1- The study aims to examine the perspective and associated convictions of fiercely loyal consumers towards Coca-Cola, such as those who expressed discontentment with the introduction of New Coke in 1985. How might their attitude and beliefs contrast with those of less devoted, less loyal consumers? Additionally, what implications would these disparities have on marketing strategies? Response: This category of consumers holds a robustly favorable disposition towards the Coca-Cola brand.
Consumers’ emotional and self-relevant connection to the brand can surpass the company’s expectations, intertwining with their lifestyle and self-perception. Factors like previous buying experiences, brand associations, promotions, and price contribute to consumer satisfaction. Coca-Cola effectively provided all these elements to its customers, resulting in high levels of satisfaction and a strong dependence on the product as an integral part of their lives. This profound loyalty even led some individuals to deviate from the norm by protesting against the company’s decision to discontinue the original Coca-Cola flavor and introduce a new one. How do the beliefs and attitudes of these highly engaged, loyal consumers differ from those who are less involved?
Coca-Cola evokes different attitudes and beliefs among loyal and less loyal customers. The announcement of discontinuing the main brand elicits distinct reactions from these two groups. Loyal consumers, who have a strong connection to the product, respond differently compared to less involved individuals. Less loyal customers are open to trying new Coca-Cola varieties and readily switch to other brands due to their weaker bond with the product. Conversely, loyal consumers perceive Coca-Cola as an integral part of their lives. In case of boycott campaigns against Coca-Cola, loyal consumers find it challenging to join the movement and defend their continued purchases. However, less loyal customers are more likely to participate in a boycott and opt out of buying Coca-Cola again. These disparities hold significant marketing implications.
Marketing implications vary significantly between loyal consumers and those who are less loyal. In the case of loyal consumers, the company should prioritize maintaining the relationship by providing effective communication channels, offering various benefits (both tangible and intangible), and implementing loyalty programs. Additionally, the company must be mindful of consumers’ emotional connection to the product and strive to create positive memories associated with it. This can be achieved by linking the product to occasions like holidays, parties, graduations, sports activities with friends, first dates, or movie experiences. It is crucial for these strategies to be integrated into the company’s promotional plans.
While targeting less loyal consumers, the company will use various marketing strategies to gain their loyalty over time by offering different product offers and periodically changing the marketing strategy. This approach is similar to what Coca-Cola did with its loyal consumers.
In terms of consumer loyalty to multiple brands of soft drink, particularly multiple brands of Cola, it is unlikely. The term “loyal” implies dedicating attention and involvement to one specific thing. For instance, when Coca-Cola discontinued its old recipe in 1985 and introduced New Coke, loyal consumers who also preferred Pepsi were disappointed and some even protested against Coca-Cola’s decision. However, if Pepsi made a similar move, the reaction wouldn’t be as strong or result in the same level of dissatisfaction experienced by Coca-Cola. This illustrates that consumers cannot simultaneously be loyal to both brands.
The text highlights that consumers can develop emotional connections and loyalties towards different products, including various Cola brands. Loyalty towards multiple Cola brands is possible if each brand is associated with a specific memory or occasion. For instance, an individual may demonstrate loyalty to one brand when it evokes memories of going to the movies, whereas another brand may always be present during sport events or parties. In this situation, they can maintain loyalty to both brands, but each brand has its own designated moment. Now let’s discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having multiple brands within a product category such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi in the cola category.
The main advantage of having multiple brands in a product category is the ability to increase market share. For instance, Coca-Cola successfully introduced Diet Cola, which eventually became the third most popular brand alongside main Coca-Cola and Pepsi.
However, I believe this approach should only be taken when there is a genuine need for a new product and potential competitors can enter the market. This prevents other parties from sharing the market with the company.
Nevertheless, it is important to carefully consider this step because continuously introducing new brands without limitations may cause loyal consumers to lose their attachment over time. When consumers constantly see new brands with the Coke logo on the packaging, they may no longer hold onto their fond memories of Coca-Cola. The concept of memory plays a crucial role in Coca-Cola’s brand equity.
In comparison, line extension strategy can be seen as creating completely distinct brands for these products.
When implementing a line extension, it is important to ensure that the new brand competes in the same category without negatively impacting the market share of the current product. To achieve this, targeting a different group of consumers is crucial. The company must avoid alienating its existing consumers when introducing a line extension. Promotion plans should mainly focus on the main product if it has a strong presence in the market.
However, if the company decides to introduce a completely distinct brand, its goal will be to attract a wider range of consumers and potentially win customers from competing brands. In such cases, heavy promotion efforts are necessary to acquire as many consumers as possible. Marketers need to carefully consider various factors before making this significant decision.
The factors that need to be considered include customer segmentation, consumer desires, pricing breadth and flexibility, excess capacity, competitive intensity, trade pressure, and short-term sales gain (Kapferer, 1992). Many marketers distinguish between customers and consumers. For example, Coca-Cola sells cola syrup directly to its customers, the operators of bottling plants. The bottlers then sell bottled Coke products to retailers, vending machine operators, restaurants, airlines, and others. These organizations in turn sell Coca-Cola products to individual consumers who consume it. This raises the question of how the salient beliefs about Coke products might differ for customers and consumers and how their attitudes toward Coke might differ. Which group should Coca-Cola focus more on – its customers or consumers – and why? Customers’ beliefs would differ significantly from consumers’; for customers, their demand for Coke is based on consumers’ demand. They may have a certain attitude towards the product, but it won’t be as strong as that of consumers because their demand is directly related to consumers’ demand.
Who should Coca-Cola prioritize more – its customers or the consumers? Why? It is crucial for Coca-Cola to focus more on its consumers as they are the ones making the final purchase. If consumers start buying less, it will ultimately affect demand for Coca-Cola among customers. Therefore, the real positive attitude towards Coca-Cola products and the strong emotional connection comes from consumers, who associate Coca-Cola with their lifestyle and self-image, rather than solely from customers.
Discuss Coca-Cola’s various strategies for managing brand equity across its diverse range of products. For example, consider the advantages and disadvantages of building brand equity through borrowing versus creating it from scratch. Evaluate Coca-Cola’s efforts to revive brand equity by reintroducing the iconic contour bottle worldwide.
Answer: Coca-Cola employs different strategies to manage brand equity. They adopt strategies when designing their products and also implement sales, cost-efficiency, and carbon footprint reduction strategies. “It’s about creating value for our business,” Butler stated while emphasizing their company’s sustainability and productivity objectives.
Coca-Cola employs multiple brand strategies, aiming to revitalize and improve its image in order to attract consumers. These strategies are rooted in adapting to shifting market conditions and the growing discernment of consumers, necessitating a fresh approach and reimagining of the brand. Initially, Coca-Cola prioritized affordability, accessibility, and acceptability to establish a prominent and esteemed brand identity. Yet as consumer expectations evolved, Coca-Cola has adapted its branding tactics by providing value for cost, tailoring products to align with consumer preferences, and achieving extensive market presence.
Today, Coca-Cola is a corporation that has developed a strong brand identity and image. They accomplish this by regularly testing around 20 different brands each month with a sample group of 4,000 consumers. One factor to consider is the advantages and disadvantages of borrowing brand equity versus creating it from scratch. Borrowing brand equity offers benefits such as simplifying message delivery, especially when leveraging an established top brand. Moreover, borrowing is cost-effective. However, it is important to recognize that there are risks involved in borrowing brand equity. Utilizing the reputation of other brands to promote your own can be detrimental if the borrowed brand has any negative perception associated with it. Additionally, any failures within your own brand can also impact the reputation of the top brand.
Coca-Cola successfully leveraged its brand equity through various initiatives. One notable example is when the company sponsored the 1996 Olympics to promote Sprite, which proved to be highly successful due to Coca-Cola’s esteemed reputation. An examination of how Coca-Cola revived its brand equity by introducing the contour bottle worldwide is warranted.
In response to concerns from bottlers about confusion with imitations, Coca-Cola introduced the first contour bottle in 1916. The Root Glass Company of Terre Haute emerged victorious in designing a distinct bottle, obtaining rare trademark status for packaging from the U.S. Over time, Coca-Cola made design modifications but eventually returned to the original contour bottle after realizing the strong consumer connection and emotional attachment people have with it.
This decision highlights consumers’ deep sentiments towards Coca-Cola and how it evokes cherished memories. Few products in the world have become as integral to people’s lives as Coca-Cola – truly an enduring companion.
5- I believe that the abundance of options for Coca-Cola has a significant impact on how consumers feel and what they intend to do. However, I don’t think that having a wide range of Coke products available is effective. Although the research suggests that consumers want variety in their soft drinks and attributes the decrease in overall soft drink sales to consumer dissatisfaction with current choices, I believe that people’s behavior towards Coke is different from their behavior towards other products. Just because people want constant updates in car designs doesn’t mean they would behave similarly when it comes to Coke. This case study specifically examines how people interact with Coca-Cola, which is a unique product that can’t be compared to others.
People enjoy Coca-Cola for what it is – Coca-Cola. Additional products like Diet Coke and Sprite may seem unnecessary. However, the many products under the Coca-Cola brand seem to forget their primary purpose: competing with rival brands and filling market gaps. This can be seen in the introduction of Coke-Diet. The abundance of line extensions creates internal competition and confuses customers who have numerous choices, ultimately leading them to not stay loyal to any specific product.
