Dr. Pepper3

Dave Saucier
Zhongling Cao
Yoshives Belizaire
Shawn Parker
2013, Yoshives Belizaire, Zhongling Cao, Shawn Parker, Dave Saucier, UMFK
History
Dr. Pepper was created in 1885 by Charles Alderton at Morrisons

Old Corner Drug Store in Waco, Texas.
Nearly a 100 years later , three New York- area food storeowners
created a unique addle soda they named Snapple.
In 2006, Cadbury Schweppes purchased Dr Pepper and Snapple.
In May 2008 Cadbury Schweppes spun off Cadbury Schweppes

Americas Beverages into an independent company, called the Dr
Pepper Snapple group.
Existing Mission Statement
Existing Vision Statement
Company Current Strategy
Build and enhance leading Brands

Focus-on opportunities in high growth and high margin areas
Increase presence in high margin channels and packages
Leverage our integrated business model
Strengthen our route-to-market through acquisitions
Improve operating efficiency
RCI- Rapid Continuous Improvement
Health and Wellness initiative
Vision Statement
Mission Statement
At Dr. Pepper Snapple Group it is our mission to be the domestic leader

(3) in the flavored beverage industry (2). Our established and reputable
brand (6) allows us to deliver high quality beverages (7) to faithful and
potential customers (1). We will achieve this through effective
marketing, strong distribution channels, and fruitful partnerships. We
will continue to invest in our employees (9) as well as the communities
we operate in while remaining environmentally friendly (8). By
implementing the best technology (4) we are committed to reducing
costs in order to ensure sustained profits (5).
1. Customers 4.Technology 7. Self-concept

2. Products 5. Survival Growth & Profitability 8. Concern for Public Image
3. Markets 6. Philosophy 9. Concern for Employees
External Audit
Industry Market Analysis
Opportunities
1. Pepsi and Coke distribute other brands globally.
2. Americans are looking for more low/no calorie drinks, this market grew
1.2% in 2010.
3. Consumers are looking for nutrient enriched beverages.
4. There are over 300 Soft Drink manufactures .
5. Owning bottling distribution networks reduces cost and dependence on
other companies.
6. Strategic alliances with restaurants and fast food chains are readily
available.
7. The US beverage market to expect grow by 0.9 percent in 2011.
8. Growth to international market.
9. Countries such as India and China has over 9% GDP growth in 2010.
Threats
1. New York City is looking to banning sugary drinks.

2. Increasing cost of commodities, especially the volatile sugar industry and
sugar tax.
3. Some legislators are proposing tax on sugared soft drinks.
4. U.S consumption of soft drinks in 2011 is the lowest since 1996, The
carbonated soft drinks market is expected to decrease 2.2% by 2015.
5. Operate in a discretionary item industry, very volatile.
6. Highly competitive market.
7. The health issue with some of their products for example sodas.
8. The Institute of Medicine, a government-chartered organization, which
stated that food and beverage companies are using television ads to entice
kids into eating and drinking unhealthful quantities.
9. Diet Pepsi experienced an 8% decrease in 2011 in sales according to
beverage digest.
Competitive Profile Matrix
Dr. Pepper
Snapple Coca Cola Pepsi
Critical Success factors Weights Rating Rating Rating
Weighted Weighted Weighted
0.0 to 1.0 1 to 4 Score 1 to 4 Score 1 to 4 Score
Advertising 0.1 2 0.2 3 0.3 4 0.4
Organization 0.08 3 0.24 4 0.32 4 0.32
Structure 0.07 3 0.21 4 0.28 4 0.28
Customer Service 0.06 3 0.18 3 0.18 3 0.18
Global Expansion 0.08 1 0.08 4 0.32 3 0.24
Financial Position 0.09 2 0.18 4 0.36 3 0.27
Management
Experience 0.08 3 0.24 4 0.32 4 0.32
Customer Loyalty 0.07 3 0.21 3 0.21 3 0.21
Market Share 0.1 2 0.2 4 0.4 3 0.3
Product Quality 0.1 3 0.3 4 0.4 3 0.3
E-commerce 0.08 3 0.24 4 0.32 4 0.32
Price Competitiveness 0.09 3 0.27 3 0.27 3 0.27
Totals 1 2.55 3.68 3.41
External Factor Evaluation

External Opportunities
1. Pepsi and Coke distribute other brands globally 0.05 3 0.15
2. Americans are looking for more low/no calorie drinks, this market grew 1.2% in 2010 0.08 2 0.16
3. Consumers are looking for nutrient enriched beverages 0.07 1 0.07
4. There are over 300 Soft Drink manufactures 0.06 2 0.12
5. Strategic alliances with restaurants and fast food chains are readily available. 0.06 2 0.12
6. Owning bottling distribution networks reduces cost and dependence on other companies 0.05 3 0.15
7. The US beverage market grew by 0.9 percent in 2011 0.06 1 0.06
8. Growth to international market. 0.05 2 0.1
9. Countries such as India and China has over 9% GDP growth in 2010. 0.05 2 0.1
External Threats 0
1. New York City is looking to banning sugary drinks 0.04 1 0.04
2. U.S consumption of soft drinks in 2011 is the lowest since 1996, The carbonated soft
drinks market is expected to decrease 2.2% by 2015 0.06 3 0.18
3. Some legislators are proposing tax on sugared soft drinks 0.05 1 0.05
4. Increasing cost of commodities, especially the volatile sugar industry and sugar tax. 0.06 1 0.06
5. Operate in a discretionary item industry, very volatile. 0.07 1 0.07
6. Highly competitive market. 0.05 2 0.1
7. The health issue with some of their products for example sodas. 0.05 2 0.1
8. The Institute of Medicine, a government-chartered organization, which stated that food
and beverage companies are using television ads to entice kids into eating and drinking
unhealthful quantities. 0.03 2 0.06
9. Diet Pepsi experienced an 8% decrease in 2011 in sales according to beverage digest. 0.06 2 0.12
Totals 1 1.81
Internal Audit
Organization Structure
Larry Young
President, CEO, and
Director
EVP and EVP EVP of R&D EVP

EVP SVP and EVP Human
General Corporate Marketing
and CIO Resources
Counsel Affairs
CFO
Information EVP Supply

Technology Chain
President Manager
President
Beverage Packaged
Concentrates Beverages Manager, IT Director IT
Quality Program
Assurance
Latin America Division
Beverages Manager
Network
Operations
Engineer
Branch Manager
Manager
Technical Support
& Systems
Programing Director of
Human
Resources
Senior Project
Engineer
Financial-Income Statement
Financial Balance Sheet
Financial Balance Sheet
Net Worth Analysis
Stockholders' Equity $2,459
Net Income x 5 2,640
(Share Price/EPS) x Net Income 7,886
Number of Shares Outstanding x Share Price 7,863
Method Average $5,212

In millions
Ratio Analysis
Liquidity Ratios DPS PEP KO
Current Ratio 0.98 1.11 1.17
Quick Ratio 0.80 0.89 1.02
Leverage Ratios
Debt-to-Total Assets Ratio 0.72 0.68 1.00
Debt-to-Equity Ratio 2.60 2.19 2.33
Long-Term Debt-to-Equity Ratio 0.69 0.94 0.45
Times-Interest-Earned Ratio 8.01 9.23 11.53
Activity Ratios
Inventory Turns 30.63 36.38 34.13
Fixed Assets Turnover 4.83 3.03 2.38
Total Assets Turnover 0.64 0.85 0.48
Accounts Receivable Turnover 9.87 9.15 7.93
Average Collection Period 36.98 39.90 46.04
Profitability Ratios
Gross Profit Margin 0.60 0.54 0.64
Operating Profit Margin 18.19% 14.41% 24.06%
Net Profit Margin 9.37% 10.96% 34.65%
Return on Total Assets 5.96% 9.30% 16.19%
Return on Stockholders equity 21.47% 29.79% 37.71%
Earning per Share 2.20 3.40 5.12
Price-Earnings Ratio 14.89 17.96 6.01
Growth Rations (yearly)
Sales 1.90% 33.79% 13.32%
Net Income -4.86% 6.00% 73.05%
Earnings per Share 0.46% 4.20% 73.56%
Dividends per Share 500.00% 6.78% 7.32%
Strengths
1. Owns 6 of the top 10 non-cola drinks.
2. 9 of their top 12 brands are number 1 in their flavor category.
3. Snapple brand grew 10% in 2010.
4. Pay above average dividends, raising 500% in 2010 to $.90.
5. Has 21 manufacturing / bottle facilities located in the United States,
Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbeans .
6. Overall Dr. Pepper Snapple group is the #1 company in the flavored CSD
market. Dr. Pepper is the #2 flavored CSD and Snapple is the leading
ready-to-drink tea.
7. The Companys combination of brand ownership, bottling and
distribution gives it inherently more control over the value chain and
thus a competitive advantage.
8. Has more than 50 brands under Dr. Pepper Snapple group.
9. Dr. Peppers brand is spanning more than 125 years.
10.22% increase on EPS
Weaknesses
1. Low market share in Carbonated Beverage industry.
2. Does not have low calorie or sports drinks.
3. Does not have a strong water brand.
4. 71% of its volume is distributed by Coca-Cola and PepsiCo.
5. We are not a global company like Pepsi and Coca Cola, only operating in
North America and the Caribbean.
6. Is considered the third top brand for soft drinks.
7. Only rank #20 in beverage industry worldwide.
8. Too focused on every drink production.
9. Dr. Pepper wasn't list in top 20 most nutrition beverage company.
10.Revenues increased 1.8% in 2010 while net income decreased 5%.
Internal Factor Evaluation

Key Internal Factor Weights Rating Weighted
Score
Internal Strengths 3 or 4
1.Owns 6 of the top 10 non-cola drinks. 0.04 3 0.12
2.9 of their top 12 brands are number 1 in their flavor category. 0.05 3 0.15
3.Snapple brand grew 10% in 2010. 0.04 4 0.16
4.Pay above average dividends, raising 500% in 2010 to $.90. 0.05 4 0.2
5.Has 21 manufacturing / bottle facilities located in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbeans. 0.04 3 0.12
6.Overall Dr. Pepper Snapple group is the #1 company in the flavored CSD market. Dr. Pepper is the #2
flavored CSD and Snapple is the leading ready-to-drink tea. 0.07 4 0.28
7.The Companys combination of brand ownership, bottling and distribution gives it inherently more
control over the value chain and thus a competitive advantage. 0.05 3 0.15
8.Has more than 50 brands under Dr. Pepper Snapple group. 0.07 4 0.28
9.Dr. Pepper Snapple group's brand is spanning more than 200 years. 0.04 4 0.16
10.22% increase on EPS. 0.04 4 0.16
Internal Weaknesses 1 or 2
1.Low market share in Carbonated Beverage industry. 0.06 1 0.06
2.Does not have low calorie or sports drinks. 0.05 1 0.05
3.Does not have a strong water brand. 0.04 1 0.04
4.71% of its volume is distributed by Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. 0.05 2 0.1
5.We are not a global company like Pepsi and Coca Cola, only operating in North America and the
Caribbean. 0.06 2 0.12
6.Is considered the third top brand for soft drinks. 0.06 2 0.12
7.Only rank #20 in beverage industry worldwide. 0.05 1 0.05
8.Too focused on every drink production. 0.04 1 0.04
9.Wasn't list in top 20 most nutrition beverage company? 0.06 1 0.06
10.Revenues increased 1.8% in 2010 while net income decreased 5%. 0.04 1 0.04
Totals 1 2.46
Strategy Formulation
SWOT Matrix
SO Strategies WO Strategies
1. Develop more non-cola, low calorie drinks. (S1, S6, O2) 1. Produce more healthy drink. (W9, O2, O3, O7)
2. Enter new market such as India, China or other Asian 2. Develop sports drink. (W2, O2, O3, O7)
countries that has large GDP growth. (S5, O8, O10)
3. Partner with restaurants and fast food chain. (S8,O5) 3. Develop water drink. (W3, O2, O3, O7)
ST Strategies WT Strategies
1. Start to brand off more on Snapple than there soft drinks 1. Invest more in healthier products like a sports
since Snapple brand is growing and soft drinks are drink, or flavored water.(W2,W3,T2,T7)
decreasing. (S3,T2,T7)
2. Us the advantages of other countries manufacturing 2. The company should be more independent and
facilities to produce products to help avoid taxes on sugar. not really so much on there competitors to sell
(S5, S7,T3,T4) there products (W4,T6)
3. Us brand threw advertisement with celebrities to help 3. Advertise there other brands more like
sell product like Snapple, and show that there products are Snapple, Hawaiian Punch, and Motts
healthy and good for you. (S1,S6,T7,T9) (W6,W7,T8)
4. Purchase vineyards and produce wine (W7, T2)
Space Matrix
Financial Position Score Competitive Position Score
Cash flow 4 Market share -4
Working capital 2 Product quality -1
Inventory turnover 7 Customer loyalty -3
EPS 3 Technology know-how -4
Leverage 3 Product life cycle -2
Liquidity 2 Capacity utilization -4
3.50 -3.00
Stability Position Score Industry Position Score
Technological changes -3 Growth potential 3
Rate of inflation -3 Profit potential 3
Demand variability -4 Financial stability 4
Competitive pressure -3 Extent leverage 4
Barriers to entry -6 Resource utilization 3
Price elasticity of demand -5 Ease of entry into market 5
-4.00 3.67
Space Matrix
FP
Conservative Aggressive
+6
+5
+4
+3
+2
+1
CP -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6
IP
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
Defensive Competitive
-6
SP
Grand Strategy Matrix
Possible Strategies:
Rapid Growth Market 1. Backwards,
Forwards, or
Horizontal
Quadrant II Quadrant I
Integration
2. Market Penetration
3. Market
Development
4. Product
Development
5. Diversification
(Related)
Quadrant III Quadrant IV
Slow Growth Market
Matrix Analysis
Alternative Starategies IE SPACE GRAND BCG COUNT

Forward Integration x x 2
Backward integration x x 2
Horizontal Integration x x 2
Market Penetration x x 2
Product Development x x 2
Market Development x x 2
Related Diversification x 1
Unrelated Diversification 0
Retrenchment 0
Divestiture 0
Liquidation 0
Alternative Strategies
Forward Integration Product Development

The company should be more independent Develop more non-cola, low calorie drinks.
and not really so much on their competitors (S1, S6, O2)
to sell their products (W4,T6)
Horizontal Integration Market Development
Use the advantages of other countries Enter new market such as India, China or
manufacturing facilities to produce products other Asian countries that has large GDP
to help avoid taxes on sugar. (S5, S7,T3,T4) growth. (S5, O8, O10)
Market Penetration Related Diversification
Advertise with celebrities to help sell Develop sports drink. (W2, O2, O3, O7)
product like Snapple, and show that there Produce more healthy drinks. (W9, O2, O3,
products are healthy and good for you. O7)
(S1,S6,T7,T9) Develop a luxury water. (W3, O2, O3, O7)
Advertise their other brands more like Develop a flavored water.(W2,W3,T2,T7)
Snapple, Hawaiian Punch, and Motts Purchase vineyards and produce wine. (W7,
(W6,W7,T8) T2)
Concentrate marketing efforts on Snapple
rather than soft drinks since Snapple brand
is growing and soft drinks are decreasing.
(S3,T2,T7)
QSPM
Develop new Create Purchase
products in strategic vineyards and
non CSD alliances produce wine
Key factors Weight AS TAS AS TAS AS TAS
External 1 to 4 1 to 4 1 to 4
Pepsi and Coke distribute other brands globally 0.09 2 0.18 3 0.27 - -
Americans are looking for more low/no calorie drinks, this
market grew 1.2% in 2010 0.11 4 0.44 - - - -
Consumers are looking for nutrient enriched beverages 0.11 4 0.44 - - 2 0.22
There are over 300 Soft Drink manufactures 0.06 - - 3 0.18 - -
Strategic alliances with restaurants and fast food chains are
readily available. 0.07 - - 4 0.28 3 0.21
Owning bottling distribution networks reduces cost and
dependence on other companies 0.08 1 0.08 3 0.24 3 0.24
The US beverage market grew by 0.9 percent in 2011 0.06 1 0.06 2 0.12 - -
U.S consumption of soft drinks in 2011 is the lowest since
1996, The carbonated soft drinks market is expected to
decrease 2.2% by 2015 0.08 3 0.24 1 0.08 2 0.16
Increasing cost of commodities, especially the volatile sugar
industry and sugar tax. 0.11 - - - - 4 0.44
Operate in a discretionary item industry, very volatile. 0.10 - - - - - -
Highly competitive market. 0.08 1 0.08 4 0.32 1 0.08
The health issue with some of their products for example
sodas. 0.05 4 0.2 - - 2 0.1
QSPM
Develop new Create Purchase
products in Strategic Vineyards and
non CSD alliances produce wine
Key factors Weight AS TAS AS TAS AS TAS
Internal
Owns 6 of the top 10 non-cola drinks 0.08 - - 3 0.24 - -
9 of their top 12 brands are number 1 in their flavor category
0.08 - - 3 0.24 - -
Snapple brand grew 10% in 2010 0.07 3 0.21 - - - -
Has 21 manufacturing / bottle facilities located in the United
States, Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbeans .
0.09 - - 2 0.18 1 0.09
Overall Dr. Pepper Snapple group is the #1 company in the
flavored CSD market. Dr. Pepper is the #2 flavored CSD and
Snapple is the leading ready-to-drink tea. 0.09 - - - - - -
Has more than 50 brands under Dr. Pepper Snapple group.
0.07 - - 1 0.07 - -
Low market share in Carbonated Beverage industry
0.07 - - 3 0.21 - -
Does not have low calorie or sports drinks 0.11 4 0.44 - - - -
Does not have a strong water brand 0.1 4 0.4 - - - -
71% of its volume is distributed by Coca-Cola and PepsiCo
0.11 - - 4 0.44 - -
Is considered the third top brand for soft drinks. 0.07 - - - - - -
Only rank #20 in beverage industry worldwide. 0.06 3 0.18 2 0.12 2 0.12
1 2.95 2.99 1.66
Objective
Continue with the current strategies that the company

already has but also:
Expand our brands

Create more strategic alliances
Expand our market share
Increase awareness nutritional line of products
Look for feasible and equally beneficial mergers and
acquisitions
Strategic
Dr. Pepper Snapple group will invest more in R&D to develop a new
sports drink that is high in electrolytes and low in sodium to compete
against PowerAde and Gatorade.
Dr. Pepper Snapple Group will seek out new technology to create the
purest best tasting artesian/luxury water on the market to compete with
FIJI and EVIAN also expand market with current water Deja Blue.
Dr. Pepper Snapple Group will invest in R&D to create a Snapple drink
that helps relieve the symptoms of a mild Hangover. It will have caffeine
to energize you, natural vitamins to cure headaches and upset stomachs
and taste great.
Dr. Pepper Snapple Group will aggressively Market their healthier

drinks as the smart choice for the refreshment needs.
Dr. Pepper Snapple Group will actively seek out mergers and acquisitions
like Red Bull, and Hansen Natural which owns Monster plus others
carbonated beverages.
Dr. Pepper Snapple Group will develop low Calorie Soft Drinks
3 Year Goal and Annual Objective

Year 1:
Develop products and test with focus group. $16 million
Increase advertising efforts for our nutritional drinks, campaign with
theme smart choice with people like Jillian Michaels or Mario
Lopez and other celebrities that are physically fit.
Develop Social media sites and advertise within and on other sites.
Purchase more retail space, create alliances with school districts and
universities for the smart choice option for their students.
Search out mergers and acquisitions.
Year 2
Roll out new products with huge marketing campaign.
Finalize merger and acquisitions.
At the end of the year evaluate new products and Smart Choice
Campaign, refocus.
Year 3
Continue to re-evaluate current strategy and adjust for changes to
environment.
Continue to develop and market new products.
Continue to look for mergers and acquisitions
Strategy Selection with Year 1 Cost
Total funding needed to implement new strategies
We are going to double the funding to the R&D department

from 16million to 32 million annually.
We are going to increase or advertising budget by 50% from

445 million to 671 million to really push our new products as
well as our currently Smart Choice products.
Total Cost for recommended strategy $250 million.
EPS/EBIT
Recessio Recession Normal Boom
n Normal Boom Debt Financing
Common Stock Financing EBIT 800 1,000 1,400
EBIT 800 1,000 1,400 Interest 141 141 141
Interest 128 128 128 EBT 660 860 1,260
EBT 672 872 1,272 Taxes 237 309 453
Taxes 242 314 458 EAT 422 550 806
EAT 430 558 814 # Shares 240.4 240.4 240.4
# Shares 248 248 302 EPS 1.76 2.29 3.35
EPS 1.73
Recession 2.25
Normal Boom2.70 Recession Normal Boom
90% Stock 10% Debt Financing 90% Debet 10% Stock
EBIT 800 1,000 1,400 EBIT 800 1,000 1,400
Interest 129 129 128 Interest 139 139 128
EBT 671 871 1,272 EBT 661 861 1,272
Taxes 241 313 458 Taxes 238 310 458
EAT 429 557 814 EAT 423 551 814
# Shares 247 247 247 # Share 241 241 241
EPS 1.74 2.25 3.29 EPS 1.75 2.28 3.38
Close Price for Dr Pepper Snapple 12/31/10 32.71
EPS for Disney on October 11,2011 2.19 Conclusion
Initial Shares Outstanding 240.4 The best option for Dr Pepper Snapple is to implement
Dividends on Preferred Stock 0.90 their strategy by financing the entire project. It
Funds Needed 250 reflects a higher EPS for the company in all categories
90% of Funds Needed 225 with the exception of a boom economy. Given the
10% of Funds Needed 25 current economy, we can expect normal earnings.
Interest Rate 5%
Current Tax Rate 36%
Projected Income Statement

For the Year Ended December 31,
Projected
2009 2010
2011 Reasoning
(In millions, except per share data)
Net sales $ 5,531 $ 5,636 $6,200 10% Increase
Cost of sales 2,234 2,243 2,480 Average % of 2009-10 (10%)
Gross profit 3,297 3,393 3,720
Increase 250M
Selling, general and administrative expenses 2,135 2,233 2,483 (Advertising:220M/R&D:30M)
Depreciation and amortization 117 127 137 8% Increase--New Brand Depreciation
Impairment of goodwill and intangible assets
Restructuring costs
Other operating expense (income), net (40) 8 8
Income (loss) from operations 1,085 1,025 1,092
Additional Interest from Financing 250M-->
243
Interest expense 128 141 13M
Interest income (4) (3) (3)
Loss on early extinguishment of debt 100
Other income, net (22) (21) (21)
Income (loss) before income taxes and equity in
earnings 868 821 975
Provision for income taxes 315 294 351 Average Tax Rate 36%
Income (loss) before equity in earnings 553 527 624
Equity in earnings, net of tax 2 1 1
Net income (loss) $ 555 $ 528 $625
Earnings (loss) per common share:
Basic $ 2.18 $ 2.19 $2.60
Diluted $ 2.17 $ 2.17 $2.58
Weighted average common shares outstanding:
Basic 254.2 240.4 240.4
Diluted 255.2 242.6 242.6
Cash dividends declared per common share $ 0.15 $ 0.90 $0.90
Projected Balance Sheet

Projected
2009 2010
2011
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents $ 280 $ 315 381 Fudge #
Accounts receivable:
Trade, net 540 536 616 Increase 15% (Distribution)
Other 32 35 39 Increase 10%
Inventories 262 244 256 Increase 5% - New Products (RCI)
Deferred tax assets 53 57 60 Increase 5% - New Products
Prepaid expenses and other current assets 112 122 128 Increase 5% - New Products
$
Total current assets $ 1,279 1,309 $ 1,480
6% Increase - Mixing, Bottling,

Property, plant and equipment, net 1,109 1,168 1238 Distribution Space
Investments in unconsolidated
subsidiaries 9 11 11
Goodwill 2,983 2,984 2999 .5% increase - New Product
Other intangible assets, net 2,702 2,691 2691
Other non-current assets 543 552 563 % Increase of Prior 2 Years (2%)
Non-current deferred tax assets 151 144 144
$
Projected Balance Sheet
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
Current liabilities: 2009 2010 Projected 2011
Accounts payable and accrued expenses 850 851 868 2% Increase (Supply)
Deferred revenue 65 65
404 Increase by 1/5 of 20M (60 month term
Current portion of long-term obligations 454 financing)
Income taxes payable 4 18 18
Total current liabilities $ 854 $ 1,338 $ 1,405
Long-term obligations 2,960 1,687 1,887 Increase by 4/5 of 20M
Non-current deferred tax liabilities 1,038 1,083 1,083
Non-current deferred revenue 1,515 1,515
Other non-current liabilities 737 777 777
Total liabilities $ 5,589 $ 6,400 $ 6,667
Commitments and contingencies
Stockholders equity:
Preferred stock, $.01 par value, 15,000,000
shares authorized, no shares issued
Common stock, $.01 par value, 800,000,000 2
shares authorized, 223,936,156 and
254,109,047 shares issued and outstanding
for 2010 and 2009, respectively 3 2
Additional paid-in capital 3,156 2,085 2,085
Retained earnings 87 400 400
Accumulated other comprehensive loss (59) (28) (28)
Total stockholders equity $ 3,187 2,459 2,459
Total liabilities and stockholders
equity $ 8,776 $ 8,859 $ 9,126
Projected Ratios
Dr Pepper Snapple
2010 Projected
Liquidity Ratios
Current Ratio 0.98 1.05
Quick Ratio 0.80 0.85
Leverage Ratios
Debt-to-Total Assets Ratio 0.72 0.73
Debt-to-Equity Ratio 2.60 2.71
Long-Term Debt-to-Equity Ratio 0.69 0.77
Times-Interest-Earned Ratio 8.01 6.91
Profitability Ratios
Gross Profit Margin 0.60 0.60
Operating Profit Margin 0.18 0.18
Return on Total Assets 5.96% 6.84%
Return on Stockholders' Equity 21.47% 25.38%
Earnings per Share 2.20 2.60
Growth Rations (yearly from previous)
Sales 1.90% 10.01%
Net Income -4.86% 18.18%
Earnings per Share 0.46% 25.11%
Strategic Evaluation
How are we going to evaluate or strategy?

Through KPIs
- Market share increase in targeted areas of at least 3%
annually
- Revenue increase of at least 10% annually
- Increase in customer satisfaction in taste tests
- Social media footprint, increase views and likes 5 fold annually.
- Increase of 15% EPS annually
- Increase of at least $.02 dividend quarterly to investors.
- At least one acquisition bi-annually in distribution and
beverage market.
Stock Performance
Update
Introduction of Dr. Pepper Ten and other brands,

http://youtu.be/2l5OVWZ7QWE
Consistent revenue, EPS and net income gains by increasing store placement and
promotions designed at the on-the-go driver
DPS has 13 of 14 leading brands are number 1 or 2 in their flavor category
Returned 684 million back to shareholders in 2012, 400 million in buyback and
284 in dividends.
Increased dividend for the 5th time since going public.
Since 2011 RCI has reduced days sale of inventory by 40%, and closed 10 outside
warehouses freeing up resources to grow the business. They also have cut the
fleet delivery miles by more than 1 million, removing 3.7 millions pounds of
greenhouse gas emissions from the atmosphere.
Questions??

Dr. Pepper3

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Dr. Pepper3

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Dave Saucier

Dr. Pepper was created in 1885 by Charles Alderton at Morrisons

In 2006, Cadbury Schweppes purchased Dr Pepper and Snapple.

In May 2008 Cadbury Schweppes spun off Cadbury Schweppes

Build and enhance leading Brands

At Dr. Pepper Snapple Group it is our mission to be the domestic leader

1. Customers 4.Technology 7. Self-concept

1. New York City is looking to banning sugary drinks.

External Factor Evaluation

EVP and EVP EVP of R&D EVP

Information EVP Supply

Stockholders' Equity $2,459

Net Income x 5 2,640

(Share Price/EPS) x Net Income 7,886

Number of Shares Outstanding x Share Price 7,863

Method Average $5,212

Internal Factor Evaluation

4. Purchase vineyards and produce wine (W7, T2)

Quadrant III Quadrant IV

Slow Growth Market

Alternative Starategies IE SPACE GRAND BCG COUNT

Forward Integration Product Development

Continue with the current strategies that the company

Expand our brands

Dr. Pepper Snapple Group will aggressively Market their healthier

3 Year Goal and Annual Objective

Total funding needed to implement new strategies

We are going to double the funding to the R&D department

We are going to increase or advertising budget by 50% from

Total Cost for recommended strategy $250 million.

Projected Income Statement

Projected Balance Sheet

6% Increase - Mixing, Bottling,

How are we going to evaluate or strategy?

Introduction of Dr. Pepper Ten and other brands,

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi