Economic Analysis Of An Oligopoly Market Structure

NEW YORK Feeling bad about the economy? despoil a little, own a daddy. Marketers at Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. are counting on that sentiment to appeal to consumers everywherewhelmed with a drumbeat of bad economic youthfuls. What tidy sum want to do is pause and refresh, verbalise Coca-Cola chief market placeing policeman Joe Tripodi. Pepsi, the worlds second-largest soft tipsiness maker, engulfed a sunrise(prenominal) marketing entreat at the beginning of the year, while No. 1 puff launched its campaign one- one-third weeks later.Soda makers, who sustain seen their highest-profile harvests tolerate ground to vital force drinks and monetary valuey nursing bottled water in recent years, are turning away from the lifestyle marketing that has henpecked the soda wars. Now, they hope to draw customers back to the old favorites with a unsubdivided lure theyre cheaper or at least a better value. coulombs campaign includes 16-ounce p functionic bottles of snowfal l, Coke Zero, Diet Coke, Sprite and Fanta for 99 cents. The new size of it could draw people looking for a bargain, in that a 20-ounce bottle costs $1. 25 to $1. 50.An ad campaign called Open Happiness and fix to the Coke Side of Life ads launched on American Idol last week. One spot features both students sitting across from each early(a) in a library and flirting by dra cajoleg competing images of Coke bottles and on their arms. A get by of people take on left the category, drunkenness Digest editor John Sicher said last week. Also, a lot of young people have non entered the category, so these ads may cooperate Coke twain recruit new young consumers and re-recruit few move ones. Coke plans to run three ads during Sundays broadcast of the Super Bowl football championship on NBC.PepsiCo spokeswoman Nicole Bradley said PepsiCo would air five to six proceedings of commercials for bottled drinks during the Super Bowl, making it the biggest advertiser for the game. The ads go away feature Pepsi, Gatorade, PepsiMax and SoBe Life Water. With the launch of its new logo, the antic along besides has adjoind its number of drink ads on billboards and in other public places such as subway stations, raft stops and on tops of taxis. In recent years, as U. S. soda gross revenue fell steadily including 2. 5 percent in the third quarter last year at PepsiCo,while Coke doesnt flaw out soft drink performance the two turned to other bottled drinks for growth. PepsiCo refocused its drinks portfolio around bottled Lipton teas and Starbucks coffees, its Aquafina bottled water, Izze sparkling juice drinks and others.Coke made the biggest drinks acquisition in diligence history in June 2007 when it bought Glaceaus VitaminWater for $4. 1 billion. Though its products contain plenty of sugar, the soil had attracted health-conscious consumers with drink names such as Power-C, Defense, Endurance, Rescue and Multi-V.But CEO Muhtar Kent said last fall that soft drin ks are the oxygen of our industry. The chief executives of both soda makers indicated they were refocusing on soft drinks last fall as consumers felt the weight of a recession but it had not provided been officially declared. PepsiCos push is complementary with the trend of shoppers trading down, the companys North American beverages chief Massimo DAmore said Tuesday. He declined to say the company was appealing to consumers pocketbooks. We forget not communicate on bell, he said in an interview. honor to consumers is much broader than price.Its not the primary focus of our marketing. DAmore told reporters gathered Tuesday to hear detail of the companys Super Bowl plans that Pepsis drink portfolio is the exact ammunition it needs to win in the current climate. Chief Executive Indra Nooyi has said the company which likewise owns the Frito-Lay, Tropicana, Gatorade and Quaker brands aims to slow the decline of U. S. soda sales. Both companies are cope with how to hold on to c onsumers that have grown wary of the high-fructose corn sirup that is used in a wide variety of bottled drinks, from soft drinks to bottled teas and energy drinks.David Schardt, senior nutritionist at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, said the companies latest campaigns are not going to correct public health if sales of sugar-based sodas do rebound. We already drink too many of our calories he said. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF AN OLIGOPOLY MARKET social system 1. INTRODUCTION 1a. ARTICLE SUMMARY Not many corporations can ball up of a 100 Year rivalry. The beverages industry witnessed such intense disputation between Coca-Cola and PepsiCo.One can say that the competition between the corporations was and still isso intense that it could be likened to sibling rivalry. The product offerings of both companies are so similar, if Pepsi were to offer a new product it wouldnt be move to see Coca-Cola follow suit. Pepsi has always taken the lead in ontogenesis new product s, but Coke soon learned their littleon and started to do the same. The companies not only compete in soft drinks, but also have branched out to other beverages including coffee, juice drinks and even water. As the companies lose their market share in energy drinks and pricy bottled water in recent years now they refocus on soda kill to draw customers back.PepsiCo is innovative with launching a marketing campaign of new logos while Cokes campaign is price dodge with a footslog of cheaper products. The fact is each company is coming up with new products and ideas in order to increase their market share. The creativity and enduringness of each companys marketing strategy go away ultimately determine the succeeder with respect to sales, profits, and customer loyalty. 1b. JUSTIFICATION OF THE TOPIC Pepsi and coke control everywhere 75. 3% of market (as fork all overn in the figure 1).These two companies have remarkable control over the direction of the market in terms of price , tonicity and taste. This clearly indicates that the industry has a duopolistic structure. It is not easy to enter into the market as it needs a large investment and can count the big players to crush into the competition. The presence of barriers to entry protects the present players from competition from new firms. The companies compete on product differentiation either through product itself or through heavy advertising to reduce the elastic of direct for their product.Clearly the industry is oligopolistic with the market shared between these two firms, and the oligopoly characteristics of high tightness ratio, fewness, high barriers entry, product differentiation and mutual interdependence apply. Figure 1 Source Beverage Marketing Corporation, New York. Retrieved from www. beverageworld. com data and statistics on 4/10/2008 2. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS A firm under oligopoly faces a twirled pray curve (see figure 2). The point of the kink is the point of the open market price.Th e kink of the demand curve suggests that a competitor would oppose asymmetrically to price increases and price decreases by the firm. Suppose the price is completed at $1. 99 for a six-pack of either Pepsi or Coke. Lets interpret the demand curve for Pepsi. If Pepsi increases its price to $2. 49 per six-pack, it bequeath lose some of its market to Coke on the AB component of the demand curve. Pepsi leave alone be able to sell 500 six-packs a day preferably of the original sales aim of 1000.Coke is likely to stay at $1.99 and taste the additional sale, as some people who were originally buying Pepsi will be switching to Coke. If Pepsi lowers its price to $1. 49 to gain an advantage over Coke and increase it sales to 1500 six-packs, it may not succeed. The increase in sales by Pepsi to 1500 can only happen if Coke did not react to Pepsis price cut. However, Coke is likely to match the price decline by Pepsi to protect itself against loss of market share. As the result of pri ce cuts by both Pepsi and Coke, there will be an increase in sales by both at least partially at the expense of smaller competitors.The sales of Pepsi increase to 1300 six-packs per day from the original 1000. This is along the BC segment of the demand curve. Therefore, there are two demand curves facing PepsiAB relatively elastic for price increases and no answer by Coke, and BC relatively inelastic for price decreases and price twinned reaction by Coke. This explains the kinked demand curve for Pepsi and similarly for Coke. Notice that the kink in the demand curve is at the established market price. It is also important to realize that the established price tends to be maintained.Neither Pepsi nor Coke will be inclined to raise their price since it would give birth loss of sales and market share to the rival. Also neither of them is particularly interested in lowering the price and starting a price war since the issue is loss of profit for both in favor of consumers. The prof it maximation level of output can be determined by adding to the demand-MR mystify the cost curves for a firm under oligopoly. The profit maximizing level of output is 1000 six-packs of Pepsi, where MC = MR. Pepsi can sell this quantity at $1. 99 according to the demand curve.The average total cost of government issue at 1000 level of output is $0. 99 per six-pack. Therefore the company is making $1000 a day of economic (or excess) profit as illustrated in Figure 3. An interesting observation is that the profit maximization of oligopolies, generally, occurs at the kink of the demand curve, which in-turn represents the established market price and market shares of the oligopolies. another(prenominal) observation is that moderate changes in the cost conditions of oligopolies do not cause a change in their profit maximization quantity and price as long as they are in the vertical range of the MR curve.This implies that technological improvements that lower the cost of production or change in the price of inputs encountered by an oligopoly would not lead to a quantity or price change. We therefore suggest that under an oligopoly market prices are rigid. Firms in particular avoid lowering their price from fear of igniting a price war. rather oligopolies resort to non-price competition such as advertising. Price wars can and now and then do occur when one of the preponderating firms in the oligopoly market experiences a significant decrease in its production cost and attempt to increase its market share.Coke and Pepsi know that they are spending millions of dollars on advertising on the button to counter each others ads. advertise game will provide us with a modeling framework within which to show the choice that the managers of oligopolistic firms face. ( see figure 4) Although it would increase both firms payoffs if both play little Advertising, this cannot be easily achieved. According to the above payoff matrix, playing Intensive Advertising yields a h igher payoff for Coke no matter what Pepsi does. In other words, Intensive Advertising is Cokes dominant strategy.Similarly, Intensive Advertising is also Pepsis dominant strategy. Given that there is no guarantee the other player plays Less Advertising, each player will play Intensive Advertising, which is the unique Nash equilibrium of this game. 3. CONCLUSION Sales of carbonated soft drinks have been declining in US for several years, as consumers turn to a evolution number of new beverages like enhanced waters, sports drinks and energy drinks. But the problems have accelerated in a volatile economy, with consumers eating at restaurants less and buying fewer grab-and-go beverages.In addition, consumers are increasingly choosing tap water over other beverages at restaurants and at home to help save capital and the environment. Both companies have also relied on finding new markets, peculiarly in foreign countries. Although the goal of both companies are exactly the same, the tw o companies rely on somewhat different marketing strategies. The companies must be willing to accommodate their target markets. They have to always be creating and modify their marketing plans and products. Gaining market share occurs when a company stays trip the light fantastic toe ahead of the competition by knowing what the consumer wants.