search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
market report | Single-serve capsules


Figure 1: Major capsule system launches, 1989-2016


Source: AMI Consulting


Figure 2: Single-serve beverage capsules – market segmentation 2016


Proprietary 78%


Source: AMI Consulting


Moving into this century, the capsules format became more popularised and brands such as Dolce Gusto (Nestlé), Tassimo (Kraft, now Jacobs Douwe Egberts) and A Modo Mio (Lavazza) found successful, high margin niches.


The rise of compatibles However, the expiry of the Nespresso and Keurig design patents in 2012 brought about disruptive changes in the supply chain and created new opportunities for both end-users and converters to tap into this growing market segment. Albeit with some legal battles, this triggered the development of Nespresso-compatible brands and own label products that could rely on the installed base of Nespresso machines but offer more competitive retail pricing. Barriers to entry to the capsules segment became lower, both from a filling and moulding perspective. As a consequence, the capsule supply chain is fast


losing its oligopolistic nature and the former dominance of major suppliers is being challenged as the market expands. A more fragmented supply chain affects the overall profit pool and the way consumers make choices. Inevitably, that transformation has had an


84 COMPOUNDING WORLD | October 2016


Compatibles 22%


adverse effect on the premium image of the segment: the average price has fallen and the level of quality of some capsules on the market has declined (based on OTR and performance in brewing machines). The potential machine malfunction (or misuse) in correla- tion with compatibles also introduced some operational challenges for Nestlé and its machine partners, which increased service costs. Today, AMI Consulting estimates that plastic compatible capsules (across all systems) account for 22% of the global single-serve beverage capsule market by units. The Nespresso system is the biggest selling system


globally, with a volume of around 17bn units (including both aluminium capsules and plastic Nespresso compatibles). Interestingly, the North American market has not experienced an influx of Keurig imitations post-2012 comparable to Nespresso’s experience in Europe. The development of new compatible offerings is now in favour of the Nescafé Dolce Gusto system (another brand of Nestlé). While market penetration of Dolce Gusto compatibles is low at the moment, it is expected to grow strongly in the coming years.


Production technologies Thermoformed single-serve beverage capsules account for nearly three-quarters of global market demand for plastic capsules. This bias towards thermoformed formats has been created by the interlinked success of systems such as Keurig K-Cups in North America and Nescafé Dolce Gusto in Europe. Until recently, injection moulding technology was reserved for the Tassimo system and the conventional Italian espresso discs of the past. However, it seems to be becoming the technology of choice for newcomers to the market while for existing injection moulders of thin wall packaging such as as caps and closures a portfolio diversification into capsules is a logical strategic step given the high margin and high growth opportunity. Injection moulders such as Alpla, Global Closure Systems (now part of RPC


www.compoundingworld.com


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112