International journal of market research vol 51,advertising videos download free xp,how do you sell videos online - Good Point

An empirical analysis of business cycles, credit market imperfections and the exchange rate. Consumers started to pay more attention to various “special offers” and “bonuses” by retail networks. Over the months they would go to (purchase from) more outlets than before, looking for the most interesting (cheapest) offers and trying to avoid impulse purchases.
Obviously, beer is not a basic good and in spite of the adjustment to new trade rules, consumers were buying less beer than previous year.
In this connection we expect the competition to become fiercer between producers and retail networks for a consumer who is able to pay but rather economical and rational on the one hand, and on the other hand, producers and retail will fight for decreasing margin. Since October 2013, the consumer expenses stopped growing (against the corresponding period of the previous year).
Consumption was decreased both by low-income and by middle class buyers who thought about credit reimbursement and currency purchase. After ten years of nominal (and actual) growth, the Russian food market and market of everyday goods in general has approached saturation.
Let us note that nowadays, beer takes up a considerable share of Russians’ net expenses on foods and services. WeatherIn order to give prognoses concerning the market dynamics in 2014, one has to keep in mind the conditions of the previous year.
The previous season was in general favorable for beer sales, so if we consider weather as an independent factor, the base of 2013 was high. March of 2013 was very cold on virtually all territory of Russia (see weather chart of RosHydroMet), however this month is of little importance for beer market, owing to sharp seasonality of sales.
Besides, in European and Black Earth region and in the western Siberia there was totally rainy weather.
After neutral by temperature September and moderately warm October, the autumn decided to stay for a while and November was extremely “hot”, and many regions beat records of temperature anomalies. The warm autumn, in spite of the consumer spending reduction, surely impacted the beer market dynamics, which was positive from September till November. Over the recent years climatologists have been returning to the formed trend of the country-wide warming. Relying on this trend, one can expect a neutral or moderately negative impact of the weather base of the last year on the beer sales dynamics of 2014.
The positive influence is obvious in March (because of cold March in 2013) and probable in May (because of heavy precipitations).
Thus, the brewers can somehow mitigate the excise rise, which takes place at the start of the year.
The main decline took place during the first half of the year, when the sales dynamics was sharply negative too. In the context of competition of the leading producers, apparent redistribution of positions could be observed. At the same time, the pendulum swung in favor of big federal companies, which had been rapidly gaining market weight till 2007, and seemed to absolutely dominate the market.
The emphasis is no longer placed on “live” beer, which was an attempt of medium breweries to distance themselves at the first stage of their recovery. Neither the focus is made on “craft” beer by small producers, which account for only several per cent of the market, and do not have a serious impact on the market volumes. Beer lovers seem to be a little tired of standard flavors and many variations of mass brands and aggressively swanky advertising campaigns.
However, the total prohibition for advertisement outside supermarkets draws the flavor, package, and the product identity to the foreground. Consumer now pays more attention to the location of production and the history of a certain product.
This is reflected in the popularity growth of more expensive brands, local, so called “nostalgic” sorts, craft and draught beer. The branding activity of transnational brewing companies was accordingly revised, to the direction of product range changing, simulating regional breweries or even mini-breweries. This trend led to degradation of the “old” economy national brands and made brewers think about the potential of regional sorts scaling. There appeared brands without distinct geographical identity in Russia, but with limited distribution.
For example, Carlsberg Group late in 2012 launched a new rice beer Dragon, brewed by “Asian formula” especially for Far East of Russia.
This brand was bottled by Samara subdivision of Baltika and distributed in Tatarstan and Bashkortostan.
Despite the growing share of independent producers, we cannot that all them rosper, as the aggregate volumes of sales have been shrinking slowly since 2012.
Despite the redistribution of sales in favor of independent companies, in 2011 Baltika stopped losing its positions and has been gradually increasing its market share ever since.
This means that compared to the immediate competitors, the company’s performance look relatively good and better than the market in general. According to the company estimation the decline was mainly due to the aforementioned outlet restrictions which were further compounded by a slowdown of Russian economy growth and consumer sentiment in the second half of the year. The influence of the annual strategy to produce excess volumes in order to overstock the distributors’ warehouses before the excise rise was limited. Obviously, this means that the excess volumes were the same as last year and the .% decline reflects the sale volume change in retail.
The report for 2013 states that the company improved our market share in both the modern and traditional trade, and across most Russian regions, with particularly strong performances in the super-premium and mainstream segments. Brands such as Baltika 0, Baltika Cooler, Zatecky Gus, Holsten and Zhigulevskoe performed particularly well, while Baltika 7 was negatively impacted by outlet restrictions. Several line extensions of Baltika, such as Baltika Praha and Baltika Munchen, were launched, and we introduced Grimbergen with good results. In addition, for much of the year the sponsorships of the Sochi Olympic Games and the Russian National Hockey League were being activated. The launch of the rejuvenated Tuborg was an important step in strengthening Tuborg’s very strong brand equity in the superpremium category. The regional dynamics of beer production at different branches of Baltika was very inhomogeneous. In European part of Russia the company unexpectedly demonstrated high growth of beer output. Under company estimations, Russian beer market shrank by .% against the previous year due to kiosks prohibition, macroeconomic environment and poor economic growth.
Besides, the financial performance of the company in the first quarter was negatively impacted by Russian ruble weakening. In the current difficult economic conditions, which are negatively influencing consumer’s sentiment, Baltika manages to sustain its leadership on the market.

A small contribution into the common result of the modern trade was made by the region Ural-Povolzhye, and North-West region in the channel of the traditional trade.
We should say that the positions of Russian AB InBev subdivisions have been worsening since 2009.
However, Baltika in percent points has lost much more, but in view of the activity scales, one can say that AB InBev losses on Russian market were bigger than those of other transnational companies.
In order to gain insight into the preconditions for the outrunning loss of market share, it is necessary to switch at the global level of AB InBev activity. Firstly, in the course of so many mergers and acquisitions, the scale of AB InBev activity has increased sharply and the company global priorities have changed significantly. In other words, AB InBev shareholders, unlike the competitors’ shareholders, are very little worried by the troubles on Russian markets.
The funds are directed to acquisitions of perspective companies in perspective regions, as well as to pay the debts of the previous acquisitions.
The company is obviously not ready to enter the competition on the falling and losing profitability Russian beer market. Secondly, since AB InBev is now headed by a first class financier Carlos Brito, the emphasis is made on profitability via price increase and cost reduction. Globally, there have been selected three key brands, which have been receiving investments from the company, namely, Budweiser (Bud in Russia), Corona Extra and Stella Artois. At the international level there are still old brands of InBev, they are Beck's, Hoegaarden and Leffe, but they are rapidly losing their significance. But increasing profitability by market share expansion has been in process for a long time, since 2007 (it was otherwise till then). The point is that as there appeared other options such as regional producers and draught beer segment, economy sorts of AB InBev with an extra charge “for brand” became not attractive to the consumer.
Under the pressure from Baltika company, AB InBev was slowly losing its positions in the blurred mainstream segment, and not paying so much attention to local brands development as its competitors.
By implementing the chosen strategy, that is premiumization and expense cutting, the company was acting radically. Almost every year, AB InBev closed breweries – in Saint Petersburg in 2010, in Kursk in 2012, in Novocheboksarsk (Chuvash Republic) in 2013 and in Perm in 2014. By redistributing production volumes by different subdivisions AB InBev managed to avoid production decline at some of them. Thus, according to our estimation, the biggest company brewery in Omsk retained the output volumes at the level of .. Judging by the regional statistics data, Klin subdivision also experienced a considerable decline. Following the strategy of premiumization and global brands development, over 2013 AB InBev was actively investing into beer Bud promotion, which yielded bigger volumes and, accordingly, bigger sales share of the brand. Besides, the launch of brand Tinkoff Avtorskoye proves that within the chosen strategy AB InBev is striving to adjust to new conditions and produce niche “craft” beer. This launch cannot be called important for the company, due to very high retail price of the brand, which is by the way, going down. Tri Khmelya” also possesses all attributes –unfiltered beer in bottle of non-standard volume and shape. But this launch targets a perceivable sale volume generation, as the sort price is at the level with the brand range. So far the new launches have not slowed the company sale decline, which is outrunning the market decline. In the new season, the company is still strongly focused on the global brands, thus in February-March 2014 the company started outputting alcohol free sort Bud Alcohol Free. Besides, as one could expect, the distribution of the company’s global brand Corona Extra came over to the new owner from Carlsberg Group.
This brand is well known to Russian consumer, but its development has been so far unstable. Most likely, in the nearest future, Corona will occupy the top price segment in Russian portfolio of AB InBev (which means it will not get cheaper) and, will probably increase its market share due to the company’s developed distribution network. Besides, AB InBev, following the trend to produce sorts with pronounced identity, launched “Chinese” beer to the market.
The price of beer Dao corresponds to the border between the mainstream and Premium segments. Our consumers are offered an alternative of Russian rice beer, which not only matches Chinese beer by flavour, but is much more cost saving” – writes press release of the company. We should say that the idea of AB InBev is not so original, as in 2010 Irkutsk mini-brewery produced bottle beer Dao brewed under Chinese technologies.
According to Heineken report, in 2013 the company managed to increase the market shares by volume and value. Russian market is rather important for Heineken as .% of the total sales by volume accrues to it. At the same time, the growth and profitability of company sales are now provided by other regions. Heineken was demonstrating comparative stabilization of performance starting from 2010, as the company managed to follow the consumer trends.
In this way the company reacted to the growing beer patriotism and the dynamic development of draught beer segment. For example, major Siberian independent producer, company Tomskoe Pivo, pointed out the vast number of local producers and weak positions of federal companies, when assessing the competition on the domestic market of keg beer. At the same time, among its geographically close competitors Tomskoe Pivo emphasized two Altai enterprises and Heineken. In the regions, where the beer sales structure is dominated by packed beer, which is sold via the traditional and network trade, Heineken also offered its affordable regional alternative.
For example, in distant Kaliningrad region, where brewing production of the company is located, it controls almost a half of the market, both due to federal brands and two regional sorts. Diesel, which have been expanded by a variety of flavours over the recent years, mainstream beer “Ohota” and economy “Tri Medvedya” have obviously to full extent experienced all negative impacts of beer markets.
For instance, when describing the results of 2013, it was stated that the reduction of sales volume of Heineken in Russia was caused by lower demand for key brands and brands of economy segment, which was only partially offset by sustainable growth of brand Heineken. The general figures of the portfolio range and profits calculated by hectolitre demonstrated positive dynamics, which provides for the strategy fulfillment to promote revenue growth in the region. In the first quarter of 2014, the calm optimism of the previous years was shadowed by a negative report.
Speaking with investors, Rene Hooft Graafland, CFO, talked about the selling prices of Heineken in Russia. We have taken price only in March now we see that part of the competition has not taken price. So the negative pricing environment continues in Russia, but we will do everything to take wherever possible to take price.

What we see in Russia on the positive side is that we are now really - we are now for a couple of years very much focused on the top end of our portfolio.
So we get a stronger and better portfolio in Russia and that should help build the margins, which we have said on many occasions are below standards. So we need to go for margin improvement, the environment is not helping, the pricing environment is not helping, but our strategy is a solid one to build that”.
We should also add that, data from the market auditing reflect an outrunning growth of the market prices for Heineken production starting from the third quarter 2013 *. This growth is particularly evident against the background of the soft price policy of the company during the previous years.* Data for city Kaliningrad were used Company Efes has been rapidly losing its market share since the acquiring SABMiller assets, and in 2012 lost 2nd position in the list of the leading brewing companies. The joined portfolio of Efes and SABMiller brands looks too big now, taking into consideration the market decline and no possibilities for effective promotion.
Competition for the shelves between rivals as within own shelf space would inevitably lead to market share decline, all other conditions being equal.
An important reason for volume reduction was temporal halt in SABMiller production sales in the network retail, owing to integration processes, as the contracts with supermarkets had to be concluded again.
But this process was obviously difficult, as today all big companies are actively fighting for shelf space in the network retail. The existing sale system provides for offsetting for short –received profits to supermarkets in case some of brands, sorts or formats do not provide the planned margins. Obviously, Efes has to restrict distribution and the shelf share of low margin or competing products, in order to preserve necessary profitability.
According to Efes report for 2013 a comparatively big share of company sales accrues to the traditional retail, while the kiosks were till the recent time one of the biggest channels of the traditional retail. That is why the ban on beer sales in non-stationary objects affected Efes more than other market players. Shot-down of two Efes subdivisions became a logic sequence of the integration processes, against the background of the lingering decline and the necessity to control profitability.
In 2013 the plant in Rostov was closed, as well as Moscow brewery early in 2014, which had been the starting point of the company operation in Russia.
The both breweries had a great deal smaller capacity and were less modern than SABMiller breweries in Kaluga and Ulyanovsk.
The regional statistics of beer production generally reflects the same negative trends of 2013. However, judging by the company report concerning the results of 1 quarter 2014, the integration processes at the local levels are finally completed and exhausted their negative effect. In our largest market Russia, our volume performance was better than our expectations due to brand initiatives as well as better execution, supporting overall performance of EBI. However, more importantly, our brand initiatives proved to be successful across the region and contributed to our outperformance compared to our expectations. Despite local price increases during the quarter in addition to the rise in volumes, the improvement in EBI’s sales revenues was negatively impacted in USD terms mainly due to the weaker Ruble against USD. This significant improvement… was mainly due to the margin expansion in the Russian operations, contributed by the network optimization programme and further cost cutting initiatives, as well as higher volumes leading to lower per liter fixed costs”.Regional beer production, ths.
Obviously, the volumes of 2012 compensated the malt deficit, which formed due to poor crop of 2009 and 2010. The deficit of qualitative malt, which appeared three years ago, resulted in growth wave of foreign deliveries. In 2011 the import volume slightly decreased, and the main expensive malt supplier was Finland, while Belarus sold more affordable malt.
However, over the recent years, Russian producers have preferred to import barley rather than malt and to process it on their own (see below). Interestingly, in 2011 the same amount of malt was delivered to UAE, that is, the key buyers have been changing over the recent years. Basing on the shipments data and the custom statistics, one can define the dynamics of the trade balance. Kursk region became the sales leader, as own agricultural projects are developed by holding branch Russkiy Solod and by company Kurskiy Solod, that bought a malt house from AB InBev branch, which stopped its operation, as well as many independent agricultural producers. Obviously, the company not only provided for its own needs by the gathered volumes of brewing malt but also was able to sell the excesses. In particular, the general sales volumes were considerably influenced by the performance in Voronezh and Lipetsk regions.
Though Russian producers significantly increased the volumes of sold malting barley in 2012, till the active selling of new harvest grain, market was much impacted by import barley.
Arrival of the new harvest to the market and its saturation in 2013, accordingly, led to … decline of foreign deliveries, i.e.
In 2013, against the background of import decline, its structure was completely changed in favor of Scandinavian suppliers traditional for Russia.
Russian and foreign markets are now experiencing situation when prices for the harvest 2014 will be much influenced by already built stocks of qualitative raw materials.
Besides, due to the lingering decline of beer production volumes, supply exceeds the expected demand. However, there has formed a considerable price difference between different purpose barley, among other reasons due to the sharp price decline of feed grain, which can encourage agricultural producers to grow malting barley.
The highest buying prices are fixed in the regions where the malting barley is not grown and transport costs are particularly big. In Irkutsks, Sverdlovsk, Kaliningrad oblasts and the Primorsk Territory the average price for a malting barley ton in 2013 and early in 2014, comprised nearly .. Besides, Novosibirsk oblast and the Khabarovsk Territory also had higher than average prices.
At the same time, there are several regions, which are situated not far from the areas where malting barley is grown, but buy it at high price. Obviously, it is caused by high demands for malt quality and brewing of licensed beer sorts. Republic Bashkortostan and Tatarstan, where Efes breweries are located as well as Nizhniy Novgorod oblast, where the biggest Heineken brewery is located, were also buying malting barley a rather high price. Buying prices for malting barley in the regions where Baltika plants are located, varied considerably, but in general were at the level with the average for Russia price. Relatively low purchasing prices for barley are recorded in the regions where AB InBev breweries are located.To get the full version of this article propose you to buy it now ($80) or visit the subscription page.

Movie maker free 2016
Digital marketing and media
Marketing for a small business

Comments to «International journal of market research vol 51»

  1. liqa207 writes:
    Sophisticated however simple to use ?�all-in-one' marketing and.
  2. Guiza writes:
    2011, 15 of the 17 Callaway staff not have considerably knowledge engadget video-rundown test (looping a 720p video.
  3. bakililar writes:
    Productive B2B companies who never use marketing.
  4. ismayil writes:
    'Ripple effect' of decisions in life, it is told the the.