Aziende che hanno molto business in India

  • Ecco la 60° Edizione del settimanale "Le opportunità di Borsa" dedicato ai consulenti finanziari ed esperti di borsa.

    Questa settimana abbiamo assistito a nuovi record assoluti in Europa e a Wall Street. Il tutto, dopo una ottava che ha visto il susseguirsi di riunioni di banche centrali. Lunedì la Bank of Japan (BoJ) ha alzato i tassi per la prima volta dal 2007, mettendo fine all’era del costo del denaro negativo e al controllo della curva dei rendimenti. Mercoledì la Federal Reserve (Fed) ha confermato i tassi nel range 5,25%-5,50%, mentre i “dots”, le proiezioni dei funzionari sul costo del denaro, indicano sempre tre tagli nel corso del 2024. Il Fomc ha anche discusso in merito ad un possibile rallentamento del ritmo di riduzione del portafoglio titoli. Ieri la Bank of England (BoE) ha lasciato i tassi di interesse invariati al 5,25%. Per continuare a leggere visita il link

alessioto

Nuovo Utente
Registrato
17/11/11
Messaggi
412
Punti reazioni
5
Alla luce della crescita dell'INDIA e sopratutto della possibilità di sviluppare la classe media, vorrei sapere quale sono delle società che hanno una buona parte di business in questo paese.
Grazie 1000
 
sicuramente le aziende indiane :D
con la globalizzazione è tornata l'influenza dell'impero britannico sulle sue ex colonie, un'azienda che ha lavorato molto bene in india è unilever (perchè ha capito che doveva adattare i formati dei suoi prodotti alle esigenze di quei consumatori, che lavorano un giorno e con i soldi guadagnati devono comprare una dose di shampoo a fine giornata), un'altra che potrebbe avere grandi margini di crescita è coca-cola perchè il consumo pro capite è bassissimo, prova a guardare questo:
Best Consumer Stocks for Emerging Market Investors (Morningstar) | Emerging Market Skeptic
 

Allegati

  • 20130126_WBC848.png
    20130126_WBC848.png
    23,3 KB · Visite: 381
quale mi consiglieresti???

uno può fare qualunque cosa: dall'high-frequency trader all'investitore di lunghissimo periodo alla munger, ma uno degli errori peggiori è quello di cercare consiglio su un investimento da un'altra persona, perchè è segno che non si è approfondito a sufficienza, se si rivelasse un errore diventerebbe l'altro il responsabile,ecc
 
sicuramente interessante è Unilever e fare un PAC non sarebbe stupido, ha una stagnazione nel fatturato ma è presente in tutto il mondo e quindi non dovrebbe risentire i rallentamenti economici in Europa... a differenza di P&G è presente anche nel settore del cibo quindi potenzialmente più avvantaggiata e rispetto a Nestle é presente anche nel consumer healthcare (mentadent, Dove...)
unilever-brands-logos.jpg
 
uno può fare qualunque cosa: dall'high-frequency trader all'investitore di lunghissimo periodo alla munger, ma uno degli errori peggiori è quello di cercare consiglio su un investimento da un'altra persona, perchè è segno che non si è approfondito a sufficienza, se si rivelasse un errore diventerebbe l'altro il responsabile,ecc

Non sono certo al persona che rinfaccia le cose, anche se ce ne sono tanti in questo forum.. era solo per sapere la tua opinione ;)
 
un'azienda che ha lavorato molto bene in india è unilever (perchè ha capito che doveva adattare i formati dei suoi prodotti alle esigenze di quei consumatori, che lavorano un giorno e con i soldi guadagnati devono comprare una dose di shampoo a fine giornata)

però adesso i poveri indiani:
Unilever, P&G Try Tweaked Formulas, Higher Prices for Developing World - WSJ

BANGALORE, India—A. Ragini earns around $130 a month as a nanny in this city of nearly 10 million, just about the average wage in India. After paying for food and shelter, she has little cash to spare. Ms. Ragini recently noticed the price of her favorite soap, Unilever PLC’s Hamam, had gone up to 24 rupees, or about 39 cents, from 16 rupees. It also had new packaging, and some variations offered different ingredients. Even though it stretches her budget, Ms. Ragini, 49, has continued to buy the soap. “I’m so used to it, I don’t want to change it now,” she says. Marketers are counting on many more reactions like hers throughout the developing world. For decades, consumer-goods companies expanded in emerging economies through rock-bottom prices and small, affordable pack sizes. At Unilever, the world’s second-largest consumer-goods maker by revenue after Procter & Gamble Co. , that meant one-use sachets of Sunsilk shampoo and 3½-ounce bars of Lifebuoy soap.
But now, with the global economy sluggish and emerging-market sales growth waning for the first time in years, companies are employing a developed-world strategy with their poorest customers: Pack more features into basic products and raise their prices.
That is why Unilever recently launched a concentrated liquid version of its OMO laundry detergent in Brazil, one of its biggest markets. Packs cost around 30% more than the powder, although Unilever says the price per wash actually goes down. The powder itself replaced the soap bars that many poorer Brazilians used for washing clothes 10 years ago. The company has also shown Brazilian consumers online ads for higher-price TRESemmé shampoo, resulting in millions of Facebook likes. And in India, Unilever has developed a hand-wash version of its Lifebuoy soap that changes color after 10 seconds to signify that hands are clean.

Unilever’s big global rivals are employing similar tactics. Procter & Gamble is trying to persuade Indian men to upgrade from unguarded razors to Gillette products with added safety features. Colgate-Palmolive Co. is selling tea-flavored mouthwash in China. Germany’s Henkel AG is focusing on making premium-price, locally inspired products across the Middle East, such as shampoo for hair covered by veils or washing detergent designed for black clothes. “Something like toothpaste or soap bars, you would think, where’s the premiumization there?” says Samir Singh, vice president of personal care at Hindustan Unilever Ltd., Unilever’s Indian unit. “But there is a lot of scope in the future to develop these categories.” Two years ago, Nisha Kawa, a mother of two living in Mumbai, started using Unilever’s Sunsilk conditioner. She had never used conditioner before—only shampoo—but was convinced by television commercials that promised it would make her hair shinier. It adds the equivalent of a couple of dollars a month to her expenses, a lot in a country where average income is a little over $4 a day. But even though she has noticed higher prices on a variety of products in the past year, Ms. Kawa, 33, says she won’t give up her conditioner. “Everybody here uses it now,” she says. Beyond increasing prices on basic products, Unilever has brought in a series of twists on its Sunsilk range and many other beauty products, allowing it to charge even more. In the Big Bazaar, a supermarket in Bangalore, Sunsilk with added keratin proteins—designed to strengthen hair—costs around 150 rupees, compared with 120 rupees for regular Sunsilk.
But playing with price is a dangerous game. Consumers in many developing countries are ultrasensitive to changes in prices, especially those that push through a particular coinage denomination. In India, “so much is about value,” said Hindustan Unilever’s Mr. Singh. Launching new products, or tweaking the designs of older ones, is helping Unilever gain market share in 60% of the categories in which it operates, the company says. It is also helping to justify higher prices even as per capita incomes in many of the biggest emerging markets have stagnated or fallen.

Those price increases are increasingly crucial. Sales growth of consumer goods in emerging markets slowed to 7.5% in the year ended in June, from 8.8% a year earlier, according to research by Kantar Worldpanel. The fall cost the products’ manufacturers $8.3 billion in lost revenue, the research shows. At Unilever, sales growth in emerging markets fell to 6.2% in its most recent quarter from 8.8% a year earlier. Analysts expect 2015 to be even tougher. Prior to 2013, Unilever reported years of unbroken double-digit growth in emerging markets. Helping to counter the trend, Unilever says it was able to raise prices world-wide by 1.8% in the three months ended September, with an “increasingly positive contribution from emerging markets.” In Brazil, prices rose 3% in the quarter, despite the country being in recession, and prices were up 5% in Indonesia. The company declined to break out price data for India. New and revamped products not only sell for more, but also show through on the bottom line. Unilever says 75% of its innovations add to its overall gross profit margin. “Our innovations are carrying the company,” Chief Executive Paul Polman said earlier this year.
Unilever is under even more pressure than its rivals to succeed in the developing world. Nearly 60% of the company’s $67 billion in annual revenue comes in emerging markets, compared with around 40% at P&G. Mr. Polman in 2009 set an open-ended goal of doubling annual sales to about $100 billion, with as much as 75% coming from emerging markets. In many developing countries, Unilever has an advantage because it got there first. Founded in 1930 after the merger of a Dutch margarine producer and a British soap maker, the company has had businesses in India and other former British colonies since 1888. Consumers in India often assume brands like Axe deodorant and Lifebuoy soap are in fact Indian. Now, Mr. Polman—a P&G veteran of 26 years before joining Unilever in 2009—is attempting to remodel Unilever for success over the next century. As part of his plan, Unilever has scrapped its former goal of becoming the world’s largest packaged-food maker, now hoping instead to overtake L’Oréal SA and P&G in beauty and personal care.

Food, which in 2008 accounted for 35% of Unilever’s business, now makes up 25% after the sale of big-name brands such as Skippy peanut butter and Ragú pasta sauce. In December, Unilever said it would separate its struggling spreads division, which includes brands such as Flora margarine, a move seen by many analysts as a first step toward an exit from the business. Meanwhile, personal-care products like Axe and the TRESemmé hair-care line have seen their budgets—and sales—boosted. The reason: Shampoos and deodorants sell better in emerging markets than culturally tied foods such as peanut butter and pasta sauce. Personal-care products also carry higher margins and are more receptive to innovations, such as new ingredients or larger pack sizes. A Unilever spokeswoman said all the company’s innovations are designed to benefit the consumer first. For some customers, the new pitches aren’t playing so well. In 2012, R. Krishnappa, a hotel worker in Bangalore, switched to Unilever’s Axe deodorant from the talcum powder he had used since he was a child. He liked the promotions linking Axe with cricket, his favorite sport. But soon after making the switch, Mr. Krishnappa noticed the price of the deodorant had gone up. There were also bigger bottles and several new Axe variations in his local store. Sometimes he couldn’t even find his favorite style, branded Axe Googly after a particular play in cricket. “I couldn’t choose which one I wanted,” he says, and eventually reverted to using powder.

Unilever spends around $1.25 billion a year on research and development. The company exports some of its innovations, such as the skin-care treatments used in Dove products, around the world. Others, like adding sunscreen to the skin-lightening cream Fair & Lovely and developing water purifiers that run without batteries or running water, are created directly for emerging markets. The result has been an explosion of new products on offer. In India, that has brought with it an opportunity for some. Haresh Bhai has owned Welcome Stores in Mumbai’s western suburbs for 20 years. He used to sell basic foodstuffs and bars of soap. Now he has moisturizing shampoos, invigorating face creams and pump-action hand washes stacked from floor to ceiling. Mr. Bhai says spending on personal-care brands like Unilever’s Dove range and P&G’s Pantene shampoo has increased tenfold over the past five years as the companies have introduced new, higher-price variants of their basic products. “The customers come running,” he says.
 
sicuramente interessante è Unilever e fare un PAC non sarebbe stupido, ha una stagnazione nel fatturato ma è presente in tutto il mondo e quindi non dovrebbe risentire i rallentamenti economici in Europa... a differenza di P&G è presente anche nel settore del cibo quindi potenzialmente più avvantaggiata e rispetto a Nestle é presente anche nel consumer healthcare (mentadent, Dove...)
unilever-brands-logos.jpg

Credo che America e Cina abbiano un maggior rischio di veder rallentare la loro economia rispetto all'europa. Altresi è più alto il rischio di una "guerra" tra America ed Europa che creerebbe problemi a molte società su entrambe le sponde.

Poi vi chiedo, ma se il 3d starter vuole investire sulla crescità della classe media indiana, che senso ha focalizzarsi su compagnie che sono esposte solo parzialmente a questa economia?
Non dovreste più che altro cercare compagnie esposte per il 50% (numero a caso) del fatturato al mercato indiano?
Tanto vale che consigli FCA, ha appena iniziato a produrre la Jeep in India, con Magneti Marelli produce motori ed altro per le case autoctone; poco importa che l'80% del fatturato ad ora sia fatto in America.
 
How Colas lost their mojo: Amid downturn, Coca-Cola, Pepsi face challenge from local companies

They lorded over the Indian soft drink market for almost three decades, often setting the rules of the game. Indeed, after PepsiCo entered India in 1989 and Coca-Cola re-entered via a dramatic launch at Agra in 1993, cola had become synonymous with beverages and vice versa. The two US giants applied every tactic in the book to coax, cajole, threaten, acquire or smother local and international rivals. Within a decade, they had cornered nearly all the organised carbonated beverage market between them. Then they battled each other in the bitter cola wars every summer. But in the past couple of years, the hunters are being hunted in India's Rs60,336 crore soft drink market. Ironically, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola find themselves on the same side of the fence as old and new rivals - Dabur, Parle, Hector Beverages (Paper Boat), ITC, Manpasand Beverages, and a host of others - have managed to push the cola giants into a corner through some innovative healthy beverages, smart positioning and deft moves in the marketplace. Not just that, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola failed to see through the enormous opportunity in milk-based beverages and also couldn't protect their market share in packaged drinking water, even as their attention got diverted to fending off charges of depleting water tables at their plants across the country.
According to Euromonitor, between 2014 and 2016, Coca-Cola India's market share has shrunk from 35.5 to 33.5 per cent while PepsiCo's has gone down from 23.2 to 22.2 per cent. Interestingly, as consumption switched dramatically to healthy beverages, the duo, ill-equipped to tap the new opportunities, have been losing share in a growing market. Their combined share is now down 3 percentage points to 55.7 per cent in a market that has grown from Rs44,624 crore to Rs60,336 crore and continues to grow at a healthy 9.7 per cent per annum. The share of carbonated beverages, commonly referred as colas, was 51 per cent at its peak in 2014 - it's now down to 46 per cent.
This trend is mirrored in the bottled water segment, which has grown 19 per cent in the last five years and at Rs14,270 crore, commands a 24 per cent share of the overall soft drink market. Parle Bisleri is the outright market leader with a 24.6 per cent share while Coca-Cola's Kinley at 17.2 per cent has lost 2 percentage points since 2014. PepsiCo's Aquafina has stagnated at 10 per cent. True, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have retained their hold in carbonated beverages with a near 96 per cent share but, unfortunately for them, the segment is lagging overall industry growth. The segment has grown at barely 3.9 per cent between 2011 and 2016. They entered India to tap the potential offered by the abysmally low per capita consumption of soft drinks in the country. And though the per capita consumption has grown from 1.2 litres in 1990 to 13 litres per day today, to their dismay, the bulk of the new growth hasn't come their way. Effectively, the duo has failed to tap a substantial part of the Rs16,000 crore growth, largely in the healthy beverages category, in the past two-three years. And it's getting tougher by the day. The major beneficiaries have been Parle Bisleri and Parle Agro whose combined market share in soft drinks has gone up from 15.8 per cent in 2014 to 17.7 per cent last year. In a highly fragmented market, the rest - including Dabur, UB Group, Dhariwal Industries, Narangs Hospitality, ITC, Bisleri, Parle Agro and Dharampal Satyapal among others - have together risen 1 percentage point in the last three years. Then, there are the smaller players led by Manpasand and Hector Beverages that are also slowly making their presence felt.
Both PepsiCo and Coca-Cola have responded with a range of their own in healthy beverages but the slide in market share is yet to be arrested. While Coca-Cola launched three non-carbonated beverages (Aquarius, a low calorie beverage; Vio, a milk-based beverage and Zico, a coconut water brand), competitor PepsiCo, has promised to bring down the calorie content in two-thirds of its beverage portfolio to 100 or less calories per 12 ounce serving (approx 350 ml) by 2025. It has already launched 7UP with 30 per cent less sugar. While these launches may seem like strategic moves of the two cola giants to strengthen their position in India, the truth is these are desperate tactics to retain and grab market share.
Their delayed entry into the dairy segment is a case in point. The packaged dairy business in India is an even bigger opportunity than all soft drinks - aerated beverages and juices put together - valued at Rs70,924 crore in 2016. Coca-Cola ventured into the category last year with 'Vio' while Pepsi has only recently ventured into this segment with their ready to drink flavored oat milk offering. Experts believe the delay will make it harder for them to start producing blockbuster successes in healthier beverages. The tepid response to Vio only underlines that.
The plight of the Cola giants is evident in their finances. In fiscal 2016, Coca Cola India suffered a 6 per cent decline in net profit while its total income was nearly stagnant at Rs1,833.86 crore. Its operating margin has slipped from 38 per cent to 28 per cent since fiscal 2014. For PepsiCo, the going has been even tougher. Its net loss in FY 2016 widened to Rs554.2 crore from Rs154.83 crore in the previous fiscal while total income declined 15 per cent. Its operating margin has progressively declined from 4.95 per cent in 2013/14 to 1.73 per cent in 2015/16.

WHO MOVED MY COLA?

The growing consumer preference for healthier food and beverages and the excessive use of sugar in their soft drinks has played against the duo. But the two companies' complacency and reluctance to let go off their dependence on carbonated beverages has also proved detrimental. Only four years ago, PepsiCo had launched a stronger flavoured cola, Atom, in its bid to take on Coca-Cola's Thums Up. It bombed spectacularly, providing the first indication that the market was not ready for another aerated beverage. "It is a case of clinging on to carbonated beverages and not moving on. Both Coke and Pepsi still believe that the low per capita consumption of carbonated beverages in India could work for them, but the consumer has changed," points out former head of marketing of Coca-Cola India, Shripad Nadkarni (currently, co-founder of food start-up, Foodlix) "Colas are not fashionable anymore. They are considered detrimental to health and the cola majors have to understand that," adds Ajimon Francis, Country Head of brand valuation company, Brand Finance.
The cola giants are in a dilemma. Venkatesh Kini, the former head honcho of Coca-Cola India, in an interview with Business Today a fortnight prior to his exit, candidly admitted that there has been three consecutive years of downturn for the company because of a slowdown in rural consumption and steep increase in taxation. The Union Budgets of 2015 and 2016 increased excise duty on aerated beverages by 3.5 per cent and that forced manufacturers to increase prices. To make things worse, Chief Economic Advisor Arvind Subramanian has also recommended a 40 per cent "sin tax" on the category under the Goods and Services Tax (GST). If that happens, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola India will be the worst affected as the consumer shift from colas may get accentuated. "The consumers, their choices today are much more precise and varied. We are therefore transitioning ourselves to being a company that can offer a range of beverages for life. Our innovation pipeline includes products which are non-carbonated and also products that are diets and lighter versions of our carbonated range. Today, about 35-40 per cent of our business is from our non-carbonated portfolio," points out T. Krishnakumar, President, Coca-Cola India and South West Asia, who recently stepped into the shoes of Kini. The cola giants are clearly in a mood to admit their strategies need immediate overhauling. Vipul Prakash, Senior Vice-President, PepsiCo India, also agrees that dependence on a certain category is a myopic way of looking at a business. "The need to build the portfolio is very clear. Today, the consumer is exposed to more brands, unlike in the past where he only had a carbonated drink for every occasion."
While the company has already taken the first step of reducing sugar content in its products with 7UP, will it be able to do so with Pepsi as successfully? Prakash is unsure. "Obviously, Pepsi will be tougher. It's very difficult for any sweetener to taste like full sugar. So, don't expect it to be the same. Perhaps the classic version can also continue and we could do a Pepsi light, we don't know." Prakash also admits that Pepsi could have done better with its juice brand, Tropicana. Juice as a category has been growing at a robust 16.8 per cent. Despite getting into the market early in 1998, Tropicana has registered a sharp decline in market share - from 33.5 to 28.7 per cent (as per Nielsen) between March 2016 to February 2017 while Dabur is the market leader with a share of 56.3 per cent. "Dabur has done a good job over the last few years in terms of their innovation. We are also doing that but I think we need to step up our game," admits Prakash. While Coca-Cola's mango beverage Maaza is the market leader in the mango juice category, its other juice brand, Minute Maid, has been a slow burner.
The new Coca-Cola India head stresses that his company is taking steps to reduce its dependence on carbonated beverages but says his immediate concern is the possibility of heavy taxes being levied on carbonated beverages, which is the companys bread and butter. "The best way would be to tax based on sugar levels and not carbonation. Carbonated beverages is an affordable indulgence just like a chocolate or biscuit. If the prices are too high, the consumption will go down, consumers may end up getting their beverage needs from somewhere else," points out Kini. In fact, Indra Nooyi, PepsiCo Chairman and CEO, during her recent visit to India met Finance MinisterArun Jaitley to pitch for a lower rate of taxation for beverages under the soon to be implemented GST. Sugar carbonated beverages are likely to fall under the highest 28 per cent category of taxes. Worse, there are murmurs that an additional 15 per cent cess, reserved for those products which the government wants to discourage, may also be slapped on this category of beverages.

HOMEGROWN CHALLENGERS

While the two cola giants are struggling to cover lost ground, homegrown beverage makers are slowly and steadily making headway. There are established companies such as Dabur, ITC, Parle Agro, Bisleri as well as newcomers such as Global Consumer Products, Hector Beverages, Raw Pressery. Then there are regional players including Manpasand Beverages and Caavinkare. Each of these companies has its unique positioning but all of them are focused on fruit-based beverages and not colas. The likes of Parle Agro and Manpasand Beverages are growing their mango beverage business from strength to strength and at the same time foraying into carbonated fruit beverages. It is a category where Parle Agro has the first mover advantage with its brand Appy Fizz. The company has recently launched Frooti Fizz, a carbonated variant of its popular mango drink, which has 11 per cent fresh fruit extracts (as opposed to a Fanta or a Mirinda, which are fruit flavoured beverages). "The beverage category has opened up as consumers are willing to experience new products and are looking for variety," says Nadia Chauhan, Joint Managing Director, Parle Agro.
Similarly, Hamdard recently ventured into the ready-to-drink juice segment, with Rooh Afza Fusion - an extension of its 100 year old brand Rooh Afza - which not only has fresh juice content of 20 per cent, but also retains the flavour of the parent brand. Dabur, on the other hand, not only has the early mover advantage in juices, it has the lead in terms of innovations. From a variety of fruit juices to healthy vegetable juices, Daburs portfolio is much larger than Tropicana or Minute Maid. It has recently launched a mass mango juice brand, Ju.C. to compete with Frooti and Mazaa.
These companies benefit from being a local company. Not only do they understand local tastes better, they are also able to innovate faster. "Domestic companies always have faster decision making. That aids innovation. If I have to take permission from Atlanta or Connecticut or wherever, there will be time-lag. Also, the guidelines in these international companies are very strict. So half of their proposed innovations gets killed there," points out K.K. Chutani, Executive Director, Dabur India. Concurs Mansoor Ali, Chief Sales and Marketing Officer, Hamdard. "When we were working on Rooh Afza Fusion we test marketed several versions. Some which didnt work and we pulled it out at once. Had we been bound by global diktats, I dont think we could have been so flexible," he says.
The other company which has created a niche on the back of innovations is Hector Beverages, a company founded by former Coca Cola India employees. Though it is not yet profitable, by touching the ethnic Indian tastes with juices such as Aam Panna, Thandai, etc, through its Paper Boat brand, Hector has managed to get premium consumer mindspace. "Acquiring speed is a tough one for a large company. The main-stay of the business is their core carbonated beverages. They will always have a small team for innovation, but whenever there is a strain in the business, that segment suffers as the focus is on growing the core business more," says Parvesh Debuka, marketing head of Paper Boat for Hector Beverages. In every FMCG segment in India, homegrown players are not only successful but smarter in their go to market, says Arvind Singhal, Chairman of business consultancy firm Technopak. "It is not a matter of desi versus videshi, but they (Pepsi and Coke) are bound by their own legacy and are not able to think Indian. A Paper Boat will give you the taste that consumers want and can relate to."

THE FRUIT DRINKS REVOLUTION

Both PepsiCo and Coca-Cola have made little headway in the segments that have found favour with consumers and are growing faster-juices and dairy. The packaged juices segment in India - categorised into three sub segments fruit drinks, juices and nectar - has grown at a CAGR of 16.8 per cent over the last 5 years. At Rs16,207 crore in 2016, it accounts for 27 per cent of the soft drink market. While Pepsi has the advantage of a bigger portfolio-Slice in fruit drinks and Tropicana in juices and nectar-it is clearly losing out to local rivals Parle Frooti and Dabur Real respectively. Tropicana has lost 5 percentage points in the last one year at the hands of Dabur, ITC and Hector Beverages. Coca-Cola's fruit drinks Maaza and Minute Maid does give them a significant 33.8 per cent share in juices but it does not have a presence in the other categories. Juices and nectar have higher fruit content and are considered healthier. "Ultimately the market will evolve and consumers will move towards this category," says Deepika Warrier, Vice President, Nutrition category, PepsiCo India.
The pace of innovation in the two companies is visibly slower in this category. When Prime Minister Narendra Modi exhorted beverage companies to mix at least 5 per cent fruit juice in aerated drinks to help distressed farmers around the country in September 2014, Vadodara-based Manpasand Beverages was ready with such a drink, Fruits Up, within a week. Mixing fruit with aerated beverages would create a healthy demand for fruits across the country thus benefiting farmers while, at the same time, it will at least partly take care of the high sugar content in these drinks. Though most beverage companies claim it was already part of their gameplan much before the PM's speech, his appeal did speed up the process. Indian companies seem to have a head start in this area.
Yet, it may not be all smooth sailing for the homegrown firms. At least 600 odd-beverages are launched every summer in India but 90 per cent of them do not live to see another season. With their deep pockets and distribution network, Coca-Cola and Pepsi may still capture the market with a me-too beverage. Smaller players face the challenge of scaling up quickly. "To sustain distribution for a full year, one needs deep pockets for a broader portfolio of products," points out Abheek Singhi, Partner (Head, Consumer Practice), Boston Consulting Group. Agrees Prakash of PepsiCo. "They understand local taste better than us and are free spirited. Their biggest limitation is scaling up, that's why you will not find these people being able to go outside their state." Abhishek Singh, Director at Manpasand, believes most beverage businesses lack long-term focus. "One needs to have a solid hold on manufacturing," he says.

PROBLEMS GALORE

Increasing competition is not the only challenge the two cola giants are grappling with. They also find themselves at the centre of a backlash over depleting water table across the country. In March, two major trade bodies in Tamil Nadu - the Federation of Tamil Nadu Traders Associations (FTNTA) and the Tamil Nadu Traders Associations Forum (TNTAF) - banned the sale of Coca-Cola and Pepsi beverages across the state blaming the companies for extracting too much water from rivers that has increased problems for farmers in the state. The issue is still unresolved. "We pay the price for being a large, visible consumer brand," says Krishnakumar of Coca-Cola India. "In Tamil Nadu, we had nothing to do with what transpired in the beginning of the year. Yet we were targeted. We listened, engaged and clarified." A week later, a similar call for boycott was given by a trader in the neighbouring state of Kerala but it has not had much impact. PepsiCo however, has faced relentless resistance from locals in Kerala for drawing water from the Kanjikode area for its bottling plant in Palakkad. The plant operates at way less than optimum capacity today after the state government put a temporary restriction on industrial water consumption in the state. Coca Cola also had a factory in the vicinity but it had to shut it down back in 2004 after facing a similar resistance. There are also protests against the Atlanta based firm in Hoshangabad in Madhya Pradesh where it is setting up a Rs750 crore greenfield bottling unit. It would be Coca-Cola's biggest in India and draw water from the Narmada. A group of local activists have started an agitation, claiming it would cause pollution and water scarcity in the region and are planning to file a petition in the Jabalpur High Court. The two companies have steadfastly refuted allegations and claim they replenish the water table more than they exhaust. "Through our rainwater replenishment initiatives, we return 148 per cent water to the ground than our usage, yet we are targeted," says Krishnakumar. The ire, however, is directed only at the two companies, which means the field is open for the homegrown companies to invest and grow. With challenges multiplying, will PepsiCo and The Coca-Cola Company be able to regain their erstwhile glory? They have to change their strategy in order to succeed. For now, the odds are against them.

a.jpg
 
diageo con il patron della force india (formula 1):
‘King of Good Times’ Gives Diageo a Hangover - WSJ

MUMBAI—India’s liquor market was for years a thorn in the side of Diageo PLC, the world’s largest spirits maker. Then it met the “King of Good Times.” Vijay Mallya, a billionaire fond of mullet haircuts, diamond earrings, sports and lavish parties, invited Diageo executives to his Mumbai residence in early 2012 and offered them a deal for a majority stake in India’s largest liquor maker, which he controlled. Diageo was desperate to break into India and had long coveted United Spirits Ltd. As the two sides began discussions, the challenge of absorbing the company and its freewheeling founder became increasingly obvious. The liquor company was intricately, and confusingly, intertwined with Mr. Mallya’s wider business empire, which was crumbling.
His airline company was low on cash. To prop it up, he had advanced money from his liquor business, recording the payments on a handwritten ledger he showed the Diageo executives gathered in his home, according to two people familiar with the meeting and the ledger itself, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. The Diageo executives also learned payments were being made to political figures in some key Indian states where United Spirits operated, the two people say.
Diageo subsequently bought a 55% stake in United Spirits for $3.2 billion, the largest food-and-beverage transaction in Indian history. Five years later, its gamble on Mr. Mallya’s business has made India the second-largest market for its brands, which include Johnnie Walker whisky and Smirnoff vodka. The man who orchestrated the deal for Diageo, then-Chief Operating Officer Ivan Menezes, has become chief executive.
Yet the commercial success has been accompanied by lots of trouble. Diageo is in the crosshairs of Indian authorities and entangled in multiple legal proceedings stemming from the acquisition. The authorities are looking into whether Mr. Mallya used the deal to launder money, and Mr. Mallya’s creditors have sought the return of shares purchased by Diageo.
Mr. Mallya, who Diageo alleges diverted nearly $500 million from United Spirits and didn’t pay it back, said in an email to the Journal that Diageo had “complete knowledge” of the money he had taken out of the company to support his other businesses. Diageo was “happy with the transactions happening at United Spirits” and “analysed all the underlying documents” before signing a deal, he said. Diageo spokesman Dominic Redfearn disputed Mr. Mallya’s version of events. “At no time were we made aware of the diversions of funds that Dr. Mallya now suggests Diageo was ‘happy with’,” Mr. Redfearn said in an email. “His claims that we ‘analysed all the underlying documents’ and were therefore ‘happy with the transactions happening at USL’ are false.” He said “evidence of diversion of funds only became clear after the closing of the transaction.”

Unpaid debts
London-based Diageo cut ties with Mr. Mallya last year, and he left India amid criminal investigations of unpaid debts and possible money laundering and tax evasion. He resurfaced in a London townhouse filled with impressionist art. India sought extradition, and bank creditors who claim they are owed $1.6 billion say they hope to see him imprisoned. In April, he was arrested in London and released on £650,000 bail, pending an extradition hearing. Mr. Mallya has said he did nothing illegal.
Other Western firms betting on the world’s fastest-growing large economy also have run into trouble in India. Last year, BP PLC was hit with a $1.55 billion fine in connection with a gas-drilling joint venture in India. Vodafone PLC, after buying India’s largest telecommunications company for $16.4 billion, received a $2.2 billion tax bill when India changed its tax laws in 2012. BP and Vodafone say they are contesting the findings.
Diageo’s spokesman said the United Spirits transaction, despite its complexity, “was a fantastic opportunity in a key market.” He said the company “knew from the start there were aspects of governance and controls that would need to be brought into line with international best practice.” Since Diageo took control, he said, United Spirits has strengthened its corporate governance, compliance practices and controls systems, and its board has ordered two forensic audits of the company, sharing the results with Indian authorities. One Indian court handling claims by Mr. Mallya’s creditors has ruled Diageo’s deal to buy United Spirits was designed by Mr. Mallya’s holding company to “keep creditors in the dark.” In February another court paved the way for a group of Indian state banks to demand at least $350 million worth of shares Mr. Mallya sold to Diageo.
An Indian money-laundering investigation of Mr. Mallya, in cooperation with the U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office, is broadening to look at whether Diageo helped him shift assets offshore through side deals connected to the United Spirits takeover, according to an official at India’s Enforcement Directorate. The Serious Fraud Office declined to comment.
In January, India’s securities regulator announced it had ordered Diageo to compensate United Spirits shareholders for a $140 million payment it made last year to pay off one of Mr. Mallya’s overseas debts. Diageo is appealing. Mr. Mallya said he had become “a political football.” United Spirits’ share price is 25% lower than when Diageo bought its last tranche of company stock in July 2014. Annual profits are below where they were before Diageo agreed the deal in 2012. Diageo said United Spirits revenue rose last year and it is “confident for the future.” In late 2012, before the deal was struck, Paul Walsh, then Diageo’s chief executive, met with United Spirits executives over drinks at their company’s Bangalore headquarters and was adamant about getting into the booming India market, says a former United Spirits executive who was there.
Diageo had launched a wine business in India in 2006, but closed it after only three years. A joint venture with the country’s second-biggest liquor firm was wound down in 2011. French liquor giant Pernod Ricard SA, Diageo’s rival, owns one of India’s biggest liquor businesses. Diageo had long had its eye on United Spirits, according to executives from both companies, but it wasn’t until 2012 that Mr. Mallya looked to Diageo as a potential savior. Mr. Walsh assigned Mr. Menezes, an Indian-born, U.S.-educated Diageo veteran, to seal the deal. Some India states still have prohibition laws, but many eliminated them relatively recently. Mr. Mallya embodied India’s new spirit. Parties at his villa in Goa drew business and political luminaries and featured performers such as Enrique Iglesias and Bollywood’s Sonu Nigam. He owned more than 200 luxury and vintage cars, a 311-foot yacht, a French castle and a Formula One team, Sahara Force India. He personally selected each air hostess at his airline company, Kingfisher Airlines, according to local news reports.
Kingfisher Airlines, however, was in financial trouble. Crippled by high fuel costs and a slump in the Indian economy, it was on the brink of bankruptcy in 2012, court documents indicate, forcing Mr. Mallya to consider a sale of United Spirits to raise cash.
In United Spirits’ Bangalore headquarters, Diageo’s finance team pored over the liquor company’s accounts, while Mr. Menezes listened to presentations there and at Mr. Mallya’s Goan villa, says a former United Spirits executive. Mr. Menezes, a 57-year-old graduate of Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, peppered United Spirits senior managers with questions. Mr. Mallya occasionally chimed in to offer his views, the former executive says.
Seeking to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, one of Diageo’s in-house lawyers requested sales records from distributors and interviews with individual distillers, according to internal emails reviewed by the Journal. A year earlier, Diageo had been fined $16 million for breaching that U.S. law after being caught paying bribes in India and elsewhere.
India’s liquor trade is rife with unorthodox practices and allegations of corruption. Political figures in states with monopoly retailing laws often have sought payments to allow drinks brands to sell their products there, local court records show.
At the meeting in Mumbai in early 2012, Mr. Mallya pulled out a handwritten document that two people in attendance say outlined diversions of money aimed at propping up non-liquor businesses of Mr. Mallya’s that were struggling. It also outlined some payments to people in India’s political system that Mr. Mallya said were to secure distribution rights, according to those two people and a document reviewed by the Journal.
Mr. Menezes looked at the document, the two people say, and left it with Mr. Mallya. One person with close knowledge of the meeting says the Diageo executives didn’t want to get into the details of the payments at that time.
Before the deal closed in May 2013, Diageo received a spreadsheet listing transactions that didn’t conform to standard accounting. The spreadsheet, which was reviewed by the Journal, showed that a range of manufacturing and distributing partners, from a bottling plant in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh to a sugar factory in the southern state of Karnataka, had received advances from United Spirits and then lent the money to Mr. Mallya’s other businesses. The spreadsheet indicated that Utkal Distilleries Ltd, a rum maker in India’s south, had advanced $8 million from United Spirits to another company controlled by Mr. Mallya. Internal forensic audits ordered by the Diageo-appointed CEO later concluded that most of the money had been used to pay jet-fuel bills. A bottling plant had borrowed $7 million to upgrade its facilities, then advanced the money to Mr. Mallya’s holding company, the spreadsheet and other company documents showed. Auditors later concluded the cash had been sent to Kingfisher Airlines. Overall, United Spirits had advanced $340 million to Mr. Mallya’s other companies and creditors, the spreadsheet showed. Mr. Mallya said Diageo received this spreadsheet “periodically during due diligence.” The Diageo spokesman said the company hadn’t received it until later, after agreeing to the terms of a deal in November 2012. Diageo bought its first tranche of shares in May 2013. Diageo offered Mr. Mallya a range of sweeteners to get the deal done. Its lawyers helped draft a new $75 million sponsorship deal between United Spirits and a holding company for Mr. Mallya’s Formula One team that increased payments fivefold, documents viewed by the Journal show. Diageo agreed to buy his South African brewery assets, to keep Mr. Mallya as chairman of the company indefinitely, and to allow him to retain benefits, including access to luxury properties owned by United Spirits, according to Diageo filings. The two companies agreed to a deal in November 2012 that called for Diageo to buy shares in United Spirits. Diageo bought one tranche of shares from another company of Mr. Mallya’s. Court documents from a subsequent judicial action by creditors show that Diageo knew the creditors considered those shares collateral against their unpaid loans, and that Diageo might have to give the shares back to those creditors later.

Strategy conflicts
Conflicts soon erupted over the strategic direction of United Spirits. The company’s Diageo-appointed CEO and board hired forensic auditors to comb through accounts. They confiscated hard drives of United Spirits’ top executives and, using Mr. Mallya’s emails, began piecing together a picture of his collapsing empire, according to documents reviewed by the Journal.
The emails appeared to show that Mr. Mallya cajoled and pressured his management team to divert money from United Spirits to save his other ventures, even as he was wrapping up a deal with Diageo. In July 2012, when Diageo was still doing due diligence, Mr. Mallya emailed United Spirits’ chief financial officer asking for $1.5 million to pay salaries at his U.K.-based Formula One team. “The Brits will be very upset,” he wrote. “You need to perform some magical balancing act.” In another email, he instructed the CFO to send $7 million to pay for taxes owed by his airline.
According to auditors, Mr. Mallya secretly pledged thousands of crates of whiskey to an Indian billionaire in exchange for a $30 million loan to his airline, and he asked India’s cricket board to use $12 million owed to a cricket team owned by United Spirits to pay off a sponsorship agreement his airline was struggling to pay.
Mr. Mallya said in his email to the Journal that forensic auditors “didn’t understand the underlying business principles of United Spirits and so jumped to wild conclusions.” After its first forensic audit in 2015, United Spirits’ board asked Mr. Mallya to step down as chairman. When he refused, the CEO wrote to the chief of Bangalore’s police department, alleging money had been “wrongfully diverted” as part of a “criminal breach of trust.” Diageo never filed an official complaint with the court. Mr. Mallya resigned as chairman in February 2016, after agreeing to a $75 million severance package. Forensic auditors brought in by United Spirits after the deal allege at least about $500 million was advanced from United Spirits to Mr. Mallya’s other companies and never paid back. In February, Mr. Mallya’s other creditors won the right to liquidate one of Mr. Mallya’s companies that sold shares to Diageo, and are seeking to have 7% of United Spirits’ shares returned to them, or to strike a cash settlement with Diageo, says a person familiar with the situation. In its 2016 annual report, Diageo said it believes it will remain in control of United Spirits regardless of the outcome of the litigation.
a.jpg
 
Indietro