COFFEE SHOP:

A STUDY ON THE FEASIBILITY OF PUTTING UP ANOTHER IN-CAMPUS COFFEE SHOP

CHAPTER 1:

BACKGROUND

 TWO THE

PURPOSES OF COFFEE BEFORE

CHANGING OF CUSTOMER NEEDS AND PREFERENCES LED TO DIVERSIFICATION OF COFFEE AS A BEVERAGE AS AN ICON FOR SOCIAL STATUS

COFFEE

RESEARCH PROBLEM

IS IT FEASIBLE TO PUT UP ANOTHER COFFEE SHOP IN THE ATENEO DE DAVAO COLLEGE CAMPUS?
The question addresses the following sub-problems: What are the students, faculty, and staffs preferences in terms of: Price Flavor Quality Service Variety How much are they willing to spend for a cup of coffee?

How often do they drink coffee while in school? What types of coffee do they prefer to drink? Where do they prefer to take their coffee breaks in campus or outside campus coffee shops?

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Price Flavor Market Preference or Perception Quality Service Variety Price Range Frequency of purchase Type of Coffee preferred Proposed Campus Coffee Shop

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

FOCUS

:Ateneo de Davao University College Campus 100 questionnaires will be distributed using the convenience sampling method GREATEST LIMITATION: time :the results may not effectively represent the general population of the Ateneo de Davao University :inability to use the random sampling method in the collection of data.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The present coffee shop The future coffee shop The students, faculty, and staff The researchers research will educate entrepreneurs and marketers

DEFINITION OF TERMS
Stimulant Condiment Economies

of scope Proliferated Feasible Amaretto Butterscotch Vanilla

 Espresso Cappuccino Macchiato Doppio Mocha Americano Cafe

latte Convenience sampling Random sampling Apposite Competitive advantage

CHAPTER 2

Review of Related Literature

 Butod Fabe

(2009)

(2008) Van Auken, and Kim's (1994) 2008)

Gaskill, (Butod, Porter Butod

(1980) (2009)

CHAPTER 3 Research Methodology

RESEARCH DESIGN
qualitative research design adapting the descriptive research method Conclusive convenience sampling Statistical cross-sectional research descriptive type ex post facto Census method

SAMPLING PLAN
Survey

method Convenience sampling

SAMPLE SIZE COMPUTATION

n= z^2 [p(1-p)] / MOE^2. Where:
n

is the required sample size Z is the value from the normal distribution tables corresponding to the desired confidence level. P is the population proportion being estimated. MOE is the desired precision or margin of error.

Z=1.96 [p(1-p)]=.25. 10% as margin of error.

n= (1.96)^2 (.25) / (.10)^2 = 96.04 the researchers round it off to 100 for a more clear-cut number of respondents.

RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
survey

questionnaire Likert scale and importance scale close-ended questionnaire two parts of questionnaire

STATISTICAL TREATMENT OF DATA

Statistical

analysis weighted mean error. Variance standard deviation Percentage Percentage

CHAPTER 4 Presentation, Interpretation, and Analysis of Data

Table 4.1 AGE Age(years) Number of Respondents % Gender

Table 4.2 GENDER Number of Respondents %

16-18 19-21 22-24 25-27 28-30 Above 30 Total

48 47 2 2 0 1 100

48 47 2 2 0 1 100%

Male Female Total

48 52 100

48 52 100%

Table 4.3 CIVIL STATUS CIVIL STATUS Number of Respondents %

Table 4.4 OCCUPATION Occupation Number of Respondents %

Single Married

97 3

97 3

Student Full-Time Faculty Part-Time Faculty Staff Member Total

96 1 0 3 100

96 1 0 3 100%

Widowed

Separated

Total

100

100%

Table 4.5 MONTHLY ALLOWANCE (in pesos) Monthly allowance Above 10,000 7,001-10,000 5,001-7,000 2,001-5,000 2,000 below No allowance Total Number of Respondents 5 9 14 36 31 1 96 5.2 9.4 14.6 37.5 32.3 1.0 100% %

Monthly allowance Above 50,000 30,001-50,000 Table 4.6 MONTHLY INCOME (in pesos) 15,001-30,000 8,001-15,000 3,001-8,000 3,000 below No income Total

Number of Respondents 1 1 3 0 3 5 20 33

% 3.0 3.0 9.1 0 9.1 15.2 60.6 100%

Table 4.7 PSYCHOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

Descriptive Statistics
N Adventurous Athletic Studious Party-Goer Home body Couch Potato Politically Concerned Fashion Updated Tachnology Savvy Health Conciou Vegetarian Meat Lover Omnivore Have Vices Environmentalist Humanitarian Valid N (listwise) 99 100 99 99 100 100 100 98 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 95 Minimum 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Maximum 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Mean 4.1515 3.4400 3.2323 3.1818 3.3300 3.3100 2.8900 3.2653 3.4700 3.5500 2.2900 3.9700 3.8500 2.4000 3.2900 3.6300 Std. Deviation .80005 1.18339 .99825 1.19833 1.14640 1.23660 1.11821 .99017 1.05844 .92524 1.12182 .89279 .99874 1.49071 .96708 .92829

Table 4.8 HOW OFTEN RESPONDENTS DRINK COFFEE Frequency Number of Respondents Never Rarely Sometimes Almost Always Always Total 2 99 2 100% 12 38 33 14 12.1 38.4 33.3 14.1 %

Table 4.9 HOW MANY RESPONDENTS GO TO COFFEE SHOPS Do you go to Number of %

coffee shops? Respondents

YES NO Total

76 23 99

76.8 23.2 100%

Table 4.9.1 MAJOR REASONS TO GO TO COFFEE SHOPS Reason Number of Respondents %

Table 4.10 TYPES OF COFFEE Type of Coffee Number of Respondents Brewed 17 12 2 27 39 9 106 16.0 11.3 1.9 25.5 36.8 8.4 100% %

Use of WiFi Drink Coffee Rest & Relax Total

32 19 47 98

32.7 19.4

Instant Decaffeinated Latte

48.0 100%

Cappuccino Other Total

Table 4.11 AWARENESS OF RESPONDENTS TO THE EXISTENCE OF A COFFEE STALL IN THE CAFETERIA Are you aware? Number of Respondents %

Table 4.12 BEST LOCATION Is the cafeteria the best location? Number of Respondents %

YES

55

56.1

YES NO

41 56 97

42.3 57.7 100%

NO

43

43.9

Total

Total

98

100%

Table 4.13 NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAVE BOUGHT COFFEE FROM COFFEE STALL Have you ever from the coffee stall? YES YES NO Total 33 65 98 33.7 66.3 100% NO Total Number of % Is the price suitable? bought coffee Respondents

Table 4.13.1 PRICE Number of Respondents %

22 17 39

56.4 43.6 100%

Table 4.14 CHOICES Table 4.13.2 LIKING Do you like the sell? YES NO Total 27 9 36 75 25 100% YES NO Total 42 46 88 47.7 52.3 100% Number of % Does the coffee stall offer your choice of coffee? Number of Respondents %

coffee that they Respondents

Table 4.15 FACTORS Descriptive Statistics Minimum Maximum 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00

N Price Variety Ambience Uniqueness Service Presentation Valid N (listwise)

Mean 4.3093 4.5361 4.5361 4.3402 4.7113 4.4742

Std. Deviation .97212 .76461 .73686 .90008 .66079 .89084

CHAPTER 5
Conclusions and Recommendations

SUMMARY
The

researcher intended to answer the following questions: 1.What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of the following variables: 1.1 Gender 1.2 Civil Status 1.3 Age 1.4 Monthly Allowance 1.5 Monthly income

2.What is the psychographic profile of the respondents in terms of the following variables: 2. 1 Adventurous 2.2 Athletic 2.3 Studious 2.4 Party-goer 2.5 Home body 2.6 Couch Potato 2.7 Politically concerned

2.8 Fashion-updated 2.9 Technology-savvy 2.10 Health-conscious 2.11 Vegetarian 2.12 Meat-lover 2.13 Omnivore 2.14 Have vices 2.15 Environmentalist 2.16 Humanitarian

Additional information: 3.1: How often do the respondents drink coffee? 3.2: How many of them go to coffee shops? For what reasons? 3.3: What type of coffee do the respondents drink the most often? 3.4: How many of them are aware that there is a coffee shop in the Ateneo College Campus Cafeteria? 3.5: In their opinion, where is the best location for the coffee shop? 3.6: How many of these respondents have bought coffee from the coffee stall? 3.6.1: How do they rate the price? 3.6.2: Do they like the coffee that they sell? 3.7: Does the coffee stand in the cafeteria offer the choice of coffee the respondents prefer?

How

do the respondents rate the importance of the following factors: 4.1 Price of coffee 4.2 Variety of choice 4.3 Ambience 4.4 Uniqueness 4.5 Service 4.6 Presentation

CONCLUSION:
1.) Ateneo students, faculty and staff Female ages 16 to 21 Single average monthly allowance of P5,000 and below 2.) non-athletic and have vices common type of people who are average in terms of outgoingness and activeness not so health-conscious

3.) In terms of the consumers preferences in coffee and coffee shops: 3.1 fairly large market of coffee-drinkers in the Ateneo College campus 3.2 Majority go to coffee shops; for the reasons : use of wireless internet, take a break and relax 3.3: Cappuccino and Latte ; these taste better than brewed coffee, and are relatively cheaper than other types of coffee. 3.4: almost half of the respondents are not aware of the coffee stand. 3.5: location of the coffee shop is not preferred; the coffee stand should have its own establishment outside or inside the campus 3.6: the price of the coffee is reasonable and the quality of the coffee is good. 3.7: stand lacks in choices and not in quality.

4.) greatest factors: variety of choices and service. -expect good service and many choices in the menu -least important factor: uniqueness -present coffee stall is doing quite a good job; it just lacks in choices and the promotion strategy -market for coffee drinkers in the campus is large enough to gain profit from -feasible to put up another coffee shop within the campus.

RECOMMENDATION
1.)That either of the actions be taken: -proper promotion strategy be implemented; coffee stall be relocated somewhere within the campus -another coffee shop be established alternatively 2.)the results and recommendations be used only in similar cases