COFFEE SHOP:A STUDY ON THE FEASIBILITY OF PUTTING UP ANOTHER IN-CAMPUS COFFEE SHOP

CHAPTER 1:

BACKGROUND

TWO PURPOSES OF COFFEE BEFORE

THE CHANGING OF CUSTOMER NEEDS AND PREFERENCES LED TO DIVERSIFICATION OF COFFEE AS A BEVERAGE

COFFEE AS AN ICON FOR SOCIAL STATUS

RESEARCH PROBLEM

IS IT FEASIBLE TO PUT UP ANOTHER COFFEE SHOP IN THE ATENEO DE DAVAO COLLEGE CAMPUS?

The question addresses the following sub-problems: What are the students, faculty, and staff’s preferences

in terms of: Price Flavor Quality Service Variety

How much are they willing to spend for a cup of coffee?

How often do they drink coffee while in school? What types of coffee do they prefer to drink? Where do they prefer to take their coffee breaks – in

campus or outside campus coffee shops?

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Market Preference or Perception

Market Preference or Perception

Price

Flavor

Quality

Service

Variety

Price Range

Frequency of purchase

Type of Coffee preferred

Price

Flavor

Quality

Service

Variety

Price Range

Frequency of purchase

Type of Coffee preferred

Proposed Campus Coffee Shop

Proposed Campus Coffee Shop

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

FOCUS :Ateneo de Davao University College Campus

100 questionnaires will be distributed using the convenience sampling method 

GREATEST LIMITATION: time:the results may not effectively

represent the general population of the Ateneo de Davao University

:inability to use the random sampling method in the collection of data.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The present coffee shop The future coffee shop The students, faculty, and staff The researchers research will educate entrepreneurs

and marketers

DEFINITION OF TERMS

StimulantCondiment Economies of scopeProliferatedFeasibleAmarettoButterscotchVanilla

Espresso Cappuccino Macchiato Doppio Mocha Americano Cafe latte Convenience sampling Random sampling Apposite Competitive advantage

CHAPTER 2

Review of Related Literature

Butod (2009)

Fabe (2008)

Gaskill, Van Auken, and Kim's (1994)

(Butod, 2008)

Porter (1980)

Butod (2009)

CHAPTER 3

Research Methodology

RESEARCH DESIGN qualitative research design adapting the

descriptive research method Conclusive convenience sampling Statistical cross-sectional research descriptive type ex post facto Census method

SAMPLING PLAN

Survey methodConvenience sampling

SAMPLE SIZE COMPUTATION

n= z^2 [p(1-p)] / MOE^2. Where:

n is the required sample size Z is the value from the normal distribution tables

corresponding to the desired confidence level. P is the population proportion being estimated. MOE is the desired precision or margin of error.

Z=1.96 [p(1-p)]=.25. 10% as margin of error.

n= (1.96)^2 (.25) / (.10)^2 = 96.04 the researchers round

it off to 100 for a more clear-cut number of respondents.

RESEARCH INSTRUMENTsurvey questionnaireLikert scale and importance scale close-ended questionnairetwo parts of questionnaire

STATISTICAL TREATMENT OF DATAStatistical analysisweighted meanerror.Variancestandard deviation PercentagePercentage

CHAPTER 4

Presentation, Interpretation, and

Analysis of Data

Age(years) Number of

Respondents

%

16-18 48 48

19-21 47 47

22-24 2 2

25-27 2 2

28-30 0 0

Above 30 1 1

Total 100 100%

Gender Number of

Respondents

%

Male 48 48

Female 52 52

Total 100 100%

Table 4.1AGE

Table 4.2GENDER

CIVIL

STATUS

Number of

Respondents

%

Single 97 97

Married 3 3

Widowed 0 0

Separate

d

0 0

Total 100 100%

Table 4.3CIVIL STATUS

Occupation Number of

Respondents

%

Student 96 96

Full-Time

Faculty

1 1

Part-Time

Faculty

0 0

Staff Member 3 3

Total 100 100%

Table 4.4OCCUPATION

Monthly

allowance

Number of

Respondents

%

Above 10,000 5 5.2

7,001-10,000 9 9.4

5,001-7,000 14 14.6

2,001-5,000 36 37.5

2,000 below 31 32.3

No allowance 1 1.0

Total 96 100%

Table 4.5MONTHLY ALLOWANCE (in pesos)

Monthly

allowance

Number of

Respondents

%

Above 50,000 1 3.0

30,001-50,000 1 3.0

15,001-30,000 3 9.1

8,001-15,000 0 0

3,001-8,000 3 9.1

3,000 below 5 15.2

No income 20 60.6

Total 33 100%

Table 4.6MONTHLY INCOME (in pesos)

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. DeviationAdventurous 99 2.00 5.00 4.1515 .80005

Athletic 100 1.00 5.00 3.4400 1.18339

Studious 99 1.00 5.00 3.2323 .99825

Party-Goer 99 1.00 5.00 3.1818 1.19833

Home body 100 1.00 5.00 3.3300 1.14640

Couch Potato 100 1.00 5.00 3.3100 1.23660

Politically Concerned 100 1.00 5.00 2.8900 1.11821

Fashion Updated 98 1.00 5.00 3.2653 .99017

Tachnology Savvy 100 1.00 5.00 3.4700 1.05844

Health Conciou 100 1.00 5.00 3.5500 .92524

Vegetarian 100 1.00 5.00 2.2900 1.12182

Meat Lover 100 2.00 5.00 3.9700 .89279

Omnivore 100 1.00 5.00 3.8500 .99874

Have Vices 100 1.00 5.00 2.4000 1.49071

Environmentalist 100 1.00 5.00 3.2900 .96708

Humanitarian 100 1.00 5.00 3.6300 .92829

Valid N (listwise) 95

Table 4.7PSYCHOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF

RESPONDENTS

Frequency Number of

Respondents

%

Never 12 12.1

Rarely 38 38.4

Sometimes 33 33.3

Almost

Always

14 14.1

Always 2 2

Total 99 100%

Table 4.8HOW OFTEN RESPONDENTS

DRINK COFFEE

Do you go to

coffee

shops?

Number of

Respondents

%

YES 76 76.8

NO 23 23.2

Total 99 100%

Table 4.9HOW MANY RESPONDENTS GO

TO COFFEE SHOPS

Reason Number of

Respondents

%

Use of WiFi 32 32.7

Drink Coffee 19 19.4

Rest & Relax 47 48.0

Total 98 100%

Table 4.9.1MAJOR REASONS TO GO TO

COFFEE SHOPS Type of Coffee Number of

Respondents

%

Brewed 17 16.0

Instant 12 11.3

Decaffeinated 2 1.9

Latte 27 25.5

Cappuccino 39 36.8

Other 9 8.4

Total 106 100%

Table 4.10TYPES OF COFFEE

Are you

aware?

Number of

Respondents

%

YES 55 56.1

NO 43 43.9

Total 98 100%

Table 4.11AWARENESS OF

RESPONDENTS TO THE EXISTENCE OF A COFFEE STALL IN THE CAFETERIA

Is the cafeteria

the best

location?

Number of

Respondents

%

YES 41 42.3

NO 56 57.7

Total 97 100%

Table 4.12BEST LOCATION

Have you ever

bought coffee

from the

coffee stall?

Number of

Respondents

%

YES 33 33.7

NO 65 66.3

Total 98 100%

Table 4.13NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAVE BOUGHT COFFEE

FROM COFFEE STALL

Is the price

suitable?

Number of

Respondents

%

YES 22 56.4

NO 17 43.6

Total 39 100%

Table 4.13.1PRICE

Do you like the

coffee that

they sell?

Number of

Respondents

%

YES 27 75

NO 9 25

Total 36 100%

Table 4.13.2LIKING Does the

coffee stall

offer your

choice of

coffee?

Number of

Respondents

%

YES 42 47.7

NO 46 52.3

Total 88 100%

Table 4.14CHOICES

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum MeanStd.

DeviationPrice 97 1.00 5.00 4.3093 .97212

Variety 97 1.00 5.00 4.5361 .76461

Ambience 97 1.00 5.00 4.5361 .73686

Uniqueness 97 1.00 5.00 4.3402 .90008

Service 97 1.00 5.00 4.7113 .66079

Presentation 97 1.00 5.00 4.4742 .89084

Valid N (listwise)

97

Table 4.15FACTORS

CHAPTER 5

Conclusions and Recommendations

SUMMARY The researcher intended to answer the

following questions:1.What is the demographic profile of the

respondents in terms of the following variables:1.1 Gender1.2 Civil Status1.3 Age1.4 Monthly Allowance1.5 Monthly income

2.What is the psychographic profile of the respondents in terms of the following variables:

2. 1 Adventurous2.2 Athletic2.3 Studious2.4 Party-goer2.5 Home body2.6 Couch Potato2.7 Politically concerned

2.8 Fashion-updated2.9 Technology-savvy2.10 Health-conscious2.11 Vegetarian2.12 Meat-lover2.13 Omnivore2.14 Have vices2.15 Environmentalist2.16 Humanitarian

Additional information: 3.1: How often do the respondents drink coffee? 3.2: How many of them go to coffee shops? For

what reasons? 3.3: What type of coffee do the respondents drink

the most often? 3.4: How many of them are aware that there is a

coffee shop in the Ateneo College Campus Cafeteria?

3.5: In their opinion, where is the best location for the coffee shop?

3.6: How many of these respondents have bought coffee from the coffee stall?

3.6.1: How do they rate the price?3.6.2: Do they like the coffee that they sell?

3.7: Does the coffee stand in the cafeteria offer the choice of coffee the respondents prefer?

How do the respondents rate the importance of the following factors:

4.1 Price of coffee4.2 Variety of choice4.3 Ambience4.4 Uniqueness4.5 Service4.6 Presentation

CONCLUSION:1.) Ateneo students, faculty and staff Female ages 16 to 21 Single average monthly allowance of P5,000 and

below2.) non-athletic and have vices common type of people who are average in

terms of outgoingness and activeness not so health-conscious

3.) In terms of the consumer’s preferences in coffee and coffee shops:

 

3.1 fairly large market of coffee-drinkers in the Ateneo College campus

3.2 Majority go to coffee shops; for the reasons : use of wireless internet, take a break and relax

3.3: Cappuccino and Latte ; these taste better than brewed coffee, and are relatively cheaper than other types of coffee.

3.4: almost half of the respondents are not aware of the coffee stand.

3.5: location of the coffee shop is not preferred; the coffee stand should have its own establishment outside or inside the campus

3.6: the price of the coffee is reasonable and the quality of the coffee is good.

3.7: stand lacks in choices and not in quality.

4.) greatest factors: variety of choices and service. -expect good service and many choices in the menu -least important factor: uniqueness

-present coffee stall is doing quite a good job; it just lacks in choices and the promotion strategy -market for coffee drinkers in the campus is large enough to gain profit from-feasible to put up another coffee shop within the campus.

RECOMMENDATION

1.)That either of the actions be taken:-proper promotion strategy be

implemented; coffee stall be relocated somewhere within the campus

-another coffee shop be established alternatively

2.)the results and recommendations be used only in similar cases