP and within which margins can it operate to remain profitable? Before answering these questions, it is important to highlight some of the external challenges that would face the company were they to go ahead and introduce a new energy drink. Firstly, there has been significant price erosion within the energy drink market, with energy drink prices declining by 30% between the years 2001 and 2006. This has been attributed to larger package sizes, the introduction of multi-packs, and the increasing availability in supermarkets, which operate with lower retail gross margins. Secondly, the market has also experienced product proliferation due to line extensions, new packaging and sizes, and market segmentation. Thirdly, DPSG needs to be aware of the changing attitudes of the consumer. The consumer is becoming more and more health conscious and while energy drinks are not perceived as unhealthy as other soft drinks, there are certainly healthier options becoming more readily available and so the brand positioning will need to be carefully thought out to combat this. Having looked at the overall challenges faced with entering the energy drinks market, there are also opportunities. The energy drinks category may only be the fourth largest non-alcoholic drinks category but it is the fastest growing. Between 2001 and 2006, total energy drink retail sales grew at an average rate of 42.5%, reaching a total value of $6.2 billion in 2006. Situational......

Words: 2686 - Pages: 11

Pepsico or Coke for a Solid Investment

...food and snack businesses in North America and Latin America. PepsiCo Americas Beverages, which includes all of their North American and Latin American beverage businesses. PepsiCo Europe. PepsiCo Asia, Middle East and Africa. PepsiCo’s main competitors in the non-alcoholic beverage industry are the Coca-Cola Company and Dr. Pepper Snapple Group Inc, their main competitor and long time rival is Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola has the larger market share of carbonated soda drinks, however; PepsiCo holds strong with its larger market share in liquid refreshment beverages like Gatorade and Tropicana. PepsiCo also has a leadership position in the snack industry world wide, against other food and beverage competitors such as: ConAgra Foods, Inc., DPSG, Kellogg Company, Kraft Foods Group, Inc., International, Inc., Monster Beverage Corporation, Nestlé S.A., Red Bull GmbH and Snyder’s-Lance, Inc. They also receive competition from regional and local companies in many markets. Although Coke has remained victorious as the world’s number one cola of choice it does not mean it is the overall more successful corporation. “Since the start of 2006, Pepsico and Coca-Cola are almost identical in overall market capitalization. But ask analysts to nominate which is in the best place for the future and most will choose PepsiCo. While Coke’s share price has fallen by a third in the past five years, PepsiCo has risen the same amount.”(Ritson, 2006) PepsiCo Inc. operates in an oligopoly market......

Words: 1576 - Pages: 7

Dr. Pepper Snapple Group

...Functional Drinks -> Drinks boost consumers energy, non-alcoholic drinks. o Other Functional Drinks: Teas, enhanced water drink, fruit and sports drinks, o Ingredients: vitamins, herbs, minerals, amino acids. ϖ DPSG -> Dr. Pepper Snapple Group participated in the CSD flavored carbonated soft drink US and Canada market segment. - Competitor: o Second Largest non-alcoholic drink category. First largest beverage: carbonated soft drinks, sport drinks, and bottled water. o Fastest growing non-alcoholic industry. ϖ DPSG -> Competitors: Red Bull, Monster Energy, and Coca Cola. - Consumers: o Boosts consumers energy and good taste. o Consumed by males 12-34 years old during the morning and the afternoon. o According to the US per capita, energy drinks consumers increased 14% since 2004. o Average US per capita consumption of energy beverage drinkers increased by 14% since 2004. ϖ DPSG -> engaging position in the profitable, large, expanding market. - Channels: convenience stores and supermarkets. o Dominant retail channels to sell energy beverages. DPSG -> Broad distribution coverage and manufacture of the product. 2. Does your characterization bode well for a new energy beverage introduction generally and for Dr. Pepper Snapple Group in particular? DPSG will need to invest a lot of money, creativity and money in their new product because they will need to compete with other brands. Red Bull, Hansen Natural Corporation, Pepsi-Cola, Rockstar and......

Words: 576 - Pages: 3

Gsřmr

...011))* @KIiXHZLS3 CSLgUH I(Y ULIV */ >I(Y H F7C= Y X_JOSVYZj Hc +. >I(Y’ FjJ ‘QPYZjZL UH ]]]’\VKHMVUL’J‘(HKYS ?fDAIE OND JNMRPNKNS 5PYRE QT] TfDAIE VJP[RJA$ :[LE OPN T[Q GMED DTA XHJNTM] M[QRPNIE" Q MHLHY LdYERE e\RU IEDMNDSXE GK_DAR$ 8SL^P=PTPZ \fY [WV‘VXUj UH WXV\VSfUj gfYZR_% RZLXV[ YP WlLKLT UHYZH\jZL \ :UZLXULZV\h YHTVVIYS[‘L’ 4 RK_c I[KLZL JOZjZ% TmcLZL YP OV RK_RVSP ‘TiUPZ% ULIV ‘X[aPZ’ 8SL^PCZXVW YL \fT ‘HYL WVYZHXf V ZV% cL ULWXV\VSfZL \jJ% ULc QL \fT TPSh’ AV QLOV KVYHcLUj YL \fT VKJOV‘j \VSfUj ‘HISVR[QL Hc KV RVUJL ngZV\HJjOV VIKVIj’ 8SL^P=PTPZ P 8SL^PCZXVW YP TmcLZL UHYZH\PZ% ‘TiUPZ ULIV ‘X[aPZ UH YHTVVIYS[OH’\VKHMVUL’J‘’ 8DE MAIDERE QKNYEMJS1 AVR[K QYZL ‘\_RSj WSHZPZ WVaZV\Uj WV[Rf‘RV[% OcHOPATHKH IQLE IH OPN T[Q MA DPSG]L KHQRS ?Ue\RNT[M_ ’ CZHgj QP QLU VKZXOUV[Z H YZH\PZ YL UH WVaZi’ eOXHK[ F_ngZV\fUj YHTV‘lLQTi S‘L WXV\hYZ P QPUoTP ‘WmYVI_3 3AMJNTM_L OcETNDEL #KSL WSHZLIUjJO nKHQm [\LKLUoJO \L F_ngZV\fUj$% ;PNQRcEDMHCRT_L QKSYBU : W;KARBU MEBN :#3AMJA #YZHgj TjZ C:> WS[Y RHXZ[$% ;KARBNS OcEQ BAMJNLAR #V‘UHgLUoT SVNLT FVKHMVUL$% ?JKADEL T GNRNTNQRH MA e\ER T C KV QPUoJO YjZj 4EKJEL VA =:= QKSYBU 4EKJEL VA =:= 4EKJEL VA QKSYBU ?NDAFNME ;N\ER =:= +1 0 2* ’(, @[JKADM_ QAVBA *1%0. 1%0. *12%.1 (’-"&. ?U\EPOAM] TNKM] =:= =KETA =AVBA 5;6 +) " +) " +) " 8\ BEV 5;6 *1%0. 1%0. *12%.1 (’-"&. (’-"&. (+("+, ;KARBU RcER_L QRPAM[L ;KARBU RcER_L QRPAM[L ;NSY_T[M_ QKSYEB 4E 2))+)22 C>C WSHZIH & Xm‘Uh 4EKJEL VA ;KARBU RcER_L QRPAM[L 4EKJEL VA ;KARBU RcER_L QRPAM[L......

Words: 1020 - Pages: 5

Content & Seo

...other current liabilities | 520  | 488  | (133) | 718  | 522  | | Change in income taxes payable | (340) | 123  | 319  | (180) | 128  | | Change in operating capital | (844) | 763  | 264  | (424) | 25  | | Other, net | (688) | (132) | (281) | (391) | (221) | | Net cash provided by operating activities | 8,944  | 8,448  | 6,796  | 6,999  | 6,934  | | Capital spending | (3,339) | (3,253) | (2,128) | (2,446) | (2,430) | | Sales of property, plant and equipment | 84  | 81  | 58  | 98  | 47  | | (Investment in) proceeds from finance assets | – | – | – | – | 27  | | Acquisitions of PBG and PAS, net of cash and cash equivalents acquired | – | (2,833) | – | – | – | | Acquisition of manufacturing and distribution rights from DPSG | – | (900) | – | – | – | | Acquisition of WBD, net of cash and cash equivalents acquired | (2,428) | – | – | – | – | | Investment in WBD | (164) | (463) | – | – | – | | Other acquisitions and investments in noncontrolled affiliates | (601) | (83) | (500) | (1,925) | (1,320) | | Divestitures | 780  | 12  | 99  | 6  | – | | Cash restricted for pending acquisitions | – | – | 15  | (40) | – | | Cash proceeds from sale of PBG and PAS stock | – | – | – | 358  | 315  | | Short-term investments, more than three months, purchases | – | (12) | (29) | (156) | (83) | | Short-term investments, more than three months, maturities | 21  | 29  | 71  | 62  | 113  | | Short-term investments, three months or less, net |......

Words: 2643 - Pages: 11