Brand Loyalties in Alcoholic Beverage essay

Download this essay in word format (.doc)

Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formatting

Excerpt from essay:

6%, Nebraska -- 17.6%, Illinois -- 17.5%, Delaware -- 17.4%, Colorado -- 17.2%, Montana -- 17%, South Dakota -- 16.9%, Ohio -- 16.9%, Massachusetts -- 16.9%, District of Columbia -- 16.6%, Alaska -- 16.3%, Missouri -- 16.2%, Michigan -- 16.1%, Wyoming -- 16.1%, Vermont -- 16.1%, New Hampshire -- 16%, Texas -- 15.6%, Arizona -- 15.5%, New York -- 15.2%, Maine -- 14.9%, Connecticut -- 14.8%, California -- 14.7%, New Jersey -- 14.4%, Indiana -- 14.4%, Louisiana -- 14.2%, Washington -- 14.2%, Virginia -- 13.7%, Us Virgin Islands -- 13.6%, South Carolina -- 13.5%, Oregon -- 13.1%, New Mexico -- 13%, Oklahoma -- 13%, Maryland -- 12.8%, Kansas -- 12.8%, Alabama -- 12.7%, Idaho -- 12.6%, Florida -- 12.4%, Puerto Rico -- 12.2%, Georgia -- 12.1%, Arkansas -- 11.2%, Mississippi -- 10.4%, West Virginia -- 9.7%, Kentucky -- 9.6%, North Carolina -- 9.5%, Utah -- 9.2%, Tennessee -- 8.2%. The weighted average reached 14.8% (StateMaster, 2004).

The consumption for beer, wine, and spirits is different from one state to another.

Beer consumption

The beer consumption in gallons by state for each person, and their rank is the following: Washington -- 20, rank 33, Oregon -- 23, rank 19, California -- 19, rank 40, Idaho -- 21, rank 36, Nevada -- 31, rank 2, Utah -- 12, rank 51, Arizona -- 24, rank 16, Montana -- 30, rank 4, Wyoming -- 26, rank 10, Colorado -- 23, rank 21, New Mexico -- 26, rank 13, South Dakota -- 27, rank 9, Nebraska -- 25, rank 17, Kansas -- 21, rank 41, Oklahoma -- 20, rank 43, Texas -- 25, rank 24, Minnesota -- 21, rank 29, Iowa -- 25, rank 23, Missouri -- 24, rank 25, Arkansas -- 20, rank 48, Louisiana -- 28, rank 8, Illinois -- 22, rank 27, Michigan -- 20, rank 38, Wisconsin -- 28, rank 7, Indiana -- 20, rank 45, Kentucky -- 19, rank 50, Tennessee -- 21, rank 39, Mississippi -- 25, rank 22, Alabama -- 22, rank 32, Ohio -- 23, rank 26, West Virginia -- 23, rank 31, Georgia -- 20, rank 42, Florida -- 24, rank 12, Maine, 23, rank 20, New Hampshire -- 32, rank 1, Vermont -- 23, rank 14, Massachusetts -- 20, rank 28, New York -- 17, rank 49, Pennsylvania -- 22, rank 37, Maryland -- 19, rank 46, Virginia -- 21, rank 34, North Carolina -- 22, rank 35, South Carolina -- 27, rank 11, Hawaii -- 24, rank 15, Alaska -- 23, rank 18 (Time Magazine, 2008).

Wine consumption

The wine consumption in gallons by state for each person, and their rank is the following: Washington -- 3, rank 14, Oregon -- 3, rank 12, California -- 3, rank 9, Idaho -- 2, rank 24, Nevada -- 4, rank 3, Utah -- 1, rank 49, Arizona -- 2, rank 21, Montana -- 2, rank 20, Wyoming -- 2, rank 34, Colorado -- 3, rank 18, New Mexico -- 2, rank 32, South Dakota -- 1, rank 43, Nebraska -- 1, rank 39, Kansas -- 1, rank 48, Oklahoma -- 1, rank 44, Texas -- 1, rank 38, Minnesota -- 2, rank 26, Iowa -- 1, rank 45, Missouri -- 2, rank 27, Arkansas -- 1, rank 46, Louisiana -- 2, rank 30, Illinois -- 2, rank 22, Michigan -- 2, rank 29, Wisconsin -- 2, rank 25, Indiana -- 2, rank 37, Kentucky -- 1, rank 47, Tennessee -- 1, rank 42, Mississippi -- 1, rank 50, Alabama -- 1, rank 40, Ohio -- 2, rank 35, West Virginia -- 1, rank 51, Georgia -- 2, rank 33, Florida -- 3, rank 13, Maine - 3, rank 17, New Hampshire -- 5, rank 2, Vermont -- 4, rank 6, Massachusetts -- 4, rank 4, New York -- 3, rank 15, Pennsylvania -- 2, rank 36, Maryland -- 2, rank 23, Virginia -- 2, rank 19, North Carolina -- 2, rank 28, South Carolina -- 2, rank 31, Hawaii -- 3, rank 11, Alaska -- 3, rank 16.

Spirits consumption

The spirits consumption in gallons by state for each person, and their rank is the following: Washington -- 1, rank 27, Oregon -- 2, rank 19, California -- 1, rank 30, Idaho -- 1, rank 37, Nevada -- 3, rank 3, Utah -- 1, rank 51, Arizona -- 2, rank 22, Montana -- 2, rank 15, Wyoming -- 2, rank 6, Colorado -- 2, rank 10, New Mexico -- 1, rank 34, South Dakota -- 2, rank 20, Nebraska -- 1, rank 29, Kansas -- 1, rank 41, Oklahoma -- 1, rank 49, Texas -- 1, rank 48, Minnesota -- 2, rank 9, Iowa -- 1, rank 36, Missouri -- 2, rank 24, Arkansas -- 1, rank 38, Louisiana -- 1, rank 31, Illinois -- 1, rank 26, Michigan -- 2, rank 21, Wisconsin -- 2, rank 5, Indiana -- 1, rank 33, Kentucky -- 1, rank 40, Tennessee -- 1, rank 44, Mississippi -- 1, rank 35, Alabama -- 1, rank 47, Ohio -- 1, rank 45, West Virginia -- 1, rank 50, Georgia -- 1, rank 39, Florida -- 2, rank 11, Maine - 2, rank 17, New Hampshire -- 4, rank 1, Vermont -- 1, rank 28, Massachusetts -- 2, rank 12, New York -- 1, rank 32, Pennsylvania -- 1, rank 42, Maryland -- 2, rank 18, Virginia -- 1, rank 43, North Carolina -- 1, rank 46, South Carolina -- 2, rank 23, Hawaii -- 1, rank 25, Alaska -- 2, rank 7.

4. Alcohol consumption among college-age individuals

Alcohol consumption levels were reported as being the following:

Abstainer -- 47.3%

Light consumption -- 26.2%

Moderate consumption -- 19.5%

Heavier consumption -- 7%

Alcohol consumption levels by age were reported as being the following:

For the 18-39 age group:

Abstainer -- 29.9%

Light consumption -- 27.1%

Moderate consumption -- 29.6%

Heavier consumption -- 13.3%

For the 40-59 age group:

Abstainer -- 37.2%

Light consumption -- 26.1%

Moderate consumption -- 24.9%

Heavier consumption -- 11.8%

For the 60 + age group:

Abstainer -- 51.8%

Light consumption -- 21.4%

Moderate consumption -- 18.8%

Heavier consumption -- 8%

The alcohol consumption levels in relation to education are the following:

For high school undergraduates:

Abstainer -- 66.7%

Light consumption -- 15.6%

Moderate consumption -- 12.3%

Heavier consumption -- 5.5%

For high school graduates:

Abstainer -- 49.8%

Light consumption -- 25.3%

Moderate consumption -- 17.5%

Heavier consumption -- 7.4%

Abstainer -- 38.1%

Light consumption -- 30.8%

Moderate consumption -- 22.8%

Heavier consumption -- 8.3%

Abstainer -- 32.6%

Light consumption -- 33.8%

Moderate consumption -- 27%

Heavier consumption -- 6.6%

The data as collected by the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA, 1999).

In 2002, the alcohol consumption situation for each age group was the following:

12-17 years -- 34.6%

18-25 years -- 77.9%

26-34 years -- 77.7%

35 + years -- 66.1%

Total -- 66.1%

As one may observe from the data presented above, the age group represented by college individuals has reported the highest levels of alcohol consumption, for all types of consumption, in comparison with all the other age groups. Also, the alcohol consumption attributed to college-age individuals is higher than the total average.

The reasons behind this situation rely on the causes that determine college students to drink so much. The categories of students that are responsible for the highest levels of alcohol consumption are represented by: males, whites, members of fraternities and sororities, athletes, and some of the first-year students.

In opposition, students who do not share the same increased appetite for alcohol are represented by individuals who attend: 2-year institutions, religious schools, commuter schools, historically black colleges and universities. Also, alcohol consumption seems to be inhibited by a competitive school environment. Categories of students that reported lower alcohol consumption levels also include a large percentage of students aged 24 or older, and a larger percentage of students whose parents have a college education.

Alcohol consumption seems to be related with living arrangements also, where college age individuals are concerned. For example, students who live in fraternity and sorority houses have reported the highest drinking rates. The majority of these students can be categorized as binge drinkers. Similar drinking rates have been reported in the case of students who live in on-campus housing.

In comparison, students who live off-site drink less. Even more, commuting students who live with their families drink the least.

However, an interesting fact has occurred in the past few years with the drinking behavior of students. The alcohol consumption among off-site students has increased, while the alcohol consumption of on-site students has decreased. This is a reverse drinking behavior of the regular one, described above.

This is probably because drinking has been restricted in some campuses in order to reduce the problems related to alcohol abuse. As a result, students who lived in campuses and used to drink large amounts of alcohol moved outside the campuses, therefore increasing alcohol consumption off-site.

The…[continue]

Cite This Essay:

"Brand Loyalties In Alcoholic Beverage" (2010, March 25) Retrieved December 7, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/brand-loyalties-in-alcoholic-beverage-994

"Brand Loyalties In Alcoholic Beverage" 25 March 2010. Web.7 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/brand-loyalties-in-alcoholic-beverage-994>

"Brand Loyalties In Alcoholic Beverage", 25 March 2010, Accessed.7 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/brand-loyalties-in-alcoholic-beverage-994

Other Documents Pertaining To This Topic

  • Anheuser Busch s Budweiser PR Campaign Love Beer My

    Anheuser-Busch's Budweiser PR Campaign LOVE BEER. My favorite brand is by far Anheuser-Busch's top selling brand -- Budweiser. Or do I love beer? I just saw two lizards on channel forty-two tell me that Budweiser is what I crave. Anheuser-Busch has to continuously expand sales so that the corporation meets both Wall Street's and the Anheuser-Busch shareholder's 'expectations' for continued corporate profits. Well, they are not actually expectations at all --

  • Coca Cola Company Description the Coca Cola

    With a small number of companies competing for a market that in many cases (North America, for example) is subject to slow growth, the competition can be characterized as intense. Thus, Coca-Cola's marketing message must also take into account the moves that its competitors are making. Coca-Cola not only must respond to shifts in the competitive environment but as industry leader must protect its position by making proactive moves

  • Protection of Proprietary Information Is

    This education program must include all levels of the institution from the highest level of management, physicians, nurses, technicians and support staff. As much as possible, it should also include all outside vendors and casual hires. Although employee leaks remain the primary source for the loss of proprietary information attacks on information systems by hackers, viruses, worms and the occasional angry employee are becoming an increasingly more serious problem. The


Read Full Essay
Copyright 2016 . All Rights Reserved