# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 2: Coffee Takeaway Cup Redesign

Should BrewMasters switch to eco-friendly cups based on results?

60% would like eco-friendly cups, but 65% would not purchase coffee for higher price.

Therefore, the majority of customers at the moment value a lower coffee cup price over an eco-friendly cup.

However, eco-friendly cups are a growing trend, indicating it has practical significance. We can assume that soon >60% would prefer eco-friendly cups, and as more shops adapt to the change in price, the higher price of $5.50 will become universal and less of a deciding factor.

The preference for eco-friendly cups is also statistically significant (p>0.05 - given), indicating it is impactful on the customer purchasing decision.

Therefore, we suggest BrewMasters switch to eco-friendly cups.

# data[].attributes.body
Colgate - Yashika, Nicole, Mabel, Rachael, Jovey, Kiki, Anna

1. What issue did the brand face?

The company failed to communicate its unique value proposition in a saturated market, and consumers were unsure of why they would switch brands to Colgate.

Diluted their time and resources in creating the kitchen entrees but it was inadequate and these resources could have instead been allocated to improving its current product offering and expanding their market reach.

What impact did this have on the brand/product

The failure to extend into the frozen meals market tarnished Colgate’s reputation and led to ridicule from customers over concerns of the product offerings being unrelated and unappealing.

The product did not sell well and hence the resources and time allocated to these products was wasted.

2. How could marketing analytics have been used to prevent or mitigate these issues?

Subsequent to undertaking market research and determining the established brands and their market share, Colgate could have used prescriptive analytics to identify the best course of action.

Use secondary data to determine how other brands introduced a product that was different from their core offering.

Gauged customer sentiment using surveys to see if there was a demand for this offering and whether customers would be interested in this product from Colgate.

# data[].attributes.body
Colgate Kitchen Entrée Group 22:

colgate attempted to enter a new market they had never previously entered before: food

not enough research was conducted prior to this product launch; colgate didn’t learn if their existing customer base would be possible buyers for a frozen food line

customers buy their products because they are a reputable dental products producer and not a frozen food brand

colgates existing distinct branding means that consumers associate the logo with toothpaste and other dental products, not food: would have not being appealing to customers seeing a toothpaste logo on food

considered to be one of the biggest failures in product history

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 6: E-commerce Site Redesign

+An online retailer, ShopSmart, is considering a full redesign of its website to improve user experience and increase conversion rates. The current site has been in use for five years, and while it performs adequately, there is a growing belief that a more modern design could help the company stay competitive in the rapidly evolving e-commerce space.

+ShopSmart conducted an experiment with a sample of 10,000 users, comparing the current design with the redesigned site. The results showed:

+The redesigned site produced a 2% increase in conversion rates compared to the current design.

+The redesign would cost $300,000 to fully implement.

+The 2% increase in conversion rates was found to be statistically significant with a p-value of less than 0.05.

+ShopSmart now needs to determine whether the improvement in conversion rates justifies the substantial cost of the redesign.

Question: Should ShopSmart proceed with the full redesign based on these results? Is there anything else they should consider?

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 5: Premium Membership Model

+FitLife Gym is considering introducing a premium membership model that would offer additional perks, such as unlimited personal training sessions, access to exclusive classes (e.g., yoga, pilates), and spa services. The standard membership costs $50 per month, while the premium membership would be priced at $100 per month.

+Implementing the premium model would require an initial investment of $200,000 to upgrade the gym’s facilities, hire additional staff, and add new equipment.

+To assess demand for the premium model, the gym surveyed 2,000 current members. The results revealed:

+45% of members expressed interest in upgrading to the premium membership.

+30% of members indicated they would switch to another gym if FitLife raised the price of standard membership to subsidize the premium model.

+The survey results were found to be statistically significant with a p-value of less than 0.05.

Question: Should FitLife proceed with the premium membership model based on these results? Is there anything else they should consider?

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 4: Sustainable Ingredient Sourcing

+A restaurant chain, GreenBites, is considering switching to sustainably sourced ingredients for its menu in response to growing consumer demand for ethical and eco-friendly food options. The current ingredients cost the chain $50,000 per month, while switching to sustainably sourced ingredients would increase the monthly cost by 12%, raising costs to $56,000 per month. The restaurant chain is concerned about whether customers will support the higher costs and whether this will lead to higher menu prices.

+To gauge customer interest, GreenBites conducted a survey of 1,000 regular customers. The results showed that:

+50% of customers indicated they support the idea of switching to sustainable ingredients.

+40% of customers stated they would be willing to pay higher prices for meals made with sustainably sourced ingredients.

+The survey results were found to be statistically significant with a p-value of less than 0.05.

+GreenBites must now decide whether to proceed with the switch, knowing it will raise costs and potentially require a price increase of 5% per meal.

Question: Should GreenBites proceed with switching to sustainable ingredients based on these results? Is there anything else they should consider?

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 3: Retail Store Self-Checkout Kiosks

+ShopEase, a large retail chain, is considering introducing self-serve checkouts to improve the shopping experience and reduce wait times. Currently, all customers use traditional cashier-operated checkouts, which sometimes results in long queues during peak hours. The installation of self-serve checkouts would reduce these wait times, but it comes with a significant investment cost—approximately $100,000 per store for installation and maintenance.

+A recent customer survey was conducted with 2,000 respondents across different store locations:

+70% of respondents indicated they would prefer using self-serve checkouts for small purchases.

+50% of respondents said they would still prefer a cashier, especially for larger purchases.

+The preference for self-serve checkouts for small purchases was statistically significant (p < 0.05).

+ShopEase must now decide whether to proceed with the installation of self-serve checkouts across all locations, considering the high cost and mixed customer preferences.

+Question: Should ShopEase proceed with the installation of self-checkout kiosks based on these results? Is there anything else they should consider?

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 2: Coffee Shop Takeaway Cup Redesign

+BrewMasters, a popular coffee chain, is considering switching to eco-friendly takeaway cups to align with sustainability trends and to meet growing consumer demand for environmentally friendly options. Currently, the coffee shop uses standard disposable cups, which cost $0.15 per cup. Switching to eco-friendly, compostable cups would increase the cost per cup to $0.30, doubling the current cost.

+A regular takeaway coffee currently sells for $5.00, but to maintain current profit margins, BrewMasters would need to increase the price of takeaway coffee to $5.50 if they switch to the eco-friendly cups.

+A recent survey of 1,500 customers revealed the following:

+60% of respondents indicated they would prefer eco-friendly takeaway cups.

+35% of respondents said they would still purchase coffee at the higher price point of $5.50.

+The preference for eco-friendly cups was statistically significant (p < 0.05).

+BrewMasters must now decide whether to proceed with the eco-friendly cups, considering the higher cost and potential impact on customer willingness to pay more for takeaway coffee.

+Question: Should BrewMasters proceed with the switch to eco-friendly cups based on these results? Is there anything else they should consider?

they should have the option to purchase whichever cup they want

you need to look at the competitors to see their pricing and also identify if the respondents saying they would purchase coffee is statistically significant

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 1: Beverage Company Bottle Redesign

+HydraDrink, a premium beverage company known for its high-quality reusable water bottles, is considering redesigning its 500ml bottle to use eco-friendly materials. Currently, the bottle is made from high-grade plastic, costing $12.00 per unit to produce. Switching to eco-friendly, plant-based materials would increase the cost per unit to $15.00, a 25% increase in production costs.

+HydraDrink’s 500ml bottle currently sells for $60.00. To maintain profit margins, the company will need to raise the price to $75.00 if they proceed with the eco-friendly redesign.

+A recent survey of 2,000 customers revealed that 65% of respondents indicated they would be more likely to purchase the product if it were made with eco-friendly materials. This preference for eco-friendly materials was statistically significant (p< 0.05).

+HydraDrink must now decide whether the increased costs and higher retail price are justified based on customer interest in the eco-friendly redesign.

Question: Should HydraDrink proceed with the eco-friendly redesign based on these results? Is there anything else they should consider?

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 4: New Coke

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The time-tested adage appears to be the lesson from Coca-Cola's disastrous introduction of "New Coke." Except in 1985, Coca-Cola indeed thought its signature brand was broken.

Although Coca-Cola remained the world's best-selling soft drink, rival Pepsi-Cola continued to gain market share in the 1970s and early 1980s, thanks in part to its aggressive "Pepsi Challenge" campaign in which consumers taking blind taste tests were surprised to learn they preferred the flavor of Pepsi. To the shock of Coca-Cola, internal taste tests yielded the same results. Company executives grew convinced that its soda's taste-not its rival's advertisements targeting the "Pepsi Generation"-was the reason for its declining market share.

Since its introduction in 1886, Coca-Cola's secret recipe had been tweaked several times-such as when changing sweeteners from cane sugar to beet sugar to corn syrup-but its taste had remained constant. While the company was developing the unique formula for Diet Coke, which was introduced in 1982, it found in top-secret taste tests that a sweeter version of the concoction beat not only Pepsi but the classic version of Coke. Executives decided to make a risky change.

Coca-Cola bets everything on New Coke

On April 23, 1985, Coca-Cola Company chairman and CEO Roberto Goizueta stepped before the press gathered at New York City's Lincoln Center to introduce the new formula, which he declared to be "smoother, rounder, yet bolder-a more harmonious flavor." The press, however, said what Goizueta couldn't admit: New Coke tasted sweeter and more like Pepsi.

Had it been an opera, the Lincoln Center performance would have been a tragedy to devoted fans of Coke's original formula. Rather than divide its market share between two sugar sodas, Coca-Cola discontinued its 99-year classic recipe and locked Formula 7x away in an Atlanta bank vault with the intention that it never again see the light of day.

"Some may choose to call this the boldest single marketing move in the history of the packaged-goods business," Goizueta said. "We simply call it the surest move ever made." Coca-Cola president Donald Keough echoed the certainty: "I've never been as confident about a decision as I am about the one we're announcing today."

New Coke falls flat

While Goizueta and Keough toasted each other with cans of New Coke, the news was already beginning to fall flat. On the New York Stock Exchange, shares of Coca-Cola dropped, while those of its rival rose. Pepsi gave its employees the day off and declared victory in full-page newspaper advertisements that boasted, ''After 87 years of going at it eyeball to eyeball, the other guy just blinked.''

New Coke left a bitter taste in the mouths of the company's loyal customers. Within weeks of the announcement, the company was fielding 5,000 angry phone calls a day. By June, that number grew to 8,000 calls a day, a volume that forced the company to hire extra operators. "I don't think I'd be more upset if you were to burn the flag in our front yard," one disgruntled drinker wrote to company headquarters. At protests staged by grassroots groups such as "Old Cola Drinkers of America," consumers poured the contents of New Coke bottles into sewer drains. One Seattle consumer even filed suit against the company to force it to provide the old drink.

The outrage caught Coca-Cola executives by surprise. They had hardly made a rash decision unsupported by data. After all, they had performed 190,000 blind taste tests on U.S. and Canadian consumers. The problem, though, is that the company had underestimated loyal drinkers' emotional attachments to the brand. Never did its market research testers ask subjects how they would feel if the new formula replaced the old one.

Coca-Cola Classic returns

Seventy-nine days after their initial announcement, Coca-Cola executives once again held a press conference on July 11, 1985-this time to announce a mea culpa and the return of the original formula, which hardly had time to gather dust in its Atlanta bank vault, under the label "Coca-Cola Classic." "Our boss is the consumer," Keough said. "We want them to know we're really sorry." The news was so momentous that television networks broke into normal programming with special reports.

Coca-Cola Classic quickly outsold New Coke and within a few months had returned to its position as the top-selling sugar cola, ahead of Pepsi. The company rebranded the new formula "Coke II" in 1990 before it was eventually abandoned in 2002. In spite of the blowback, Coca-Cola emerged from the fiasco with its market position actually strengthened as consumers rediscovered their attachment to the iconic brand. (Moreover, in 2019, Coca-Cola actually re-released a very limited run of New Coke.)

"The simple fact is that all the time and money and skill poured into consumer research on the new Coca-Cola could not measure or reveal the deep and abiding emotional attachment to original Coca-Cola felt by so many people," Keough admitted. The blunder was so colossal that some thought it must have been an intentional marketing gimmick. "Some cynics say that we planned the whole thing," Keough said. "The truth is we're not that dumb and we're not that smart."

Fact Check

We strive for accuracy and fairness. But if you see something that doesn't look right, click here to contact us! HISTORY reviews and updates its content regularly to ensure it is complete and accurate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Coca-Cola's 'New Coke' Flopped | HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Coca-Cola's disastrous introduction of "New Coke" in 1985 delivered a painful lesson: Don't mess with a classic.

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 3: Pepsi’s Kendall Jenner Ad

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If the Black Lives Matter movement were led by a 21-year-old white supermodel armed with a can of fizzy soda, then maybe everyone would just get along.

That's the vision presented in Pepsi's new ad featuring reality TV star Kendall Jenner. The ad was pulled on Wednesday after being met with widespread condemnation, with critics accusing the drinks giant of appropriating a nationwide protest movement following police shootings of African Americans.

"Pepsi was trying to project a global message of unity, peace and understanding. Clearly we missed the mark, and we apologize," Pepsi wrote in a statement on Wednesday. "We did not intend to make light of any serious issue. We are removing the content and halting any further rollout. We also apologize for putting Kendall Jenner in this position."

In the ad released Tuesday, Jenner is in the middle of a photo shoot when she happens to notice a protest march making its way down the street.

It's not clear what the smiling, attractive demonstrators are upset about, the only clues being their placards reading "peace" and "love" and "join the conversation."

But Jenner decides to join them anyway, beckoned into the throng by a handsome man with a cello. She rips off her blonde wig, wipes away her lipstick and joins the marchers. The beaming, break-dancing protesters are a far cry from the often fractious demonstrations that have broken out across the United States over the past few years.

In Pepsi's version, no one seems too worked up about anything. Jenner fist-bumps one of her recently adopted activists, before grabbing a can of Pepsi from a well-stocked ice-bucket.

Then comes the ad's climax - and perhaps the part that has caused most uproar. Jenner reaches the remarkably calm front-line of the protest. She spots an officer, walks up to him and hands him the Pepsi.

He takes a sip, a woman wearing a nose-ring and a traditional Muslim headscarf takes a photograph and everybody cheers.

The ad has sparked accusations that Pepsi has appropriated a racial protest movement to sell a global fizzy drinks brand.

"This ad trivializes the urgency of the issues and it diminishes the seriousness and the gravity of why we got into the street in the first place," activist DeRay McKesson told NBC News correspondent Gabe Gutierrez.

McKesson, who organized and protested in Ferguson after the death of Michael Brown, also takes issue with the brand's apology. "Pepsi didn't apologize to all of the people who have been protesting for two years, didn't apologize to the people who dedicated their lives and their time to these issues and to understand the urgency of them because in so many cases, there's so much at stake including people's lives," he said.

It drew scathing criticism on social media from Bernice King, the youngest daughter of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. She posted an image of her father mid-peaceful protest - literally being pushed back by a police line and tweeted: "If only Daddy would have known about the power of #Pepsi."

Pepsi in turn responded directly to King, "We at Pepsi believe in the legacy of Dr. King & meant absolutely no disrespect to him & others who fight for justice."

Many people believe the final scene of the ad in particular is a direct reference to one of the defining images of the Black Lives Matter movement: a photograph of Ieshia Evans, a 28-year-old nurse being detained in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Some took to Twitter, calling out the brand with satire.

Pepsi said the film, titled "Jump In," was produced by PepsiCo's in-house content creation arm, Creators League Studio.

The company said the ad "features multiple lives, stories and emotional connections that show passion, joy, unbound and uninhibited moments."

It was designed to "truly reflect today's generation and what living for now looks like" and it described Jenner as someone who "exemplifies owning 'Live For Now' moments."

Pepsi is not the first multinational brand to attempt to use counterculture and protest movements to sell its product. In 1971, Coca-Cola's iconic "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing," advertisement rode the wave of flower-power protest that had emerged in opposition to the Vietnam War.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'We missed the mark': Pepsi pulls ad featuring Kendall Jenner after controversy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If the Black Lives Matter movement were led by a 21-year-old white supermodel armed with a can of fizzy soda, then maybe everyone would just get along. That's the vision presented in Pepsi's new ad featuring reality TV star Kendall Jenner.

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 2: Amazon’s Fire Phone

1. What issue did the brand face?

poor pricing

initially high price $199

same price as iPhone 6

too much stock

small app store

apps weren't compatible with phone, would require redesign

late to the market

iPhone was on 8th generation and already had major market share

features of limited interest

ability to scan objects

didn't have bluetooth

2. What impact did this have on the brand/product?

initial stock price increase, but declined in the long run

$170 million loss on the fire phone

decreased brand reputation

company hasn't continued to join this market

3. How could Marketing Analytics have been used to prevent or mitigate these issues?

could've collected primary data/ looked at secondary data to understand the market

was there a need for the product?

what features do people look for in a smartphone?

could've looked at the price points as there product didn't have a competitive advantage (same price for a worse product)

looked more at customer segmentation to differentiate the product

cost-leadership

differentiation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Was Amazon’s Fire Phone Reduced To Embers?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Several months ago, Amazon released its Fire Phone - the tech and retail giant’s first foray into the ever-expanding smartphone market. After a $170 million write-down and $83 million in unsold inventory, the Amazon Fire Phone can safely be declared a dud.

# data[].attributes.body
Scenario 1: Colgate Kitchen Entrée

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Colgate Kitchen Entrees — Museum of Failure

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Colgate launched a line of frozen food in the 1960s. This was a mistake…