Both companies had many difficulties, especially Coca-Cola, and it's useful to observe how it dealt with the different aspects, stating from the political environment of the Indian market and the trade barriers it faced, going through the market entry and penetration strategies considered and the flexible marketing mix used and how it was placed to increase consumption and market share, ending with the change in the environment and market due to boycott campaigns for different reasons.
Political environment and trade barriers:
Until the early 1990s, India was considered unfriendly to foreign investors, especially in consumer goods sector. If an item could be obtained within the country, imports of similar items were forbidden.
Due to this environment, Coca-Cola had withdrawn from the Indian market in 1977.
Looking back at Coca-Cola's withdrawal we can notice:
Coke's refusal to give the formula and withdraw from the market wasn't a clever decision, because as a big company, coke must expect to face many challenges. It should have believed in it marketing capabilities and its ability to position its brand as a unique one, different from others even if they claim they are the same. And using the huge resources it has worldwide, it could have planned a strategy to overcome this problem and stay in the market and even gain market share as the only unique multinational brand.
If coke had stayed in the market, it could have too advantage of the BVO warning crisis that the local companies faced after it appeared to be carcinogenic.
And if coke had stayed in the market, it could have took advantage of 1991 economic crisis and increased its equity stakes and profit, like other foreign companies that...