Strategic analysis of Pepsi Co.

Strategic Analysis: PepsiCo ‘s Restaurant Business Divestment


In 1997, Pepsi Co announced that it would spin-off its eating house concern into a separate publically traded company through issue of revenue enhancement free new stocks. The statement put frontward by the PepsiCo top direction was that the house would wish to concentrate on its nucleus carbonated drink concern. It would be complemented by the high net income giving bite nutrients division of Frito Lays.

The figures below for FY ’96, show that the eating house concern contributed the least to the net incomes earned by PepsiCo pudding stone. This was mostly attributed to the sulky growing in this section.

PepsiCo was compelled to take the divestment path to hike its stock monetary value and slightly pacify the investors, analysts and the markets in general.

I believe the new eating house company will be a powerful organisation with great possible. For the detached companies, independency would do them far more capable of bettering their operations to make solid, sustainable growing.

PepsiCo emphasized that it already has taken stairss to fix its ironss for independency, including consolidating their paysheet, accounting, buying, information processing, building and real-estate maps every bit good as consolidative foreign operations under a individual direction squad. Franchisees willing to notice on the by-product gave cheerful appraisals of the trade.

David Adelman, restaurant analyst at Dean Witter Reynolds predicted that –

Intangible blessing to the spun-off eating house company would be greater pride of ownership. Its directors could be inspired by a more direct compensation correlativity between what the company earns and their wagess.

Larry Walker, accountant for Holland Foods Inc. , a 17-unit KFC franchisee in Texarkana, Texas, said that, after the by-product, “ These separate companies will hold a clearer way. PepsiCo ‘s been a conglobation ; you get confused when you try to run that many concerns. ”

Besides TGI would profit from certain advantages once it is spun off from PepsiCo –

Sound commercial recognition evaluation

High hard currency flow part from franchising fees and royalties

Strong plus base in its existent estate portfolio and ownership of about 13000 eating houses

Pepsi did non reassign any of its $ 9.5 billion outstanding debt to the new company

Tricon Global International ( TGI )

Tricon Global International ( TGI ) is the keeping company for the three eating house trade names of PepsiCo

  • Kentucky Fried Chicken ( KFC )
  • Taco Bell
  • Pizza Hut

It owns, franchises or licenses the 29,000 world-wide subdivisions of the three ironss, whose world-wide gross revenues exceeded $ 20 billion in FY ’96 and was 2nd merely to $ 32 billion gross revenues of McDonalds.

The freshly formed entity TGI would besides be the universe ‘s largest concatenation in footings of the figure of mercantile establishments under its direction, with around 29000 units.

Kentucky Fried Chicken ( KFC )

Kentucky Fried Chicken was started in 1939 in Corbin, Kentucky. After ownership changed custodies through the decennaries, it was eventually acquired by PepsiCo in 1986 and rechristened as KFC.

KFC chiefly offers fried poulet formulas of which the iconic one is the Original Recipe – prepared with secret blend of 11 herbs and spices. It was devised by the eating house concatenation laminitis, Colonel Harlan Sanders.

It subsequently started to complement the pillar merchandise with additions like staff of life, murphies, gravy, sweets and non-alcoholic drinks and besides offered non-fried poulet dishes.

The nutrient is prepared and delivered on custom-built footing, as and when clients place orders.

KFC is the market leader in poulet QSR with 55 % of the market portion in the US in 1997.

As of 1997, KFC operates 10397 mercantile establishments in 79 states.

In the US, KFC operates 5120 mercantile establishments either through franchises or through licensees. TGI is sharply developing non-traditional mercantile establishments like educational campus, airdromes etc, where it expects to recognize important gross that would reenforce gross revenues from traditional mercantile establishments.

KFC besides has a important international presence, with its major markets as below

Taco Bell

Taco Bell was founded by Glen Bell in 1962 in Downey, California. It bit by bit grew into a eating house concatenation specialising in Mexican nutrient with a pan-American mercantile establishment web. The concatenation was acquired by PepsiCo in 1978 and made a portion of its eating house concatenation.

Taco Bell offers typical Mexican nutrient like greaser, burritos, salads and nachos. The bringing is done after readying of the order placed by the client.

As of 1997, it was the dominant participant in the Mexican fast nutrient class, commanding 72 % portion of the US market.

Pizza Hut

Pizza Hut was started in 1958 by Frank and Dan Carney in Wichita, Kansas. At the clip of its introduction, pizza parlours – dedicated mercantile establishments for pizza was unheard of, and the construct shortly caught up across the US. Business expanded, even went overseas ( get downing with Canada ) and PepsiCo eventually took over the house in 1977, to do it an built-in portion of it restaurant division.

The chief offerings are pizzas, appetisers, pasta, sandwiches, sweet and non-alcoholic drinks.

Pizzerias prepare the nutrient after the client places the order while express counters serve readymade pan pizzas.

Future Roadmap

TGI would follow the undermentioned scheme to re-invigorate the former eating house concern of Pepsi

  • The top precedence was to turn to the high employee turnover endemic to the industry. To carry through this end, Tricon gave each Restaurant General Manager ( RGM ) a erstwhile, $ 20,000 stock option grant called YUMBUCKS. This program provided an chance to gain even more options based on the RGM ‘s eating house public presentation, along with a alone plan to acknowledge outstanding eating house teamwork.
  • Through merchandise invention, advertizement, publicities and client service, TGI would take to increase same shop gross revenues growing. Tricon besides would unite the three trade names within individual eating houses in an attempt to give clients more pick under the same roof and increase the opportunity of a portion of their billfold.
  • By working closely with top-performing franchisees and company operators, TGI would seek more effectual ways to convey down costs. To leverage economic systems of graduated table, TGI purchases its nutrient, paper goods and equipment for all its U.S. eating houses through a $ 4 billion co-op. The company besides uses new engineerings that simplify operations and better service clip.
  • Tricon would concentrate on cut downing complexness and redundancy, general and administrative disbursals. In this respect, company leaders and franchisees from all three trade names would run into to discourse Tricon ‘s one-system attack, portion best patterns and research bundled trade name enlargement chances.
  • Tricon would seek to heighten stockholder value by puting in high return restaurant units and go outing persistently low return units. Besides there would be added focal point on gross revenues & A ; border growing, cut downing redundancies and good thought out enlargement programs.

PepsiCo has decided to aline itself with a different scheme where its eating house concern would non suit into the strategy of things.

  • Restaurant concern is more management-intensive and labor-centric compared to the drink or bite nutrient distribution concern. PepsiCo ‘s nucleus strength is in selling and distribution. It would be best put into consequence in the other two divisions where it has historically yielded good returns. However the mutual exclusiveness between the demands of eating house concern and PepsiCo ‘s capablenesss was drawing down the public presentation of Pepsi stocks and doing much angst to the investors and markets likewise.
  • PepsiCo realized that the food-service concern is going progressively competitory with a big figure of established participants. Growth has started to plateau in the domestic market which is non assisting to increase the group ‘s grosss.
  • While other participants largely standalone, were sharply prosecuting abroad markets, TGI association with PepsiCo was non assisting affairs. There was bureaucratic holds and big lead clip in determination devising, being a division of a pudding stone.
  • PepsiCo could non tap into the fountain-dispensed soft drinks concern, long dominated by Coke. It was partially due to Coke ‘s monopolistic actions by which it did non let nutrient service distributers to cover with Pepsi. Food service distributers provide wide assortment of consumable supplies like nutrient, drinks, paper etc to restaurant ironss, film theatres etc. Besides PepsiCo ‘s ownership of nutrient ironss did non let it to efficaciously flip for fountain service concern with houses which were basically its challengers in nutrient concern.

In the visible radiation of these, PepsiCo decided to concentrate merely on concern where its nucleus strengths could be leveraged. Thus the renewed and sole focal point on drinks and nosh nutrient section which would imply divestiture of the eating house concern.

In the visible radiation of the above developments, it would be of import to consider on the determination and its impact through different facets of strategic direction position

External Environment Analysis

The external environment can be farther classified as

General environment

Industry environment

Competitive landscape

The analysis of the competitory landscape for TGI starts with an overview of the nutrient & A ; drink section. The nutrient services sector in the US can be classified based on the manner of distribution

  • Full-service eating house
  • Limited-service/Quick-service eating house ( QSR )
  • Cafeterias
  • Snack & A ; non-alcoholic drink saloon
  • Food service contractor
  • Caterer
  • Mobile nutrient service
  • Alcoholic imbibing constitution

In add-on to this, there is considerable overlap with other concern which act as non-traditional distribution centres and distribute nutrient & A ; drink service –

  • Grocery or convenience shops
  • Gasoline filling Stationss
  • Supermarkets
  • Educational constitution

Business Level Strategy

PepsiCo has followed a distinction scheme at the concern degree due to the undermentioned grounds

  • The broad portfolio of merchandises including carbonated drinks and bite nutrients help it make out to a huge human ecology among the client base. The mixture of picks enables assorted clients to run into their refreshment demands through PepsiCo merchandises of their penchant.
  • PepsiCo is a planetary company with operations in several states. In order to obtain a portion of billfold of consumers in different parts, it must supply merchandises that are tuned to the gustatory sensations and penchants, prevalent in those local parts. This besides explains the principle behind holding assortment of merchandises so that purchasers perceive value for money through their preferable trade names.
  • PepsiCo operates in a duopoly market viing with Coke merely. It need non follow a cost leading scheme as both the Cola big leagues take monetary value signals from each other and adjust markup monetary values consequently, to retain market portion and gross. There has seldom been an full-scale monetary value war between the two which would hold finally bled both to immense losingss. This allows both participants to vie on the footing of differentiated merchandises targeted at a wider and more diverse client base

TGI on the other manus demands to follow an integrated cost-leadership and distinction scheme due to the nature of the industry it operated in –

  • Dining is a higher engagement activity compared to buying Cola or bites. While remainder of PepsiCo ‘s concern required more of a merchandise selling attack, the eating house group was more of service concern. Differentiation is the key in such a scenario to pull clients. Variety in footings of bill of fare options, atmosphere etc leads to higher footsteps. Besides the local divisions in foreign states need to be geared up to provide to the local demands.
  • Unlike a duopoly in Cola section, eating house concern has many established rivals. This has led to coerce on the monetary value forepart ensuing in decreased borders. To remain competitory, all participants have to minimise cost and base on balls on the benefit or hazard losing clients.
  • As evident from the treatment above, the concern degree scheme for Cola & A ; bites divisions and that of the eating house division are divergent. PepsiCo would hold struggle in its twenty-four hours to twenty-four hours operations every bit good as long-run planning while seeking to pull off the demands of the concern.

Corporate Level Strategy

PepsiCo has been seeking to follow a corporate degree scheme of related linked variegation due to the undermentioned grounds –

  • The Cola and the bite nutrient concern would take to synergy in the corporate activities. While drinks could be mass produced in bottling workss, separate and dedicated fabrication installations for bite nutrients would be required. The natural stuffs would besides be procured through different paths. The ingredients of Cola would chiefly be H2O, sugar and chemicals and plastic or glass bottles. These could be obtained freely or from institutional providers like sugar Millss, bottle makers etc. The inputs for bite nutrients would be farmed veggies sourced through the contract farming path.
  • In malice of the diverse operational demands of both the concern, there exists ample chance to leverage the nucleus competences of PepsiCo for both type of merchandises – selling musculus and broad distribution web. Both the merchandises could be marketed by sharing the expertness within the divisions and the range could be extended utilizing the superior supply concatenation and logistics agreements of PepsiCo.
  • Such a synergism would non profit the eating house concern. It non merely has operational divergency with the soft drinks and bite nutrients concern, but besides the nucleus competences of PepsiCo in selling and distribution can non be meaningfully transferred. More of a service orientation is required for the eating house division apart from pull offing disparate supply concatenation, big base of fixed assets particularly existent estate. The human resource position would besides be different as in pull offing workers who are service suppliers instead than working in production lines.

On the other manus, TGI would necessitate to follow a corporate degree scheme of dominant concern

  • The pillar would be restaurant concern and each of the constitutional trade names can leverage the common pool of resources of the company. Existing existent estate, antecedently being utilized by a individual trade name, can be shared among the others to concentrate on new shop growing.
  • The supply concatenation can be streamlined through coordination with logistics suppliers to cut down redundancy in operations. Suppliers can be managed in an incorporate mode to cut down costs through economic systems of graduated table. This can be achieved by consolidating the procurement procedure of the eating house trade names with TGI.
  • The concern can be consolidated by working with top acting franchises to better efficiency and drive stockholder value.


The above mentioned facts and resulting analysis of PepsiCo ‘s strategic determination to deprive its interest in TGI, point to a few facets that stand out.

The eating house concern is a dominant participant in all the QSR classs it operates in – sandwich, pizza and poulet. There are besides ample growing chances in abroad markets though the US domestic market is bit by bit maturating and growing is decelerating down at that place.

  • Pepsi ‘s nucleus competences in selling & A ; distribution do non suit good with the demands of a service-oriented concern like QSR. Besides PepsiCo would wish to prosecute clients with differentiated merchandises across a wide portfolio like drinks, bite nutrients, wellness & A ; energy drinks etc. To this consequence it would wish to convey synergism in its fabrication and client range for all merchandises. This would ask diversifying into related classs and concentrate on growing in these.
  • TGI on the other manus, has to non merely to offer differentiated service to its client, but besides needs to vie on the cost forepart more smartly. The concern of TGI is such that it is concentrated in the nutrient service sector and there is non much range or principle for variegation. This would take to loss of focal point and much land would be lost to the rivals.
  • There is obviously some mutual exclusiveness in the operational every bit good as corporate scheme of PepsiCo and TGI. This would halter the chances of both the groups in the long tally and earnestly sabotage the planetary growing chances of TGI which is so critical at this point of clip.

That the divestment determination was good thought and done with batch of foresight, was vindicated by the more than mean returns of both PepsiCo and TGI portions thenceforth.

Pepsi was able to collar the slide in its border and earnestly dispute its rival -Coke in many emerging markets like South Asia, Eastern Europe etc.

TGI on the other manus was able to keep its dominant place in the QSR and besides increase its planetary footmark well