Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
There is an abundance of work going on inside Starbucks right now to bring GIS expertise in-house to aid in their segmentation planning based on taking both demographic, psychographic and attitudinal segmentation criteria overlaid against potential market areas.
Marketing Mix Analysis
The following is an analysis of the marketing mix for Starbucks compared to Dietrich Coffee and Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf Company.
Product
Starbucks' ability to continually innovate new products is central to its lasting competitive advantage in this area. That combination of innovation and focus on being able to executive product delivery globally is a sustainable competitive advantage. Starbucks has steadily grown their cold and hot drink menu equally in terms of product offerings, and continues to experiment with light lunch, mainstay bakery items, and seasonal fruit and bakery goods.
The approach to this product strategy however is muted and not as pronounced on their website as it is in their stores. The majority of revenue growth in Starbucks however comes from recently added drinks, according to Mintel Research and DataMonitor. This is also supported by Baird (2006) and their investment analysis.
Comparably, both the Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf Company and Dietrich Coffee rely on the higher-priced and correspondingly higher margin drinks. The product strategies at both of these competitors are decidedly focused on the higher end of the market, the segments where Starbucks is positioning the Vendi class of hot drinks and the Frappacino line of "fancy" drinks.
Starbucks' two competitors are relying on these higher-end beverages, both pictured with mounds of whipped cream, as dessert replacements and communicating their product...
Starbucks' senior executives
Price
Pricing is the most powerful differentiator there is and Starbucks uses it sparingly to retain their profitable business model. For Starbucks, their strategy of having classes of products that overlap each product category is critical. Their approach to "blanketing" the price points of competitors with three different sizes of each drink and the successful up-selling and cross-selling strategies that occur in stores all contribute to the company's revenue growth and corresponding profitability. What Starbucks does best with regard to its pricing is not try and test the elasticity of price, but rather looks to create price-quality relationships with each of their brands and offerings.
Dietrich and Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf Company on the other hand are using a series of pricing decisions today to differentiate from Starbucks. Dietrich uses price elasticity as a lever for example on its lower-end coffees, plummeting the price down to test the pricing "floor" of this market. Their approach is actually costing them greater levels of margins and lost business. For Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf Company, their approach is to stabilize all prices and use the up-sell and cross-sell opportunities their product-laden stores provide for. it's clear from their pricing strategies for drinks are meant as "loss leaders" to bring customers in to purchase products in stores.
The bottom line on pricing is that Starbucks is using pricing as a differentiator to align their products to specific segments, connoting price-quality relationships. The two competitors are using pricing in the way many companies use price - as the differentiator itself, where the elasticity of demand is tested through plummeting
Place Starbucks can be left without profits if it markets its products in the wrong locations. Place is the sites at which the company avails its products. This includes channels of distribution from the distribution point to the end customer. Starbucks attempts to minimize the distance customers have to move to the point where the product is sold. This is followed by targeting the appropriate target market before making decisions on
Starbucks and Gloria Jeans in Singapore. The focus will be on the marketing elements of these two stores. For Starbucks, the store visited was in Raffles City. The Gloria Jeans was in Suntec City Galleria. The focus of the report will be on describing the elements of the marketing mix, including product, price and promotion. A table will be presented, and then there will be descriptions of the findings.
The company tried breakfast food with little success, and failed at branching out into music as well. Overall, there is little evidence that Starbucks can be anything other than a coffee company. Despite the weaknesses, there are a number of great opportunities in the market. The best is the opportunity that Starbucks is already pursuing in emerging markets. There is a strong focus on Asia and the Middle East. The
Marketing Plan Description of the Product The product is coffee, or specifically it is high end coffee, expertly roasted and made available to coffee shops, institutional customers and retail customers over the Internet. There are several elements to the product. The first is the beans, which are sourced from equatorial regions around the world. There are different breeds and cultivars of coffee available on the market. Coffee, like wine grapes, picks up
Starbucks Coffee Marketing Plan Industry Overview Competitive Landscape Target Markets Product Price Promotion Marketing Strategy Starbucks is a global coffee powerhouse that has had a success record that nearly any company would die for. It has never undertaken much a traditional route in regards to marketing and advertising. Starbucks specialty is using word of mouth, tribal, and viral social formats to promote its products and services. It is recommended in the wake of global populist movements that Starbucks further
Starbucks and Dunkin Donuts Comparing Starbucks and Dunkin Donuts Marketing The differences between Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts permeate every aspect of the two company's cultures and have a reverberating effect in who they attract and keep as customers. The intent of this analysis is to analyze how each of these two companies vary from a marketing standpoint, and how those differences are continually perpetuated in their approach to managing the marketing mix.