Business

Research
Methods:
INDIAN INSTITUTE
OF FOREIGN
TRADE,Project
DELHI Report
(Under the guidance of Prof. Sanjay Rastogi)
Submitted By:

Ashish Jain 7C

Devising a market entry

strategyafor
Coca-Cola
to
Devising
market
entry
enter Indian Energy Drinks
strategy for Coca-Cola to
market
Girish Kumar Sharma 12C

Mayank Bhawsinghka 21C

Piyoosh Pathak 29C

Shivangi Upadhyay 44C

Usman Aslam Khan 51C

Utkarsh Modi 52C

enter Indian Energy

Drinks market

Submitted By:

Ashish Jain 7C

Girish Kumar Sharma 12C

Mayank Bhawsinghka 21C

Business Research Methods Project

Piyoosh Pathak 29C

Shivangi Upadhyay 44C

Usman Aslam Khan 51C
Utkarsh Modi 52C
my
Submitted By:
Ashish Jain 7C
Girish Kumar Sharma 12C
Mayank Bhawsinghka 21C
Piyoosh Pathak 29C
Shivangi Upadhyay 44C
Usman Aslam Khan 51C
Utkarsh Modi 52C

Prepared by:

Section A - Group 1
Amit Yadav

5A

Ashish Khola

12A

Khushit Mehta

21A

Rohit Nadgouda

37A

Sameeksha Gupta

42A

I N D I A [NT YI PNES T HI TE UCTOEM O

P AFN FY OARD ED IRGE N
S S ]T R A D E

Contents
Introduction
Literature review
Global Energy Drink Market
Indian Energy Drink MarketStructure
Health Aspects of Energy Drink
Problem Statement and Research Objectives
Business Research Design
Research Design
Sampling design
Questionnaire Design
Data Analysis
Discriminant Analysis
Factor Analysis
Multi Dimensional Scaling
Interpretation and Recommendations
Bibliography
Annexure - Questionnaire

Introduction
The term energy drinks refers to beverages that contain caffeine in
combination with other ingredients such as taurine, guarana, and B vitamins, and
that claims to provide its consumers with extra energy
Long and erratic working hours and the increasing occurrence of social
gatherings are driving Indian consumers towards the consumption of energy
drinks which are primarily classified as non-alcoholic, caffeinated beverages and
sports drinks. The popularity of energy drinks in India is not merely due to its
functional aspect as perceived in other countries. Over the past few years, the
sales of energy drinks have been driven by changing consumer lifestyle and
increasing demand for alcohol mixers. Their association with high octane sports
such as the Indian Grand Prix and with eating out has further boosted sales and
increased consumer awareness.

Company Information and background:

In India, the Coca-Cola system comprises of a wholly owned subsidiary of The
Coca-Cola Company namely Coca-Cola India Pvt Ltd which manufactures and
sells concentrate and beverage bases and powdered beverage mixes, a Companyowned bottling entity, namely, Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt Ltd; thirteen
licensed bottling partners of The Coca-Cola Company, who are authorized to
prepare, package, sell and distribute beverages under certain specified
trademarks of The Coca-Cola Company; and an extensive distribution system
comprising of our customers, distributors and retailers.
The Coca-Cola Company's brands in India include Coca-Cola, Fanta Orange,
Limca, Sprite, Thums Up, Burn, Kinley, Maaza, Minute Maid Pulpy Orange, Minute
Maid Nimbu Fresh and the Georgia Gold range of teas and coffees and Vitingo (a
beverage fortified with micro-nutrients).

Coca Cola globally operates in more than 200 countries with around more than
3500 products.

Literature review
Global Energy Drink Market
The global energy drink market grew 14-15% in 2011 to ~USD 4.1 billion,
accounting for 8-9% of the global soft drinks industry. In the US, the energy
drinks segment continued its strong success reaching ~USD 700 million, growing
at a CAGR of 6-7%. Red Bull, Hansen Naturals Monster energy drink and
Rockstar remain the top 3 brands in the US. In the UK, energy drinks sales grew
to ~USD 159.1 million at a CAGR of 6-7% as energy shots continue to expand the
consumer base for energy drinks.
This growth is also witnessed in volume and is fuelled by the increasing
emphasis on packaging convenience and design to attract consumers. Although
the US and Japan are considered to be the key markets for energy drinks, the
most dynamically growing markets are India, China and Brazil.
Indian Energy Drink Market
The Indian energy drinks market is currently estimated at ~USD 154.5 million
and is expected to grow at a CAGR of 28-30%. This growth was mainly driven
by an extraordinary performance by Red Bull, which has been the most dominant
player in the caffeinated energy drink segment, and Gatorade, which is the leader
in the sports drink segment. In order to offset the increasing raw material price,
fluctuation in foreign exchange rates and rise in electricity costs, the current unit
prices have increased for energy drinks.
Energy drinks account for 14-15% of the non-alcoholic beverage segment
and compete with other non-alcoholic beverages such as soda and brewed coffee,
both of which contain caffeine for energy boost, even if the caffeine content is
relatively lower than in energy drinks. Soda is the most consumed non-alcoholic
beverage while ready-to-drink tea also offers stiff competition as it provides the
benefits of anti-oxidants in addition to a boost of caffeine. Unlike the US and the
UK markets, energy shots are currently unavailable in the Indian market and
could serve as a potential business opportunity to expand the consumer base for
the energy drinks players.
There seems to be a growing acceptance for the consumption of energy drinks in
India. Affordability and visibility are likely to encourage impulse purchases and
increase the frequency of consumption. As energy drinks are one of the most
expensive beverages available in the market, consumers consider price as a key
4

attribute for its purchase. Energy drinks which are priced at INR 75-85 are
usually available at a much higher price of INR 150-250 at a nightclub or a
premium lounge. Consumers are brand loyal and with Red Bulls first mover
advantage, it has been able to maintain its stronghold in the market. Due to
increasing safety concerns amongst consumers regarding the ingredients used in
energy drinks, a number of new entrants are offering all-natural products that
provide a long-lasting energy boost. Packaging size and flavour variety are other
criteria for brand selection. A recent survey by the Associated Chambers of
Commerce and Industry of India states 71 per cent of adolescents in urban
centres of India consume energy drinks, often leading to seizures, diabetic
hazards, cardiac abnormalities and behavioural disorders.
Market Structure
The Indian landscape for energy drinks is fast getting crowded. Red Bull is the
market leader in the segment with 62 percent market share. Energy brands
trying to jostle for space are PepsiCos Sobe, Power Horse and Goldwin
Healthcares Cloud 9. Cunningly entwining energy drinks subconsciously with
sex are JMJ Groups XXX, as well as the recently-launched KS E, from the stables
of Raymonds Kamasutra brand. However, the real monster in the cupboard is,
well, Monster, the US energy drink brand that entered into Indian market with
serious intent.
Red Bull has a presence in 300 cities across India and the companys more than
70 percent of retail sales are in restaurants, pubs and night clubs.
Other key brands present in Indian market are Rhino, Bullet, Amway XL and
Gatorade among others.

Health aspects of energy drinks

Positive Effects
A variety of physiological and psychological effects have been attributed to
energy drinks and their ingredients. Excess consumption of energy drinks may
induce mild to moderate euphoria primarily caused by stimulant properties of
caffeine and may also induce agitation, anxiety, irritability, and insomnia. During
repeated cycling tests in young healthy adults an energy drink significantly
increased upper body muscle endurance.
Adverse Effects
5

Caution is warranted even for healthy adults who choose to consume energy
beverages. Consumption of a single energy beverage will notlead to excessive
caffeine intake; however consumption of two or more beverages in a single day
can. Other stimulants such as Ginseng are often added to energy beverages and
may enhance the effects of caffeine consumption in amounts greater than 400 mg
include nervousness, irritability, sleeplessness, increased urination, abnormal
heart rhythms, and stomach upset. Energy drinks do not provide electrolytes,
and have a higher likelihood of an energy crash-and-burn effect. Caffeine in
energy drink can excrete water from the body to dilute high concentrations of
sugar entering the blood stream, leading to dehydration. If the body is
dehydrated by 1%, performance is decreased by up to 10%.

Problem Statement and

Research Objectives

Management Decision Problem:

Devising a market entry strategy for Coca Cola to enter Indian energy drinks
market.
Research Objectives:
Identify consumer behavior pattern of beverages segment.
Sub Problem 1: To create a profile of energy drink user and find patterns among
consumer demographics, if any.
Research Question 1: How to discriminate between Users and Non-Users of
energy drinks on the basis of parameters such as age, location, income and usage
frequency

Sub Problem 2:To identify buying behavior of prospective energy drink

consumers
Research Question 2: At the time of buying, what are the attributes which prove
to be most important for the customers?

Sub Problem 3:Identifying the positioning and market segmentation of energy

drinks currently in market
Research Question 3: How will you compare energy drink 1 with energy drink 2
to 11 and so on keeping in the mind all the parameters you consider essential
while purchasing an energy drink (such as Availability, Price, Glamour Quotient,
Brand, Contents etc)

Business Research Design

Research Design:
Exploratory:
To explore the preferences of prospective consumers for a new energy drink. We
will aim to gauge the factors responsible for decision making when it comes to
purchase of energy drinks. It will help the organization to design different
product features; as well as leverage these very features so as to enable focused
and scientific marketing.
Descriptive:
To shortlist several parameters from exploratory research and identify key pain
points where people demand for energy drink. Post that, well survey a set of
consumers to identify why, when, where, who, how do they take up energy drink
as a product.
Sampling Design:
Exploratory:
Target Population: Consumer groups
Sampling Framework: Consumers who consume soft drinks and energy drinks
Sampling Method: Non probabilistic method (Convenience)
Descriptive:
Target Population: Energy drink users and non-users
Sampling Framework: List of consumers contacted at the retail shop (users and
non users to be contacted in equal number) for Sub Problem 1.
Sampling Method: Non-probabilistic method (convenience sampling), research to
be carried out in New Delhi. We shall divided Delhi into five regions namely:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

North
East
West
South
Central
9

We shall try to aim for a representative mix so that all demographic factors
and variables are accounted for.

Sample Size:
Taking a confidence level of 95% (Z score = 1.96)
Margin of error = 5%
20% of the people in Delhi consume soft drinks. Thus p=0.2 & q=0.8
By using the formula Sample size (n) = p*q*Z*Z/e*e
N = 245
Thus our sample size would be 250 (for ease of calculation)
This was the proposed sample size. However, we could get only 150
responses for our research survey and have hence used only 150 responses as
a base for all research and calculations.

Questionnaire Design
The key focus areas of questionnaire design are1. Demographics information-age, location and income
2. Awareness of the consumer about the existing energy drinks in the market
3. Frequency of Consumption
4. Place of Purchase
5. Place of Consumption
6. Whether consumption is standalone or in a mix
7. Preference order of attributes such as Price, Brand, Flavour, Contents,
Availability, Advertisement
8. Perception about the product such as feel good factor, health risk etc
9. Impact of celebrity endorsements on energy drink market

10

Data Analysis
It is a case of Multivariate analysis because research objectives are
multidimensional and more than three variables (price, brand, content etc.) are
analyzed at any given point.
We have used Discriminant analysis to differentiate users of energy drink from
non-users. Further we used Factor Analysis to identify key factors that can
represent all the variables required for the study. Further we did a
multidimensional scaling using paired brand comparison to create a perception
map and identify the probable spaces where Coca-Cola can position its product.

Discriminant Analysis
Sub Problem 1: To create a profile of energy drink user
The typical respondent is from West Delhi, age is between 16-25, income of
household is more than Rs. 5 Lakh per annum.
We used Discriminant Analysis for differentiating users from non-users. For
doing this, we identified four parameters Location, Age, Income and Frequency
to assess the key variables that play a major role in differentiating users from
non-users.
Output Analysis
Grouping Variables: Both the variables are categorical variables
1) Users
2) Non-users
Grouping variables coding:
1: Users
2: Non-users
Independent variables: We took four variables and collected interval scale data
for them. The four variables are:
a)
b)
c)
d)

Location
Age
Income
Frequency
11

4.3 Discriminant Function Analysis

Key assumptions:
a) Predictor variables have a multivariate normal distribution
b) Normal data with equal variance

DISCRIMINANT
/GROUPS=Groups(1 2)
/VARIABLES=Location Age Income Frequency
/ANALYSIS ALL
/SAVE=CLASS SCORES PROBS
/PRIORS EQUAL
/STATISTICS=MEAN STDDEV UNIVF BOXM RAW CORR TCOV TABLE
/CLASSIFY=NONMISSING POOLED.
Discriminant
Analysis Case Processing Summary
Unweighted Cases

Percent

Valid

150

100.0

Excluded Missing or out-of0

range group codes

.0

At least one missing

0
discriminating variable

.0

Both missing or out-ofrange group codes and

0
at least one missing
discriminating variable

.0

Total

.0

150

100.0

Total

12

Group Statistics
Valid N (listwise)

Groups

Mean

Std.
Deviation

Location

3.10

1.262

94

94.000

Age

2.56

1.349

94

94.000

Income

3.84

1.655

94

94.000

Frequency 3.91

1.695

94

94.000

Location

3.02

1.228

56

56.000

Age

4.54

2.115

56

56.000

Income

3.12

1.717

56

56.000

.000

56

56.000

3.07

1.246

150

150.000

Age

3.30

1.924

150

150.000

Income

3.57

1.708

150

150.000

Frequency 2.83

1.948

150

150.000

Frequency 1.00
Total Location

Unweighted Weighted

Tests of Equality of Group Means

Wilks'
Lambda

df1

df2

Sig.

Location

.999

.136

148

.712

Age

.753

48.658

148

.000

Income

.959

6.379

148

.013

165.083 1

148

.000

Frequency .473

Pooled Within-Groups Matrices

13

Location Age

Income

Frequency

1.000

.027

-.028

.055

Age

.027

1.000

-.049

-.122

Income

-.028

-.049

1.000

.053

-.122

.053

1.000

Correlation Location

Frequency .055

The matrix shows the correlation between the predictor variables

Covariance Matricesa
Groups

Location Age

Income

Frequency

Total Location

1.553

.020

-.045

.146

Age

.020

3.701

-.468

-1.626

Income

-.045

-.468

2.917

.610

-1.626

.610

3.795

Frequency .146

a. The total covariance matrix has 149 degrees of freedom.

Analysis 1
Box's Test of Equality of Covariance Matrices
Log Determinants
Groups

Rank

Log
Determinant

3.072

.a

3.079

Pooled
groups

within-

14

The ranks and natural logarithms of

determinants printed are those of the group
covariance matrices.
a. Singular
Summary of Canonical Discriminant Functions
Eigenvalues
Functi
%
on
Eigenvalue Variance
1

1.334a

100.0

of Cumulative
%
100.0

Canonical
Correlation
.756

a. First 1 canonical discriminant functions were used in the

analysis.

Wilks' Lambda
Test
of
Functi Wilks'
on(s) Lambda

Chi-square df

Sig.

123.754

.000

.428

Test of Significance:
Null Hypotheses: For two groups, means of the two groups on the discriminant
function the centroid, are equal
We use Wilks Lambda for testing the null hypotheses.
In this case, the value comes out to be 0.428 that is below 0.5 thus, null
hypotheses cannot be accepted. Thus we reject the null hypothesis.

15

Test of Homogeneity of Covariance Matrix:

Since discriminant analysis assumes homogeneity of covariance matrices
between groups, we would like to see the determinants be relatively equal.
a) The larger the eigenvalue, the more of the variance in the dependent variable is
explained by that function.
b) Dependent has two categories, there is only one discriminant function.
When there are two groups, the canonical correlation is the most useful measure
in the table, and it is equivalent to Pearson's correlation between the
discriminant scores and the groups.
The associated chi-square statistictests: The small p-value (0.000 in our case)
indicates that the discriminant function does better than chance at separating the
groups.

Standardized
Canonical
Discriminant
Function Coefficients
Function

Structure Matrix

1
Location

-.008

Age

-.386

Income

.115

Frequency .862

Function
1
Frequency .914
Age

-.496

Income

.180

Location

.026

Only one discriminant

function is in this study.
An absolute value of more
than 0.3 indicates a
significant
correlation
between
variable
and
discriminating function.

16

In this case, Frequency and Age turn out to be more

correlated variables in discrimanting the two
groups.
Discriminant Function = -1.278 + (-0.006)*Location
+ (-0.230)*Age + (0.068)*Income +
(0.641)*Frequency
Canonical
Discriminant
Function Coefficients
Function
1
Location

-.006

Age

-.230

Income

.068

Frequency .641
(Constant) -1.278
Unstandardized
coefficients
Classification Statistics
Classification Processing Summary
Processed

150

Excluded Missing or out-of0

range group codes
At least one missing
0
discriminating variable
Used in Output

150

17

Prior Probabilities for Groups

Group
s
Prior

Cases Used in Analysis

Unweighted Weighted

.500

94

94.000

.500

56

56.000

150

150.000

Total 1.000

Classification Resultsa
Predicted
Membership
Group
s
1

Total

79

15

94

56

56

84.0

16.0

100.0

.0

100.0

100.0

Original Count 1

Group

a. 90.0% of original grouped cases correctly

classified.

Classification Statistics
Hit Ratio = (79+56)*100/150
= 90%
Final Verdict:Frequency and Age are two more important variables that
differentiate Users from Non-Users than the other two variables.

18

Factor Analysis
Sub Problem 2: To identify buying behaviour of prospective energy drink
consumers
Research Question 2: At the time of buying, what are the attributes which prove
to be most important for the customers?
In all, there are 6 variables Price, Brand, Flavour, Contents, Availability and
Advertisements. So a factor analysis was done to put the variables, representing
similar characteristics, under one category. Factor analysis is a statistical method
used to describe variability among observed variables in terms of a potentially
lower number of unobserved variables called factors.
We have used iterated principal axis factor as our method of extraction and a
varimax rotation.The determination of the number of factors to extract will be
guided by theory, but also informed by running the analysis extracting different
numbers of factors and seeing which number of factors yields the most
interpretable results.
a. Kaiser Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy
It means if the value of the partial coefficients between two variables is
greater than 0.5, (0.628 in our case) - it means that the two variables are
interdependent.
b. Bartletts Test of Sphericity
Following are the two hypothesis
Ho: It is an identity matrix (There is no correlation among pair of
variables)
H1: it is not an identity matrix (There is no correlation among pair of
variables)
Chi-Square test is used to test the correlation of one sub-category variable
to other sub-category variable
During the factors extraction, we extract only those factors whose Eigenvalue is
more than one. This value of above 1 suggests that there is at least one variable
that is loaded in that particular factor (or component). The total Eigenvalue
19

comes by squaring and adding all factor loadings. Also the cut off (minimum
acceptance level) for % variance explained is 60%.
Then we look at Rotated Component Matrix. The idea of rotation is to reduce
the number factors on which the variables under investigation have high
loadings. All the variables have got some rotated component matrix value. To
find that which variables are loaded in which component, we load only those
variables into a factor, whose Rotated Component Matrix Value is greater than
0.4. If one variable is loaded into two factors, then it is extracted with that factor
for which it has the higher loading factor value.

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
Adequacy.
Bartlett's
Sphericity

Test

Measure

of

Sampling

of Approx. Chi-Square

.628
107.812

df

15.000

Sig.

.000

The table shows that the KMO measure of sampling adequacy is greater than
0.5 which means that the two variables are interdependent
In the Bartletts test of sphericity, the observed significance level is .0000. It is
small enough to reject the hypothesis which concludes that the strength of the
relationship among variables is strong. It means that it is a good idea to apply a
factor analysis for the data
Total Variance
After performing the factor analysis, we come out with the following table. It
indicates a total of 3 factors with Eigenvalues greater than 1 and these
Eigenvalues are obtained by squaring and adding the factor loadings. The
cumulative variance explained by all the factors is 69.152% (which is greater
than the cut off value of 60%).

20

Total Variance Explained

Extraction
Sums
Squared Loadings

Initial Eigenvalues

of Rotation Sums of Squared

Loadings

Com
pon
%
of Cumulati
ent Total Variance ve %
Total

%
of Cumulati
Variance ve %
Total

2.049 34.155

34.155

2.049

34.155

34.155

1.940 32.336

32.336

1.063 17.711

51.865

1.063

17.711

51.865

1.156 19.271

51.607

1.037 17.287

69.152

1.037

17.287

69.152

1.053 17.546

69.152

.740

12.341

81.493

.705

11.742

93.235

.406

6.765

100.000

%
of Cumulati
Variance ve %

Extraction Method: Principal

Component Analysis.
Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1

Price

-.425

-.567

-.087

Brand

-.081

.904

-.054

Flavour

.797

-.016

.150

Content

.810

.097

-.252

Availability

.678

.087

-.032

.004

.977

Advertisemen
-.041
t

21

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser
Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 4 iterations.
All components were orthogonal. In our case, we can categorize the variables
under 3 factors as follows:

Factor 1:
Flavour, Contents, Availability
Factor 2:
Price, Brand
Factor 3:
Advertisement
Component Score Coefficient Matrix
(Factor weight matrix)
Component
1

Price

-.157

-.453

-.109

Brand

-.169

.824

-.048

Flavour

.439

-.121

.183

Content

.410

-.024

-.199

Availability

.352

-.013

.004

.017

.932

Advertiseme
.027
nt

22

Component Score Coefficient Matrix

(Factor weight matrix)
Component
1

Price

-.157

-.453

-.109

Brand

-.169

.824

-.048

Flavour

.439

-.121

.183

Content

.410

-.024

-.199

Availability

.352

-.013

.004

.017

.932

Advertiseme
.027
nt

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser
Normalization.
Component Scores.
Each factor can be expressed in terms of the significant variables identified under
each category
F1 = 0.439* (Flavour) + 0.410*(Content) + 0.352*(Availability)
F2 = - 0.453* (Price) + 0.824* (Brand)
F3 = 0.932* (Advertisement)
These factors can be named as:
F1: Kick Quotient
F2: Brand Premium
F3: Communication Efficacy
23

Multi Dimensional Scaling

Sub Problem 3:Identifying the positioning and market segmentation of energy
drinks currently in market
Research Question 3: How will you compare energy drink 1 with energy drink 2
to 11 and so on keeping in the mind all the parameters you consider essential
while purchasing an energy drink (such as Availability, Price, Glamour Quotient,
Brand, Contents etc)
To create a perceptual map and effective positioning for the brand, we created a
composite dissimilarity matrix by collecting the data for paired brand
comparisons from 149 users.
Based on the data, following perception map was generated using SPSS:

24

Stress and Fit Measures

Normalized Raw Stress .06890
Stress-I

.26250a

Stress-II

.71131a

S-Stress

.18051b

Dispersion Accounted
.93110
For (D.A.F.)
Tucker's Coefficient of
.96493
Congruence
PROXSCAL
minimizes
Normalized Raw Stress.
a. Optimal scaling factor = 1.074.
b. Optimal scaling factor = .985.
As can be seen, Dimension 1 can be classified as a dimension depicting Price of
the product while Dimension 2 can be classified as a dimension depicting Getting
High or Kick Quotient.
So, Monster, Rockstar and Cloud9 are majorly the drinks that are used in parties
to get high and sheer enjoyment whereas drinks such as Tzinga, Gatorade etc. are
majorly used because of their low price and for utility purposes. Tzinga is a drink
that is used majorly by college students (both graduates and post graduates) to
avoid sleep and Gatorade is used by sportspersons to hydrate and energize
themselves before and during the sport event.
Based on this perception map, Coca Cola should position their energy drink Burn
above Bullet and below AmwayXL as currently no energy drink manufacturer
operate in that region and thus, it would be able to cater both the markets i.e.
people who go to party to get high as well as people looking for a utility value
from it.

25

Interpretation and Recommendations

As a result of this analysis, we identified that Frequency of Usage and Age are the
two variables that are very crucial to differentiates users of energy drink from
non-users. Further, we identified variables that a user of energy drink deems
important while making a purchase.
These six variables are: Price, Brand, Flavour, Content, Availability and
Advertisement. These six variables were reduced to three factors using Factor
Analysis as follows:
Factor1: Kick Quotient, A combination of Flavour, Contents & Availability
Factor2: Brand Premium, A combination of Price & Brand
Factor3: Communication Efficacy, it includes Advertisement
After assessing the three factors, we created a perceptual map to enable the
organization to best position its energy drink in the market.
After performing Multi Dimensional Scaling on SPSS, we identified two
dimensions as:
1. Price
2. Kick Quotient/Getting High on energy

Recommendations
1. Based on this perception map, Coca Cola should position their energy drink
above Bullet and below Amway XL as currently no energy drink manufacturer
operate in that region and thus, can maximize their profitability.
2. Price & Brand Image are the key aspects of preference of one energy drink over
the other. So, Coca-Cola must emphasize on these two variables.
Based on our discussion with some of the industry experts, following parameters
also need to be factor in for all the energy drink manufacturers:
3. Awareness among the people need to be increased to promote energy drink by
introducing proper marketing mix strategy
4. An integrated marketing effort by the company would minimize the illusion
among potential buyers about the adverse impact of energy drink on health.

26

Bibliography
1. Food, Safety & Standards Authority of India
2. Business Today
3. Times of India
4. Technopak Consulting
5. Campaign India
6. Food Navigator Asia
7. Down to Earth
8. DNA India
9. Economic Times
10. Hindu Business Line
11. Live Mint
12. Caffeine Informer
13. Coca-Cola India
14. Red Bull India
15. Tzinga
16. MedicineNet
17. NutriConnect
18. The Hindu
19. Austrian Times
20. Google

27

Annexure - Questionnaire
* Required
1. Are you aware of energy drinks? *
Yes
No
2. Do you currently drink energy drinks? (If no, please go to Question
21)
Yes
No
3. If you use energy drinks, what brands are you aware of ? *
Red Bull
Cloud 9
Power Horse
Rhino
Current
Bullet
Amway XL
Pepsi SoBe
Gatorade
Tzinga
XXX
Other:
4. How often do you use energy drinks?
Everyday
A couple of times a week
Once a week
A couple of times a month
On occasions like parties, social gatherings,etc.
28

Other:
5. Do you drink alcohol?. If yes what do you consume it with?
Soft Drinks
Fruit Juice
Energy Drinks
I dont' drink alcohol
Other:
6. Which of the following places do you, or would you like to consume
energy drinks?
Home
Office
College Campus
Pub
Night club
Gym
Joggers Park
Sports Club
Cafe
Restaurant
Other:

7. Rank according to preference- what do you consider the most

important while purchasing an energy drink? ("1-least important"
and "5-most important")
1

Price
Select a value from a range of 1 to 7.

8. Rank according to preference- what do you consider the most

important while purchasing an energy drink? ("1-least important"
and "5-most important")
29

Brand
Select a value from a range of 1 to 7.

9. Rank according to preference- what do you consider the most

important while purchasing an energy drink? ("1-least important"
and "5-most important")
1

Flavour
Select a value from a range of 1 to 7.

10. Rank according to preference- what do you consider the most

important while purchasing an energy drink? ("1-least important"
and "5-most important")
1

Contents
Select a value from a range of 1 to 7.
11. Rank according to preference- what do you consider the most
important while purchasing an energy drink? ("1-least important"
and "5-most important")
1

Availability
Select a value from a range of 1 to 7.
12. Rank according to preference- what do you consider the most
important while purchasing an energy drink? ("1-least important"
and "5-most important")
1

Advertisement
Select a value from a range of 1 to 7.
30

13. Other attributes you consider important while purchasing an

energy drink.

14. Do you feel there is any health risk associated with Red Bull?
Yes
No
Can't Say
15. Why don't you drink energy drinks? (For those who answered
"no" to Question 4)
I don't like them
I find them too expensive
I prefer other beverages
Other:

16. If you were made aware of energy drinks, would you buy them?
Yes
No
Can't say
17. If given a choice, you would buy energy drinks from...
Established brands
Willing to try new brands
No such preference
Other:
18. Would you buy an energy drink if it was endorsed by a celebrity
or a sports star?
Yes
No
I don't care, I would buy anyway
31

19. City/Town:

20. Are you..?

Male
Female
21. What is your age group? *
Below 16 years
16-20 years
21-25 years
26-30 years
Above 30 years
22. What is your household income per annum?
Less than 3 lacs
3-5 lacs
More than 5 lacs

32

23. How will you compare energy drink 1 with energy drink 2 to 11 and so
on keeping in the mind all the parameters you consider essential while
purchasing an energy drink (such as Availability, Price, Glamour Quotient, Brand,
Contents etc) on a scale of 0-7 where 0 denotes no difference at all, 1 denotes
minimal difference and 7 denotes maximum difference.
(we are attaching the combined dissimilarity matrix that we received from 150
users)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
1
1

Red
Bull

Clou Tzin
d 9 ga

Rhi
no

Bull
et

Amw
ay XL

380
0

834
967

829
245

485
609

1000
713

612
0

650
300
0

861
209
258
0

Pep
si
Sob
e
604
104
4
923
619
430
438

Gatora
de

XXX Monst Rockst

er
ar

924
814

284 729
195 181

813
480

615
230
355
470

970
1011
698
505

546
938
926
415

392
0

896
581
484
102
3
224
831
0

611
927
967
0

986
262
1029
394
0

33