A Paper on Pepsico

2. Starbucks enjoyed strong financial performance in 2011. The company did not explicitly attribute this, but with an 8% rise in same store sales it seems that either the consumer market bounced back, or Starbucks made changes that attracted more consumers. The company feels that it offered better products and a better experience at its stores. The company also credited operating efficiencies and tight control of spending for improved profits. In addition, the company continued its global expansion, which improved the top line, and used the economies of scale it generated as part of its cost control program.

From a financial perspective, Costco’s income statement shows it has increased its total revenue from its domestic and foreign stores every year. Operating income, total and net assets, and number of warehouses have increased steadily each year. However, long-term debt has sharply increased after 2006 and stockholder’s equity has been inconsistent for the past few years. Newer warehouses are being built to its maximum size and top volume warehouses would exceed $5 million in sales per week.

The dividend payout ratio provides an idea of how well earnings support the dividend payments. More mature companies tend to have a higher payout ratio. This is well evident with Pepsi Co’s dividend payout ratio of 45.95% as compared to Coca-Cola’s 20.11%. A low dividend payout is always better as it leaves more room for the company to increase dividend payouts in the future while a high ratio means there is less room.

* Overall, despite the drop in price earnings ratio, Pepsi has increased the value of its stock. By increasing investor incentives and demand, Pepsi can also regain positive numbers in its future price earnings ratios

As a percentage of net sales, Costco’s operating income rose from 2.70% in 1997 to 2.91% in 2001. This is a positive factor, meaning that the firm became more efficient.

According to PepsiCo “Organic revenue grew 5 percent in the fourth quarter and in the full year, reported net revenue declined 1 percent for the quarter and 1.5 percent for the full year, reflecting the impact of previously announced structural changes” (PepsiCo, 2013). The cost of running the business paid off from a revenue standpoint but overall net revenue fell by one percent. Additionally, Pepsi remained exceedingly concentrated on generating appealing returns for shareholders, and returned $6.5 billion to shareholders in 2012 “through a combination of share repurchases and dividends,” (Pepsi, 2013) This increased costs for the company but the cost spending implemented paid off for shareholders who would be more willing to invest more in the company in the future.

During this time, sales increased from: $7.11 billion in 2010 to $7.99 billion in 2012. Earnings improved from $2.84 to $3.57. While the total amount of dividends rose from $1.00 to $1.72. These figures are showing how the company has been continually increasing sales, earnings and dividends over the last three years. In the future, the management predicts that their current strategy will increase returns. As, executives believe that their focus on building the brand and accounting for costs will lead to net earnings of $5.20 to $7.19 annually by

Profitability ratios decreasing from 2005 to 2006 although the sales has increased substantially and the net income as well but not in the same percentage of increase due to the high reliance on debt as the interest expense increased as mentioned before.

During this period, the Return on Assets increased from 5.7% in 2012 to 34.6% in 2013. This implies the number of cents earned on each dollar of assets increased from 2012 to 2013. This shows that the business has become more profitable. Equally, the Return on Equity also increased from 12.0% in 2012 to 46.5% in 2013. This similarly implies that the company in 2013 was more efficient in generating income from new investment. This, also can be attributed to the sale of the Digital Business Brand which enabled the company appraise its strategic plan.

Operating profit margin figures in the table above show the return from net sales[13]. However profit margin ratios are high enough for the 3 years, there is a fall from 12.86% to 11.26% during 2011-12. Sales revenue increases with a higher rate than gross profit so there is a poor

Next, I invested in a popular food and beverage company, PepsiCo Inc. PepsiCo is comprised of multiple consumer segments in North America such as: Frito Lay, Quaker Foods, Aunt Jemima mixes and syrups, Aunt Jemima mixes and syrups, Quaker Chewy granola bars, Cap n Crunch and Life cereals, and Rice-A-Roni side dishes. The popular beverage segment includes beverage concentrates, fountain syrups, and finished goods such as Pepsi, Gatorade, Mountain Dew, Aquafina, etc. Since PepsiCo is worldwide, it has a handful of segments that provide consumer goods to various country and serves wholesale distributors. The company was founded in 1898 and is headquartered in Purchase, New York and expanded worldwide first entering Japan an Eastern Europe in 1966 (PepsiCo). The company was established by a merger with Pepsi-Cola and Frito-Lay and continues to add more brand names to its company today. On March 22nd, 2014 the net income applicable to common shares was 1,216,000,000 this number is a slight decrease from the 1,742,000,000 net income applicable to common shares on December 28, 2013 (Yahoo Finance). Earnings this year have been good with a positive numerical percentage of 3.76%. In the past year PepsiCo has invested five billion dollars in Mexico. This five-year investment plan Focuses on Innovation and Brand

Comparing financial data from statements can help determine whether or not it is a sound decision to invest in a company. This information can also help determine if a company is operating successfully and areas of risk within the company. This analyzing can help one company compare itself to another company and ensure that they are able to compete with other companies in their respective industries. PepsiCo and Coca-Cola are two major companies that make a majority of their money from producing and selling soft drinks. To compare these companies we are going to use vertical and horizontal analyses to see if these

Pepsi Co 's assignment taken as a whole is to amplify the value of its shareholder 's investment through sales intensification, expenditure gearshift and prudent investment of resources (Bongiorno, 1996, p 71). In this pose, Pepsi believes that its moneymaking triumph depends on

PepsiCo and Coca-Cola are fierce competitors and according to their financial statements they are both healthy companies. Therefore I would invest in Coca-Cola if I had to make the decision because it has higher income, a stronger long-term debt to networking capital ratio, steadily rising net income per common share, and a climbing and high solvency ratio. PepsiCo still shows healthy growth and outperforms Coca-Cola in many areas. I will conduct a financial analysis of Coca-Cola and PepsiCo to identify their strengths and weaknesses, ultimately deciding which one is worth the investment.

Pepsi-Cola brand is a brand that has been established within the refreshment industry since the 19th century. Pepsi pride the business of consumer products in beverages and snacks, on being one of the best in the world. They seek