EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PepsiCo is one of the worlds most familiar consumer food and beverage companies, offering brands like Frito-Lay, Gatorade, Tropicana and Quaker. After taking over as PepsiCo chief executive in 2006, Indra Nooyi rather than following her predecessors into battle against Coke, has sought to redefine the playing field in a way that allows PepsiCo to win. Consumption of carbonated soft drinks in the US has been in steady decline over the past decade, in part because of the profusion of alternative beverages available in the market, from still water to sports drinks, and in part out of health concerns in a nation with an obesity problem. Rather than buck this broad trend, Ms Nooyi has sought to change PepsiCos focus away from carbonated soft drinks and towards juices, teas and sports drinks. The company is also placing a large bet on developing a line of healthy foods through its Quaker Oats division. PepsiCo is currently focused on better-for-you snacks and drinks, says Caroline Levy, an analyst at CLSA. To that end, Ms Nooyi has hired several well-known nutritionists to direct the companys efforts at reducing the fat and sodium in its foods, and the sugar in its drinks. While PepsiCo took its focus away from the carbonated drinks segment and moved into non-carbonated drinks segment, Muhtar Kent, Coca-Cola chief executive, has did not change his position. Mr Kent has maintained his companys focus on selling soft drinks in the US and around the world and is holding his companys position as the Worlds number 1 soft drink company. Indeed, looking at all carbonated soft drinks, Coke brands commanded 41.9% of the total market last year compared to PepsiCos 29.9%. After looking at the changing markets and changing strategies of PepsiCo, we have conducted applied research for PepsiCo India to support their decision regarding entering into non-carbonated drinks segment. Hence we studied PepsiCos consumers and their changing preferences and have tried to understand the importance of the changing strategy of PepsiCo. The above-mentioned objectives were achieved by carrying a proper and planned research involving different types and methods. The data collected laid the foundations for the study and gave a platform for the analysis and findings which lead to the fulfilment of the objectives. The data collected for research is primary and secondary. Primary data is collected by observation, interviews and questionnaires. While secondary data is collected from the internet through different case studies and PepsiCo companys internal reports. Observation method was carried across Delhi to know the market position and market share of PepsiCo products. Interviews of people from the sales and marketing department were conducted to know the sales and distribution network and marketing policies of PepsiCo India, while questionnaire method was used to know about the customer behaviour and preferences. The data collection and analysis paves way for the recommendation and conclusion of the study that reveals some important findings regarding the strategy and corporate structure and strategy of PepsiCo India.

OBJECTIVE OF STUDY
The objective of the research is to validate if the consumer is actually moving towards the healthier beverages. And hence understand how crucial is the changing marketing strategy of PepsiCo is regarding focusing away from carbonated soft drinks and towards juices, teas and sports drinks.

INTRODUCTION
PepsiCo was founded by Caleb Bradham in 1902 in USA .It entered India in 1989 and in the span of a little more than a decade it became the country's largest selling soft drinks company. Today PepsiCo and its affiliates operate in more than 140 countries in the world and generate revenues in excess of $ 40 Billion. In its pursuit of never ending growth and expansion, PepsiCo entered India in 1989 in a joint venture with Punjab Government. However, PepsiCo India very soon started its beverage operations in collaboration with the R K Jaipuria group. The Company has invested heavily in India making it one of the largest multinational investors. The group has built an expansive beverage, snack food and exports business and to support the operations are the group's 43 bottling plants in India, of which 15 are company owned and 28 are franchisee owned. PepsiCo stays committed to providing its consumers with top quality beverages. Its diverse portfolio of brands include the flagship cola brand - Pepsi; Diet Pepsi; 7Up; Mirinda; Mountain Dew; Slice fruit drink; Tropicana brand 100% fruit juices in various flavours; Aquafina packaged drinking water; Gatorade plus local brands Lehar Evervess Soda, Dukes Lemonade and Mangola. PepsiCo is also a dominant player in the snack food segment in India. PepsiCo's snack food company Frito-Lay is the leader in the branded potato chip market. It manufactures Lay's Potato Chips; Cheetos extruded snacks, Uncle Chips; traditional namkeen snacks under the Kurkure and Lehar brands; and Quaker Oats.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Cola Wars Continue: Coke and Pepsi in the 21st Century Harvard Business School (David B Yoffie)[5] The Cola Wars In 1950, Alfred Steele, a former Coca-Cola marketing executive, became Pepsis CEO. Steele made Beat Coke his theme and encouraged bottlers to focus on take-home sales through supermarkets. The company introduced the first 26-ounce bottles to the market, targeting family consumption, while Coke stayed with its 6.5-ounce bottle. Pepsis growth soon began tracking the growth of supermarkets and convenience stores in the United States: There were about 10,000 supermarkets in 1945, 15,000 in 1955, and 32,000 at the peak in 1962. In 1963, under the leadership of new CEO Donald Kendall, Pepsi launched its Pepsi Generation campaign that targeted the young and young at heart. Pepsis ad agency created an intense commercial using sports car, motorcycles, helicopters, and a catchy slogan. The campaign helped Pepsi narrow Cokes lead to a 2-to-1 margin. At the same time, Pepsi worked with its bottlers to modernize

plants and improve store delivery services. By 1970, Pepsis franchise bottlers were generally larger compared to Coke bottlers. Cokes bottling network remained fragmented, with more than 800 independent franchised bottlers that focused mostly on U.S. cities of 50,000 or less. Throughout this period, Pepsi sold concentrate to its bottlers at a price approximately 20% lower than Coke. In the early 1970s, Pepsi increased the concentrate price to equal that of Coke. To overcome bottlers opposition, Pepsi promised to use the extra margin to increase advertising and promotion. Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola began to experiment with new cola and non-cola flavors and a variety of packaging options in the 1960s. Before then, the two companies had adopted a single product strategy, selling only their flagship brand. Coke introduced Fanta (1960), Sprite (1961), and lowcalorie Tab (1963). Pepsi countered with Teem (1960), Mountain Dew (1964), and Diet Pepsi (1964). Each introduced nonreturnable glass bottles and 12-ounce metal cans in various packages. Coke and Pepsi also diversified into non-soft-drink industries. Coke purchased Minute Maid (fruit juice), Duncan Foods (coffee, tea, hot chocolate), and Belmont Springs Water. Pepsi merged with snackfood giant Frito-Lay in 1965 to become PepsiCo, claiming synergies based on shared customer targets, store-door delivery systems, and marketing orientations. In the late 1950s, Coca-Cola, still under Robert Woodruffs leadership, began using advertising that finally recognized the existence of competitors, such as Americans Preferred Taste (1955) and No Wonder Coke Refreshes Best (1960). In meetings with Coca-Cola bottlers, however, executives only discussed the growth of their own brand and never referred to its closest competitor by name. During the 1960s, Coke primarily focused on overseas markets, apparently believing that domestic soft drink consumption had neared saturation at 22.7 gallons per capita in 1970.14 Pepsi meanwhile battled aggressively in the United States, doubling its share between 1950 and 1970. The Pepsi Challenge In 1974, Pepsi launched the Pepsi Challenge in Dallas, Texas. Coke was the dominant brand in the city and Pepsi ran a distant third behind Dr Pepper. In blind taste tests hosted by Pepsis small local bottler, the company tried to demonstrate that consumers in fact preferred Pepsi to Coke. After its sales shot up in Dallas, Pepsi started to roll out the campaign nationwide, although many of its franchise bottlers were initially reluctant to join. Coke countered with rebates, rival claims, retail price cuts, and a series of advertisements questioning the tests validity. In particular, Coke used retail price discounts selectively in markets where the Coke bottler was company owned and the Pepsi bottler was an independent franchisee. Nonetheless, the Pepsi Challenge successfully eroded Cokes market share. In 1979, Pepsi passed Coke in food store sales for the first time with a 1.4 share point lead. Breaking precedent, Brian Dyson, president of Coca-Cola, inadvertently uttered the name Pepsi in front of Cokes bottlers at the 1979 bottlers conference. During the same period, Coke was renegotiating its franchise bottling contract to obtain greater flexibility in pricing concentrate and syrups. Bottlers approved the new contract in 1978 only after Coke conceded to link concentrate price changes to the CPI, adjust the price to reflect any cost savings associated with a modification of ingredients, and supply unsweetened concentrate to bottlers who preferred to purchase their own sweetener on the open market. This brought Cokes policies in line with Pepsi, which traditionally sold its concentrate unsweetened to its bottlers. Immediately after securing bottler approval, Coke announced a significant concentrate price hike. Pepsi followed with a 15% price increase of its own.

Cola Wars Heat Up In 1980, Cuban-born Roberto Goizueta was named CEO and Don Keough president of Coca-Cola. In the same year, Coke switched from sugar to the lower-priced high fructose corn syrup, a move Pepsi emulated three years later. Coke also intensified its marketing effort, increasing advertising spending from $74 million to $181 million between 1981 and 1984. Pepsi elevated its advertising expenditure from $66 million to $125 million over the same period. Goizueta sold off most of the non-CSD businesses he had inherited, including wine, coffee, tea, and industrial water treatment, while keeping Minute Maid. Diet Coke was introduced in 1982 as the first extension of the Coke brand name. Much of CocaCola management referred to its brand as Mother Coke, and considered it too sacred to be extended to other products. Despite internal opposition from company lawyers over copyright issues, Diet Coke was a phenomenal success. Praised as the most successful consumer product launch of the Eighties, it became within a few years not only the nations most popular diet soft drink, but also the third-largest selling soft drink in the United States. In April 1985, Coke announced the change of its 99-year-old Coca-Cola formula. Explaining this radical break with tradition, Goizueta saw a sharp depreciation in the value of the Coca-Cola trademark as the product had a declining share in a shrinking segment of the market.16 On the day of Cokes announcement, Pepsi declared a holiday for its employees, claiming that the new Coke tasted more like Pepsi. The reformulation prompted an outcry from Cokes most loyal customers. Bottlers joined the clamor. Three months later, the company brought back the original formula under the name Coca-Cola Classic, while retaining the new formula as the flagship brand under the name New Coke. Six months later, Coke announced that Coca-Cola Classic (the original formula) would henceforth be considered its flagship brand. New CSD brands proliferated in the 1980s. Coke introduced 11 new products, including Cherry Coke, Caffeine-Free Coke, and Minute-Maid Orange. Pepsi introduced 13 products, including Caffeine-Free Pepsi-Cola, Lemon-Lime Slice, and Cherry Pepsi. The number of packaging types and sizes also increased dramatically, and the battle for shelf space in supermarkets and other food stores grew fierce. By the late 1980s, both Coke and Pepsi offered more than ten major brands, using at least seventeen containers and numerous packaging options.17 The struggle for market share intensified and the level of retail price discounting increased sharply. Consumers were constantly exposed to cents-off promotions and a host of other supermarket discounts. Throughout the 1980s, the smaller concentrate producers were increasingly squeezed by Coke and Pepsi. As their shelf-space declined, small brands were shuffled from one owner to another. Over five years, Dr Pepper was sold (all and in part) several times, Canada Dry twice, Sunkist once, Shasta once, and A&W Brands once. Some of the deals were made by food companies, but several were leveraged buyouts by investment firms. Philip Morris acquired Seven-Up in 1978 for a big premium, but despite superior brand rankings and established distribution channels, racked up huge losses in the early 1980s and exited in 1985. In the 1990s, through a series of strategic acquisitions, Cadbury Schweppes emerged as the clear (albeit distant) third-largest concentrate producer, snapping up the Dr Pepper/Seven-Up Companies (1995) and Snapple Beverage Group (2000). (Appendix A describes Cadbury Schweppes operations and financial performance.)

The Rise of Non-Cola Beverages As consumer trends shifted from diet soda, to lemon-lime, to tea-based drinks, to other popular noncarbs, Coke and Pepsi vigorously expanded their brand portfolios. Each new product was accompanied by debate on how much each company should stray from its core product: regular cola. On one hand, cola sales consistently dwarfed alternative beverages sales, and cola-defenders expressed concern that over-enthusiastic expansion would distract the company from its flagship product. Also, history had shown that explosions in demand for alternative drinks were regularly followed by slow or negative growth. On the other hand, as domestic cola demand appeared to plateau, alternative beverages could provide a growth engine for the firms. By the late 1990s, the soft drink industry had seen various alternative beverage categories come and go. From double-digit expansion in the late 1980s, diet CSDs peaked in 1991 at 29.8% of the CSD segment and then declined to their 1988-level share of 24.4% in 1999. PepsiCos introduction of Pepsi One in late 1998 was partially responsible for the minor recovery of the diet drink segment. Flavored soft drinks such as citrus, lemon-lime, pepper, and root beer were also popular. In 1999, Mountain Dew grew faster than any other CSD brand for the third year in a row, posting 6.0% volume growth, but in 2000, its growth slowed to 1.5% due to competing new-age non-carbs. At the turn of this century, CSDs accounted for 41.3% of total non-alcoholic beverage consumption, bottled water accounted for 10.3%, and other non-carbs accounted for the remainder.25 When measured in gallons, sales of non-carbs rose by 18% in 1995 and 5% in 2000, compared to 3% and 0.2% respectively for CSDs. The drinks with high growth and high hype were non-carbs such as juices/juice drinks, sports drinks, tea-based drinks, dairy-based drinksand especially bottled water. In the 1990s, the bottled water industry grew on average 8.3% per year, and volume reached more than 5 billion gallons in 2000. Revenue growth outpaced volume growth, with a 9.3% increase to approximately $5.6 billion, and per capita consumption gained 5.1 gallons to 13.2 gallons per person. Pepsis Aquafina went national in 1998. Coke followed in 1999 with Dasani. Though Pepsi and Coke sold reverse-osmosis purified water instead of spring water, they had a distribution advantage over competing water brands. Coke and Pepsi launched other new drinks throughout the 1990s. They also aggressively acquired brands that rounded out their portfolios, including Tropicana (Pepsi, 1998), Gatorade (Pepsi, 2000), and SoBe (Pepsi, 2000). Both companies predicted that future increases in market share would come from beverages other than CSDs. Pepsi pronounced itself a total beverage company, and Coca-Cola appeared to be moving in the same direction, recasting its performance metric from share of the soda market to share of stomach. If Americans want to drink tap water, we want it to be Pepsi tap water, said Pepsis vice-president for new business, describing the philosophy behind the new strategy. Cokes Goizueta had echoed the same view: Sometimes I think we even compete with soup. Though cola remained the clear leader in terms of both companies volume sales, both Coke and Pepsi relied heavily on non-carbs to stimulate their overall growth in the late 1990s. In 1999, non-carbs accounted for 80% of Pepsis and more than 100% of Cokes growth.

At the turn of the century, Pepsi had the lions share of non-CSD sales. Pepsi led Coke by a wide margin in 2000 volume sales in three key segments: Gatorade (76%) led PowerAde (15%) in the $2.6-billion sports drinks segment, Lipton (38%) led Nestea (27%) in the $3.5-billion tea-based drinks segment, and Aquafina (13%) led Dasani (8%) in the $6.0-billion bottled water segment.30 Including multi-serve juices, Tropicana held an approximate 44% share of the $3-billion chilled orange juice market, more than

twice that of Minute Maid.31 With the acquisition of Quaker and South Beach Beverages, Pepsi raised its non-carb market share to 31%, to Cokes 19%. Non-CSD beverages complicated Cokes and Pepsis traditional production and distribution processes. While bottlers could easily manage some types of alternative beverages (e.g., cold-filled Lipton Brisk), other types required costly new equipment and changes in production, warehousing, and distribution practices (e.g., hot-filled Lipton Iced Tea). In many cases, Coke and Pepsi paid more than half the cost of these investments. The few bottlers that invested in these capabilities either purchased concentrate or other additives from Coke and Pepsi (e.g., Dasanis mineral packet) or compensated the franchiser through per-unit royalty fees (e.g., Aquafina). Most bottlers, however, did not invest in hot-fill (for some iced tea), reverse-osmosis (for some bottled water), or other specialized equipment, and instead bought their finished product from a central regional plant or one owned directly by Coca-Cola or PepsiCo. They would then distribute these alongside their own bottled products at a percentage mark-up. More split pallets led to slightly higher labor costs, but otherwise did not significantly affect distribution practices. Despite these complicated and evolving arrangements, higher retail prices for alternative beverages meant that margins for the franchiser, bottler, and distributor were consistently higher than on CSDs.

MARKET ANALYSIS
COKE vs PEPSI: In India Capturing the market is the main issue facing any company and when it comes to Beverage market, it becomes more intense because there are just two players and they are fighting strongly to capture each others market and don't have any other option. As per last year Coke is currently enjoying the market share of 41% against Pepsi at 29.1%. Pepsi might lag behind in terms of market share but they are positioning themselves way ahead of the Coke to capture future markets and they are moving right ahead of the Coke who still believes in their Signature drinks portfolio. Both Coke and Pepsi are trying to gain market share in this beverage market, which is valued at over $130 billion a year. Just how this is done in such a competitive market is the underlying issue. Currently the Coke is enjoying the market share of 41% compared to Pepsi which is 29.1% last year.

The facts are that each company is coming up with new products and ideas in order to increase their market share. Pepsi has always taken the lead in developing new products, but Coke soon learned their lesson and started to do the same. As per the latest survey conducted we found out that Pepsi has done a great job in sensing the market way ahead of the Coke where they are still focusing on their signature drinks (Coke, Diet Coke, Fanta and Miranda).

We have conducted a market research for 150 people by sharing the online forms for their feedback regarding the likes and dislikes for beverages (Cola Drinks VS Fruit Juices, health and Sports drinks) Major highlights of the survey are as follows: We have taken the feedback from 150 people and find out that major active members were students contributing to 68% of the response, second one were Salaried people that contributes to 25% and rest others. As per the research conducted we found that fruit juices ( Tropicana, Real) are just 1% behind the regular beverage market. Percentage Split among them are as follows. o Carbonated Drinks: 45% o Fruit Juices ( Tropicana, Real, Minute Made): 44% This indicates that the young generation prefers healthier drinks over carbonated drinks and this indicates that sooner or later the market is going to decline for carbonated drinks and people will become more health conscious and expect more and more innovation from the beverage industries to satisfy their needs.

The creativity and effectiveness of each company's marketing strategy will ultimately determine the winner with respect to sales, profits, and customer loyalty. These two companies are constructing new ways to sell Coke and Pepsi, but they are also thinking of ways in which to increase market share in other beverage categories. Although the goal of both companies is exactly the same, the two companies rely on somewhat different marketing strategies. Pepsi has always taken more risks, acted rapidly, and was always developing new advertising ideas. Both companies have also relied on finding new markets, especially in foreign countries. In the foreign markets, Coke has been more successful than Pepsi. For example, in Eastern Europe, Pepsi has relied on a barter system that proved to fail. However, in certain countries that allow direct comparison, Pepsi has beat Coke. In foreign markets, both companies have followed the marketing concept by offering products that meet consumer needs in order to gain market share. For instance, in certain countries, consumers wanted a soft drink that was low in sugar, yet did not have a diet taste or image. Pepsi responded by developing Pepsi Max. The next step is to take fast action to develop a product that meets the requirements for that particular region. Both companies cannot just sell one product; if they do they will not succeed. They have to always be creating and updating their marketing plans and products. Gaining market share occurs when a company stays one-step ahead of the competition by knowing what the consumer wants. My recommendation is to make sure the company is always doing market research. This way they are able to get as much feedback as possible from consumers. Next, analyze this data as fast as possible, and then develop the new product based upon this data and get into the marketplace quickly.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
a) Problem Statement Formulation We formulated the problem statement by doing the following: - Talking to general consumers to understand their awareness levels, preferences and usage level in carbonated and non carbonated drinks. - Talking to retailers in general to understand the markets of Pepsi and Coca-Cola. b) Research Objectives Are consumers actually moving towards healthier beverages or is it just a fad? c) Exploratory Research Exploratory research provides insights into and comprehension of an issue or situation. It should draw definitive conclusions only with extreme caution. Exploratory research is a type of research conducted because a problem has not been clearly defined. Exploratory research helps determine the best research design, data collection method and selection of subjects. Given its fundamental nature, exploratory research often concludes that a perceived problem does not actually exist. The results of exploratory research are not usually useful for decision-making by themselves, but they can provide significant insight into a given situation. Although the results of qualitative research can give some indication as to the "why", "how" and "when" something occurs, it cannot tell us "how often" or "how many."Our study includes a general understanding of beverage industry by reading through the latest published articles, general market survey and Focused Group Discussions and Experiential Group Discussions. The interviewees are asked open ended questions. Through their responses we analysed the various factors that influence their preferences on selecting a beverage. 1. Secondary Data : -Website of the company. -Online consumer forums. -Communities of coffee lovers and youth. -Newspapers and magazines. 2. Focus Group Discussions: We conducted two focus group discussions amongst 5 students across Delhi. 3. Experiential Group Discussions: We visited the company PepsiCo in Delhi and talked to Area Sales Managers at PepsiCo India. 4. In-Depth Interviews: We took in-depth of 5 retailers (in Katwaria Sarai, South Delhi) who are stocking the products of Pepsi and Coca-Cola.

5. Pilot Studies: We did a brief Literature review to understand the consumer behavior, the differentiating factors among the players which helped us in formulating the questionnaire.

d) In-depth Interviews PepsiCo India talked about how Pepsi was now moving on from just being a cola company to a new motto of quenching the thirst.

Pesticide Episode The 2003 pesticide incident was a turning point for Pepsis India strategy, sales fell by double digits. Since then Pepsi has been trying to improve its image as a responsible company. CSD
In India cola consumption is around 8-20 bottles per capita (per year) this is low compared to other developing countries like Mexico with 700-800 bottle capita (per year). Colas contribute 45% of the revenue of PepsiCo in India. Mountain Dew has become a huge success with sales surpassing those of Pepsi due to a very effective advertising and positioning .

Tropicana Tropicana has 35 SKUs and comes in 2 varieties: 100% Juices (sold as Tropicana 100%) and Juice beverages & nectars (sold as Tropicana). Tropicana is a market leader in its segment with 56% of the market share. Its market is growing at around 15% annually. Pepsi Max Although market research indicated that consumers would welcome the no sugar drink, however, even after a 2 crore advertising budget sales have not been assuring. My Pyramid

Coconut Water

Gatorade

Juice Water

Within Pepsi the above figure is known as My Pyramid. It describes the stages of thirst. It shows beverages in increasing order of nutrients.

Future Plans
In the near future Pepsi plans to introduce drinks such as coconut water. In addition to the Indian market, employees at PepsiCo India are also looking at opportunities in Africa. One of the countries that are being studied is Mozambique.

DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH
1. Sample Decisions
a. Whom did we Surveying? Our study of consumer opinions is concentrated on youngsters and young urban professionals. These people come within the age brackets of 19 and 30, which is the main consumer segment. Apart from them, we are also looking at some respondents from the 30-60 and below 18 age bands. This is because a part of our research would be to find out whether can expand its target market to this age group as well. b. How Many People Were Surveyed? We took a sample size of 152 respondents. This included people from the segments mentioned above. We divided these samples among the youth accessible to us, teenagers across Delhi and NCR and professionals and older people. c. How We Chose Our Respondents? Samples will be chosen according to a combination of sampling procedures: a) Cluster Sampling can be by breaking the regions into different sub regions and then identifying the potential outlets.We conducted the survey in the following regions of Delhi: Sarojini nagar, lajpat nagar, Saket, Indirpuram, Rohini, GKI and Connaught place. b) Convenience sample is one of the methods we will be using, as a part of our respondents are easily accessible to us.

2. Questionnaire Finalization The study was done on the basis of:

demographic and socioeconomic characteristics psychological and lifestyle characteristics attitudes and opinions awareness and knowledge - brand awareness Intentions - purchase intentions. While useful, intentions are not a reliable indication of actual future behaviour. Motivation - a person's motives are more stable than his/her behaviour, so motive is a better predictor of future behaviour than is past behaviour. Consumer behaviour.

3. Methods of Data Collection When conducting any type of research, data collection inevitably becomes the main phase. Data collection refers to gathering opinions and views of sample respondents in order to get a structured view of what consumers think. To further our objective, we have chosen the following methods of data collection: 1. Personal Interview- This used to garner subjective information from respondents, which is not possible with close-ended questionnaires. Also, questions with options like others can be answered effectively with personal interviews. 2. Written Questionnaire- We used a structured questionnaire with closed and open ended questions and get a section of respondents to answer these questions. 3. E-mail Questionnaire- We sent questionnaires by e-mail also. These was answered by respondents at leisure and without inhibitions. It gave us a wider spectrum of consumers to consider.

4. Fieldwork: Other than online survey, we went across different regions in Delhi to do consumer interview and get the consumer questionnaire filled.

Analysis
Customer opinion and views are important in shaping a companys business plans and working on areas to further improve its services. The questionnaire which was developed to get responses for the study has been attached in APPENDIX. According to the questionnaire prepared data has been analysed under the following heads: 1. Age and Occupation We basically divided the age group into 5 categories and from the data we can see that a major portion of the respondents are from the age group 19-25 years of about 64%.

Regarding the profession profile of the various respondent a mixed profile were taken grouped into 4 categories and from the data we see that students forms the maximum portion.

2. Most preferred drink Respondents were asked to mark their most preferred drink amongst carbonated drinks, fruit juices, Nimbu pani and sports drink. And it was seen that 45% prefer carbonated drinks over other.

3. Frequency of purchase and consumption Frequency of purchase and consumption helped us understand the scope of non-carbonated drinks market vis a vis carbonated drinks. We found out that 53% consumers are consuming carbonated drinks. And 26% purchase carbonated drinks almost every day and 29% purchase carbonated drinks more than once in a week. Although 20% purchase non-carbonated drinks almost every day and 33% purchase noncarbonated drinks more than once in a week. This shows that although the carbonated drinks market is doing well but even the non carbonated drinks market is picking up.

4. Brand awareness Although Tropicana as a PepsiCo brand and minute maid as a coca-cola brand is well recognized in the market , still the consumers are not very much brand aware.

5. Factors influencing the consumer purchase Although factors like peer influence did not play a very crucial role in soft drink purchase, factors like taste, availability and health are looked as important factors by the consumer while making the purchase. Although consumers are not much brand aware but it is noted that while making the purchase, they have the brand factor in their mind. This shows that consumers can be influenced by portraying the brand as a healthy and reliable brand by means of right advertising. Also the findings shows that consumers rate health factor of high importance while making a purchase, which shows that consumers have become more health conscious. Availability is another crucial factor of purchase for the consumer. Hence for PepsiCo to be selling more, it has to make itself available across different markets. 5= Most Important, 1=Least Important

6. Healthy factor awareness of the consumers Most of the consumers agreed that carbonated drinks are bad for health and have also reduced their consumption as compared to last year.

CONCLUSIONS
Our research has two important findings: 1. Customers do give an importance to the brand while selecting a beverage. However, they are not aware of the fact that brands such as Gatorade and Tropicana are brands of PepsiCo. PepsiCo should try and communicate this through advertising. 2. Although the per capita consumption of carbonated soft drinks is still rising, urban consumers are slowly moving towards healthier beverages.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. http://www.pepsico.com/Company/Our-History.html 2. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d8c08404-f0de-11df-bf4b00144feab49a.html?ftcamp=rss#axzz15qtHn01B 3. http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report_coca-cola-focuses-on-non-carbonated-drinks_1467722 4. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-company/corporate-trends/After-IndraNooyi-Gautham-Mukkavilli-rises-at-PepsiCo/articleshow/5900702.cms 5. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35897141/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/ 6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hADniEVH9ks&feature=player_embedded#at=24 7. http://gulfnews.com/news/world/india/delhi-pushes-for-cola-ban-in-schools-and-universities1.270934 8. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/cons-products/fmcg/Tata-Tea-Pepsiplan-health-drinks-JV/articleshow/5779847.cms 9. http://www.moneymint.in/brands/pepsicos-health-drink-gatorade-now-in-india-when-is 10. http://www.livemint.com/2008/05/08223800/PepsiCo-to-tap-health-energy.html 11. http://www.investmentu.com/2010/November/are-the-coke-vs-pepsi-cola-wars-over.html 12. http://wehner.tamu.edu/mgmt.www/v-buenger/466/Coke_and_Pepsi.pdf

Evaluation Chart

Degree of Attendance Member Name and Initials at meetings (30%) SONAKSHI GULATI ABHINAV AGARWAL ABHINAV MITTAL DEEPALI AGARWAL ABHINAV MAHAJAN SAURAB SAHARAN 27 28 29 29 28 27 Participation (Enthusiasm) (25%) (30%) 28 28 28 29 29 28 (15%) 13 13 13 14 13 13 23 24 23 23 23 22 (100%) 91 93 93 95 93 90 Contribution Cooperation Overall

Group Members Signatures / Names in capital letters and Date

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

We met as a group on this marketing II project (Prof Vyass class) a total of 10 times. We spent approximately 720 total minutes discussing issues and sharing information. We connected (actually met) with 3 real world executives that have all been named and identified in the acknowledgement, made 23 phone calls, made 2 appointments, sent out 2 emails during the course of this project. In our view our effort and accomplishments are of the order of (circle ONE) : A (above 90%) B (80 to 90%) C (70 to 80%) D (60 to 70%) F (less than 60%).