Coors Case Analysis
COORS CASE STUDY Q&As
I. Evaluations of Coors’s competency in different stages of development
Super Regional Brewer to National Brewer:
* Bounded conservative family company with all board members plus 5 directors insiders. Later followed by more open minded management such as issuing stocks for outside financing, changing policy towards minority, * Traditional strengths in production; 70 days aging of its beers compared to other brewers. Also enjoyed good profit margins during the time of non competitiveness. * Controlled production costs by brewing a single kind of beer. This later changed to segmentation by new products launches such as silver bullet; light beer consisting of exactly the same ingredients only with lower amounts which in fact was a more profitable. * Intensified marketing of Coors. The advertisement cost per barrel was higher than any other. The marketing style changed focusing to product quality and differentiation as trying to be a national brewer in following years. * In producing inputs Coors had stressed quality and self-reliance. Held the rights to acquire water in territory. Made its own malt under long term contracts with 2000 farmers. * Built its own malting equipment, 90% of brewing equipment, 75% of packaging equipment and tried to be self-sufficient in energy by developing its own coalfield. * Super regional manufacturer localized in a area of short fall in supplying the demand. Later this has turned into search for new plant need after penetration of other brands into the territory of their control. * Capacity utilization rate slightly higher than other brewers with multi plants. * Coors being the only brewer which was not unionized. * Coors’s technology such as producing first cans * Domination over resale channels, force them to carry its brands exclusively, prohibit to cut down prices, ensure them keep products in certain conditions and destroy any products after 60
I. Evaluations of Coors’s competency in different stages of development
Super Regional Brewer to National Brewer:
* Bounded conservative family company with all board members plus 5 directors insiders. Later followed by more open minded management such as issuing stocks for outside financing, changing policy towards minority, * Traditional strengths in production; 70 days aging of its beers compared to other brewers. Also enjoyed good profit margins during the time of non competitiveness. * Controlled production costs by brewing a single kind of beer. This later changed to segmentation by new products launches such as silver bullet; light beer consisting of exactly the same ingredients only with lower amounts which in fact was a more profitable. * Intensified marketing of Coors. The advertisement cost per barrel was higher than any other. The marketing style changed focusing to product quality and differentiation as trying to be a national brewer in following years. * In producing inputs Coors had stressed quality and self-reliance. Held the rights to acquire water in territory. Made its own malt under long term contracts with 2000 farmers. * Built its own malting equipment, 90% of brewing equipment, 75% of packaging equipment and tried to be self-sufficient in energy by developing its own coalfield. * Super regional manufacturer localized in a area of short fall in supplying the demand. Later this has turned into search for new plant need after penetration of other brands into the territory of their control. * Capacity utilization rate slightly higher than other brewers with multi plants. * Coors being the only brewer which was not unionized. * Coors’s technology such as producing first cans * Domination over resale channels, force them to carry its brands exclusively, prohibit to cut down prices, ensure them keep products in certain conditions and destroy any products after 60