Field study work of customer satisfaction towards

FIELD STUDY WORK OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

TOWARDS “SOFT DRINKS”WITH REFERENCE AT

KARAIKUDI TOWN

Submitted to Alagappa University in partial fulfillment of requirements for the Degree of

BACHELOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Submitted by

Y.XXXXXXXX

(REG.NO 10153142)

Under the guidance of

MR.XXXXXXXXX M.Com., M.Sc., M.Phil., PGDCA

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

ALAGAPPA GOVT ATRS COLLEGE

KARAIKUDI-630 002

2012 – 2013

1 | P a g e

ALAGPPA GOVERNMENT ARTS COLLEGE

KARAIKUDI-630002

DEPARTMENT OF

BACHELOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Date:

BONOFIDE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that this field study report on FIELD STUDY

WORK OF CUSTOMER SATISFACTION TOWARDS “SOFT

DRINKS”WITH REFERENCE IN KARAIKUDI TOWN Is done

by Y.XXXXXXX (REG.NO 10153142) during the course of this

study in the sixth semester. This field study represents independent

work on the part of the candidate.

Dr.KKKKKKKK Mrs. LLLLLLLLL

(Head of the department) (Faculty guide)

2 | P a g e

DECLARATION

I hereby that the field study report titled FIELD STUDY WORK OF

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION TOWARDS “SOFT DRINKS” IN

KARAIKUDI TOWN for the degree in BBA is my original work

Signature of the Candidate

(Y.XXXXXXXXXXXXX)

3 | P a g e

Acknowledgment

I regard my deepest sense of gratitude to (late) DR.ALAGAPPA

CHETTIYAR for his valuable contribution for this education.

First I express my thanks to our principal MR.Prof.X.YYYYYYYYYY,

M.Com., M.Phil., to give me an opportunity to study B.B.A Degree Course.

I also express my thanks to MR.DR.YYYYYYY M.B.A., MPhil., Ph.D.

Head of the Department of Business Administration for his constant

encouragement and support.

I personally thank to MRSYYYYYYYY M.Com., M.Sc., M.Phil.,

PGDCA who helped me in every possible way in bringing out this successfully.

It is my duty to thank department staffs, friend and my parents who

motivated, guided and supported me to complete this report more successfully.

By sincerely,

(Y.XXXXXXXX)

4 | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.NO TITLE PAGE NO

I INTRODUCTION 7 – 19

II COMPANY PROFILE 21 – 24

III OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY 26

IV RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 28

V DATA ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION 30 - 71

VI FINDINGS OF THE STUDY 73 – 74

VII LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 76

VIII SUGGESTIONS 78

IX CONCLUSION 80

X APPENDIX 82 – 83

5 | P a g e

INTRODUCTION

6 | P a g e

CHAPTER – I

INTRODUCTION

THE HISTORY OF SOFT DRINKS

The first marketed soft drinks in the Western world appeared in the 17th

century. They were made of water and lemon juice sweetened with honey. In

1676, the Companies des Lemonades of Paris was granted a monopoly for the

sale of lemonade soft drinks. Vendors carried tanks of lemonade on their backs

and dispensed cups of the soft drink to thirsty Parisians.

Carbonated drinks

In the late 18th century, scientists made important progress in replicating

naturally carbonated mineral waters. In 1767, Englishman Joseph Priestley first

discovered a method of infusing water with carbon dioxide to make carbonated

water when he suspended a bowl of distilled water above a beer vat at a local

brewery in Leeds, England. His invention of carbonated water (also known as

soda water) is the major and defining component of most soft drinks.

Priestley found that water treated in this manner had a pleasant taste, and he

offered it to friends as a refreshing drink. In 1772,

7 | P a g e

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Soft_drink_shelf.JPG

Priestley published a paper entitled Impregnating Water with Fixed Air in

which he describes dripping oil of vitriol onto chalk to produce carbon dioxide

gas, and encouraging the gas to dissolve into an agitated bowl of water.

Another Englishman, John Mervin Nooth, improved Priestley's design and sold

his apparatus for commercial use in pharmacies. Swedish

chemist TorbernBergmaninvented a generating apparatus that made carbonated

water from chalk by the use of sulfuric acid. Bergman's apparatus allowed

imitation mineral water to be produced in large amounts. Swedish chemist Jöns

Jacob Berzelius started to add flavors (spices, juices, and wine) to carbonated

water in the late eighteenth century.

Phosphate soda

A variant of soda in the United States called "phosphate soda" appeared

in the late 1870s. It became one of the most popular soda fountain drinks from

1900 through the 1930s, with the lemon or orange phosphate being the most

basic. The drink consists of 1 US fl oz (30 ml) fruit syrup, 1/2 teaspoon

of phosphoric acid, and enough carbonated water and ice to fill a glass. This

drink was commonly served in pharmacies.

Soda fountain pioneers

Artificial mineral waters, usually called "soda water", and the soda

fountain made the biggest splash in the United States. Beginning in 1806, Yale

University chemistry professor Benjamin Silliman sold soda waters in New

Haven, Connecticut. He used a Nooth apparatus to produce his waters.

Businessmen in Philadelphia and New York City also began selling soda water

in the early 19th century. In the 1830s, John Matthews of New York City and

John Lippincott of Philadelphia began manufacturing soda fountains. Both men

were successful and built large factories for fabricating fountains.

8 | P a g e

Soda fountains vs. bottled sodas

The drinking of either natural or artificial mineral water was considered a

healthy practice. The American pharmacists selling mineral waters began to add

herbs and chemicals to unflavored mineral water. They used birch bark

(see birch beer), dandelion, sarsaparilla, fruit extracts, and other substances.

Flavorings were also added to improve the taste. Pharmacies with soda

fountains became a popular par

t of American culture. Many Americans frequented the soda fountain on a

daily basis. Due to problems in the U.S. glass industry, bottled drinks were a

small portion of the market in the 19th century. (However, they were known in

England. In The Tenant of Wildfell Hall, published in 1848, the caddish

Huntingdon, recovering from months of debauchery, wakes at noon and gulps a

bottle of soda-water.) In America, most soft drinks were dispensed and

consumed at a soda fountain, usually in a drugstore or ice cream parlor. In the

early 20th century, sales of bottled soda increased exponentially. In the second

half of the 20th century, canned soft drinks became an important share of the

market.

Soft drink bottling industry

Over 1,500 U.S. patents were filed for either a cork, cap, or lid for the

carbonated drink bottle tops during the early days of the bottling industry.

Carbonated drink bottles are under great pressure from the gas. Inventors were

trying to find the best way to prevent the carbon dioxide or bubbles from

escaping. In 1892, the "Crown Cork Bottle Seal" was patented by William

Painter, a Baltimore, Maryland machine shop operator. It was the first very

successful method of keeping the bubbles in the bottle.

9 | P a g e

Automatic production of glass bottles

In 1899, the first patent was issued for a glass-blowing machine for the

automatic production of glass bottles. Earlier glass bottles had all been hand-

blown. Four years later, the new bottle-blowing machine was in operation. It

was first operated by the inventor, Michael Owens, an employee of Libby Glass

Company. Within a few years, glass bottle production increased from 1,400

bottles a day to about 58,000 bottles a day.

Home-Paks and vending machines

During the 1920s, "Home-Paks" were invented. "Home-Paks" are the

familiar six-pack cartons made from cardboard. Vending machines also began

to appear in the 1920s. Since then, soft drink vending machines have become

increasingly popular. Both hot and cold drinks are sold in these self-service

machines throughout the world.

Health effects:

The consumption of sugar-sweetened soft drinks is associated

with obesity, type 2 diabetes, dental caries, and low nutrient

levels. Experimental studies tend to support a causal role for sugar-sweetened

soft drinks in these ailments,[13][14] though this is challenged by other

researchers. "Sugar-sweetened" includes drinks that use high-fructose corn

syrup, as well as those using sucrose.

Many soft drinks contain ingredients that are themselves sources of

concern: caffeine is linked to anxiety and sleep disruption when consumed in

excess, and some critics question the health effects of added sugars and artificial

sweeteners. Sodium benzoate has been investigated by researchers at University

of Sheffield as a possible cause of DNA damage and hyperactivity.

10 | P a g e

In 1998, the Center for Science in the Public Interest published a report

titled Liquid Candy: How Soft Drinks are Harming Americans' Health. The

report examined statistics relating to the increase in soft drink consumption and

claimed that consumption is "likely contributing to health problems." It also

criticized marketing efforts by soft drink companies.

Obesity and weight-related diseases

From 1977 to 2002, Americans doubled their consumption of sweetened

beverages trend that was paralleled by doubling the prevalence of obesity. The

consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages is associated with weight and

obesity, and changes in consumption can help predict changes in weight. One

study followed 548 schoolchildren over 19 months and found that changes in

soft drink consumption were associated with changes in body mass

index (BMI). Each soft drink that a child added to his or her daily consumption

was accompanied by an increase in BMI of 0.24 kg/m2. Similarly, an 8-year

study of 50,000 female nurses compared women who went from drinking

almost no soft drinks to drinking more than one a day to women who went from

drinking more than one soft drink a day to drinking almost no soft drinks. The

women who increased their consumption of soft drinks gained 8.0 kg over the

course of the study while the women who decreased their consumption gained

only 2.8 kg. In each of these studies, the absolute number of soft drinks

consumed per day was also positively associated with weight gain.

It remains possible that the correlation is due to a third factor: people who

lead unhealthy lifestyles might consume more soft drinks. If so, then the

association between soft drink consumption and weight gain could reflect the

consequences of an unhealthy lifestyle rather than the consequences of

consuming soft drinks. Experimental evidence is needed to definitively establish

the causal role of soft drink consumption.

11 | P a g e

Many of these experiments examined the influence of sugar-sweetened

soft drinks on weight gain in children and adolescents. In one experiment,

adolescents replaced sugar-sweetened soft drinks in their diet with artificially

sweetened soft drinks that were sent to their homes over 25 weeks. Compared

with children in a control group, children who received the artificially

sweetened drinks saw a smaller increase in their BMI (by −.14 kg/m2), but this

effect was only statistically significant among the heaviest children (who saw a

benefit of −.75 kg/m2). In another study, an educational program encouraged

schoolchildren to consume fewer soft drinks. During the school year, the

prevalence of obesity decreased among children in the program by 0.2%,

compared to a 7.5% increase among children in the control group.

Sugar-sweetened drinks have also been speculated to cause weight gain in

adults. In one study, overweight individuals consumed a daily supplement of

sucrose-sweetened or artificially sweetened drinks or foods for a 10 week

period. Most of the supplement was in the form of soft drinks. Individuals in the

sucrose group gained 1.6 kg, and individuals in the artificial-sweetener group

lost 1.0 kg. A two week study had participants supplement their diet with sugar-

sweetened soft drinks, artificially sweetened soft drinks, or neither. Although

the participants gained the most weight when consuming the sugar-sweetened

drinks, some of the differences were unreliable: the differences between men

who consumed sugar-sweetened drinks or no drinks was not statistically

significant.

Other research suggests that soft drinks could play a special role in

weight gain. One four-week experiment compared a 450 calorie/day supplement

of sugar-sweetened soft drinks to a 450 calorie/day supplement of jelly

beans. The jelly bean supplement did not lead to weight gain, but the soft drink

supplement did. The likely reason for the difference in weight gain is that

people who consumed the jelly beans lowered their caloric intake at subsequent

12 | P a g e

meals, while people who consumed soft drinks did not. Thus, the low levels of

satiety provided by sugar-sweetened soft drinks may explain their association

with obesity. That is, people who consume calories in sugar-sweetened

beverages may fail to adequately reduce their intake of calories from other

sources. Indeed, people consume more total calories in meals and on days when

they are given sugar-sweetened beverages than when they are given artificially

sweetened beverages or water.

A study by Purdue University reported that no-calorie sweeteners were

linked to an increase in body weight. The experiment compared rats who were

fed saccharin-sweetened yogurt and glucose-sweetened yogurt. The saccharin

group eventually consumed more calories, gained more weight and more body

fat, and did not compensate later by cutting back.

The consumption of sugar-sweetened soft drinks can also be associated

with many weight-related diseases, including diabetes, metabolic syndrome and

cardiovascular risk factors, and elevated blood pressure.

Bone loss:

In a meta-analysis of 88 studies, drinking soda correlates with a decrease

in milk consumption along with the vitamin D, vitamin B6,vitamin

B12, calcium, protein and other micronutrients.[33] Phosphorus, a micronutrient,

can be found in cola-type beverages, but there may be a risk in consuming too

much. Phosphorus and calcium are used in the body to create calcium-

phosphate, which is the main component of bone. However, the combination of

too much phosphorus with too little calcium in the body can lead to a

degeneration of bone mass.

13 | P a g e

Dental decay

Most soft drinks contain high concentration of

simple carbohydrates: glucose, fructose, sucrose and other simple sugars. Oral

bacteria ferment carbohydrates and produce acid, which dissolves tooth enamel

during the dental decay process; thus, sweetened drinks are likely to increase

risk of dental caries. The risk is greater if the frequency of consumption is

high. This has led to dentists referring to soft drinks as "liquid chainsaws".

A large number of soft drinks are acidic, and some may have a pH of 3.0

or even lower. Drinking acidic drinks over a long period of time and continuous

sipping can therefore erode the tooth enamel. However, under normal

conditions, scientific evidence indicates Coca-Cola's acidity causes no

immediate harm.

Using a drinking straw is often advised by dentists as the drink does not

come into as much contact with the teeth. It has also been suggested

that brushing teeth right after drinking soft drinks should be avoided as this can

result in additional erosion to the teeth due to the presence of acid.

Hypokalemia

There have been a handful of published reports describing individuals

with severe hypokalemia (low potassium levels) related to chronic extreme

consumption (4-10 L/day) of colas.

Soft drinks and bone density

Research suggests a statistically significant inverse relationship between

consumption of carbonated beverages and bone mineral density in young girls,

which places them at increased risk of suffering fractures in the future.

14 | P a g e

One hypothesis to explain this relationship is that the phosphoric acid contained

in some soft drinks (colas) displaces calcium from the bones, lowering bone

density of the skeleton and leading to weakened bones,

or osteoporosis. However, calcium metabolism studies by Dr. Robert Heaney

suggested that the net effect of carbonated soft drinks, (including colas, which

use phosphoric acid as the acidulent) on calcium excretion in urine was

negligible. Heaney concluded that carbonated soft drinks, which do not contain

the nutrients needed for bone health, may displace other foods which do, and

that the real issue is that people who drink a lot of soft drinks also tend to have

an overall diet that is low in calcium. In the 1950s and 1960s there were

attempts in France and Japan to ban the sale of Coca-Cola as dangerous since

phosphates can block calcium absorption. However, these were unsuccessful as

the amounts of phosphate were shown to be too small to have a significant

effect.

Sugar content

The USDA's recommended daily intake (RDI) of added sugars is less

than 10 teaspoons per day for a 2,000-calorie diet. High caloric intake

contributes to obesity if not balanced with exercise, with a large amount of

exercise being required to offset even small but calorie-rich food and drinks.

Until 1985, most of the calories in soft drinks came from sugar or corn syrup.

As of 2010, in the United States high-fructose corn syrup(HFCS) is used nearly

exclusively as a sweetener because of its lower cost, while in

Europe, sucrose dominates, because EUagricultural policies favor production

of sugar beets in Europe proper and sugarcane in the former colonies over the

production of corn. HFCS has been criticized as having a number of detrimental

effects on human health, such as promoting diabetes, hyperactivity,

15 | P a g e

hypertension, and a host of other problems.[45] Although anecdotal evidence has

been presented to support such claims, it is well known that the human body

breaks sucrose down into glucose and fructose before it is absorbed by the

intestines. Simple sugars such as fructose are converted into the same

intermediates as in glucose metabolism.[46] However, metabolism of fructose is

extremely rapid and is initiated by fructokinase. Fructokinase activity is not

regulated by metabolism or hormones and proceeds rapidly after intake of

fructose. While the intermediates of fructose metabolism are similar to those of

glucose, the rates of formation are excessive. This fact promotes fatty

acid and triglyceride synthesis in the liver, leading to accumulation of fat

throughout the body and possibly non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Increased

blood lipid levels also seem to follow fructose ingestion over time. A sugar

drink or high-sugar drink may refer to any beverage consisting primarily

of water and sugar (often cane sugar or high-fructose corn syrup), including

some soft drinks, fruit juices, and energy drinks.

Benzene

In 2006, the United Kingdom Food Standards Agency published the

results of its survey of benzene levels in soft drinks, which tested 150 products

and found that four contained benzene levels above the World Health

Organization (WHO) guidelines for drinking water.

The United States Food and Drug Administration released its own test

results of several soft drinks containing benzoates and ascorbic or erythorbic

acid. Five tested drinks contained benzene levels above the Environmental

Protection Agency's recommended standard of 5 ppb.

The Environmental Working Group has uncovered additional FDA test

results that showed the following results: Of 24 samples of diet soda tested

16 | P a g e

between 1995 and 2001 for the presence of benzene, 19 (79%) had amounts of

benzene in excess of the federal tap water standard of 5 ppb. One sample

contained 55 ppb of benzene, 11 fold tap water standards. to date do not pose a

safety concern for consumers".

Pesticides in India

In 2003, the Delhi non-profit Centre for Science and

Environment published a disputed report finding pesticide levels in Coke and

Pepsi soft drinks sold in India at levels 30 times that considered safe by the

European Economic Commission. The Indian Health Minister said the CSE

tests were inaccurate, and said that the government's tests found pesticide levels

within India's standards but above EU standards.

A similar CSE report in August 2006 prompted many state governments

to have issued a ban of the sale of soft drinks in schools. Kerala issued a

complete ban on the sale or manufacture of soft drinks altogether. (These were

later struck down in court.) In return, the soft drink companies like Coca-Cola

and Pepsi have issued ads in the media regarding the safety of consumption of

the drinks.

The UK-based Central Science Laboratory, commissioned by Coke,

found its products met EU standards in 2006. Coke and the University of

Michigan commissioned an independent study of its bottling plants by The

Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), which reported in 2008 no unsafe

chemicals in the water supply used.

Government regulations:

Schools:

17 | P a g e

In recent years, debate on whether high-calorie soft drink vending

machines should be allowed in schools has been on the rise. Opponents of the

(soft drink) vending machines believe that soft drinks are a significant

contributor to childhood obesity and tooth decay, and that allowing soft drink

sales in schools encourages children to believe they are safe to consume in

moderate to large quantities. Opponents argue that schools have a responsibility

to look after the health of the children in their care, and that allowing children

easy access to soft drinks violates that responsibility. Vending machine

proponents believe that obesity is a complex issue and soft drinks are not the

only cause. They also note the immense amount of funding that soft drink sales

bring to schools. Some peopletake a more moderate stance, saying that soft

drink machines should be allowed in schools, but that they should not be the

only option available. They propose that when soft drink vending machines are

made available on school grounds, the schools should be required to provide

children with a choice of alternative drinks (such as fruit juice,

flavored water and milk) at a comparable price. Some lawmakers debating the

issue in different states have argued that parents—not the government—should

be responsible for children's beverage choices.

On May 3, 2006, the Alliance for a Healthier Generation, Cadbury

Schweppes, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and the American Beverage

Association announced new School Beverage Guidelines that will voluntarily

remove high-calorie soft drinks from all U.S. schools.

On 19 May 2006, the British Education Secretary, Alan Johnson,

announced new minimum nutrition standards for school food. Amongst a wide

range of measures, from September 2006, school lunches will be free from

carbonated drinks. Schools will also end the sale of junk food (including

carbonated drinks) in vending machines and tuck shops.

18 | P a g e

Taxation

In the United States and elsewhere, legislators, health experts and

consumer advocates are considering levying higher taxes on the sale of soft

drinks and other sweetened beverages to help curb the epidemic

of obesity among Americans, and its harmful impact on overall health. Some

speculate that higher taxes could help reduce soda consumption. Others say that

taxes could help fund education to increase consumer awareness of the

unhealthy effects of excessive soft drink consumption, and also help cover costs

of caring for conditions resulting from overconsumption. The food and

beverage industry holds considerable clout in Washington, DC, as it has

contributed more than $50 million to legislators since 2000.

In January 2013, a British lobby group called for the price of sugary fizzy

drinks to be increased, with the money raised (an estimated £1 billion at 20p per

liter) to be put towards a "Children's Future Fund", overseen by an independent

body, which would encourage children to eat healthily in school.

Bans

In March 2013, New York City's mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed to ban

the sale of non-diet soft drinks larger than 16 ounces, except in convenience

stores and supermarkets. A lawsuit against the ban was upheld by a state judge,

who voiced concerns that the ban was "fraught with arbitrary and capricious

consequences". Bloomberg announced that he would be appealing the verdict.

19 | P a g e

COMPANY PROFILE

20 | P a g e

SOFT DRINKS PRODUCTION

Soft drinks are made by mixing dry ingredients and/or fresh ingredients (for

example, lemons, oranges, etc.) with water. Production of soft drinks can be

done at factories or at home.

Soft drinks can be made at home by mixing either a syrup or dry

ingredients with carbonated water. Carbonated water is made using a soda

siphon or a home carbonation system or by dropping dry ice into water. Syrups

are commercially sold by companies such as Soda-Club. Drinks like ginger

ale and root beer are often brewed using yeast to cause carbonation.

Ingredient quality

Of most importance is that the ingredient meets the agreed specification

on all major parameters. This is not only the functional parameter (in other

words, the level of the major constituent), but the level of impurities, the

microbiological status, and physical parameters such as color, particle size, etc.

Potential alcohol content

A report in October 2006 demonstrated that some soft drinks contain

measurable amounts of alcohol. In some older preparations, this resulted from

natural fermentation used to build the carbonation. In the United States, soft

drinks (as well as other beverages such as non-alcoholic beer) are allowed by

law to contain up to 0.5% alcohol by volume. Modern drinks introduce carbon

dioxide for carbonation, but there is some speculation that alcohol might result

21 | P a g e

from fermentation of sugars in an unsterile environment. A small amount of

alcohol is introduced in some soft drinks where alcohol is used in the

preparation of the flavoring extracts such as vanilla extract.

CHAPTER-II

SOFT DRINKS COMPANY PROFILE

TIME LINE

1798 The term "soda water" is first coined. 1810 First U.S. patent is issued for the manufacture of imitation mineral

waters. 1819 The "soda fountain" is patented by Samuel Fahnestock. 1835 The first bottled soda water is available in the U.S. 1850 A manual, hand & foot operated, filling & corking device, is first

used for bottling soda water. 1874 The first ice-cream soda is sold. 1881 The first cola-flavored beverage is introduced. 1892 The crown bottle cap is invented by William Painter. 1898 "Pepsi-Cola" is invented by Caleb Bradham. 1899 The first patent is issued for a glass blowing machine, used to

produce glass bottle. 1913 Gas motored trucks replace horse drawn carriages as delivery

vehicles. 1919 The American Bottlers of Carbonated Beverages is formed. Early 1920's The first automatic vending machines dispense sodas into

cups. 1934 Applied color labels are first used on soft drink bottles. The

coloring was baked on the face of the bottle. 1957 The first aluminum cans are used. 1965 The resalable top is invented.

22 | P a g e

1966 The American Bottlers of Carbonated Beverages is renamed The National Soft Drink Association.

1970 Is first time plastic bottles are used for soft drinks. 1974 The stay-on tab is invented. 1981 The "talking" vending machine is invented.

INTRODUCTION TO SOFT DRINK INDUSTRY

The main production of soft drink was stored in 1830’s &sincet hen from

those experimental beginning there was an evolution until in1781, when the

worlds first cola flavored beverage was introduced. These drinks were called soft drinks,

only to separate them from hard alcoholic drinks. This drinks do not contains

alcohol & broadly specifying this beverages, includes a variety of regulated

carbonated soft drinks, diet & caffeine free drinks, bottled water juices, juice

drinks, sport drinks & even ready to drink tea/coffee packs. So we can say that soft drinks

mean carbonated drinks. Today, soft drink is more favorite refreshment drink than

tea, coffee, juice etc. It is said that where there is a consumer, there is a producer

& this result into completion. Bigger the player, the harder it plays. In

suchsituation broad identity is very strong. It takes long time to make

broadfamous. Coca – Cola has its beginning in 1981 & since then has been one

of the three most dominate players in this soft drink industry.

Growth Strategies in Soft Drinks

A management report from Business Insights. The battle for ‘share of throat’

Positioning of new soft drinks launches aimed at children29% 36%

In spite of growing competition in the soft drinks market, many

companies, ranging from multinationals to niche specialists, continue to see

volume growth well in excess of the market average. Much of their success can

23 | P a g e

be attributed to progressive attitudes to their competitive environment and by

exploiting new production, packaging and distribution technologies, they are

able to meet consumers' needs more accurately and immediately than ever

before. With leading players such as The Coca-Cola Company driving the

battle.

Market Share in India

The two global majors Pepsi & Coca – Cola dominate the soft drink industry market. Coca

– Cola, which had winded up its business from India during the introduction of IERA regime

reentered in India after 16 years letter in1993.Coca – Cola has acquired a major soft drink market

by buying out local brands like Thums up, Limca& Gold Spot from Parle Beverages. Pepsi although

started a couple of years before Coca – Cola in1991, right now it has lower market share. It has

brought over Mumbai based Dukes range of soft drinks. Both Cola manufactures Pepsi & Coca –

Cola come up with their own market share & claim to have increased their share. Market Share (in

%) Brand Name Market Share Market Share

(IMRB)Pepsi 41 49Coca – Cola 57 48Other Brands 2 3

Raw Materials used in Soft Drinks

1. Water:

The simple sweetened soft drink contains about 90% of water, while in diet

drinks; it contains 95% of water.

2. Flavor:

Flavor is of great importance in soft drink. Even water from different places

has different taste. The flavor for taste added can be natural or artificial, acidic, caffeine.

3. Artificial Flavor:

These are the flavors manufactured from natural extracts; this issued to

give greater choice, in taste to consumers.

24 | P a g e

4. Acids:

Acids like citric acid & phosphoric acid are added to giverefreshing tartness

or bite & help in preserving the quality of a drink.

5. Natural Flavors:

These are the flavors, which are extracted from fruits, vegetables, nuts,

barks, leaves etc. in soft drink containing natural flavors & fruit juice

OBJECTIVE OF

THE STUDY

25 | P a g e

CHAPTER -III

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

1. To know about the awareness among the public regarding innovative

products offered by the soft drinks

2. To determine the public response to the product and quantity

3. To know about the distribution channels, physical distribution system and

sales promotional activities of the various companies.

4. To find out the external factors which stimulates the public to purchase

the particular brand?

5. To highlight the pricing the soft drinks and its effectiveness.

6. To suggest ways and means for the improving the marketing of soft drink

products.

7. To identify the internal factors which decides brand choice?

8. To find out the needs and necessity for marketing a brand.

26 | P a g e

9. To know about which soft drinks have heavy marketing trend.

10.To know about the awareness of the consumers soft drinks.

REASEARCH

METHODOLOGY

27 | P a g e

CHAPTER-IV

REASEARCH METHODOLOGY

1. SAMPLE UNITS:

Respondents include students and aged person

2. SAMPLE SIZE:

The sample size of field study was restricted 120.

3. SAMPLE AREA:

The respondents were selected from karaikudi town only.

4. SAMPLING TECHNIQUES:

Convenience sampling techniques was used due to lack of time.

5. NATURE OF DATA:

The data for the study includes only primary data

28 | P a g e

6. METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION:

Questionnaire method is only used for collecting data

DATA ANALYSIS

29 | P a g e

CHAPTER – V

DATA ANALYSIS

TABLE – I

1. GENDER COMPOSITION

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 Male 67 55.83

2 FEMALE 53 44.10

TOTAL 120 100

30 | P a g e

From the above analysis it is found that out of 120 respondents

nearly 67(55.83%) of male respondents and 53( 44.10%) are consuming

soft drinks in karaikudi town.

CHART– I

GENDER COMPOSITION

S.NO 1 20

50

100

150

200

250

Series3Series2Series1

31 | P a g e

TABLE – II

2. AGE CATOGARY

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 10 – 20 21 17.5

2 20 – 30 65 54.17

3 Above 30 34 28.33

TOTAL 120 100

32 | P a g e

From the above analysis it is found that out of 120 respondents nearly

21 (17.5%) are having only 10- 20 years aged person, 65 (54.17%) are 20 –

30 years aged persons and 34 (28.33%) respondents are having above 30

years aged persons.

CHART – II

AGE CATOGARY

S.NO 1 2 30

50

100

150

200

250


33 | P a g e

TABLE – III

3. MARITAL STATUS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 MARRIED 57 47.5

2 UN MARREID 63 52.5

TOTAL 120 100

34 | P a g e


nearly 63 (52.5%) respondents are married 57(47.5%) respondents are

un married.

CHART – III

MARITAL STATUS

S.NO1

2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Series1

Series2

Series3


35 | P a g e

TABLE – IV

4. OCCUPATION

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 EMPLOYEE 31 25.83

2 BUSINESS 23 19.17

3 STUDENTS 40 33.33

4 OTHER SPECIFY 26 21.67

36 | P a g e

TOTAL 120 100

From the above analysis it is evident that out of 120 respondents

nearly 31 (25.83%) respondents are employee 23 (19.17%) are

businessmen’s 40 (33.33)%) of respondents are students and 26

(21.67%) are in other category.

CHART – IV

OCCUPATION

S.NO

1

2

3

4

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


37 | P a g e

TABLE - V

5. INCOME LEVEL

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 BELOW 3000 29 24.17

2 4000 – 5000 34 28.33

3 ABOVE 6000 27 22.5

TOTAL 120 100

38 | P a g e


nearly 29 (.2417%) respondents are earn below 3000 salary, 34 (28.33%)

are earn 4000 - 5000, 27 (22.5)%) respondents are earn above 6000.

CHART - V

INCOME LEVEL

S.NO1

23

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Series1

Series2

Series3


39 | P a g e

TABLE –VI

6. Educational Background

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 HIGH SCHOOL 21 17.5

2 HIGHER

SECONDARY

27 22.5

3 GRADUATION 49 40.83

4 POST

GRADUATION

23 19.17

40 | P a g e

TOTAL 120 100


nearly 21 (17.5%) respondents are high school students 27 (22.5%) are

higher secondary students, 49 (40.83)%) respondents are graduation and

23 (19.17%) respondents are post graduates.

CHART – VI

Educational Background

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 140

10

20

30

40

50

60


41 | P a g e

TABLE – VII

7. FAMILY NATURE OF RESPONDENCE

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 1-3 57 47.5

2 4-6 46 38.33

3 Above 7 17 14.17

TOTAL 120 100

42 | P a g e


57 (47.5%) are having under 1- 3, 46 (38.33%) are under 4 –6 and 17

(14.17%) respondents are under below 7.

CHART – VII

FAMILY NATURE OF RESPONDENCE

S.NO 1

23

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

Series1Series3


43 | P a g e

TABLE – VIII

8. ARE YOU LIKE SOFT DRINKS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 YES 67 55.83

2 NO 53 44.10

TOTAL 120 100

44 | P a g e


nearly 67 (55.83%) of respondents are like soft drinks and 53( 44.10%)

respondents are not like.

CHART – VIII

ARE YOU LIKE SOFT DRINKS

S.NO

1

2

0 50 100 150 200 250


45 | P a g e

TABLE - IX

9. CONSUMING BRANDS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 MAAZA/SLICE 35 29.16

2 PEPSI/COKE 22 25.48

3 FANTA/MIRANDA 33 27.5

46 | P a g e

4 OTHER BRAND 10 18.33

TOTAL 120 100


nearly 35 (29.16%) respondents are likemaaza/slice, 22 (25.48%) are

like pepsi/coke, 33 (27.5)%) respondents like Fanta/Miranda and

10(18.33%) like other brand.

CHART - IX

CONSUMING BRANDS

S.NO 1

23

4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Series1Series3


47 | P a g e

TABLE - X

10. PERIOD OF CONSUMPTION

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 DAILY 20 18.33

2 WEEKLY 32 25

3 MONTHLY 34 28.33

48 | P a g e

4 OCCATIONALY 34 28.33

TOTAL 120 100


30 (8.33%) consume soft drinks daily, 30 (25%) are consumes weekly, 34

(28.33%) respondents are consume monthly and 34(28.33%) respondents

consumes occasionally.

CHART - X

PERIOD OF CONSUMPTION

S.NO 1 2 3 40%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


49 | P a g e

TABLE – XI

11. REASON FOR LIKE TO DRANK THESE

PRODUCTS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 TASTE 56 38.33

2 COST 5 4.17

3 QUALITY 43 27.51

50 | P a g e

4OTHER 16 13.33

TOTAL 120 100


nearly 46 (38.33%) are consuming soft drinks for taste,5 (4.17%) are

consumed for the purpose of cost and 33(27.51%) consumed for quality

and 16 ( 13.33% ) for other reason.

CHART – XI

REASON FOR LIKE TO DRANK THESE PRODUCTS

S.NO

1

23

4

0

100

200


51 | P a g e

TABLE – XII

12. WHO INDUCED TO BUY THIS PRODUCT

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 FRIENDS 20 18.33

2 RELATIVES 32 25

3 NEIGHBORS 34 28.33

52 | P a g e

4 OTHERS 34 28.33

TOTAL 120 100


20 (8.33%) induced buy friends, 30 (25%) are induced by relatives, 34

(28.33%) respondents are induced by neighbors and 34(28.33%)

respondents are induced by others.

CHART – XII

WHO INDUCED TO BUY THIS PRODUCT

S.NO 1 2 3 4

Series1

Series2

Series3


53 | P a g e

TABLE –XIII

13. PRODUCT INDUCED TO BUY

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 ADVERTISEMEN 34 28.33

2 PACKAGING 67 55.83

3 PRICE 19 15.84

54 | P a g e

TOTAL 120 100

From the above analysis it is found that out of 120 respondents nearly 34

(28.33%) are induced by advertisement, 67 (55.83%) are induced by

packaging and 19 (15.84%) respondents are induced by price.

CHART –XIII

PRODUCT INDUCED TO BUY

0 2 4 6 8 10 120

10

20

30

40

50

60

Series3Series6

55 | P a g e

TABLE – XIV

14. MODE OF ADVERTISEMENT

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 T.V 56 38.33

2 RADIO 5 4.17

3 PRESS 43 27.51

56 | P a g e

4OTHER 16 13.33

TOTAL 120 100


46 (38.33%) are came to consuming soft drinks through advertisements, 5

(4.17%) are know soft drinks through radio and 33 (27.51%) are through

press and 16 (13.33%) from other ways.

CHART – XIV

MODE OF ADVERTISEMENT

S.NO 1

23 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Series1Series3


57 | P a g e

TABLE –XV

15. PERIOD OF CONSUMPTION PER DAY

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 ONCE 20 18.33

2 TWICE 32 25

3 THRICE 34 28.33

58 | P a g e

4 ABOVE THRICE 34 28.33

TOTAL 120 100


30 (8.33%) consume soft drinks once per day, 30 (25%) are consumes twice

per day, 34 (28.33%) respondents are consume thrice per day and

34(28.33%) respondents consumes above thrice.

CHART –XV

PERIOD OF CONSUMPTION PER DAY

S.NO

1

2

3

4 0

100

200


59 | P a g e

TABLE – XVI

16. PRICE OF SOFT DRINK IS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 HIGH 29 24.17

2 MEDIUM 34 28.33

3 LOW 27 22.5

60 | P a g e

TOTAL 120 100


nearly 29 (.2417%) respondents are giving their opinion about price is

high, 34(28.33) is medium and 27(22.5) is low.

CHART – XVI

PRICE OF SOFT DRINK IS

S.NO 1 2 3

61 | P a g e

TABLE – XVII

17. WHICH MEDIA GIVEN ATTRACTIVE

ADVERTISEMENT FOR THIS PRODUCT

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 NEWSPAPER 45 37.49

2 T.V 27 29.65

3 RADIO 35 31.54

62 | P a g e

4 PRESS 10 18.33

TOTAL 120 100


nearly 35 (29.16%) respondents are suggest newspaper gives attractive

advertisement, 22 (25.48%) are suggest T.V, 33 (27.5)%) respondents

are suggest radio and 10(18.33%) are suggest press.

CHART – XVII

WHICH MEDIA GIVEN ATTRACTIVE ADVERTISEMENT

FOR THIS PRODUCT

S.NO 1 2 3 40

20

40

60

80

100

120


63 | P a g e

TABLE– XVIII

18. OPINION ABOUT THESE PRODUCTS WHEN

COMPARED TO OTHER BRAND

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 HIGH 29 24.17

2 MEDIUM 34 28.33

64 | P a g e

3 LOW 27 22.5

TOTAL 120 100


nearly 29 (.2417%) respondents are giving their opinion when their like

products went compare to other brand is 29(24.17) is high, 34(28.33) is

medium and 27(22.5) is low.

CHART– XVIII

OPINION ABOUT THESE PRODUCTS WHEN COMPARED

TO OTHER BRAND

0 2 4 6 8 10 120

2

4

6

8

10

12

Series2Series4

65 | P a g e

TABLE – XIX

19. SATISFIED WITH PACKAGING OF THEIR SOFT

DRINKS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 YES 67 55.83

2 NO 53 44.10

66 | P a g e

TOTAL 120 100


nearly 67 (55.83%) of respondents are satisfied their product’s

packaging and 53( 44.10%) respondents are not satisfied.

CHART – XIX

SATISFIED WITH PACKAGING OF THEIR SOFT DRINKS

S.NO1

2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Series1

Series3


67 | P a g e

TABLE-XX

20. AWARENESS ABOUT PESTICIDES ISSUES

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 FULLY KNOWN 34 28.33

2 PARTLY 67 55.83

3 DOES NOT

KNOW

19 15.84

68 | P a g e

TOTAL 120 100


nearly 34 (28.33%) are know about pesticides issues, 67 (55.83%) are

known partly and 19 (15.84%) respondents are does not know about the

pesticides issues to drank.

CHART-XX

AWARENESS ABOUT PESTICIDES ISSUES

S.NO 1 2 30

20

40

60

80

100

120

140


69 | P a g e

TABLE-XXI

21. CONSUMING SOFT DRINK AFTER KNOWN OF

PESTICIDES ISSUES

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF

RESPONDENTS

PERCENTAGE

1 YES 63 52.5

2 NO 57 47.5

TOTAL 120 100

70 | P a g e


nearly 63 (52.5%) are continue drinking after wnown well of pesticides

issues and 57(47.5%) are avoid drinking soft drinks after known well

about pesticides issues.

CHART-XXI

CONSUMING SOFT DRINK AFTER KNOWN OF

PESTICIDES ISSUES

S.NO1

2

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


71 | P a g e

FINDINGS OF

THE STUDY

72 | P a g e

CHAPTER - VI

FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

The following findings are made out of the study in karaikudi town.

Buyers of soft drinks are influenced by so many factors recording their

preference and purchase. The survey question papers contain 30 questions.

1. Nearly 55.83% of male respondents are taking soft drinks when

compared to female.

2. Out of 120 respondents, the majority respondents (33.33%) are from

student’s category.

3. Most of the respondents are graduates.

4. Respondents whose income level is Rs.3000-5000 (28.33%) are mostly

drank soft drinks when compared to others income classification.

5. Slice is the fast moving item in karaikudi because it contains more fruit

juice than others.

73 | P a g e

6. It is clear that most of the uses (38.34%) prefer to take soft drinks

occasionally.

7. Out of 120 respondents, the majority respondents (33.33%) are mostly

drank soft drinks that are in the age group of 20 – 25.

8. Most of the respondents are taking their soft drinks only from shop and

not from function & educational institute.

9. It is known that most of the respondents (31.68%) are buying soft drinks

for the purpose of refreshment and taste.

10.Most of the respondents are buying 200ml package.

FAST

MOVING

ITEM

ITEMS REASON CONSUMING

GROUP

200ml Slice Contains fruit

juice

Family

200ml Fanta Comfortable

Advertisements

Youngsters

74 | P a g e

LIMITATION OF

THE STUDY

75 | P a g e

CHAPTER – VII

LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

1. The study pertains only to the KARAIKUDI town and therefore the

findings of the study cannot be generalized to all situations and places.

2. Due to the lack of time, the sample size was restricted to 120 respondents

only.

3. It is not possible for the researcher to undertake a full-fledged empirical

study.

4. Only convenience sampling techniques was followed for this study work

due to respondent’s busy schedule.

5. Some respondents are not disclosing all the facts openly as they are

making their opinion with some personal hesitation.

76 | P a g e

6. Majority of respondents hesitate to give detailed answers to open end

question seven though they literates. They are interested to give answers

only to closed end questions.

SUGGESION OF

THE STUDY

77 | P a g e

CHAPTER – VIII

SUGGESION OF THE STUDY

1. Most of the respondents feel that the measurements of ingredients have to

be separately given in the container of soft drinks.

2. Based on opinion of respondents, fruit juice has to be added more and

improve quality.

3. Price can also be reduced to boost sales.

4. They have to adopt more advertisement program in order to retain old

customers and also to invite new customers.

5. The researcher may suggest that by way of introducing pet packs 200ml,

they can specify the public.

6. Sales promotion activates and channels of distribution are to improved by

the company to improve the sales.

78 | P a g e

7. The company has to concentrate mre on marketing are and they have to

create awareness among public.

CONCLUSION OF

THE STUDY

79 | P a g e

CHAPTER – IX

CONCLUSION OF THE STUDY

1. In this study it is known that most of the users prefer to take soft drinks

occasionally.

2. In this, it is concluded that youngster are most prefer to take cool drinks

and they except

3. more taste refreshment.

4. After these pesticide issue consumers do not must prefer soft drinks and

also they advise their friends and relatives not to consume soft drinks

often.

5. Majority of the respondents prefer to have slice, it contains more fruit

extracts than others. The company has to take steps to attract more people

80 | P a g e

by adding more fruit contents then colored flavors in other kind of soft

dinks also.

6. Most of the respondents know about we recent pesticides issues.

7. Most o the respondents feel that diseases are easily spread through

various means and so now a days they concentrate more on food in order

to prevent them.

APPENDIX OF THE STUDY

81 | P a g e

CHAPTER – X

APPENDIX OF THE STUDY

THE STUDY ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION TOWARDS “SOFT DRINKS” IN

KARAIKUDI TOWN

1. Name :

2. Age : A) 10-20 B) 20-30 C) Above 30

3. Gender : A) Male B) Female

4. Occupation : A) Student B) Govt.Employee C) Private Employee D) Other

5. Family Size : A) 1-3 B) 4-6 C) Above 6

6. Marital Status : A) Married B) Un-Married

7. Monthly Income: A) Below 3000 B) 4000 – 5000 C) 6000 - 9000

8. Do u like any Soft drinks.? A) Yes B) No

9. If, yes which brand do you consume?

A) Maaza/Slice B) Pepsi C) Miranda D) Others

10. If other means please specify…………………………………..

11. For what purpose do you like this product..?

82 | P a g e

A) Taste B) Cost C) Quality D) Others

12. If other means please specify………………………………….

13. Which of the product induced you to buy this product.?

A) Advertisement B) Packaging C) Price

14. Who induced you to buy this product.?

A) Friends B) relatives C) Neighbors D) Others

15. How many times are you drink these soft drinks..?

A) Once B) twice C) weekly D) Monthly

16. If any of your family members use other brand..?

A) Yes B No

17. If yes means please specify…………………………………..

18. How many times you will drink these soft drinks per day..?

A) Once B) twice C) thrice D) above Thrice

19. The price of the soft drinks is.?

A) High B) Medium C) low

20.Have you seen any soft drinks advertisements?

A) Yes B No


22. Which media given attractive advertisement for this product?

A) Newspaper B) Television C) Radio D) Magazines

23. Do you need any changes on your soft drinks in advertisement..?

A) Yes B No


25. Which is your opinion about these products when compared to other brand..?

A) High B) Medium C) low

26. Are you satisfied with packaging of these soft drinks?

A) Yes B No

27. Awareness about pesticides issue of soft drinks?

A) Fully Known B) Partly C) Does not know

83 | P a g e

28. Will you drank these cool drinks in future after known about pesticides issue.?

A) Yes B No

29. If yes means please specify…………………………………………………

30. Give your opinion about soft drinks in general…………………………………..

84 | P a g e