The Pepsi Refresh Project Case Study
Order Description
Please carefully read the case study (attached), then summarize it with discussing this question: “Pepsi’s Refresh Campaign is considered a form of cause marketing, attempting to reposition the brand. Was this type of branding campaign appropriate for Pepsi? Explain why or why not”

Important Note: please review the two exemplars that I attached. They are perfect examples of the case summary I look for.

You do not have to use sources or references in summarzing the case
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change
Ana Maria “Ami” Irazabal grabbed a Pepsi from the soda fountain in the hallway while dashing
to her meeting. She needed a caffeine boost to keep with the pace of her job as the senior marketing
director for Trademark Pepsi and the leader of the company’s Social Good program, the Pepsi
Refresh Project. It was December 2010, and the project was finishing its first year.
In 2009, Pepsi had announced that it would not run advertising for its trademark brands during
the 2010 Super Bowl. Instead, the company diverted $20 million—its typical Super Bowl budget—to
support grants for a cause marketing program. The Pepsi Refresh Project allowed people to submit
ideas for grants to “refresh” their communities. Grants were awarded to ideas that generated the
most votes.
Consumer response to the program was tremendous. More consumers submitted ideas to the
Pepsi Refresh Project than auditioned for American Idol; more votes were cast for Pepsi Refresh
projects than in the previous U.S. presidential election. At the same time, Pepsi sales were slumping
in the U.S.—down 5% in 2010—and PepsiCo was losing market share to its rival, Coca-Cola.1 For the
first time in 20 years, Pepsi-Cola surrendered its title as the second best-selling carbonated beverage
to Coke by slipping to third, behind Diet Coke.2 PepsiCo’s share price was also down 5% in 2010.3
Irazabal sat down with her brand team to plan their strategy for 2011. Two questions loomed:
Should Pepsi continue to invest in the Pepsi Refresh Project? And, if so, how should the team tweak
the marketing strategy and execution to use the project’s success to drive Pepsi sales?

The History of the Pepsi Brand
Brand Pepsi was owned and managed by PepsiCo, a global consumer products company that
managed a diverse portfolio of snack food, beverage, and food brands—including Fritos, Doritos,
Lay’s, Gatorade, Tropicana, Sobe Waters, Aquafina, 7-Up, Mountain Dew, Quaker Oats, Cap’n
Crunch, Rice-a-Roni, and Aunt Jemima. In 2010, Pepsi was one of the world’s most valuable brands.
Its brand equity was valued at over $14 billion, and it ranked 23rd on the Interbrand ranking of the
best global brands.4 The Pepsi brand had a long history, originating in 1898 as a hand-mixed
carbonated creation developed to delight the crowds at Caleb Bradham’s North Carolina pharmacy.
The original Pepsi-Cola drink was joined by Diet Pepsi, a low-calorie drink launched in 1964, and
Pepsi MAX, a zero-calorie, sugar-free cola with double the amount of caffeine launched in 2007, to
form the Trademark Pepsi brand family.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Professors Michael I. Norton and Jill Avery (Simmons School of Management) prepared this case. HBS cases are developed solely as the basis for
class discussion. Cases are not intended to serve as endorsements, sources of primary data, or illustrations of effective or ineffective
management.
Copyright © 2011, 2013 President and Fellows of Harvard College. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, call 1-800-5457685 FREE, write Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA 02163, or go to www.hbsp.harvard.edu/educators. This publication may not be
digitized, photocopied, or otherwise reproduced, posted, or transmitted, without the permission of Harvard Business School.

This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

The Pepsi Generation
In its early days, Pepsi-Cola was sold as a healthful drink. During the Great Depression, it
captured consumers’ attention with a message of value, offering 12 ounces of soda (twice as much as
the competition) for a nickel. During World War II, Pepsi changed its packaging to red, white, and
blue, featuring patriotic themes in its advertising.
In the 1950s, Pepsi was positioned as a drink for the young and the young at heart, embodying
being sociable and spirited, feeling free, and embracing change. In the 1960s, Pepsi ran awardwinning advertising campaigns that designated the generation then coming of age as “The Pepsi
Generation.” In 1985, Pepsi became “The Choice of a New Generation,” with an ad featuring pop star
Michael Jackson, putting Pepsi on the leading edge of popular culture. In 1997, Pepsi launched its
“GeneratioNext” campaign, reinvigorating the message for a new generation of Pepsi consumers.
Pepsi continued to include the most influential music artists (e.g., David Bowie, Madonna, Aretha
Franklin, Faith Hill, Britney Spears, Shakira, and Beyoncé), sports heroes (e.g., Joe Montana and
Shaquille O’Neal), and fashion models (e.g., Cindy Crawford) in its advertising. Howard Pulchin,
EVP and managing director of Brand Stewardship for Edelman, Pepsi’s public relations agency,
summarized Pepsi’s pop culture strategy: “Pepsi has always been at the nexus of cultural shifts,
trying different, new things. Pepsi is about bringing together people and ideas at the nexus of culture.
When people are together, Pepsi is there.”
Frank Cooper, chief engagement officer of PepsiCo Beverages, explained the enduring appeal of
this lifestyle positioning:
In the 1960s, we built a successful ad campaign on the slogan “For those who think young.”
That idea morphed into “The Pepsi Generation.” The Baby Boomers who were coming of age
were excited, engaged, and enthusiastic—and started a movement that transformed our
culture. In the 80s and 90s, Generation X experienced the transformation from typewriter to
computer, letters to email, isolated cultures to global infrastructure. Today’s Millennials, the
most globally connected group in history, embody and embrace change. They live life in beta.5
As the brand team shaped the Pepsi Refresh Project, they were careful to consider Pepsi’s rich
brand meaning from its long history, with Irazabal noting that “part of Pepsi’s DNA has always been
the spirit of the challenger, celebration of the next generation, and of optimism and all things young
at heart.”6

The Cola Wars
In the 1970s, Pepsi’s rising sales began to challenge those of the market leader, Coca-Cola—and
the “cola wars” began. Pepsi was fighting against a formidable competitor. In 2010, Coke’s brand
equity was valued at over $70 billion and it topped Interbrand’s list of the best global brands.
Interbrand’s assessment of the Coke brand was that “its brand promise of fun, freedom, spirit, and
refreshment resonates the world over and it excels at keeping the brand fresh and always evolving—
all this, while also maintaining the nostalgia that reinforces customers’ deep connection to the
brand.”7 Memorable campaigns included “It’s the Real Thing” from 1969, “I’d Like to Teach the
World to Sing” in 1971, “Have a Coke and a Smile” from 1979, “Coke is It!” from 1982, and “Always
Coca-Cola” from 1993.
In 1975, Pepsi’s brand team found a compelling way to differentiate Pepsi from Coke, converting
results from blind taste tests showing that people preferred the taste of Pepsi to Coca-Cola into an
award-winning advertising campaign. The “Pepsi Challenge” energized Pepsi sales, catapulting the
2
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

512-018

brand into the #1 slot for the best-selling soft drink in American supermarkets. In response, CocaCola reformulated Coke, creating a sweeter version that appeared on shelves in 1985. “New Coke”
beat both Pepsi and Coke in blind taste tests. However, Coke’s consumers revolted against New
Coke, demonstrating the nostalgic and iconic appeal of the Coke brand. In response, Coke quickly
introduced Coca-Cola Classic.
Pepsi and Coke’s rivalry was enduring, with the two companies constantly trying to win the battle
for “brand switchers”—the large group of die-hard cola drinkers who were fickle enough in their
preferences to switch from one brand to the other on the basis of price discounts, innovative
promotional strategies, and other marketing efforts. In 2010, Coca-Cola led the soft drink market
(Exhibit 1).

PepsiCo in the Twenty-First Century
As the new century dawned, PepsiCo faced significant challenges. The first was a decrease in soda
consumption in the United States. In 2009, the average American consumed 46 gallons of carbonated
soft drinks, the equivalent of 736 8-ounce servings—more than 2 servings per day—but down
significantly from 1998, when Americans consumed 864 servings.8 Since peaking in 2004, volume
sold had declined for six straight years, as cola drinkers switched from soda to iced teas, juices, and
waters—though in 2009 consumers still purchased more than twice as many gallons of cola than
bottled water, and more cola than milk and beer combined (Exhibit 2). Analysts expected volume to
decline by 1.5% to 3% annually for the next ten years.9,10
The second challenge came from external pressure. By 2010, two-thirds of American adults and
one-third of American children and adolescents were overweight or obese.11 First Lady Michelle
Obama initiated an anti-obesity initiative that included requiring soda manufacturers to put calorie
content on the front of containers.12 Groups lobbied lawmakers to sponsor soda taxes to reduce
consumption and pay for the health costs of obesity.13 Companies like PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, and
McDonald’s were often presented as corporate exemplars of the obesity problem. Jon Leibowitz,
chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, stated that his agency would begin “shaming companies
that aren’t doing enough.”14
In response, the American Beverage Association pledged to reduce beverage calories in the
marketplace, with their member companies offering lower-calorie beverages and smaller portion
sizes.15 PepsiCo and the Coca-Cola Company stopped selling full-calorie sweetened drinks in U.S.
schools in 2006.16 In 2009, PepsiCo’s CEO, Indra Nooyi, announced a new vision for the company—
Performance with Purpose—that placed global corporate citizenship at the forefront of PepsiCo’s
mission:
PepsiCo’s people are united by our unique commitment to sustainable growth, called
Performance with Purpose. By dedicating ourselves to offering a broad array of choices for
healthy, convenient, and fun nourishment, reducing our environmental impact, and fostering a
diverse and inclusive workplace culture, PepsiCo balances strong financial returns with giving
back to our communities worldwide.
The company began to enhance its product portfolio with wholesome foods and beverages, with a
new approach to segmenting its product line: fun-for-you products such as Pepsi, Doritos, and
Mountain Dew; better-for-you products such as Baked Lays and Propel water, with levels of fat,
sodium, and sugar in line with dietary-intake recommendations; and good-for-you products such as
Gatorade, Quaker oatmeal, and Naked juices that included whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and
3
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

nutrients. Research and development operations were directed to explore new means of making all of
PepsiCo’s products healthier. PepsiCo’s goal was to triple the number of good-for-you products by
2020. Nooyi stated: “By expanding our portfolio, we are making sure our consumers can treat
themselves when they want enjoyable products, but are able to buy a range of appetizing and
healthier snacks when they are being health conscious.”
As the company focused on making their product offerings healthier, critics claimed that
PepsiCo’s senior management was losing its focus on the core soda and snack businesses—and that
the stock price was suffering as a result. Sanford Bernstein analyst Ali Dibadj stated that “they have
to realize that at their core they are a sugary, fatty cola company and people like that. Health and
wellness is a good focus, but you can’t be singularly focused on it.”17

The Refresh Everything Campaign
As Irazabal, Cooper, and their advertising agency, TBWA\Chiat\Day, searched for the next big
idea to anchor Pepsi’s 2009 advertising campaign, they observed several important cultural shifts in
the U.S. The financial crisis of 2008 had provided a sobering end to the excesses of the 2000s. A Pepsi
consumer survey in December 2008, however, showed that Americans were hopeful about the future;
this was particularly true for Millennial consumers (ages 17-27), 80% of whom expressed hope about
their future.
In response, Pepsi launched a new campaign—“Refresh”—with the tagline “Every Generation
Refreshes the World,” which had three executions: Wordplay, targeted mainly to Millennials; Bottle
Pass, targeted mainly to Baby Boomers; and Refresh Anthem for the Super Bowl. All executions
communicated themes of optimism, hope, joy, and love; the campaign was launched to coincide with
New Year’s Eve 2009, and Pepsi kicked off the excitement by plastering Times Square in New York
City, the site of the biggest New Year’s Eve party in the U.S., with advertising. The campaign
challenged consumers to refresh and renew their world.
A “Refresh Anthem” commercial was created for the 2009 Super Bowl, featuring Bob Dylan and
will.i.am, the lead singer of the Black Eyed Peas, to the tune of the Dylan classic “Forever Young.”
The ad featured the tagline “Every Generation Refreshes the World” and juxtaposed scenes from the
1960s and the 2000s. The visuals focused on the similarities between the Baby Boomer and Millennial
generations and communicated themes of happiness, change, and youthfulness. TBWA\Chiat\Day’s
Pepsi account planner, Jeremy Simon, explained the campaign:
It came from insight into two business problems facing Pepsi. Our core Baby Boomer
consumers were leaving the soda category and weren’t being replaced by Millennials. Our
challenge was to find a single solution to both problems, to keep Baby Boomers and attract
Millennials. Our insight was that those two generations have a lot of shared values and
attitudes—they are optimistic generations who believe that they can change the world.
Many noted similarities between the messaging of “Refresh Everything” and the rhetoric of
Barack Obama, and between Pepsi’s newly redesigned logo and the logo used by Obama in his
presidential campaign. To capitalize on the excitement surrounding Obama’s inauguration, Pepsi
peppered the crowd with Pepsi tote bags and T-shirts and blanketed Washington, DC, with Pepsi
Word Play billboards. Nicole Flavin, Pepsi Brand marketing director for Diets and Innovation,
explained that “our point was not to have a political point of view, but to make sure that we were
riding the sentiment in the country—and the sentiment was change.”

4
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project
As the “Refresh Everything” campaign moved into its second year, the mood of the nation had
changed again. Simon explained: “2010 became a year of action, not words. ‘Refresh Everything’
would be judged on the brand’s actions, not just on the words in our advertising. We knew we had to
do something really big and tangible, a physical manifestation of our brand platform.”
Irazabal’s research showed that Millennials perceived the Pepsi brand as superficial: “Consumers
are tired of words without actions. ‘So, great, you’re refreshing the world. Show me how.’” Cooper
noted that “one of the ideas that came up was to show consumers that the brand is giving back to the
world—that the brand is not just taking.”
The Pepsi Refresh Project was a marketing program geared to solicit and reward consumers’ ideas
for refreshing their communities: Pepsi would enable consumers to enact change by funding their
ideas. For 2010, $20 million—originally earmarked for other marketing activities including Super
Bowl advertising—would fund the best ideas submitted by consumers. Grants ranging from $5,000 to
$250,000 would support ideas in six categories, such as “Education” and “The Planet” (Exhibit 3).
The hub of the program was its website—www.refresheverything.com—where consumers submitted
ideas, reviewed idea proposals, and cast their votes. Each month, the site accepted up to 1,000 idea
submissions. Consumers were encouraged to return frequently to vote; each person could vote for 10
ideas per day during a 30-day voting period.
The project capitalized on several converging trends. First, studies showed that brands’ social
capital was important to Millennials: 69% claimed that they considered a company’s social and
environmental commitment when shopping, and 89% said that they would switch to a brand
associated with a good cause.18 Second, Millennials believed that they were both obligated and
empowered to make the world a better place: 92% believed the world needed to be changed, and 83%
believed that their generation had a duty to change the world.19 Third, Millennials believed that
technology, and specifically social media linking people together, was a force for change.20
The brand team encapsulated these trends with the tagline “Every generation refreshes the world.
Now, it’s your turn.” Launch materials invited consumers to participate:
Imagine if people from all walks of life across the U.S. had just one idea to make the world
better. Now imagine if they had the means to bring their ideas to life. The Pepsi Refresh Project
offers a platform for change, empowering Americans to bring a positive impact to their
communities . . . . The Pepsi Refresh Project is about the power of people and their ideas.

Pepsi’s Partner Network
The scope and the scale of the project were unlike anything Pepsi had done before. The brand
team enlisted a cadre of agency partners to help plan and execute the project. In addition, all internal
Pepsi brand resources—both financial resources and personnel—were diverted from other marketing
programs. Irazabal laughed as she recalled the support she had received:
We have about 125 people working on the project, including everyone here at Pepsi and at
our agency partners. If you ask any one of them, they all feel like they own the project. There is
a huge sense of pride. People who work on the other brands here at PepsiCo ask, ‘Is there any
way I can help?’ We have a group of employees who are Millennials who help us moderate the
ideas each month, just because they want to be a part of it, not because it is part of their job.

5
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

GOOD, an integrated media company for “the people, businesses, and NGOs moving the world
forward,” played a major partnership role. PepsiCo envisioned GOOD as a guide and an enabler.
“We brought GOOD in to shepherd us through the process. They had insight into how things really
work—not just giving to an organization and hoping that they would accomplish something, but
getting involved directly to help execute an idea,” said Cooper. GOOD’s participation granted
PepsiCo legitimacy, as Irazabal explained: “We talked to non-profit entrepreneurs to understand
whether it would work. Will it be called greenwashing? How do we make it authentic?”
GOOD played several roles. They recruited and managed a team of Ambassadors—emerging
leaders, activists, neighborhood advocates, and non-profit founders—who worked to increase the
involvement of the non-profit community and cultivate and curate innovative ideas in their areas of
expertise. GOOD worked with Pepsi personnel to vet submitted ideas to ensure that they adhered to
the spirit and law of the program before being opened to consumer voting. The democratic nature of
the program—allowing consumers to decide which causes Pepsi would support—made the project
unique among cause marketing programs. Lauren Hobart, chief marketing officer, PepsiCo Sparkling
Beverages, felt that “there was a time when brands wanted to keep total control, but we gave control
to the people—which is crucial in engaging today’s consumers.” The idea-vetting process was
designed to ensure that Pepsi did not fund ideas that could damage the brand’s reputation. Andrea
Foote, senior manager of Pepsi Beverages Company Communications, was one of the employees
involved. She noted, “Pepsi has a code of conduct and ethics, and we all try to live by it. What
happens when there’s an idea that’s not in accordance with that code? Can Pepsi stand behind it?”
GOOD worked with grant winners to maximize their success in executing their ideas in their
communities. They also managed other agencies involved in the grant process, such as Global
Giving, which conducted due diligence on the spending of the grant money, and Mission
Measurement, which assessed the social impact of the grants. Grant Garrison, grants director of
GOOD, explained: “Once the money is out there, how do we ensure that the grantees impact their
community—and actually do what the voters wanted them to do? Our team of grant managers
conducts public relations for winners’ events to help them attract as much community participation
as possible.”
The goal was to help grantees succeed. Irazabal noted that “we have a whole backstage
organization that supports the winners to make their ideas a reality. We aren’t holding their hands
per se, as these are very driven people, but we’re making sure we have the right support for them.”21

Employee Engagement Programs
In addition to its external partners, PepsiCo relied on its employees to generate excitement for the
Pepsi Refresh Project. The brand team seeded a special contest among PepsiCo’s employee resource
groups, such as the Women’s Initiative Network and Adelante, the Pepsi Latino/Hispanic Inclusion
Group. Each group was asked to submit an idea for a $10,000 grant, and employees voted for their
favorites. During the voting period, the Pepsi Refresh Project team took over PepsiCo’s headquarters,
wrapping the space with Pepsi Refresh Project signage. All 41,000 PepsiCo employees received
information about the program via Pepsi’s internal newsletter, and branded T-shirts were dropped
on every desk. The winner of the employee resource group contest was announced at a Town Hall
Meeting featuring CEO Nooyi as the keynote speaker. Flavin recalled the excitement of the launch:
“Indra told us that never in her wildest imagination did she think that a brand would internalize
Performance with Purpose and bring it to life in such a meaningful way. She encouraged all of us to
tell 10 people about the Pepsi Refresh Project.”

6
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

512-018

Internal research demonstrated the program’s impact on employees: 97% said that the project
reinforced their pride in PepsiCo as a company, 83% planned to vote for an idea, and 25% planned to
submit an idea. Once the program went live to consumers, employees were encouraged to submit
ideas; in the first 10 months, 94 employees or their immediate families had done so. Kristine Hinck,
senior manager, Pepsi Beverages Company Communications, summarized the employee response:
The brand team’s decision to engage employees first was unique and significant. This
approach really helped employees across the company become active, educated, passionate
ambassadors during the launch of the consumer-facing program. We had employees writing in
to say, ‘In my 30 years as a PepsiCo employee, I’ve never been more proud!’”

Bottler Engagement Programs
Pepsi also engaged its bottler partners in the Pepsi Refresh Project. PepsiCo distributed its soda
through a complex network of independent companies who owned the franchise rights to distribute
Pepsi products in particular geographic areas. Since the bottlers were Pepsi’s front line in stores and
in local communities, the brand team knew their support was crucial to the success of the program.
The project was announced at a national bottler meeting and webinars were produced to walk
bottlers through the logistical details of the program. A special bottler grant contest spurred idea
submissions from the bottlers. Because bottlers would manage local public relations and events
surrounding the grant winners, the brand team created winner kits (with banners and oversized
checks) and press kits for bottlers to use with their local news organizations.
Some bottlers were skeptical of the program’s ability to sell more product; others recognized its
appeal for burnishing the brand’s image. As Foote recalled: “The bottlers understood that the project
was partly about the brand image, about changing people’s perceptions of carbonated soft drinks—
which had become the poster child for bad eating habits. But, for our bottlers, sales volume is much
more important to them. So for any program that we launch, their bottom line is, ‘How is this going
to help me sell more Pepsi?’”
Dave Pederson, vice president of soft drink sales at Bernick’s Beverages and Vending in
Minnesota, believed that the project had enhanced his ability to increase Pepsi’s visibility in stores:
“We fight for floor space and locations in the stores, and this year I think we’re getting better
locations than our competitors. We’re getting bigger displays, because [stores] are seeing that we’re
giving back to the community.”22 But others expressed concern. Brian Charneski, a representative of
16 independent bottlers said, “People feel good about [the Pepsi Refresh Project] and I think it’s neat,
but it doesn’t translate to ‘I’m going to buy a Pepsi.’”23

The Launch
The Pepsi Refresh campaign website went live on January 13, 2010. Irazabal remembered the
moment: “All of the media support for the Pepsi brands went toward the project in 2010. It was the
theme that united all the activities of the brand—one voice, one project.” One key decision was how
best to incorporate the Pepsi brand and products into the project. Kate Watts, of Pepsi’s digital
agency, HUGE, noted that “there was no direct call to action for purchase on the website. The
branding was obviously very much Pepsi, but there was no direct push to sell the product in any
shape or form. And that was the original intent—it was supposed to elevate the brand, not drive
sales.”

7
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

A launch blitz was designed to build excitement (see Exhibit 4 for examples). Edelman and Weber
Shandwick, Pepsi’s public relations agencies, managed a multifaceted national and local public
relations program. Actors Kevin Bacon and Demi Moore participated in a Pepsi Refresh Celebrity
Challenge, seeking votes for their favorite causes; the Celebrity Challenge was announced for the first
time on The Today Show. The Pepsi Refresh Facebook page also featured an exclusive opportunity to
watch the “Pepsi Refresh Everything through Great Ideas” brainstorm live from New York City. The
brainstorm brought together Moore, Bacon, CMO and president of joint ventures for PepsiCo
Americas Beverages Jill Beraud, advisory board member Majora Carter, and college students from
the New York City area to discuss ideas that they believed would positively move the world forward.
Viewers submitted questions in real time via Facebook and Twitter (@Pepsi); content from the
brainstorm was available on Ustream, Facebook, and a new iPhone application.
In just 72 hours, the site reached the 1,000-idea submission limit for the first month, with at least
one submission from each state. More than 141,000 votes were cast in the first three days of voting. In
the second month of the program, it took only 16 hours to field 1,000 submissions. Pulchin
remembers the moment when the team realized that the program would be a success: “We were
worried that there would be too few ideas submitted. What if no one participates? What if no one
votes? But there were way more ideas than we could put up on the site.”

Social Media Programs
Given the Millennial target audience and the fact that the projects would be posted and the voting
would take place online, the team relied heavily on social media for its reach and impact. Irazabal
increased her digital advertising spend by 60% for 2010.24 Pepsi sponsored Social Media Week, an
industry conference on trends in social and mobile media, and solicited three influential bloggers to
compete for a $50,000 grant. Irazabal, Cooper, and other executives were interviewed by bloggers at
the event, which generated 50 million impressions on Twitter.
Consumers interacted with the project across social media platforms. They voted for ideas on the
main website, on Facebook, or via SMS text messaging. They were encouraged to “Like” the Pepsi
Refresh Project on Facebook and to use Twitter to generate publicity and solicit votes. A mobile
application allowed consumers to view ideas in their area and vote from their mobile phones. On the
website, winners were encouraged to blog about their efforts to increase awareness of their causes.
Soon, the site was receiving four to five million unique visitors each month. About half of those
registering on the site to submit ideas opted in to receive brand communications and coupons from
Pepsi. By March 2010, the project had earned Pepsi an additional 300,000 Facebook friends and was
generating 1,000 tweets per day. Public relations efforts yielded 6 to 12 media stories each day. The
amount of content generated by the program was staggering.
Shiv Singh, Pepsi’s head of digital, noted that the Refresh Everything website was generating
more content and traffic than many of the websites that Pepsi had traditionally pursued for
advertising buys:
We are now a media company in our own right. Rather than having our consumers on
someone else’s website, we have their traffic. Rather than spending hundreds of thousands of
dollars advertising Pepsi on a media company’s website, I can use that money to create content
for Refresh Everything that leads to deeper engagement and a stronger relationship—and
consumers take that content and let it travel.

8
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

512-018

Traditional Media Programs
PepsiCo was one of the largest advertising media buyers in the U.S., spending $136 million to
support its Trademark Pepsi brands in 2009.25 Through August 2010, Pepsi had spent $109 million
advertising the Pepsi Refresh Project.26 Media buys included television advertising on NBC, ABC,
Fox, MTV, Spike, and ESPN, and print advertising in People and Parade magazines.
Erin Matts, chief digital officer of OMD Digital, Pepsi’s media buying agency, explained the media
strategy: “The plan was to get people engaged early on to start a snowball effect as we reached
critical mass. Public relations and media placements helped, but we wanted to engage people who
would give the program the start it deserved.” Rather than buying advertising spots and filling them
with Pepsi ads, Pepsi co-produced integrated programming. MTV correspondent Su Chin Pak and
actor, comedian, and rapper Nick Cannon traveled around the country in a Pepsi Refresh bus to film
segments about grant winners. NBC’s Today Show featured three weeks of stories on idea submissions
the hosts were passionate about. Parade conducted a national poll on “What America Cares About”
with a cover feature on the results and featured a monthly “What Celebrities Care About” column
with a customized Refresh advertisement adjacent to the column. Director of media strategy Seth
Kaufman noted the advantages of this type of advertising: “Now I get the right eyeballs, they’re
engaged with my message, and they’re looking at branded content, not advertising. Integration into
The Today Show, where we’re part of the messaging in a genuine way, is 60% more effective than
running an ad.”
Using branded content put the brand’s messaging in the hands of its media partners. Kaufman
admitted that “losing control of our creative was very, very hard” but felt that giving up control
ultimately led to more effective media: “Although no one knows the Pepsi consumer like we do, no
one knows the MTV viewer like MTV does.”

Sports Marketing Programs
Pepsi also utilized its sports marketing assets. During the lead-up to the 2010 Super Bowl, New
Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees, New York Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez, and Dallas
Cowboys linebacker DeMarcus Ware submitted ideas for a $100,000 grant, and fans voted on
www.nfl.com. The effort generated 530,000 votes in five days. Brees, who later was the 2010 Super
Bowl’s most valuable player, was awarded the grant to support The Hope Lodge in New Orleans,
which provides rooms for cancer patients and their caregivers. The grant was awarded on the Friday
night before the Super Bowl at a party hosted by musical artist Rhianna, which generated over 376
million media impressions.
The process was repeated for other sports sponsorships. Major League Baseball players—
including stars like C.C. Sabathia, Johnny Damon, and Evan Longoria—submitted ideas. After 2.5
million votes were cast, the winning grant went to the Minnesota Twins to build a field for
wheelchairs for The Courage Center, a wheelchair softball team. The check was delivered during
Fox’s broadcast of the World Series. NASCAR drivers Dale Earnhardt, Jr., Jeff Gordon, and Jimmy
Johnson competed for a grant, as did athletes from the U.S. Men’s National Soccer Team during the
FIFA World Cup.

In-Store Programs
A more toned-down approach was used in retail stores where Pepsi products were sold. Pepsi’s 2liter bottles and 12-pack cartons were stickered with a Pepsi Refresh Project snipe, but Pepsi was
careful to distance the program from the purchase of a Pepsi product. Importantly, no Pepsi purchase
9
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

was required to participate. Irazabal explained that “we were purists in the way we presented the
project. The fear of being seen as inauthentic prevented us from pushing soda sales more.”
In fact, some people participating in the project, both submitters and voters, were not soda
drinkers, and some grant winners admitted not being partial to soft drinks.27 Cooper noted:
We wondered whether we should build in an advantage for people who are Pepsi
consumers. We decided not to do so, because we felt that the program should be as pure as
possible in its intent. Everyone knew that there would be some skepticism about the
program—this is Pepsi, and Pepsi’s in the business of selling beverages. If a critic wrote that
barely beneath the surface was the quid pro quo of driving sales, the criticism might override
the good intent.

Punting the Super Bowl
One of the biggest decisions surrounding the project was Pepsi’s choice to walk away from the
Super Bowl, after being one of its biggest advertisers for 23 years. Cooper described the reaction: “I
was surprised by the emotional response—people lost their minds. They were deeply attached to
Pepsi’s appearing in the Super Bowl, viewing it as part of the cultural experience of the game.”
The Super Bowl was a preeminent advertising arena, bringing in 100 million viewers anticipating
the debut of new advertising during the game. Thirty-second advertising spots cost $2.5 to $3 million,
and Pepsi had spent $143 million on Super Bowl advertising between 1999 and 2008, second only to
Anheuser-Busch; Coca-Cola spent $30.5 million during the same period.28 Although Pepsi did buy
traditional 30-second spots in key networks, the brand team also decided to co-produce integrated
programming. Pepsi had historically used the Super Bowl to launch new campaigns, and consumers
often rated Pepsi’s Super Bowl ads highly, extending the reach and impact of the ads in the following
weeks.
Irazabal explained the decision: “We didn’t feel the Super Bowl was the right platform for the
Pepsi Refresh Project. We probably sacrificed awareness, but I think we gained authenticity and
credibility.” Hobart continued, “It is an environment where people expect humor, and this project
didn’t lend itself to that. That said, Pepsi had a long legacy on the Super Bowl—it was hard to walk
away from that exposure, and we heard it from our bottlers.”
Third-party commentators, such as Marc Lucas of Kirshenbaum Bond Senecal & Partners,
applauded Pepsi’s decision: “I am talking to clients now who used to be scared to walk away from
million dollar TV ads, but that’s not the case anymore. On the flip side, I think it’s very bold to not be
in a place where you know you’re going to have an audience.”29 Others were more critical, such as
Jeremiah Owyang, an Altimeter Group partner: “The company alienated a key channel and missed
out on tying Pepsi Refresh to the most-watched television event in Western media. By not having any
in-game discussion on the advertisements, [Pepsi] was unable to use the Super Bowl as a catapult to
launch the campaign into the social sphere.”30
However, Pepsi was the second-most buzzed-about brand around the Super Bowl (Exhibit 5).31
Pepsi added 300,000 fans to its Facebook page during the Super Bowl period, while Coca-Cola, which
took advantage of Pepsi’s absence and ran multiple Super Bowl ads, added 390,000.32 Coca-Cola’s
chief marketing officer, Katie Bayne, said, “We feel the Super Bowl is one of those iconic moments
that helps Coke burnish its brand.”33 Others, like Pete Blackshaw of NM Incite, cautioned PepsiCo
not to underestimate the value of a paid ad versus impressions generated by social media: “Some

10
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

512-018

would argue that a 30-second commercial has potential to penetrate a lot more than a quick,
incidental reference on a blog post. A good Super Bowl commercial can create massive viral
multiples.”34

Analyzing the Results
Irazabal and her team spent the meeting analyzing the project’s results. Many were positive. By
the end of November 2010, 182,931 ideas had been submitted by people of all ages from all 50 states.
Over 57 million people had voted for an idea (Exhibits 6 and 7). The project had generated 3.24
billion media impressions, estimated to be worth some $66 million in earned media value. Paul
Massey of Weber Shandwick, Pepsi’s public relations agency, commented on the momentum:
We’ve worked in close contact with the grantees, who have been remarkable spokespeople
for the impact that they’ve had; we’ve coordinated with GOOD in setting up one-on-one
interviews for grantees with local media. That’s the PR machine behind the project—a steady
drumbeat of content that tells the story of how Pepsi is making an impact at the local level.
Prior to the project, Pepsi lagged behind Coke in Facebook fans, with 225,000 to Coke’s 3.5 million:
the project added 3 million Facebook fans and 53,000 Twitter followers. The project won the Titanium
Award at the Cannes Lions International Advertising Festival, the world’s biggest advertising
awards show. Forbes magazine named the program among the “best ever social media campaigns.”
The team was most excited about the brand health measures (Exhibit 8). An independent study
conducted by Edelman—the Edelman Good Purpose Study 2010—showed that Pepsi was the leading
brand that came to mind when consumers were asked to consider which brands placed as much or
more importance on supporting a good cause as they place on profits, ahead of Coke (at #4), Nike,
and Newman’s Own.35
The first month’s grant recipients reflected the diversity of causes funded (see Exhibit 9 for
examples). Mid-year, following a catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, Pepsi added a special
grant contest for ideas to help the Gulf. Submitted ideas included relocating endangered sea turtles
and setting up a camp for young musicians. Pepsi estimated that through November 2010, the project
had positively impacted some 73,000 people directly and an additional 29,000 people indirectly.
However, there were also troubling trends in the data. The average time spent on the Refresh
Everything website was low—between three and four minutes. The website was functioning well as a
voting engine, but its content was not keeping people engaged. In 2011, Singh felt that the team
needed to “treat the voting as a starting point—as the permission for deeper engagement. What we
see today is a consumer who comes to the site, looks at an idea, votes, and then jumps ship.”
In addition, the team was not sure that the program was attracting the right consumers—either
idea submitters or voters. Irazabal noted the preponderance of large non-profit organizations that
were submitting ideas and marshaling their older supporters to drive votes (Exhibit 10). By the end
of the first year, only $1.7 million had been given to 61 grantees under the age of 24.36
The project also garnered some negative press. One blogger asked, “What do Pepsi and Coke
actually sell? Soft drinks; liquid with a lot of sugar and no vitamins. And now they want to get
associated with health, planet, art and culture, food and shelter, neighborhoods, and education?
Using social media? I am very sorry, but I think there is a value clash somewhere.”

11
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

Finally, the most troubling numbers came from the field, as sales continued to slump: Pepsi-Cola’s
volume fell 4.8%, and Diet Pepsi’s fell 5.2% in 2010. Both Pepsi and Diet Pepsi lost market share,
while Coca-Cola eked out a 0.1 percentage-point gain.37 Singh remarked, “This is a tension point:
something that builds brand equity doesn’t translate into an immediate ROI. It translates into sales a
year later or a few years later. It’s a big brand bet and investment.” Irazabal described her thinking:
“The short-term pressures are very challenging—we all recognize that it would have been better if
the project had driven sales. But in the end, we want to do well by doing good. That’s where we need
to go in 2011: our programs need to be linked to sales in consumers’ minds.” Cooper felt that it was
“partially a leap of faith. If you believe that your brand health scores are headed in the right
direction, and that consumers are more engaged with the brand, then you expect more purchasing
from your current consumers or an influx of new consumers—hopefully brand switchers.”
Given all of the data in front of them, the team struggled with how to define success. Cooper tried
to stay focused on the long term: “We are building more relationships and we have more points of
contact with our consumers. We also measure activity within social media and the response has been
tremendous. Ultimately, allowing people to do good through our platform will serve us at the retail
shelf. People who are at the market, torn between our competitors and us—this will tilt purchasing in
our favor because of how we’re giving back and adding value to people’s lives.”

Looking Ahead
As the team looked ahead to 2011, they had several pressing decisions to make. The first was
whether to continue to support the Pepsi Refresh Project from the brand marketing budget. Unlike
PepsiCo’s other philanthropic endeavors that were funded by the PepsiCo Foundation—such as
charitable contributions to nonprofit causes including Save the Children and the Safe Water
Network—the project was funded using dollars earmarked for Trademark Pepsi brand marketing.
The team wondered whether the project was the most effective way to drive sales. Irazabal struggled
with the optimal way to link the program to the brand: “I think that’s still the biggest challenge—
making sure that consumers know that it’s the brand, not the Pepsi corporation. How can we
continue to communicate that Pepsi, the cola, is actually helping to refresh the world?”
Cooper worried that the singular focus left other aspects of the brand’s equity at risk:
The aspect that concerned me most was that it was all consuming. The Pepsi brand meant
many different things over time. When Refresh became the single idea for 2010, we risked
brand equity in other areas. At the same time, the perception of what the Pepsi brand could be
had narrowed—it became a cola. Refresh was a disruptive move that, if sustained long enough,
would encourage people to think of Pepsi in a broader way.
Hobart worried that the program lacked some key elements of the brand’s personality: “By
definition, the project is heavy. The stories on the website can make you shed tears. How can we
bring in Pepsi’s DNA, which is all about fun and optimism and the spirit of youth?”

12
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

512-018

Second, if the team decided to move ahead with the program, they needed to make changes.
Irazabal explained: “Millennials are the people who engage most with the program once they are
aware of it, but they are also the people that drink less soda. Only 12% of Trademark Pepsi drinkers
are Millennials, but 38% of Pepsi Refresh folks are Millennials. If, at some point, they’re going to
choose a cola, we want them to choose Pepsi.” Irazabal also worried about sustaining consumers’
interest in the program for another year. One idea that the team was considering was adding “power
voting,” where Pepsi drinkers could garner up to 100 extra votes from codes hidden under the caps
of Pepsi products. Another idea was changing the grant categories and/or grant amounts.
As the team debated, Pepsi’s critics weighed in. Professor Mark Ritson claimed, “An overt focus
on social media had blinded Pepsi to the realities of its market. It was not marketing a movement, it
was marketing cola. Marketing at Pepsi should have never been about conversations or dialogue—it
should have been about reminding consumers what Pepsi stands for and encouraging them to go buy
it.”38 Rance Crain, editor of Advertising Age, was most direct: “The bigger question is whether any
marketer should put all of its eggs in the do-good basket. It’s risky to build your entire campaign
around a cause that doesn’t give any tangible reasons for consuming your product. There’s also the
danger that consumers could conceivably tire of causes or decide that Pepsi, a marketer long known
for its ability to amuse and entertain, is taking itself too seriously. After all, we’re talking about fizzy
soda water here.”39

13
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

263.3

298.3

503.0

1,371.8

278.7

523.1

1,358.1

3,124.1

303.1

864.1

2,028.1

4,383.8

2000

282.1

533.6

1,320.1

3,163.5

320.2

878.8

1,987.5

4,375.9

2001

287.8

552.3

1,267.3

3,170.1

435.9

905.2

1,947.8

4,468.1

2002

293.4

586.0

1,210.3

3,227.7

432.4

950.5

1,889.4

4,459.8

2003

279.8

625.0

1,179.5

3,246.1

441.5

998.0

1,832.7

4,414.8

2004

296.7

613.1

1,141.8

3,207.8

429.9

999.0

1,796.0

4,408.4

2005

271.0

607.0

1,113.2

3,167.5

357.4

998.0

1,760.1

4,357.5

2006

594.9

1,059.8

3,082.8

317.5

990.0

1,707.3

4,241.1

2007

214.6

21.8

550.3

990.9

2,964.3

286.5

960.3

1,664.6

4,107.6

2008

199.2

Source:

Casewriters, compiled from data contained in Fact Book: Statistical Yearbook of Non-Alcoholic Beverages (2010), assembled by the editorial staff of Beverage Digest, 15th ed. (Bedford Hills, NY:
Beverage Digest).

Pepsi Lime, Pepsi Summer Mix, Pepsi Vanilla, Diet Pepsi Twist, Pepsi Twist.

20.4

525.5

936.4

2,815.3

265.7

936.3

1,598.0

3,947.0

b Includes Wild Cherry Pepsi (Reg/Diet), Caffeine Free Diet Pepsi, Caffeine Free Pepsi, Pepsi One, Pepsi Throwback, Diet Pepsi Lime, Diet Pepsi Vanilla, Pepsi Natural, Pepsi NFL, Diet Pepsi Jazz,

Vanilla Coke Zero, Diet Coke Black Cherry Vanilla, Coke Black Cherry Vanilla, Coke Blak, Coke with Lime, Coke C2, Diet Coke with Lemon, Diet Vanilla Coke, Coca-Cola II.

-14-

2009 (est.)

a Includes Coke Zero, Caffeine Free Diet Coke, Cherry Coke, Caffeine Free Coke, Cherry Coke Zero, Diet Coke with Lime, Vanilla Coke, Diet Cherry Coke, Diet Coke with Splenda, Diet Coke Plus,

211.5

529.7

1,399.8

3,119.5

311.3

843.0

2,018.0

4,377.5

1999

15.0
205.1

524.5

1,391.5

3,100.2

314.5

851.8

2,037.5

4,399.5

1998

237.3

193.8

529.8

1,384.6

2,965.7

307.6

819.0

1,978.2

4,208.6

1997

Other Pepsi Variantsb

521.4

Diet Pepsi

2,880.6

312.3

811.4

1,929.2

4,005.1

1996

Pepsi MAX

1,344.3

Pepsi-Cola

315.1

2,770.7

Total PepsiCo

Other Coke

Variantsa

793.0

1,868.6

Coke

Diet Coke

3,798.0

1995

Soft Drink Case Sales by Company and Brand (192-Ounce Cases, in Millions)

Total Coca-Cola Company

Exhibit 1

512-018

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.

This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

6.9

1.0

5.0

1.7

1.3

Tea

Sports Drinks

Powdered Drinks

Wine

Distilled Spirits

Source:

29.2

1.3

1.7

4.8

1.2

7.1

9.0

23.3

9.6

23.0

22.4

50.0

1994

31.0

1.2

1.8

4.5

1.3

6.8

8.9

21.3

10.1

22.8

21.9

50.9

1995

30.3

1.2

1.8

4.2

1.5

6.9

9.0

20.2

11.0

22.7

21.8

52.0

1996

30.0

1.2

1.9

4.0

1.7

6.9

9.0

19.4

11.3

22.3

21.7

53.0

1997

29.8

1.2

1.9

3.7

1.9

6.9

9.5

18.0

11.8

22.0

21.8

54.0

1998

30.7

1.2

1.9

3.4

2.1

7.0

9.4

17.2

12.6

21.7

21.9

53.6

1999

31.6

1.2

1.9

3.0

2.2

7.0

9.5

16.8

13.2

21.3

21.8

53.0

2000

31.8

1.3

2.0

2.7

2.3

7.0

9.0

16.9

14.5

20.7

21.7

52.6

2001

31.1

1.3

2.0

2.4

2.6

7.0

8.9

16.8

15.4

20.7

21.8

52.5

2002

30.3

1.3

2.1

2.5

3.0

7.0

8.5

16.7

16.6

20.5

21.7

52.3

2003

29.0

1.3

2.1

2.6

3.5

7.0

8.6

16.6

17.7

20.2

21.6

52.3

2004

27.6

1.4

2.2

2.6

4.2

7.0

8.2

16.4

19.5

20.3

21.4

51.7

2005

26.3

1.4

2.3

2.4

4.7

7.0

8.3

16.2

21.0

20.0

21.9

51.0

2006

24.8

1.4

2.5

2.2

4.9

7.1

8.1

16.0

22.5

21.7

22.0

49.3

2007

28.9

1.4

2.6

2.3

4.6

7.3

7.6

15.9

21.4

21.4

21.7

47.4

2008

31.8

1.4

2.6

2.4

4.0

7.3

8.1

15.8

20.6

21.5

21.0

46.0

2009

-15-

Casewriters, compiled from data contained in Fact Book: Statistical Yearbook of Non-Alcoholic Beverages (2010), assembled by the editorial staff of Beverage Digest, 15th ed. (Bedford Hills, NY:
Beverage Digest).

All Others

29.8

8.8

Juices

Tap Water/ Hybrids/

8.7

25.2

23.2

Milk

Coffee

22.6

Beer

Bottled Water

48.3

1993

U.S. Liquid Consumption Trends (Gallons per Person per Year)

Soft Drinks

Exhibit 2

512-018

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.

This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

Exhibit 3

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

Pepsi Refresh Project Grant Categories 2010

Each month in 2010, Pepsi awarded $1.3 million in grants ranging
from $5,000 to $250,000 to bring 32 great ideas to life in communities
across the nation. The grants were given in the following categories
(totals are for all 12 grant cycles):

Category
Education
Health
Neighborhoods
Arts & Culture
Food & Shelter
The Planet
Do Good for the Gulf
TOTAL

# of Grants
104
77
89
37
48
29
32
416

Grant Total
$4,230,000
$5,360,000
$2,605,000
$1,165,000
$1,250,000
$ 990,000
$1,300,000
$16,900,000

Grant Level
$5,000
$25,000
$50,000
$250,000
TOTAL

# of Grants
130
130
130
26
416

Grant Total
$ 650,000
$3,250,000
$6,500,000
$6,495,000
$16,900,000

Source: Company documents.

16
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

Company documents.
Source:

Exhibit 4

Sample Launch Promotional Materials

512-018

-17-

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.

This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

Exhibit 5

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

Super Bowl 2010 Advertiser Buzz Volume

Source: Company documents.
Note: Buzz volume is depicted as a percentage of total Super Bowl marketing messages.

18
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

1:22
1.8
19,773
33.1%

Average time spent per visit
Page views per visit
New visits
New visits (%)

n/a
n/a
n/a

Total Votes
Facebook App Votes
Shares

Source: Company documents.

Posted
Flagged

Comments

UGC

n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a

PCNA logins
Facebook Connect logins

Logins

n/a
n/a

PCNA registrations – Light
PCNA registrations – Total

Registrations

Site Engagement

21,612
59,675
n/a
n/a

Key Metrics

Site visitors (monthly uniques)
Site visits
Idea submissions
Ideas started

Dec

n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a
n/a

n/a
n/a

n/a
5,668

2:46
3.4
298,001
78.7%

307,503
378,575
992
4,592

Jan

n/a
n/a

1,555,455
n/a
90,385

881,052
325,226

268,781
305,367

3:35
3.3
1,598,967
60.6%

1,630,955
2,640,451
1,014
36,586

Feb

3,589
129

2,905,991
16,604
119,989

1,393,088
336,979

309,615
333,847

3:53
3.7
1,394,819
51.6%

1,496,306
2,700,621
1,028
24,232

Mar
Apr

114,815
2,222

5,351,008
45,084
230,473

2,460,201
402,108

560,991
582,228

3:48
3.8
1,894,275
43.3%

2,010,865
4,376,951
1,312
21,237

Refresh Everything Website Statistics (as of November 2010)

General Site Statistics

Exhibit 6

May

248,380
5,634

12,740,151
96,870
188,118

3,662,093
347,939

710,590
732,465

3:39
4.3
2,089,789
43.1%

2,282,464
4,847,786
1,100
21,875

Jun

266,981
9,857

8,242,584
115,099
189,838

2,470,140
343,558

376,569
392,954

4:00
4.1
1,643,053
42.7%

1,833,275
3,854,198
1,005
16,385

Jul
Aug
2,320,615
4,133,086
1,025
8,812

Sep
1,818,886
3,366,577
1,000
8,254

Oct
1,289,325
2,707,460
1,002
7,541

Nov
2,030,581
3,949,115
1,001
6,247

n/a
36,036,144
12,142
182,931

YTD

263,459
3,657

6,753,379
142,724
137,810

1,756,706
339,721

283,467
297,052

303,189
5,204

2,330,741
250,957
199,412

2,077,523
401,849

462,877
471,689

225,872
5,924

5,256,952
442,535
114,789

1,706,848
271,639

345,931
354,185

215,635
2,346

5,317,437
714,664
147,801

1,599,009
343,246

333,666
341,207

403,378
5,726

6,844,723
486,186
199,220

1,575,083
449,582

446,069
452,316

2,045,298
40,699

57,298,421
2,310,723
1,617,835

19,581,743
3,561,847

4,098,556
4,268,978

4:03
4:02
3:52
4:13
3:30
n/a
4.2
3.6
3.6
4.1
3.8
n/a
1,415,385 2,138,288 1,642,128 1,134,356 1,824,355 17,093,189
46.9%
51.9%
48.9%
41.9%
46.2%
47.4%

1,596,580
3,021,649
1,663
27,170

-19-

255,214
5,071

5,729,842
256,747
161,784

1,958,174
356,185

409,856
426,331

3:50
3.9
1,552,129
47.4%

1,692,487
3,270,588
1,104
16,630

2010 Monthly Avg.

512-018

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.

This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

Exhibit 7

Pepsi Refresh Project Ideas Generated and Voting Statistics

Weekly Visits
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
0
01
/2
19
1/

10
20
2/
2/

0
01
/2
16
2/

10
20
2/
3/

0
01
/2
16
3/

0
01
/2
30
3/

0
01
/2
13
4/

0
01
/2
27
4/

0
01
/2
11
5/

0
01
/2
25
5/

10
20
8/
6/

0
01
/2
22
6/

10
20
6/
7/

0
01
/2
20
7/

10
20
3/
8/

0
01
/2
17
8/

0
01
/2
31
8/

0
01
/2
14
9/

0
10
10
01
20
20
/2
2/
6/
28
/1
/2
9/
10
10

0
01
/2
16
3/

0
01
/2
30
3/

0
01
/2
13
4/

0
01
/2
27
4/

0
01
/2
11
5/

0
01
/2
25
5/

10
20
8/
6/

0
01
/2
22
6/

10
20
6/
7/

0
01
/2
20
7/

10
20
3/
8/

0
01
/2
17
8/

0
01
/2
31
8/

0
01
/2
14
9/

0
10
10
01
20
20
/2
2/
6/
28
/1
/2
9/
10
10

0
01
/2
27
4/

0
01
/2
11
5/

0
01
/2
25
5/

10
20
8/
6/

0
01
/2
22
6/

10
20
6/
7/

0
01
/2
20
7/

10
20
3/
8/

0
01
/2
17
8/

0
01
/2
31
8/

0
01
/2
14
9/

0
10
10
01
20
20
/2
2/
6/
28
/1
/2
9/
10
10

Weekly Votes
4,500,000
4,000,000
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
0
01
/2
19
1/

10
20
2/
2/

0
01
/2
16
2/

10
20
2/
3/

Weekly Ideas Started
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
0
01
/2
19
1/

10
20
2/
2/

0
01
/2
16
2/

10
20
2/
3/

0
01
/2
16
3/

0
01
/2
30
3/

0
01
/2
13
4/

Source: Company documents.

20
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

Exhibit 8

512-018

Pepsi Refresh Project Awareness and Brand Impact

Pepsi Refresh Project Metrics
Awareness of Program
Correct Knowledge of Program

38%
22%

Changes since the launch of the program
Purchase Intent
Awareness that Pepsi is involved in communities
Awareness that Pepsi is a brand that does good in the world

+4%
+6%
+7%

Brand Health Metric
Consideration to buy
Pepsi is a brand I desire
Pepsi tastes better than others
Pepsi is a brand for someone like me
Pepsi offers the comfort of a favorite brand
Pepsi is high quality

Those not aware of the
Pepsi Refresh Project
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline

Those aware of the
Pepsi Refresh Project
+10 points
+11 points
+11 points
+15 points
+11 points
+12 points

Source: Company documents.

21
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

Exhibit 9

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

Sample Pepsi Refresh Project Grantees (through November 2010)

Grantee
American Legion of Indianapolis, IN

Grant
Amount
$250,000

Cause
Provide comfort items for U.S. military
troops recovering from wounds.

Economic Empowerment Initiative of
Atlanta, GA

$50,000

Provide financial literacy seminars for
high school and college students.

Frank Broulliet Elementary School
PTA, Puyallup, WA

$50,000

Complete a community playground.

All-Ages Music, Seattle, WA

$50,000

Increase access to all-ages music in
underserved areas.

The Belleville Farmer’s Market, IL

$25,000

Grow fresh produce to help fight
childhood obesity in Southern Illinois
schools.

GreenShields, Highland Park, IL

$25,000

Make school buses more energy efficient.

Glenmont Elementary School,
Delmar, NY

$25,000

Build its community through swing
dance.

The Sparkle Effect

$25,000

Help high school kids form cheerleading
squads made up of special needs
students.

Because We Are Sisters

$5,000

Support seven families in need as they
prepare for the arrival of a baby.

Source: Company documents.

22
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

Exhibit 10

512-018

Pepsi Refresh Project Voters and Grantees (through November 2010)

Voter Breakdown

Number of Votes (Millions)

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Boomers Gen Xers Millenials
(41-60)
(28-40)
(17-27)

61+

13-16

Note: Does not include votes for independent partner programs (e.g., NFL, MLB, etc.).

Grantee Breakdown

Grantee Type

Individuals
$5,000
$25,000
$50,000
$250,000

Non-Profits

Businesses

0

50

100

150

200

250

Number of Grants
Source:

Company documents.

23
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
512-018

The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

Endnotes
1

Mike Esterl, “Pepsi Thirsty for a Comeback,” Wall Street Journal, March 18, 2011, p. B5.

2

Natalie Zmuda, “How Pepsi Blinked, Fell Behind Coke,” Advertising Age, March 21, 2011.

3

Alan Rappeport, “Pepsi Chief Faces Challenge of Putting Fizz Back into Brand,” Financial Times, March 21,
2011, p. 19.
4 Interbrand Best Global Brands, http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-global-brands/best-global-brands2008/best-global-brands-2010.aspx, accessed on June 28, 2011.
5

Frank Cooper, “Optimism We Can Believe In,” Huffington Post, December 29, 2008.

6 Ekaterina Belan, “Ana Maria Irazabal, Marketing Director for Pepsi in the U.S.: ‘Pepsi Believes in Optimism
and the Power of People,’” PopSop, May 10, 2011.
7

Interbrand Best Global Brands, http://issuu.com/interbrand/docs/bgb_report_us_version? mode=a_p,
accessed on June 28, 2011.
8F

15th

act Book: Statistical Yearbook of Non-Alcoholic Beverages, assembled by the editorial staff of Beverage Digest,
ed. (Bedford Hills, NY: Beverage Digest).

9

Esterl, “Pepsi Thirsty for a Comeback.”

10

Valerie Bauerlein, “U.S. Soda Sales Fall Again, But At Slower Pace,” Wall Street Journal, March 25, 2010,

p. B4.
11 “Pepsi’s Refresh Everything vs. Coke’s Live Positively: Which Soda Wins the War?” Huffington Post,
February 17, 2010.
12

John Kell, “Pepsi, Coke Back Calorie Labeling,” Wall Street Journal, February 10, 2010, p. B3.

13

William Neuman, “Save the Children Breaks with Soda Tax Effort,” New York Times, December 14, 2010.

14

Janet Adamy, “White House Obesity Plan Mixes Carrots with Sticks,” Wall Street Journal, May 12, 2010,

p. A7.
15

Kell, “Pepsi, Coke Back Calorie Labeling.”

16

Associated Press, “Pepsi Says No to Soda Sales at Schools,” Wall Street Journal, March 17, 2010, p. D3.

17

Rappeport, “Pepsi Chief Faces Challenge.”

18

“Pepsi’s Refresh Everything vs. Coke’s Live Positively.”

19

Mark Dolliver, “What the 18-25’s Believe,” AdWeek Media, October 25, 2010, p. 22.

20

Ibid.

21

Elaine Wong, “Pepsi’s Ana Maria Irazabal: Pepsi’s Refresh Project Drives Social Buzz,” AdWeek, June 9,

2010.
22

Natalie Zmuda, “Who are the Big Pepsi Refresh Winners? Local Bottlers and Community Groups,”
Advertising Age, November 1, 2010.
23 Valerie Bauerlein, “Pepsi Hits ‘Refresh’ on Donor Projects: Company Will Give More Small Grants,
Eliminate Controversial Health and Environmental Categories,” Wall Street Journal, January 31, 2011, p. B4.
24

Suzanne Vranica, “Pepsi Benches its Drinks—Beverages Will Snap Long Streak by Sitting Out Super
Bowl,” Wall Street Journal, December 17, 2009, p. B11.

24
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.

For the exclusive use of E. Abdulqader, 2016.
The Pepsi Refresh Project: A Thirst for Change

25

Zmuda, “Who are the Big Pepsi Refresh Winners?”

26

Ibid.

27

Bauerlein, “Pepsi Hits ‘Refresh’ on Donor Projects.”

512-018

28

Jeremiah McWilliams, “Coke Bubbly About Super Bowl Surge: Rival PepsiCo’s Ads Will Highlight Snacks
from Frito-Lay, not Beverages,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, January 28, 2010, p. A1.
29

Natalie Zmuda and Kunur Patel, “Pass or Fail, Pepsi’s Refresh will be a Case for Marketing Textbooks,”
Advertising Age 81, no. 6 (2010): 1.
30

Jeremiah Owyang, “Super Bowl: A Missed Opportunity for Pepsi,” Forbes.com, February 9, 2010.

31

Zmuda and Patel, “Pass or Fail.”

32

Owyang, “Super Bowl.”

33

McWilliams, “Coke Bubbly About Super Bowl Surge.”

34

Zmuda, “Who are the Big Pepsi Refresh Winners?”

35

Dale Buss, “Is Pepsi Refresh Distracting PepsiCo from the Cola Wars?” BrandChannel, March 17, 2011.

36

Ashwini Gangal, “TBWA’s Laurie Coots Reveals Findings of ‘Social Activism 2.0,’” AFAQIN, April 6, 2011.

37

Esterl, “Pepsi Thirsty for a Comeback.”

38

Mark Ritson, “When It Comes to Social Media, Coke Is It!” Marketing Week, April 7, 2011, p. 58.

39 Rance Crain, “Just How Influential is Your Social-Media Program if it Isn’t Helping to Sell Product?”
Advertising Age, January 17, 2011, p. 14.

25
This document is authorized for use only by Eman Abdulqader in Strategic Marketing Spring 2016 taught by Mark Parker, Niagara University from January 2016 to July 2016.