Verified Document

Internal Analysis: An Illustrative Comparison Term Paper

32, and Pepsi's ratio is .29. These are close, but suggest that Pepsi is actually able to generate more revenue for every dollar of property and equipment it owns. This makes sense given the operational differences at these companies; as noted above, Coca Cola does not actually own or operate all of the production elements for its products, thus it makes sense that is has much lower property values than its rival Pepsi, which is more fully integrated (Coca Cola, 2012; Pepsi, 2012). This also suggests, however, that Pepsi's revenue generation and overall value is more tied to its physical properties, plants, and equipment than is Coca Cola, meaning expansion could ne more costly for the company (Palepu, 2007). In this way, productivity might not transfer into long-term efficiency and profitability, which is something both investors and competitors should consider.

Marketing Productivity

If determining human resource and plant/equipment productivity was difficult, determining marketing productivity can be all but impossible for an outsider to a company, as these are not required line items on the financial statements prepared in keeping with government regulations of publicly traded companies (Palepu, 2007). Estimations of marketing expenditures are very difficult to make if they are not provided by the company, as the extent of marketing campaigns cannot be ascertained without extensive and detailed media information and the cost of various advertising media and placements can vary considerably. If a figure estimating marketing expenditures is not provided by the company being analyzed, it is possible that searching through trade magazines and research journals (if the company is sizeable enough) could yield some estimations of marketing costs, but these estimations are likely to be inaccurate and would be unsuitable for company comparison purposes. Regardless of how a marketing productivity measure is determined, this is a measure that is likely to be more meaningful to a competitive analysis rather than from an investor standpoint; though clearly an investor would be concerned with the efforts being taken by a company to boost sales and determining how effective those efforts are, this is of much more direct relevance to competitors that are competing for the same market share and are likely engaged in similar marketing endeavors.

Fortunately, many companies understand the importance of marketing expenses to investor analyses -- and/or feel a need to explain the large portions of their operating budgets that are devoted to these marketing endeavors -- and thus have taken to listing and describing marketing costs in the qualitative portion of their annual reports. Both Coca-Cola and Pepsi have done this, and a comparison of these expenses to the operating revenue -- i.e. sales -- that each company generated is a fairly reliable measure of how well marketing efforts were able to generate returns. Again, operating revenue for Coca Cola was $46.5 billion in 2011 and operating revenue for Pepsi was $66.5 billion in that same year according to the consolidated statements of income for these two companies; with estimates elsewhere in their annual reports of marketing expenses totaling $3.3 billion and $3.5 billion, respectively, marketing profitability ratios can be estimated at .071 for Coca Cola and .053 for Pepsi (Coca Cola, 2012; Pepsi, 2012). Here, Pepsi seems to clearly outstrip Coca Cola in terms of the effectiveness of its advertising, which seems odd given how ubiquitous Coca Cola's advertising is.

The importance of a qualitative assessment of the reasons behind the numbers has been stressed above, and must be pointed out again here. Very different business models exist in these companies, such that marketing efforts for Coca Cola are not as directly related to sales, and for Pepsi the diversity of products means much less is being spent per brand on marketing while still yielding substantial results (Coca Cola, 2012; Pepsi, 2012). Competitors should certainly be wary of the sheer marketing clout that Coca Cola is able to wield without unduly damaging its bottom line, but investors might rightly be more attracted to the leaner (proportionally) and more effective strategies apparently employed...

Other companies that operate only in specific niche and/or business-to-business industries can also be difficult to examine in terms of segment productivity, as their market segmentation is quite small and not necessarily something such businesses would be able to proactively and effectively manipulate (Palepu, 2007). When businesses do provide broad segment breakdowns of expenditures and earnings, as most multinationals do on what is essentially a continental basis (i.e. Europe is one segment, North America is another, Asia is typically split into smaller segments such as the Middle East and South East Asia, etc.), determining true segment productivity requires a detailed understanding of the market size and purchasing power of each segment. Of course, when an inter-company comparison is the goal, certain estimations of segment productivity can be made by comparing the revenues captured in each segment, assuming the companies' segments are defined with the same borders and that similar proportions of expenditure are utilized in the segment(s) compared.
Unfortunately, Coca Cola and Pepsi do not report segmented earnings in the same way, making it impossible to conduct a meaningful comparison of segment productivity between the companies (Coca Cola, 2012; Pepsi, 2012). Coca Cola does not actually provide any concept of its segmented earnings, though again due to the company's operational structure it is not as directly involved in or affected by sales in various market segments, as its distribution involvement is limited (Coca- Cola, 2012). Given the worldwide recognition of the Coca Cola brands and the company's history of making inroads to untapped markets, however, it can be assumed that through its distribution partnerships Coca Cola does fairly well in all market segments. This purely qualitative and surface analysis would not suffice for a detailed competitive analysis nor for an institutional investor seeking to accomplish full due diligence before making a major purchase, but for the average investor it is actually a fair estimate of Coca Cola's segment productivity and profit potential.

Pepsi, meanwhile, divides its operations not only by region but also by brand/product class, as the company has much more diverse product offerings and operations than does Coca Cola (Pepsi, 2012). This would make any direct comparison meaningless without specific product selection, anyway, and this would involved far more detailed industry reports than are available to the typical investor. Such reports can be purchased, but are often fairly expensive and are more likely to be utilized by competitors or institutional investors (Palepu, 2007). If actual sales numbers for specific segments could be identified, however, and especially if expenditures on marketing and operations could be broken down into the same segments, than a real quantitative analysis of segment productivity could actually be conducted. Given current resources, direct practical examples cannot be provided for this area of analysis, however with both companies showing strong international reaches it also would not be of immense importance except in segment-specific competition.

References

Coca Cola. (2012). 2011 Annual Report. Accessed 1 April 2012. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/investors/pdfs/form_10K_2011.pdf

Fitz-enz, J. & Davison, B. (2002). How to Measure Human Resource Management. New York: McGraw Hill.

Palepu, K., Healy, P., Bernard, V. & Peek, E. (2007). Business Analysis and Valuation. Mason, OH: Cengage.

Pepsi. (2012). 2011 Annual Report. Accessed 1 April 2012. http://www.pepsico.com/annual11/downloads/PEP_AR11_2011_Annual_Report.pdf

Yahoo Finance. (2012). The Coca Cola Company. Accessed 1 April 2012. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=KO+Key+Statistics

Yahoo Finance. (2012a). PepsiCo. Accessed 1 April 2012. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=PEP+Key+Statistics

Sources used in this document:
References

Coca Cola. (2012). 2011 Annual Report. Accessed 1 April 2012. http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/investors/pdfs/form_10K_2011.pdf

Fitz-enz, J. & Davison, B. (2002). How to Measure Human Resource Management. New York: McGraw Hill.

Palepu, K., Healy, P., Bernard, V. & Peek, E. (2007). Business Analysis and Valuation. Mason, OH: Cengage.

Pepsi. (2012). 2011 Annual Report. Accessed 1 April 2012. http://www.pepsico.com/annual11/downloads/PEP_AR11_2011_Annual_Report.pdf
Yahoo Finance. (2012). The Coca Cola Company. Accessed 1 April 2012. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=KO+Key+Statistics
Yahoo Finance. (2012a). PepsiCo. Accessed 1 April 2012. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=PEP+Key+Statistics
Cite this Document:
Copy Bibliography Citation

Related Documents

Ethics Awareness Inventory Analysis
Words: 671 Length: 2 Document Type: Term Paper

Ethics Awareness Inventory According to the Ethics Inventory, I fell into two categories: those who are obligation-oriented, and those who are results-oriented. In some ways, the ethical beliefs of these two categories are in conflict; for instance, usually people who base ethical decisions on obligation or duty are not as concerned with results as with principles. However, I scored high in the results-oriented category as well. I believe that my ability

Teacher Attitudes and Perceptions About Curriculum Innovation in...
Words: 22121 Length: 76 Document Type: Term Paper

Self-Efficacy: A Definition Social Cognitive Theory Triangulation Data analysis Teacher Self-Efficacy Problems for the researcher Data Analysis and Related Literature review. Baseline Group Gender Deviation Age Deviation Comparison of data with other literature in the field. Everyday Integration Efficacy, Self-esteem, Confidence and Experience Barriers to use Integration paradigm. Co-oping and Project design. Organizational Climate Teacher Integration Education. Meta-evaluation of data and related literature. Data Analysis and Comparison Recommendation for Further Research Data Review Report Teacher efficacy in the classroom is facilitated by a number of different factors for different professions. However,

Clinical Psychology
Words: 60005 Length: 200 Document Type: Dissertation

Clinical Psychology Dissertation - Dream Content as a Therapeutic Approach: Ego Gratification vs. Repressed Feelings An Abstract of a Dissertation Dream Content as a Therapeutic Approach: Ego Gratification vs. Repressed Feelings This study sets out to determine how dreams can be used in a therapeutic environment to discuss feelings from a dream, and how the therapist should engage the patient to discuss them to reveal the relevance of those feelings, in their present,

Mercer Vs. Bowden Annotated Bibliography
Words: 2536 Length: 9 Document Type: Annotated Bibliography

Mercer, like Bowen, focuses upon potentially negative social forces that could potentially impact the critical relationship at the heart of the theory. But once again, these potential negatives are rooted to some extent in biological as well as social and psychological factors. "Young maternal age and immaturity, socioeconomic status" are all potential red flags particularly since they have been shown to reduce the likelihood that the mother will breastfeed

Audit Planning Is the First Step in
Words: 1333 Length: 5 Document Type: Research Paper

Audit planning is the first step in establishing the basis of the nature, timing, and extent of the overall audit strategy to determine the validity of the financial statements. An efficient and effective audit plan provides for a thoroughly and properly planned audit (The Importance of Audit Planning). It helps to reduce audit risk to a low level. Audit planning ensures appropriate attention to critical areas and that potential problems

Literacy in the Aegean Bronze Age Anthropologists
Words: 2634 Length: 8 Document Type: Term Paper

Literacy in the Aegean Bronze Age Anthropologists and archaeologists call certain societies "iron age" or "bronze age." In doing this they recognize that the properties of the main metal used by a society's technology greatly affect both its use and through this the nature of that society. For instance, bronze unlike iron is too soft to be used for ploughing; it is an alloy. Bronze can be smelted at lower temperatures

Sign Up for Unlimited Study Help

Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.

Get Started Now