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|Page
 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|Page
 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|Page
 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|Page
 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|Page
 INTRODUCTION

6|Page
 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|Page
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|Page
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|Page
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,
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

15 | P a g e
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
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

16 | P a g e
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:

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

17 | P a g e
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
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.

21 | P a g e
 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.
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.

22 | P a g e
 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
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.

23 | P a g e
 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.
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

24 | P a g e
 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.

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

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

26 | P a g e
 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

6. METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION:

Questionnaire method is only used for collecting data

28 | P a g e
 DATA ANALYSIS

29 | P a g e
 CHAPTER – V

DATA ANALYSIS

TABLE – I

1. GENDER COMPOSITION

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 Male 67 55.83

2 FEMALE 53 44.10

TOTAL 120 100

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.

30 | P a g e
 CHART– I

GENDER COMPOSITION

250

200

150

100

50

0
S.NO 1 2

31 | P a g e
 TABLE – II

2. AGE CATOGARY

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 10 – 20 21 17.5

2 20 – 30 65 54.17

3 Above 30 34 28.33

TOTAL 120 100

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.

32 | P a g e
 CHART – II

AGE CATOGARY

250

200

150

100

50

33 | P a g e
 TABLE – III

3. MARITAL STATUS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 MARRIED 57 47.5

2 UN MARREID 63 52.5

TOTAL 120 100

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

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

34 | P a g e
 CHART – III

MARITAL STATUS

120
100
80
60
40
20
0
S.NO 1
2

35 | P a g e
 TABLE – IV

4. OCCUPATION

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 EMPLOYEE 31 25.83

2 BUSINESS 23 19.17

3 STUDENTS 40 33.33

4 OTHER SPECIFY 26 21.67

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

36 | P a g e
 businessmen’s 40 (33.33)%) of respondents are students and 26
(21.67%) are in other category.

CHART – IV

OCCUPATION

S.NO

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

37 | P a g e
 TABLE - V

5. INCOME LEVEL

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 BELOW 3000 29 24.17

2 4000 – 5000 34 28.33

3 ABOVE 6000 27 22.5

TOTAL 120 100

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

nearly 29 (.2417%) respondents are earn below 3000 salary, 34 (28.33%)
are earn 4000 - 5000, 27 (22.5)%) respondents are earn above 6000.

38 | P a g e
 CHART - V

INCOME LEVEL

150

100

50

39 | P a g e
 TABLE –VI

6. Educational Background

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 HIGH SCHOOL 21 17.5

2 HIGHER 27 22.5
SECONDARY

3 GRADUATION 49 40.83

4 POST 23 19.17
GRADUATION

TOTAL 120 100

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

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

40 | P a g e
higher secondary students, 49 (40.83)%) respondents are graduation and
23 (19.17%) respondents are post graduates.

CHART – VI

Educational Background

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

41 | P a g e
 TABLE – VII

7. FAMILY NATURE OF RESPONDENCE

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 1-3 57 47.5

2 4-6 46 38.33

3 Above 7 17 14.17

TOTAL 120 100

From the above analysis it is found that out of 120 respondents nearly
57 (47.5%) are having under 1- 3, 46 (38.33%) are under 4 –6 and 17
(14.17%) respondents are under below 7.

42 | P a g e
 CHART – VII

FAMILY NATURE OF RESPONDENCE

50000
40000
30000 40000-50000

20000 30000-40000
10000 20000-30000
0 10000-20000
S.NO

0-10000
1

43 | P a g e
 TABLE – VIII

8. ARE YOU LIKE SOFT DRINKS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 YES 67 55.83

2 NO 53 44.10

TOTAL 120 100

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

nearly 67 (55.83%) of respondents are like soft drinks and 53( 44.10%)
respondents are not like.

44 | P a g e
 CHART – VIII

ARE YOU LIKE SOFT DRINKS

S.NO

0 50 100 150 200 250

45 | P a g e
 TABLE - IX

9. CONSUMING BRANDS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 MAAZA/SLICE 35 29.16

2 PEPSI/COKE 22 25.48

3 FANTA/MIRANDA 33 27.5

4 OTHER BRAND 10 18.33

TOTAL 120 100

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

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

46 | P a g e
 like pepsi/coke, 33 (27.5)%) respondents like Fanta/Miranda and
10(18.33%) like other brand.

CHART - IX

CONSUMING BRANDS

150

100
100-150
50
50-100
0 0-50
S.NO
2
4

47 | P a g e
 TABLE - X

10. PERIOD OF CONSUMPTION

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 DAILY 20 18.33

2 WEEKLY 32 25

3 MONTHLY 34 28.33

4 OCCATIONALY 34 28.33

TOTAL 120 100

From the above analysis it is found that out of 120 respondents nearly
30 (8.33%) consume soft drinks daily, 30 (25%) are consumes weekly, 34

48 | P a g e
(28.33%) respondents are consume monthly and 34(28.33%) respondents
consumes occasionally.

CHART - X

PERIOD OF CONSUMPTION

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1

4
S.NO

49 | P a g e
 TABLE – XI

11. REASON FOR LIKE TO DRANK THESE

PRODUCTS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 TASTE 56 38.33

2 COST 5 4.17

3 QUALITY 43 27.51

4
OTHER 16 13.33

TOTAL 120 100

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

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

50 | P a g e
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
120
100
80
60
40 1
20
0
4

3 2

51 | P a g e
 TABLE – XII

12. WHO INDUCED TO BUY THIS PRODUCT

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 FRIENDS 20 18.33

2 RELATIVES 32 25

3 NEIGHBORS 34 28.33

4 OTHERS 34 28.33

TOTAL 120 100

From the above analysis it is found that out of 120 respondents nearly
20 (8.33%) induced buy friends, 30 (25%) are induced by relatives, 34

52 | P a g e
(28.33%) respondents are induced by neighbors and 34(28.33%)
respondents are induced by others.

CHART – XII

WHO INDUCED TO BUY THIS PRODUCT

100-150
50-100
0-50
1

4
S.NO

53 | P a g e
 TABLE –XIII

13. PRODUCT INDUCED TO BUY

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 ADVERTISEMEN 34 28.33

2 PACKAGING 67 55.83

3 PRICE 19 15.84

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.

54 | P a g e
 CHART –XIII

PRODUCT INDUCED TO BUY

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
-10

55 | P a g e
 TABLE – XIV

14. MODE OF ADVERTISEMENT

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 T.V 56 38.33

2 RADIO 5 4.17

3 PRESS 43 27.51

4
OTHER 16 13.33

TOTAL 120 100

From the above analysis it is found that out of 120 respondents nearly
46 (38.33%) are came to consuming soft drinks through advertisements, 5

56 | P a g e
(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

120
100
80
60
40
20
0
S.NO

57 | P a g e
 TABLE –XV

15. PERIOD OF CONSUMPTION PER DAY

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 ONCE 20 18.33

2 TWICE 32 25

3 THRICE 34 28.33

4 ABOVE THRICE 34 28.33

TOTAL 120 100

From the above analysis it is found that out of 120 respondents nearly
30 (8.33%) consume soft drinks once per day, 30 (25%) are consumes twice

58 | P a g e
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
120
100
80
60
1
40
20
4 0

2
3

59 | P a g e
 TABLE – XVI

16. PRICE OF SOFT DRINK IS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 HIGH 29 24.17

2 MEDIUM 34 28.33

3 LOW 27 22.5

TOTAL 120 100

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

nearly 29 (.2417%) respondents are giving their opinion about price is
high, 34(28.33) is medium and 27(22.5) is low.

60 | P a g e
 CHART – XVI

PRICE OF SOFT DRINK IS

S.NO

61 | P a g e
 TABLE – XVII

17. WHICH MEDIA GIVEN ATTRACTIVE

ADVERTISEMENT FOR THIS PRODUCT

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 NEWSPAPER 45 37.49

2 T.V 27 29.65

3 RADIO 35 31.54

4 PRESS 10 18.33

TOTAL 120 100

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

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

62 | P a g e
 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

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
3
1

4
S.NO

63 | P a g e
 TABLE– XVIII

18. OPINION ABOUT THESE PRODUCTS WHEN

COMPARED TO OTHER BRAND

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 HIGH 29 24.17

2 MEDIUM 34 28.33

3 LOW 27 22.5

TOTAL 120 100

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

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

64 | P a g e
 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

140

120

100

80
Series1
60
Series2
40

20

0
-5 0 5 10 15 20
-20

65 | P a g e
 TABLE – XIX

19. SATISFIED WITH PACKAGING OF THEIR SOFT

DRINKS

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 YES 67 55.83

2 NO 53 44.10

TOTAL 120 100

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

nearly 67 (55.83%) of respondents are satisfied their product’s
packaging and 53( 44.10%) respondents are not satisfied.

66 | P a g e
 CHART – XIX

SATISFIED WITH PACKAGING OF THEIR SOFT DRINKS

150

100

100-150
50
50-100
0 0-50

67 | P a g e
 TABLE-XX

20. AWARENESS ABOUT PESTICIDES ISSUES

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 FULLY KNOWN 34 28.33

2 PARTLY 67 55.83

3 DOES NOT 19 15.84

KNOW

TOTAL 120 100

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

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.

68 | P a g e
 CHART-XX

AWARENESS ABOUT PESTICIDES ISSUES

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
S.NO 1 2 3

69 | P a g e
 TABLE-XXI

21. CONSUMING SOFT DRINK AFTER KNOWN OF

PESTICIDES ISSUES

S.NO FACTOR NO.OF PERCENTAGE

RESPONDENTS

1 YES 63 52.5

2 NO 57 47.5

TOTAL 120 100

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

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.

70 | P a g e
 CHART-XXI

CONSUMING SOFT DRINK AFTER KNOWN OF

PESTICIDES ISSUES

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
S.NO
1
2

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.
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.

73 | P a g e
 FAST

MOVING ITEMS REASON CONSUMING

ITEM GROUP

200ml Slice Contains fruit Family

juice

200ml Fanta Comfortable Youngsters

Advertisements

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.

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.

76 | P a g e
 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.

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

create awareness among public.

78 | P a g e
 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

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.

80 | P a g e
 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..?
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

82 | P a g e
 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
21. If yes means please specify…………………………………..
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
24. If yes means please specify…………………………………..
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
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…………………………………..

83 | P a g e