Ppcl Thailand Case Study
Problem Identification
As negotiations proceed with Tricon, PPCL must determine whether or not to renew its contract and keep the Pizza Hut Brand Name. If PPCL signs the agreement, they will have no choice but to sign a non-compete clause which could be potentially damaging to its success moving forward.
Pizza Hut currently occupies the majority of the pizza market in Thailand. Whether or not the deal goes through with Tricon, PPCL must also determine how to expand the pizza category. The question they face is whether they can survive not only without the Pizza Hut brand name, but also whether they can achieve growth by expanding the pizza category in Thailand. Should PPCL cut ties with Tricon and build a new brand?
PPCL must also address its current positioning in the market. Although brand awareness is lower than McDonalds and KFC, this is likely because Pizza Hut in Thailand is perceived to be a traditional family restaurant instead of a fast food restaurant. Considering 56% of sales currently come from delivery, it is unclear whether they should be positioned as fast food or fast casual. Should they push the delivery model, the dine-in model, or both?
Analysis & Recommendations
Strategic Options & Brand Positioning
Moving from a franchise model to a traditional model would mean that PPCL could no longer rely on the cachet of the Pizza Hut brand name. Pizza Hut’s brand equity has created barriers to entry for competitors such as Domino’s and Narai. If they lose the brand name, they must quickly build a new brand and position their offering before competitors move in and steal market share.
Positioning the PPCL offering as fast casual and delivery as opposed to just fast food would help to facilitate the shared dining experience desired by Thai customers. Currently the dining experience is lacking – there is not a shared experience and the food is bland according to Thai tastes. However, in terms of overall satisfaction with dining experience they
As negotiations proceed with Tricon, PPCL must determine whether or not to renew its contract and keep the Pizza Hut Brand Name. If PPCL signs the agreement, they will have no choice but to sign a non-compete clause which could be potentially damaging to its success moving forward.
Pizza Hut currently occupies the majority of the pizza market in Thailand. Whether or not the deal goes through with Tricon, PPCL must also determine how to expand the pizza category. The question they face is whether they can survive not only without the Pizza Hut brand name, but also whether they can achieve growth by expanding the pizza category in Thailand. Should PPCL cut ties with Tricon and build a new brand?
PPCL must also address its current positioning in the market. Although brand awareness is lower than McDonalds and KFC, this is likely because Pizza Hut in Thailand is perceived to be a traditional family restaurant instead of a fast food restaurant. Considering 56% of sales currently come from delivery, it is unclear whether they should be positioned as fast food or fast casual. Should they push the delivery model, the dine-in model, or both?
Analysis & Recommendations
Strategic Options & Brand Positioning
Moving from a franchise model to a traditional model would mean that PPCL could no longer rely on the cachet of the Pizza Hut brand name. Pizza Hut’s brand equity has created barriers to entry for competitors such as Domino’s and Narai. If they lose the brand name, they must quickly build a new brand and position their offering before competitors move in and steal market share.
Positioning the PPCL offering as fast casual and delivery as opposed to just fast food would help to facilitate the shared dining experience desired by Thai customers. Currently the dining experience is lacking – there is not a shared experience and the food is bland according to Thai tastes. However, in terms of overall satisfaction with dining experience they