Coca-Cola results beat estimates on price hikes, demand surge
The Sprite and Fanta maker also maintained its full-year organic revenue and comparable profit forecasts, unlike PepsiCo and Procter & Gamble that lowered their annual expectations as the global trade war triggered by steep US tariffs threatened to push up costs for American companies.
'(Coca-Cola's) operations are primarily local, however, it is subject to global trade dynamics which may impact certain components of the company's cost structure across its markets,' it said in a statement.
'At this time, the company expects the impact to be manageable.'
In the last quarter, Coca-Cola had underlined strategies to offer affordable packaging options and plans to use plastic bottles to mitigate the impact from 25 per cent tariffs on aluminum imports.
'This morning's print reaffirms our confidence in Coca-Cola's fundamentals despite a difficult macroeconomic backdrop,' RBC Capital analyst Nik Modi said.
BT in your inbox
Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox.
Sign Up
Sign Up
'Coca-Cola reiterated top- and bottom-line guidance, which should be viewed as favourable in this environment,' he said.
Shares of Coca-Cola rose 1.2 per cent in premarket trading.
Rival PepsiCo last week called out subdued consumer spending, but demand for Coca-Cola's slightly pricey products has so far remained stable, helping boost sales growth despite price hikes in highly inflationary markets such as Argentina and Latin America.
Its first-quarter overall average selling prices rose 5 per cent, while unit case volumes increased 2 per cent.
Still, volumes in its North America market fell 3 per cent, mostly due to a slowdown in demand for its legacy brands such as Coca-Cola and Sprite, as well as coffee.
In an attempt to boost demand in the region, the company has been betting on its portfolio of energy drinks and prebiotic sodas by launching new items such as Simply Pop.
Its quarterly revenue fell marginally to US$11.22 billion, compared with expectations of a 0.84 per cent fall to US$11.14 billion, according to data compiled by LSEG.
Excluding items, the company earned 73 US cents per share, compared with estimates of 71 US cents. REUTERS
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
International Business Times
25 minutes ago
- International Business Times
Trump Demands Drug Price Cuts in Letters to 17 Pharma Giants Summary
US President Donald Trump has sent letters to 17 major pharmaceutical companies demanding they cut prescription drug prices in the United States. The letters, released Thursday by the White House, outline his plan to match U.S. prices with those in other developed countries. President Donald Trump addessses the nation after U.S. bombed Iran's nuclear facilities X Trump recently signed an executive order requiring drugmakers to offer "most-favored-nation" pricing. This means companies must sell medications to U.S. patients at the lowest price they offer elsewhere. If drug companies do not comply, Trump warned the government could import cheaper alternatives or take other steps. Companies that received the letters include Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Sanofi, and AstraZeneca. Trump had previously criticized earlier proposals from the industry, saying they prioritized profits over patient care. He also demanded that drugmakers return any excess profits made by raising prices overseas to compensate American taxpayers. Shares of major pharmaceutical firms fell after the announcement. Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and Gilead each dropped by around 2%, while a broader index of drug stocks declined 3%. Trump also suggested a system where companies can sell drugs directly to patients, bypassing middlemen, but only if they agree to international pricing rules. The president gave drugmakers a deadline of September 29 to respond with binding commitments. Health experts are skeptical that companies will meet Trump's demands. Some analysts believe the proposals are unlikely to result in immediate price changes, describing them as more political pressure than enforceable policy. Still, several companies, including Pfizer and Novartis, said they are open to working with the administration. Pfizer confirmed its ongoing talks with Trump officials to improve access and affordability for U.S. patients. U.S. drug prices remain among the highest in the world, with patients often paying nearly three times more than those in other developed countries. Drugmakers argue that sharp price cuts could harm innovation, but Trump insists bold action is needed to protect Americans from high costs.
Straits Times
7 hours ago
- Straits Times
South Korea says it has no written pact on US trade deal
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox KIA Motors' vehicles are parked to be exported, at a port in Pyeongtaek, South Korea, July 31, 2025. REUTERS/Kim Hong-Ji SEOUL - There is no written agreement yet on a trade deal between South Korea and the United States announced by President Donald Trump this week, the Asian nation's trade minister said on Friday. The U.S. tariff on South Korean imports will be 15%, Trump said after meeting its ministers on Wednesday, down from a threatened 25%, but the U.S. gave scarce details, apart from social media posts by him and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Speaking to reporters as he arrived home from a visit to Washington, Trade Minister Yeo Han-koo said the two sides had an oral negotiation because of time constraints. "What we felt during this negotiation is that the U.S. trade environment is fundamentally changing. This is completely different from the first Trump term," Yeo said of the deal easing tension with a top-10 trading partner and key Asian ally. "I think we are entering a new normal era. So, although we have overcome this crisis, we cannot be relieved, because we do not know when we will face pressure from tariffs or non-tariff measures again." The White House, which issued factsheets on trade deals with Japan and the European Union a day after striking them, has not yet released a separate one on the pact with South Korea. Trump said South Korea would invest $350 billion in the United States in projects "owned and controlled by the United States" and selected by him. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Tech Reporting suspected advanced cyber attacks will provide a defence framework: Shanmugam Singapore Tanjong Katong sinkhole: Road will progressively open to motorists from Aug 2 noon World Trump modifies reciprocal tariffs ahead of deadline; rate on Singapore remains at 10% Business Singapore's US tariff rate stays at 10%, but the Republic is not out of the woods yet Singapore 5 women face capital charges after they were allegedly found with nearly 27kg of cocaine in S'pore Business Sumo Salad had valid insurance coverage for work injury claims: MOM Asia Australia to force Google to conduct age checks in world-first rules for search engines Singapore PM Wong to deliver National Day message on Aug 8 Lutnick said 90% of profits from the investments would go to the American people, while White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said they would go to the U.S. government to help repay debt. More discussions were necessary on the investment fund's profit structure, said Industry Minister Kim Jung-kwan, who returned with Yeo. Finance Minister Koo Yun-cheol, also one of the negotiation team, said detailed plans for the $350-billion investment would need be established. Wednesday's deal did not tackle most non-tariff barriers discussed during working-level talks, as well as security and foreign exchange aspects. REUTERS
Business Times
7 hours ago
- Business Times
When does capitalism become predatory?
WHEN is the last time you had an interaction with a company that made you question your sanity? Mine was with a long-term care insurance provider. My parents, both in their 80s, have paid for their policy for decades, so when my dad told me he had been struggling – unsuccessfully – to submit a claim, I figured I could easily resolve the problem. Instead, I found myself tangled in a Kafkaesque bureaucracy that was clearly designed to maximise a customer's frustration until they give up. Communications went into the void. Forms were repeatedly lost or rejected for absurd reasons – and even when the company allowed it had received them, it was months before they were accepted, much less processed. It was a textbook case of what I call predatory capitalism: companies' increasingly common willingness to harm customers in their pursuit of short-term profits. It is a notorious issue in the insurance industry (remember the wave of public rage directed at insurers after the killing of United HealthCare chief executive officer Brian Thompson?), but it appears elsewhere as well. Take private equity (PE)-owned nursing homes, for example; research has found that when a PE firm takes over, the quality of patient care decreases, as do quality ratings and patient mobility. Meanwhile, pain levels and short-term mortality increase. Beyond healthcare, consider online gambling – particularly sports betting. In addition to draining the savings of those who can least afford it, these companies have been accused of using sophisticated analytics to target people with gambling disorders. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up In fact, researchers say problem gamblers account for a hugely disproportionate fraction of online gambling revenue. A University of California San Diego study found that when online sportsbooks enter a state, Internet searches seeking help for gambling addiction go up by 61 per cent. Companies seek profits. That is their job. And nothing I have described here is illegal. But the law does not dictate the bounds of ethics – particularly when companies have vast political power to shape the law for their own benefit. When businesses take advantage of that legal leeway to harm their customers, people's faith in the system and in corporate leadership erodes. Some companies have always acted badly, but the public's attitude towards business has changed radically in a generation. Gallup polling shows that the percentage of Americans who have 'a great deal' or 'a lot' of confidence in big business has plunged from 30 per cent in 1990 to 16 per cent in 2024. Why are businesses now so routinely predatory? It is rooted in the 'financialisation' of the American economy. As the financial sector has gotten larger and more powerful, its expectations and demands have changed the behaviour of companies in all parts of the economy. That means more companies have made outperforming the market – and delivering the best short-term results – their highest priority. Businesses that want to improve their numbers to fulfil those demands have, at the highest level, two choices. They can create new customers, or they can squeeze more out of the ones they already have. The first is usually difficult. It requires innovation, inspiration or both. The leaders who can consistently do so become legends – think Steve Jobs or Henry Ford. The second is easier. A lot easier if you are willing to squeeze people who cannot push back, like senior citizens. Might customers who feel cheated or abused abandon you eventually? Sure, but by the time that happens, you would have banked the necessary profit – and the fallout will be your successor's problem. Aggregate that attitude across the entire economy and you get rising corporate profits, a booming stock market, low unemployment, and a population that increasingly feels like corporate leaders and capitalism see it as prey. Leaders who are shocked by Americans' distrust (and the attendant rise of politicians preaching socialist politics) might be well-advised to look at many of their fellow CEOs for an explanation. If they want to restore faith in the system, they can start with their own actions. Here are a few suggestions.
