admin
October 28, 2024
Nisha Qureshi, Afaqs
28 Oct 2024
Reliance Industries last year made a strategic move into the soft drink sector by acquiring the iconic carbonated beverage brand ‘Campa Cola,’ which gained prominence in the 80s and 90s.
The conglomerate intends to strengthen its brand by employing its classic pricing disruption strategy. Reliance is expanding its presence nationwide by focussing on affluent regions and utilising e-commerce and quick commerce platforms.
Recent reports suggest that Campa Cola is providing retailers with more favourable trade margins than its rivals Coca Cola and Pepsi, aiming to challenge the existing duopoly in India’s soft drink market.
In the Q2FY25 earnings call, Reliance Industries reported that its consumer brands, particularly Campa Cola and Independence, are experiencing robust growth, with general trade increasing by 250% year-on-year.
“We are taking several marketing initiatives to grow consumer brands and will leverage the festive period to drive demand,” the company’s representative said during the call, adding that the company was “very optimistic about the next few quarters”.
Experts now believe that the soft-drink beverage market will witness an increase in advertising initiatives by the competitors to mitigate the disruption.
Saurabh Munjal, co-founder and CEO of Archian Foods, the makers of Lahori Zeera, asserts that Reliance’s entry into this sector will only expand the market for soft-drink beverages.
“The consumption will increase, accompanied by a corresponding rise in marketing efforts,” he adds.
Devangshu Dutta, the founder of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm engaged with the retail and consumer products ecosystem, asserts that both Coca-Cola and Pepsi will undoubtedly endeavour to safeguard their market share.
He says the emphasis will particularly be on domestic consumption, and we can anticipate an increased investment in share-of-mind campaigns to proactively counter Campa’s expansion.
Business strategist and independent director Lloyd Mathias believes that the current circumstances are conducive to market expansion and disruption. “Other players will likewise increase their visibility through marketing strategies and retail initiatives to counter this. So what we will see in the next year is that the categories of soft drinks will grow quite dramatically,” he adds.
The classic Reliance move
Experts suggest that Reliance’s approach to Campa Cola involves competitive pricing, reflecting a strategy akin to its disruptive tactics in the telecom sector with Jio and JioCinema. For instance, a two-litre bottle of Campa Cola’s lemon flavour is priced at Rs 53 on a quick commerce platform, whereas a leading competitor offers it for Rs 74.
Besides competitive pricing, Reliance also has the significant advantage of owning a large retail and media network to scale Campa Cola.
“Reliance has earlier disrupted markets with the aggressive pricing strategy and it has the resources to follow-through on its pricing strategy for Campa as well. It can build significant volumes across its own stores prior to having to compete for shelf space in the broader distribution channels,” says Dutta.
As per Mathias, in addition to possessing deep pockets, Reliance benefits from its extensive media and entertainment wing that will be leveraged for the promotion of Campa Cola.
“I think the combined strength of Reliance in terms of distribution, media, and retail, alongside its capacity to maintain pricing integrity, are quite formidable. I think they are going to make a significant impact in the market,” says Mathias.
Impact on smaller players
Experts also suggest that the introduction of Campa Cola at its current price point will primarily affect smaller local competitors who function within the same pricing bracket, particularly in tier-2 and tier-3 markets.
Mathias asserts that Campa Cola will initially expand the soft-drink beverage market, while also emphasising that given the price point of the soft drink, the immediate impact will be felt by smaller local players who operate at similar price points. Introduction of numerous Indian innovations within the soft-drink category could significantly impact relatively smaller competitors.
Similarly, Dutta observes that the market for carbonated beverages largely hinges on the intangible qualities associated with the brands. In India, however, brand preferences are not as hard coded as they are in the United States.
“Consumers do switch between brands, and price-sensitive customers can be swayed by visible pricing differences. This gives deep-pocketed Reliance an opportunity to carve out a significant market share.”
However, according to Munjial of Lahori Zeera, there appears to be no direct impact on his brand, given that Campa Cola has thus far only introduced the well-known flavours of carbonated beverages. “As far as Lahori Zeera is concerned, there is no impact because the target consumer, the flavours are all very different.”
“This development will merely add to the market and increase the number of people consuming carbonated beverages,” he says.
(Published in Afaqs)
admin
September 16, 2024
Priyamvada C., Mint
16 September 2024
When the late George Fernandes, the industries minister in the short-lived Janata Party government of 1977, issued a diktat to multinational corporations Coca-Cola, IBM and AstraZeneca to dilute their stake in their wholly owned subsidiaries to 40% in favour of Indian shareholders, Coca-Cola and IBM chose to exit India. Later, during P V Narasimha Rao’s proliberalisation government in 1993, Coca-Cola returned. It bought out Ramesh Chauhan’s Delhi Bottling Company and Coolaid, the bottling companies of five carbonated drinks, in 1998.
With Coca-Cola India now said to be evaluating options to list its wholly owned bottling subsidiary – Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages (HCCB), Mint explains the rationale behind companies considering such moves.
What caused the change in strategy?
Experts said there is a trend of consumer giants spinning off their units to optimise their balance sheets, go asset-light and focus on their core brands and business models. Coca-Cola India’s ambitions to list HCCB come almost a decade after rival PepsiCo’s bottler, Varun Beverages, listed on the local stock exchanges, yielding significant value for the Jaipuria family.
Unlike PepsiCo, Coca-Cola owns its bottling franchise, just as other MNCs including consumer goods major Whirlpool, ball-bearing specialist Timken, and tobacco giant BAT, who are keen to take advantage of the valuations that Indian investors give to well-run MNCs. Varun Beverages commands a market valuation of ₹2.09 trillion. Hindustan Unilever and Colgate-Palmolive (India) are examples of multinational companies that have listed in India.
Coca-Cola’s move is seen as a strategic attempt to yield significant benefits, including financial gains, risk mitigation and other exit opportunities. The Economic Times was the first to report on HCCB’s listing plans in May.
How does the parent company benefit?
Through such moves, the parent company can reduce exposure to risks associated with bottling companies, which include fluctuations pertaining to raw material, regulatory changes and local market conditions, said Alpana Srivastava, a partner at Desai & Diwanji. While spinning off bottling subsidiaries is more prevalent in the beverage industry, she said other fast-moving consumer goods and retail companies may explore similar strategies to optimise their balance sheets in the current environment.
Earlier this year, HCCB announced the transfer of its bottling operations in three territories in north India to streamline supply chains in the region. However, the bottler declined to comment on its IPO plans.
As part of the transition, the Rajasthan market will be owned and operated by Kandhari Global Beverages, which operates in parts of Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab, Chandigarh, Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh.
The Bihar market will be owned and operated by SLMG Beverages Pvt Ltd, which runs bottling operations in Uttarakhand, parts of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Bihar. The Northeast market and select areas of West Bengal will be owned and operated by Moon Beverages Pvt Ltd, which operates in parts of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh.
What other factors motivate such spin-offs?
Besides providing liquidity for the bottler, listing may offer tax benefits such as reduced capital gains tax or more favourable transfer pricing rules and optimise the overall tax burden for both the parent company and the subsidiary, Srivastava explained. It may allow both entities to be valued more accurately based on their individual capacities in growth, risk profiles and capital intensity.
This comes in the backdrop of companies looking to make the most of a bullish stock market to unlock more value for shareholders by listing their manufacturing subsidiaries. It enables the companies to raise more capital, which can be used to strengthen their market presence and reduce debt, said Devangshu Dutta, founder of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm. He said the core value generator for companies such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi are brands and marketing rather than manufacturing.
In April, private equity firm Lighthouse Funds invested ₹700 crore in Parsons Nutritionals, a contract manufacturer specialising in packaged foods, beverages, and personal care products, underlining investor appetite in this sector. Other co-investors include the International Finance Corporation, a member of the World Bank Group, Evolvence India, HDFC AMC’s Fund of Funds, and various family offices.
However, there may be legal considerations, too. While exclusive contracts exist, the bottler may have partnerships with other companies in its distribution portfolio, which may have to be reviewed and renegotiated. There may be regulatory compliance and other anticompetitive considerations when it involves such big entities.
Other instances of such moves
While there are fewer examples of bottling companies listed in India, this practice is more common globally. Coca-Cola has listed most of its bottling subsidiaries in other global markets such as North America and Europe.
While there is no shareholding between PepsiCo and Varun Beverages, there is an exclusive arrangement for Varun Beverages to bottle, use trademarks, distribute, market, and sell PepsiCo products across India. The beverage giant benefits from royalty and licence fees. Over the past year, Varun Beverages’ revenue rose 22% to ₹16,400 crore while its profit increased to ₹2,056 crore from ₹1,497 crore in FY22. As of Friday’s close, the bottler’s shares had gained almost 30% to ₹645.20 since the beginning of this year.
Any potential listing opportunity for HCCB may allow a staggered exit for Coca-Cola India from managing local operations, monetising its stake and participating in future licence fees and/or royalty arrangements, said Dhruv Chatterjee, a partner at Saraf and Partners. He added that there are indications in the retail and fast-moving consumer goods category of similar divestments. Coca-Cola India did not respond to Mint’s request for comment.
Ravikumar Distilleries is an example of a listed manufacturing company that has tie-ups with liquor companies Radico Khaitan, Shashi Distilleries and John Distilleries, in addition to manufacturing and marketing its own liquor products. Bengal Beverages is an unlisted bottler that manufactures and distributes non-alcoholic beverage brands under licence from Coca-Cola across categories such as sparkling soft drinks, juice and water.
What kind of contracts exist between the bottler and the parent company?
Many bottling plants are usually set up by companies as a joint venture with a local partner. The bottler procures the concentrate from the companies. About 14-15% of the concentrate cost goes to the bottler, which translates into revenue for the brand, according to a person familiar with such discussions who spoke on condition of anonymity. The company spends a part of this revenue on marketing activities that target mass audiences through television, radio and newspapers.
Depending on the terms of the contract, the bottler may be expected to spend a portion of its revenue on marketing through outdoor settings such as billboards, flyers, social media and events. The arrangement between a bottler and a company may be either a pure bottling arrangement (or contract manufacturing) or a bottling and distribution arrangement, where the bottler is also responsible for marketing, branding, and last-mile distribution.
How has the carbonated beverage market fared?
Market research provider Statista estimated that the carbonated drink market in India clocks about $2.4 billion in revenue and is expected to grow by 6.98% annually over the next four years. The volume consumed at home and other outdoor locations is likely about 4.2 billion litres this year.
In 2022, Parle Agro’s brand Appy Fizz and Coca Cola dominated with a 31% market share each, followed by Fanta, Pepsi, 7UP and Sprite, among others. Other brands such as Reliance-backed Campa Cola are expected to challenge the dominance of these companies.
Before Reliance acquired Campa for ₹22 crore in 2022, the soft drink had been launched by Pure Drinks Group in the 1970s. The group was behind the launch and distribution of Coca-Cola in 1949, before the US company was shunted out of the country in 1977.
Pure Drinks and Campa Beverages subsequently launched Campa Cola to fill the gap left by foreign soft drink companies in the country. However, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo re-entered the Indian market in the 1990s, throttling local competition.
(Published in Mint)
admin
July 8, 2024
Sharleen D’Souza, Business Standard
Mumbai, 7 July 2024
In 2023, after more than two years of development and testing, Mondelez India launched a version of Bournvita that delivers about half the recommended daily allowance of key micronutrients for children, including iron, iodine, and zinc, as well as vitamins A, C and D. All this while having 15 per cent less added sugar.
“Prior to this and around two years ago we also introduced Bournvita 50 per cent less sugar variant to provide an option for consumers. We have made adaptations to our portfolio products like Bournvita biscuits, which now have 15 per cent less sugar, and our most loved Oreo chocolate variant has also seen a 5 per cent decrease in sugar content,” the company said in an email.
This drive is not confined to Mondelez. Other multinational companies, too, such as Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Nestle India, have been working on bringing down the sugar, salt, and sodium content. They could be patting themselves on the back for doing this. Not only has the Indian consumer become more health conscious than ever — with all the talk going around that salt and sugar are two of the monsters in your kitchen (the third being maida) — but also the country’s food regulator has swung into action.
On Saturday, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) approved a proposal that information about the sugar, salt and saturated fat content on labels of packaged foods and beverages should be bolder and bigger. “Along with empowering consumers to make healthier choices, the amendment will also contribute towards efforts to combat the rise of noncommunicable diseases and promote public health and wellbeing,” the FSSAI said in a statement.
Earlier, the regulator advised ecommerce platforms to ensure that dairy-, cereal-, and maltbased beverage mixes were not available under the “health drinks” or “energy drinks” categories. The recommended sugar intake is 20 grams a day for adults and 25 grams a day for those below 18. Not more than 5 to 10 per cent of a person’s total energy intake should come from sugar. Children under two are not supposed to consume any added sugar. However, these guidelines are often breached because people tend to consume packaged foods.
Therefore, experts and activists have been calling for a different labelling, which would announce out loud what lies inside.
Eating right, drinking right
Some multinationals had already been working on reducing the salt and sugar content. For instance, Coca-Cola removed more than 900,000 tonnes of added sugar globally since 2017, and 19 of its top 20 brands offer reduced-sugar or zero-sugar options. In India, Coca-Cola’s Minute Maid Honey Infused drinks offer added dietary fibre for healthy digestion in three flavours.
“In 2022, approximately 68 per cent of our global beverage portfolio contained less than 100 calories per 12-ounce serving (350 ml), with 246 low- or no-sugar options launched,” Coca-Cola India said in a statement to Business Standard.
The company added that it prioritised transparency by placing calorie information on the front of all its packaging worldwide and did not market its products directly to children under 13.
Nestle India joined the FSSAI’s Eat Right movement and signed the pledge to reduce an average of 6 per cent added sugar, 10 per cent salt, and 2.5 per cent fat in its relevant product categories. “The company has achieved these commitments,” it said.
Varun Beverages, PepsiCo’s India bottler, told its investors on a conference call that its gross margins improved significantly, rising by 385 basis points to 56.3 per cent — and sugar had a role to play in it.
“This increase was largely driven by our focus on reducing sugar content and the light-weighting packaging material, incidentally, also meeting our sustainability initiatives along with the benefits from reduced PET prices which contributed to this improvement,” Raj Pal Gandhi, chief financial officer of Varun Beverages, said on the investor call.
Approximately 46 per cent of the company’s reconsolidated sales volumes, he said, came from low-sugar or no-sugar products. The no- or less-sugar trend is working for the company as it optimises its cost structure and enhances its overall efficiency.
“These efforts have had a tangible impact on our financial performance with EBITDA increasing by 23.9 per cent to the level of Rs. 988.76 crore year-on-year, and the Ebitda margin improving by 240 basis points to the level of 22.9 per cent in quarter one of 2024 (January-March),” Gandhi said. Ebitda, a widely accepted benchmark of profitability, is short for earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortisation.
“So, we are developing more and more — Gatorade, we mentioned a new launch which PepsiCo has given us formulation with zero sugar. So, effort is there, and constant effort is there to reduce the sugar content,” Gandhi said. PepsiCo India said in an earlier statement it had initiated trials of a blend of sunflower oil and palmolein oil in certain parts of its portfolio last year, thus becoming one of the few players in the food industry in India to do so.
Rush of junk
Experts say the standards for food and beverages vary across the world and India should have its own. “There should be thresholds for healthy and unhealthy and, in my view, this should be labelled boldly on the front of the pack,” says Arun Gupta, convener, Nutrition Advocacy for Public Interest (NAPi), a think tank.
A report titled The Junk Rush, jointly brought out by the Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India and NAPi, said: “India faces a severe public health crisis of obesity and diabetes.” In 2022, a group of public health experts, consumers, lawyers, and patient groups had called upon the government of India to check the soaring consumption of junk food among the country’s youth.
“Certain countries are more stringent than others. Even global brands have the same product, but the ingredients differ across countries and continents,” says Devangshu Dutta, founder of Third Eyesight. He explains that India still has some road to travel on food safety, alleging that some ingredients benefit companies more — such as by providing a longer shelf life — than the consumer.
“The Indian regulator is still very new to the game. If you look at processed foods, it is a newer market and the regulator needs to pick-up pace,” Dutta says.
On Saturday, the FSSAI picked up pace.
(Published in Business Standard)
admin
May 3, 2024
SAYAN CHAKRABORTY, Nikkei staff writer
Bengaluru, 2 May 2024
India’s packaged spice manufacturers MDH and Everest are under regulatory scrutiny in several countries after their products were allegedly found to contain carcinogenic elements, barely a year after cough syrups made in the South Asian nation were linked to the deaths of over 140 children in Africa.
Countries like Australia, New Zealand and the U.S. are weighing investigations into the packaged spices made by the companies after Hong Kong authorities raised a red flag over their quality. This isn’t the first time that the two — among the largest such companies in India — have faced these kinds of issues, with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ordering a recall of Everest spice mixes in 2023 and some MDH products in 2019, both due to salmonella contamination.
The Centre for Food Safety (CFS) in Hong Kong said in a statement on April 5 that it found ethylene oxide (ETO), a pesticide that can cause cancer if consumed in large amounts, in three types of packaged spices manufactured by MDH and one made by Everest. The products were taken off the shelves and recalled, the CFS said.
Taking its cue from the Hong Kong authorities, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) a couple of weeks later recalled the Everest Fish Curry Masala product, saying in a statement that consumers who had purchased it were “advised not to consume it.”
The SFA also said, “As the implicated products [in Hong Kong] were imported into Singapore, the SFA has directed the importer to recall the products.” The agency clarified that “although there is no immediate risk to consumption of food contaminated with low levels of ethylene oxide, long-term exposure may lead to health issues.”
India’s Spice Board, a government agency that oversees spice exports, said that the limit for ETO varies between countries, from 0.02 milligram per kilogram of spices in places like the U.K. and Norway to 7 milligram per kilogram in Canada and the U.S.
Pesticides are widely used in agriculture in India, often leaving traces in food products. According to Indian government estimates, the cultivated area where chemical pesticide is used grew 33.4% from the fiscal year ending March 2019 to fiscal 2023, reaching 108,216 hectares. That was about seven times the area cultivated with biopesticides in 2023.
“We tend to look critically at the end product, but even more rigor is needed at the level of the ingredients,” said Devangshu Dutta, CEO at consultancy firm Third Eyesight, referring to the use of pesticides in cultivation. “Otherwise, we will end up kind of catching the product at the last point of control, which is not enough.”
Hong Kong and Singapore did not disclose the amount of ETO content in the recalled products. MDH and Everest had not responded to requests for comment by the time of publication.
Authorities elsewhere have also taken note of the allegations. “Food Standards Australia New Zealand is working with our international counterparts to understand the issue with federal, state and territory food enforcement agencies to determine if further action is required in Australia, e.g., a food recall,” the agency told Nikkei Asia in an email statement on Wednesday.
The regulatory scrutiny in the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Singapore, raises questions over an export market worth about $700 million, research firm Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) said in a report on Wednesday.
“Swift investigations and the publication of findings are essential to re-establish global trust in Indian spices,” GTRI said, adding that the “lack of clear communication [from government agencies] is disappointing.”
Indian food has been under scrutiny in Europe as well. The European Commission Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed estimates that since the beginning of 2023, Indian food products were deemed to pose “serious” risks in 166 instances. These included nine cases of ethylene oxide found in food supplements and spices in countries including Sweden, Greece and Italy.
Chinese food imports were found to pose serious risks on 115 occasions and those from the U.S. on 152 occasions.
The recalls come at a time when New Delhi is rolling out incentives to support local manufacturers and exporters in transforming India into a $5 trillion economy. India is the world’s largest exporter of spices with shipments worth $3.9 billion in 2023, followed by Vietnam and Mexico, according to data provider Tendata. Those figures give India a market share of 37.2%, with Vietnam at 28.1% and Mexico at 9.6%.
The issue with food products follows an outcry over the quality of medicines manufactured in India. Since 2022, the World Health Organization has linked the deaths of at least 141 children in Gambia, Uzbekistan and Cameroon to cough syrups made by India’s Maiden Pharmaceuticals, Marion Biotech and Riemann Labs that it alleged contained toxins.
But while the pharma companies are small local players, MDH and Everest made revenues of $260 million and $360 million respectively, in the fiscal year ended March 2023.
Poor food quality in India stems from a general lack of awareness about food safety and insufficient resources to track ingredients, among other reasons, said U.S.-based food and beverage consultancy AIB International in a report in October.
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India found 16,582 samples unsafe in the fiscal year 2022, the latest such data available. That was a threefold jump from the previous year.
“Most of the food and beverage manufacturers in India are focused on reducing costs to make their product affordable to the public,” the report said. “As a result, many cannot prioritize food safety as a pillar of their business because it could prevent them from meeting their profit margins.”
“Food manufacturing and processing facilities can lack the resources to maintain proper hygiene,” it noted, adding that food-borne illnesses in India is estimated to top 100 million every year.
(Published on Nikkei)
admin
April 24, 2024
Mumbai, 24 April 2024
Sharleen Dsouza, Business Standard
With the Supreme Court cracking down on Patanjali over misleading advertisements, the advertisement industry is concerned. While industry players acknowledge that some degree of exaggeration in claims is common, the Supreme Court’s firm action signals an impending shift.
On Tuesday the SC said that its interest was not limited to Patanjali but all those Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCGs) and drug companies that mislead consumers through their advertisements.
And Patanjali is not the first one to have crossed the line of puffery. There have been many cases in the past, like Horlicks Ltd versus Zydus Wellness Products where the former sought for a permanent injunction against Zydus for the broadcast of false advertisement.
Similarly, in Rajendra versus Union of India, the Bombay High Court restrained any good or service sale claiming it had supernatural and miraculous powers.
“Puffery in advertising is as old as advertising. There is always an element of exaggeration. Over the years, the government has looked the other way. Guys on the ground should take companies and brands to task and have largely been in cahoots with most of the brands,” said Sandeep Goyal, chairman and managing director of Rediffusion Brand Solutions.
Goyal believes that the SC coming down heavily on Patanjali would be a deterrent for other brands. “Puffery or not is for someone to figure out. In most food products, FSSAI doesn’t care. Who is to identify these ads? I think the SC has done something. This won’t deter other brands and get them to make claims which are within the realm of what is correct,” Goyal said.
A question of ethics
Industry experts point out that the primary objective of advertisement is to stimulate desire in the consumer’s mind. This happens by hook or by crook.
“Misleading a consumer has become inherent in advertising to a certain extent. I think this is dangerous when it comes to food, as it is basic nutrition. If you are embedding misleading information or mis-stating facts in ads then it has a real impact on whoever the customer or consumer is of that product. It is good that the issue has been highlighted,” said brand expert Devangshu Dutta, founder of Third Eyesight.
Then there is the Advertising Standards Council of India and discussions about ethical standards within the industry.
But Dutta believes there is a clear disconnect between what advertisements should say and what actually transpires. “I hope it gets acted upon from the government’s side as well. Self-regulation doesn’t seem to work. We all wish that it works, but it doesn’t. If it becomes more stringent, then it will be good overall,” he said.
While FMCG players are concerned about the stringent action of the Supreme Court, they believe that this will lead to improved advertisement regulation.
Ensuring compliance
Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior executive of a leading FMCG company said, “The industry is already disciplining itself due to the growing consumer awareness, stringent ASCI guidelines and the impact of influencer marketing. This will further ensure that misleading ads will be few and far in the future.”
Some companies also ensure that their ads adhere to ASCI guidelines before launching them. “We run our ads with ASCI before we release them. This practice has worked in our favour,” said another executive on condition of anonymity.
In its hearing, the SC had said, “We are of the opinion that the issue relating to implementation of the relevant provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act and the Rules, the Drugs and Cosmetic Act and the Rules, and the Consumers Act and the relevant rules needs closer examination in the light of the grievances raised by the petitioner…not just limited to the respondents before this court but to all similarly situated/ placed FMCGs who have… misleading advertisements, and (are) taking the public for a ride… affecting the health of babies, school going children and senior citizens who have been consuming products on the basis of the said misrepresentation.”
(Published in Business Standard)
