Monster Beats Red Bull in USA | Marketing


Question 1: Account briefly for Monsters marketing strategies in general in USA today.

Question 2: Analyse how Monster grow bigger in US than Red Bull using the terminology of Chap. 18.

Question 3: Discuss Monsters strategy before and after the “Coca Cola Deal” was signed/issued and conclude to what extent the company has changed strategies.

Question 4: Discuss and evaluate Monsters use of the Product parameter.

Question 5: Based upon the development since January 2018 up till today conclude whether you believe the Joint Venture has been a success or not for Monster.

I have used quantitative data in the description part of my assignment. For the analytical and discussion part I have focused on using qualitative data.

I have used many sources to establish background knowledge, but also to get my information and argumentation for some of my points.

Of course, some of the sources might be wayed or biased towards Monster Energy’s favour because I got them from their own platform.

Most of my sources have been updated recently, or at least in the last couple of years. I have used many statistics from “Statista” as help to provide me with an overview of the market, but some of the statistics are a little hard to see the exact development of Monster and Red Bull on, because they look at each individual brand and not the entire corporations.

Source criticism also played a role when finding information and I tried to the best of my abilities to find articles and reports from known and legit firms.

And for the ones that might not be as known I have made sure that they seem factually correct by looking through their website and other pieces.

In this assignment I have favoured the Monster Energy brand drink and not some of their others energy drinks like Nos or Burn, because they are not as known, and they have completely different selling points.


The first model that I will use to analyse the marketing strategies for Monster Energy is Porter’s Generic Strategies model.

This model has a focus on the competitive advantage, being the price of the product, but also the competitive scope, which is how broad your market segment reaches.

Monster Energy would in my opinion be placed in the Cost Leadership segment because they look to gain a competitive advantage by lowering their costs.

Monster uses this strategy to target the largest proportion of energy-drink consumers, which is the middle class and they have done this well, because they have managed to place a high importance on the pricing factor.

They have focused on being very affordable and easily accessible, which has lead them to their high brand awareness and sales growth that they have experienced in the latest couple of years.

Monster have managed to keep their prices low due to the fact that they have lowered their production costs and maximised their supply chain efficiency. This is partly due to Coca-Cola’s entrance, because they have such strong distribution channels.

I would though also be able to argue that Monster Energy support their Cost leadership strategy with a differentiation approach as well.

We can see this by looking at the changes they made because of consumers growing health concerns. They now offer sugar free and many other varieties to satisfy their customers.

Another factor that suggests they might have used differentiation to support is that they have tried to differentiate themselves by making heavy investments into marketing, advertisements, and celebrity endorsements in the form of content marketing.

They have also differentiated themselves from competitors by being the first to sell 500ml cans and their 30+ stable of energy drinks.

Even though there are traces of some differentiation going on, the deciding strategy is definitely cost leadership.

Sådan får du adgang til hele dokumentet

Byt til nyt Upload en af dine opgaver og få adgang til denne opgave
  • Opgaven kvalitetstjekkes
  • Vent op til 1 time
  • 1 Download
  • Minimum 10 eller 12-tal
Premium 39 DKK pr måned Få adgang nu