In tech a customer with an annual contact value of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars will get a dedicated team of sales reps, account mangers, customer support, solutions architects, and definitely an executive point of contact. I'm sure the McDonald's-Coca Cola partnership is worth orders of magnitude more than that.
That's usually not "a customer", it's either THE customer, or at least a strategic partner with which the company roadmap is discussed. I'm think bounds like Intel and Microsoft, or Apple and Foxconn.
Is the correction approach best, here? Of course at most companies that’s a ton of revenue! I can confirm at Google 10-100M yearly spend didn’t get you roadmap insight. Can’t parse second half of the comment, (bounds = boards, maybe?) but if we’re talking companies of that size, 10M-100M is almost assuredly _not_ getting you a front row seat to R&D.
>>In tech a customer with an annual contact value of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars will get a dedicated team of sales reps
In many Indian outsourcing firms, they permanently place a 'program manager' at big client's offices. Like for eg- Bank of America.
These managers also get a unlimited American express card, to spend on lunches, outings etc. You are expected to build 'relationships' so that when a project is needed to be won, you are just a call away from making it happen.
This is because a good percentage of the sales, projects, staffing, profits come from these big clients.
Whenever I see "President" as a corporate title, I think "over inflated sales title to make clients feel like they are being taken serious and talking to actual leadership". I've seen "presidents" reporting to "vice-presidents"!
Whether the title is president, EVP, or SVP, I find it almost shocking that people here are surprised that McDonalds has a very senior person in charge of the Coca-Cola relationship. Yes, title inflation happens at a lot of companies, but I'm willing to cut a lot of slack when you get to $1B revenue or leading responsibility for a major product area.
Yes, I flipped it. Duh. Obviously the two companies are important partners. I imagine there is a pretty senior person on the McDonalds side who has primary responsibility for the partnership.
Also it says his org deals with 100 markets globally. McDonalds isn't the same company in every country, it's basically dealing with 100 different clients with vastly disparate needs, regulations, supply chains etc.
Yea, after the syrup is remixed it's estimated that McD's sells hundreds of millions of gallons of Coke products a year. It's def something you have a dedicated executive team to make sure everything is working smoothly.
I read that the syrup is stored in these special tanks, and when it's mixed with the carbonated water, it comes out as the best tasting, freshest Coca-Cola you can get. It's always tasted amazing at McDonald's. Almost like bottled Coke.
Supposedly McDonald’s is the only business that gets the syrup distributed in metal kegs. Everyone else gets the plastic bags, which could lead to some taste difference.
I am pretty sure I could blind taste test canned vs bottled soda.
Definitely depends on the store in my experience (Aus), I think some may not maintain their machines as frequently/well, or maybe even deliberately watered down. Glass bottle Coke is the best coke imo.
I assume no sarcasm either whether or not you completely approve of the business. There must be a very significant team associated with a global business at that scale.
To go on a tangent: lots of people even like to think back nostalgically to the time when bankers were at the golf course by 3pm. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-6-3_Rule
(I don't agree, but it's a popular enough sentiment.)
This is a common convention in the financial sector and several others but not necessarily all industries. Companies that produce actual goods often have way less title inflation than others.
McDonalds has a franchise model and is in 100 markets. There are several thousand individually owned companies with various groupings of regional owners each of which needs to have delivery, logistics, costing negotiated and setup. There are also the compliance and trade aspects of being in basically every country.
Coke is a probably 90% margin product for macdonalds. Not sure i believe the 1B number. It's probably higher if you consider all the various coke products including and the juice that they sell.
Pepsi actually owns taco bell, burger king, etc which are direct competition. So the partnership with McDonalds is strategic.
Making sure coke gets sold at McDonald's is likely a huge driver of revenue.
They're in it together. McDonald's probably also wants Coke to tweak it's formula every now and then to induce hunger. They're trying to create the opposite of a GLP-1.
I worked McD in the 80s and the Coke syrup was in gallon jugs at ambient temp, then dumped into a large stainless steel holding tank at pressure. This was before bag-in-box. I've never heard of the cold temperature thing before.
My belief is that they just consume so much of it so fast that there's no time for the syrup to alter.
Not surprising. The old wisdom that "Coke tastes better at McDonald's" endures, and the strategic partnership is mutually beneficial for both companies.
I went to Bentonville, Arkansas a few years ago. You'll see every major consumer packaged good company represented in the skyscrapers there, because Walmart is hq'd there. They want to have people close to Walmart, since Walmart is always a big part of their sales
... but yes, I'm shocked more businesses don't try to put addictive substances into their food. Software learned from the food industry bliss point to try to use KPIs for 'engagement' aka addictiveness. Not trying to be holier than thou etc. but its some interesting stuff to consider; at the end of the day a lot of folks are trying to scramble to the top of their respective pile, and addiction is great driver of sales (gambling, food, video games, etc).
I hadn't really considered addiction as the ultimate form of marketing, but maybe it is?
In tech a customer with an annual contact value of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars will get a dedicated team of sales reps, account mangers, customer support, solutions architects, and definitely an executive point of contact. I'm sure the McDonald's-Coca Cola partnership is worth orders of magnitude more than that.
> tens to hundreds of millions of dollars
That's usually not "a customer", it's either THE customer, or at least a strategic partner with which the company roadmap is discussed. I'm think bounds like Intel and Microsoft, or Apple and Foxconn.
Is the correction approach best, here? Of course at most companies that’s a ton of revenue! I can confirm at Google 10-100M yearly spend didn’t get you roadmap insight. Can’t parse second half of the comment, (bounds = boards, maybe?) but if we’re talking companies of that size, 10M-100M is almost assuredly _not_ getting you a front row seat to R&D.
You made me realize I am too broke to properly understand the scale of "hundreds of millions". I took it as an order of magnitude higher.
You're right that mere millions won't get you that much love from Google.
>>In tech a customer with an annual contact value of tens to hundreds of millions of dollars will get a dedicated team of sales reps
In many Indian outsourcing firms, they permanently place a 'program manager' at big client's offices. Like for eg- Bank of America.
These managers also get a unlimited American express card, to spend on lunches, outings etc. You are expected to build 'relationships' so that when a project is needed to be won, you are just a call away from making it happen.
This is because a good percentage of the sales, projects, staffing, profits come from these big clients.
Whenever I see "President" as a corporate title, I think "over inflated sales title to make clients feel like they are being taken serious and talking to actual leadership". I've seen "presidents" reporting to "vice-presidents"!
googled it... some estimates put mcdonalds coca cola sales at over $1b usd a year
so maybe this one isnt so inflated lol
Whether the title is president, EVP, or SVP, I find it almost shocking that people here are surprised that McDonalds has a very senior person in charge of the Coca-Cola relationship. Yes, title inflation happens at a lot of companies, but I'm willing to cut a lot of slack when you get to $1B revenue or leading responsibility for a major product area.
This guy works for Coke though right, you might have this backwards?
Yes, I flipped it. Duh. Obviously the two companies are important partners. I imagine there is a pretty senior person on the McDonalds side who has primary responsibility for the partnership.
Also it says his org deals with 100 markets globally. McDonalds isn't the same company in every country, it's basically dealing with 100 different clients with vastly disparate needs, regulations, supply chains etc.
Yea, after the syrup is remixed it's estimated that McD's sells hundreds of millions of gallons of Coke products a year. It's def something you have a dedicated executive team to make sure everything is working smoothly.
I read that the syrup is stored in these special tanks, and when it's mixed with the carbonated water, it comes out as the best tasting, freshest Coca-Cola you can get. It's always tasted amazing at McDonald's. Almost like bottled Coke.
In my experience ever since the coke started coming out of the same nozzle as every other soda it has tasted like ass.
I'd guess every soda gun at every bar in the world would work the same?
Supposedly McDonald’s is the only business that gets the syrup distributed in metal kegs. Everyone else gets the plastic bags, which could lead to some taste difference.
I am pretty sure I could blind taste test canned vs bottled soda.
Definitely depends on the store in my experience (Aus), I think some may not maintain their machines as frequently/well, or maybe even deliberately watered down. Glass bottle Coke is the best coke imo.
(never mind, think I read the comment wrong!)
I don't think there was any sarcasm there.
I assume no sarcasm either whether or not you completely approve of the business. There must be a very significant team associated with a global business at that scale.
What's the opposite of Poe's law?
…to get everyone on time to the golf course.
What's your hobby, and why is it better than theirs?
To go on a tangent: lots of people even like to think back nostalgically to the time when bankers were at the golf course by 3pm. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-6-3_Rule
(I don't agree, but it's a popular enough sentiment.)
This is a common convention in the financial sector and several others but not necessarily all industries. Companies that produce actual goods often have way less title inflation than others.
Very large customers will self-justify dedicated org charts to protect the revenue they bring in.
It’s layers, like an ogre. Vice presidents with multiple layers under them.
McDonalds has a franchise model and is in 100 markets. There are several thousand individually owned companies with various groupings of regional owners each of which needs to have delivery, logistics, costing negotiated and setup. There are also the compliance and trade aspects of being in basically every country.
Coke is a probably 90% margin product for macdonalds. Not sure i believe the 1B number. It's probably higher if you consider all the various coke products including and the juice that they sell.
Pepsi actually owns taco bell, burger king, etc which are direct competition. So the partnership with McDonalds is strategic.
It's easily worth having a top level exec.
At least in the US, Pepsi used to own Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, and one or two others but that spun into its own company years ago(called Yum).
Making sure coke gets sold at McDonald's is likely a huge driver of revenue.
They're in it together. McDonald's probably also wants Coke to tweak it's formula every now and then to induce hunger. They're trying to create the opposite of a GLP-1.
Doubt they ever mess around with the formula since the New Coke fiasco
I'm sure they mess around with it, they'll just never announce it.
Makes you wonder if there's a Coca-Cola gas chromatography standard out there. Would be an easy task for new students to run every year, right?
Coca-Cola already has different ingredients in different markets.
I'm guessing that whoever posted this recently listened to the Acquired podcast episode about Coca-Cola:
https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/coca-cola
Great podcast BTW, lots of good stuff in the archives.
EDIT: Someone beat me to the comment, but leaving my comment here for the link.
I did! The episode was great
I came here to note the same.
Coke has a separate division for each continent and one of those continents is McDonald’s.
https://youtu.be/GA_OYUHYYMA?si=B-EXCoGyr9JGq87n
Coke tastes different at McDonald’s because they keep the syrup cold from the factory to the restaurant.
Why? Because it prevents the syrup from fermenting.
I worked McD in the 80s and the Coke syrup was in gallon jugs at ambient temp, then dumped into a large stainless steel holding tank at pressure. This was before bag-in-box. I've never heard of the cold temperature thing before.
My belief is that they just consume so much of it so fast that there's no time for the syrup to alter.
Not surprising. The old wisdom that "Coke tastes better at McDonald's" endures, and the strategic partnership is mutually beneficial for both companies.
Yup! https://youtu.be/GA_OYUHYYMA?si=B-EXCoGyr9JGq87n
McDonald's has an executive focused on beverages... which bringing it full circle is primarily Coke products.
This is common with companies who support very large customers.
I've seen a job listing from Levi Strauss to handle Kohl's Department Stores, and I've met the person at Hershey's that is the director for Target.
I went to Bentonville, Arkansas a few years ago. You'll see every major consumer packaged good company represented in the skyscrapers there, because Walmart is hq'd there. They want to have people close to Walmart, since Walmart is always a big part of their sales
Just one?
Seems like this is the _President_ of the division, so sounds like there's a nontrivially-sized team to manage.
I'm assuming op just finished listening to Acquired's Coca Cola episode...
Guilty as charged!
And he's a Tech grad. Makes sense. Coke and Tech, two Atlanta institutions.
turns out selling caffeinated sugar water is a lucrative business.
something something addictive.
... but yes, I'm shocked more businesses don't try to put addictive substances into their food. Software learned from the food industry bliss point to try to use KPIs for 'engagement' aka addictiveness. Not trying to be holier than thou etc. but its some interesting stuff to consider; at the end of the day a lot of folks are trying to scramble to the top of their respective pile, and addiction is great driver of sales (gambling, food, video games, etc).
I hadn't really considered addiction as the ultimate form of marketing, but maybe it is?