Delhi Milk Scheme

Important

1. A STUDY ON ISSUES BEHIND LOW SALES OF DMS
DAIRY PRODUCT IN WEST & SOUTH DELHI
INTERNATIONAL AGRIBUSINESS MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE
ANAND AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
ANAND-388110
Advisor: Industrial Guide:
Dr. M.R.Prajapati Dr. B.S. Beniwal
(GEN. MANAGER)
Presented By: Ashish Jaint
Reg. No.-04-2283-2014
1

2. LIST OF CONTENTS
1.DAIRY INDUSTRY IN INDIA
-INTRODUCTION
2COMPANY PROFILE
3OBJECTIVES
4RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
5RESULT & DISCUSSION
6CONCLUSION
7SUGGESTIONS
8REFRENCES
2

3. DAIRY INDUSTRY IN INDIA
3

4. INTRODUCTION
IndiaistheworldslargestMilkProduceraccountingforabout20%ofthe
globalMilkproductionandisalsotheworld’slargestconsumerbaseof
dairyproducts.
MilkproductioninIndiahascomealongwayoveryearsfromalow
volumeof17milliontonnesin1951toaround133milliontonnesin
2012-2013andisthelargestproducerofmilkintheworld.
Theannualmilkproductionis132.4millionmetrictones.
ThedomesticDairyIndustryisexpectedtotouchmilkoutputof190
milliontonesandaturnoverof$100billionby2015.
TheperCapitaMilkavailabilityis290gramsperday.
4

5. INTRODUCTION
More than13 million dairy farmers belong to 96,000 local dairy
cooperatives, who sell their product to one of 177 milk producers'
cooperative unions who in turn are supported by 22 state cooperative.
India has grown by around 3 million MT per annum till 2007 and requires
growing at 5 million MT per day so as to meet the ambitious target of
around 170 million MT by 2020.
•Growing at about 10 per cent annually, the Indian dairy industry is
predominantly controlled by the unorganized sector which accounts for
nearly 85 per cent.
5

6. PRODUCTION OF MILK AND AVAILABILITY IN INDIA
Year Production(Million Tonnes) Per capita Availability (gms/day)
2001-02 84.4 225
2002-03 86.2 230
2003-04 88.1 231
2004-05 92.5 223
2005-06 97.1 241
2006-07 102.6 251
2007-08 107.9 260
2008-09 112.2 266
2009-10 116.4 273
2010-11 121.8 281
2011-12 127.9 289
2012-13 133 290
Source: NDDB
6

7. COMPANY PROFILE
•Delhi Milk Scheme is a subordinate office of Ministry of Agriculture,
Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries.
•ItsHeadquarterandplantarelocatedatshadipur,westPatelnagar,Delhi.
•ItwascommissionedonNov01,1959bythethenHon’blePresidentofIndia,
Dr.RajendraPrasadwiththeprimaryobjectiveofsupplyingwholesomemilk
tocitizensofDelhiatreasonableprices,aswellasforprovidingremunerative
pricestomilkproducers.
7

8. COMPANY PROFILE
DelhiMilkSchemehasbeenmainlyprocuringraw/freshmilkfromtheState
DairyFederationsoftheneighboringStatesandsomequantityofmilkfrom
theCo-operativeSocietiestoaugmentthesupplies.
DMShasanetworkofover1101outlets(includingAllDayMilkStalls).
ThemilkboothsareallottedtoandmannedbyEx-servicemen/retiredGovt.
servants,physicallyhandicapped,widows,unemployedpersons.
TheDMSalsosuppliesmilktoabout174institutionssuchasHospitals,
GovernmentCanteens,HostelsandDefenceUnitsetc.
Withanumberofvarietiesofdairyproductsaswellasgoodquality,DMSis
continuouslyfacingloss.ThoughthedeficitcamedownfromRs.24.15Crore
in2009-10toRs.8.99Crorein2010-11,itincreasedtoRs.28.26Crorein
2011-12duetolesserprocurementofrawmilkandhigherpurchaseprice
paidforSkimmedMilkPowder&rawmilketc.Further,duringthefinancial
year2012-13thedeficithascomedowntoRs.4.66Crore.Itshowsaclear
pictureofeffectiveeffortsdonebytheformerGM,Dr.Beniwal.Butstill,
DMSisnotachievingwhatitstandsfor.
8

9. PERFORMANCE OF “DELHI MILK SCHEME”
Source: Ministry of agriculture, Govt. of India
year Milk sale (lakh litre)
2008-2009 1371.72
2000-2010 1332.77
2011-2012 1123.62
2012-2013
( Upto Dec. 2012)
843.8
9

10. OBJECTIVES
•To know the preferences of consumers with respect to dairy
products and dairy Brands.
•To know the factors behind low sales of DMS.
•To know the satisfaction factors of DMS consumers.
10

11. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
SourceofData
Primarydata:Primarydatawerecollectedfromconsumersthroughusing
questionnaires.
Secondarydata:werecollectedfrominternet,differentmagazines,newspapers,
journalsandannualreports.
Surveyapproach:Samplesurvey
SamplingMethod:Nonprobabilitysampling
Samplingtechnique:ConvenientSampling
Samplingunit:consumerswereselectedpurposivelywhodrinkmilk.
Samplesize:100consumers
Areaofsurvey:WestDelhi(50)andSouthDelhi(50).
Researchinstrument:Structuredquestionnaire
AnalyticalTools:tabularanalysisandgraphicalpresentationswereused.
Limitationofthestudy
•1.Analysiswaspurelybasedontheresponsesofrespondents.
•2.Therewaslimitedtimeforthecollectionofdataforstudy.
11

12. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
12

13. BASIC INFORMATION OF CONSUMERS
13

14. AGE OF CONSUMERS
18-25
19%
26-35
24%
36-45
20%
46-55
12%
55 above
25%
18-25
26-35
36-45
46-55
55 above
14

15. FREQUENCY OF DRINKING MILK
Daily
49%
2-3 days
4%
1-2 weeks
4%
Monthly
43%
Daily
2-3 days
1-2 weeks
Monthly
15

16. OBJECTIVE -1
-Preferences of consumers with respect to dairy
products and dairy brands.
16

17. PREFRENCE OF MILK PRODUCTS
17

18. PREFRENCE OF MILK BRAND
18

19. PLACE OF PURCHASING MILK PRODUCTS
19

20. SOURCES OF INFORMATION REGARDING MILK BRANDS
TV
5%
Newspaper
22%
Cinema
2%
Hoardings
6%
Advertisement
39%
Pamphlets
17%
Word of mouth
3%
Any other
6%
TV
Newspaper
Cinema
Hoardings
Advertisement
Pamphlets
Word of mouth
Any other
20

21. FACTORS AFFECTING CHOICE OF MILK BRAND
Taste
21%
Quality
40%
Brand image
5%
Price
1%
Sales location
3%
Package
4%
Nutritional value
5%
Quantity
6%
Availability
15%
Taste
Quality
Brand image
Price
Sales location
Package
Nutritional value
Quantity
Availability
21

22. OBJECTIVE -2
-Factors behind low sales of DMS dairy products
22

23. BRAND AWARENESS (DMS)
Yes
45%No
55% Yes
No
23

24. SOURCES FROM WHICH COME TO KNOW ABOUT DMS
24

25. RATINGS TO DMS PRODUCT ( QUALITY)
Very good
9%
Good
62%
Average
13%
Bad
11%
Very bad
5%
Very good
Good
Average
Bad
Very bad
25

26. RATINGS TO DMS PRODUCT ( TASTE)
Very good
2%
Good
5%
Average
87%
Bad
2%
Very bad
4%
Very good
Good
Average
Bad
Very bad
26

27. RATINGS TO DMS PRODUCT( PRICE )
Very good
24%
Good
16%
Average
27%
Bad
24%
Very bad
9%
Very good
Good
Average
Bad
Very bad
27

28. RATINGS TO DMS PRODUCT ( AVAILABILITY ON TIME )
Very good
2%
Good
13%
Average
18%
Bad
56%
Very bad
11%
Very good
Good
Average
Bad
Very bad
28

29. RATINGS TO DMS PRODUCT( BEHAVIOR OF BOOTH HOLDERS)
Very good
4%
Good
20%
Average
51%
Bad
16%
Very bad
9%
Very good
Good
Average
Bad
Very bad
29

30. RATINGS TO DMS PRODUCT (PACKAGING ATTRACTION)
Very good
15%
Good
20%
Average
16%
Bad
31%
Very bad
18%
Very good
Good
Average
Bad
Very bad
30

31. THINK ABOUT DMS PRODUCT ( ACCESSIBILITY )
Very good
27%
Good
18%
Average
6%
Bad
27%
Very bad
22%
Very good
Good
Average
Bad
Very bad
31

32. WHEN DMS INCREASES PRICE
Change in brand
32%
Change in type of
milk
40%
Decrease in
amount of
purchase
24%
Don't do anything
4%
Change in brand
Change in type of milk
Decrease in amount of purchase
Don't do anything
32

33. SATISFIED WITH DMS PRODUCTS
Yes
89%
No
11%
Yes
No
33

34. FACTORS FOR SHIFTING TO ANOTHER DAIRY BRAND
Available at distant
market
31%
Non affordable
8%
Taste is not good
8%
Not matching
quality
expectations
15%
Shorter shelf life
38%
Available at distant market
Non affordable
Taste is not good
Not matching quality
expectations
Shorter shelf life
34

35. REASONS FOR NOT USING DMS PRODUCTS
Not accessible
40%
High price
13%
Not fresh
1%
Spoiled
2%
No door delivery
7%
Adulterated
9%
Not natural
6%
Low quality
9%
Not good for
children
2%
Non availability
11%
Not accessible
High price
Not fresh
Spoiled
No door delivery
Adulterated
Not natural
Low quality
Not good for children
Non availability
35

36. OBJECTIVE -3
-Satisfaction factors of DMS consumers
36

37. REASONS OF SATISFACTION
good for health
26%
Fat content
27%
Good quality
22%
Brand image
12%
Taste
8%
Price
2%
Packaging
3%
good for health
Fat content
Good quality
Brand image
Taste
Price
Packaging
37

38. WHEN GO FOR PURCHASING DMS PRODUCTS
Reliable price
13%
Good quality
57%
Easy availability
13%
Good taste
15%
Any other
2%
Reliable price
Good quality
Easy availability
Good taste
Any other
38

39. CONCLUSION
•AMULandmotherdairyareleadingbrandsinthisregionfollowingthatisDMS.
Onlyfewconsumersgoforpurchasingloosemilkoranyotherbrand.Itisalso
observedthathalfoftheconsumerspurchasemilkproductsfromretailershop,
followingthatisfrombooths.
•Itisobserved,thatmostoftheconsumersknowaboutDMSandtheygettoknow
aboutDMSfromtheirfriendsorrelativesandwordofmouth.Mostofthe
consumersgetinformationregardingothermilkproductthroughadvertisement.
•ItisobservedthatDMSstandsgoodintermofitsproduct’squalityandtaste.
•AvailabilityofDMSproductsisamajorissue,becauseproductsarenoteasily
availabletoconsumers.
•Duringthestudy,itisobservedthatmostoftheconsumersdon’trespondtoprice
increaseofDMS,theygoonpurchasingit’sproducts,whereassomeofthem
changethetypeofmilktheypurchase.ItshowstheirloyaltytowardsDMS.
39

40. CONCLUSION
Itisobserved,thatthosewhoarenotusingDMS’sproductsareunawareabout
DMS.DMS’sproductsarenotaccessibletothemandarenoteasilyavailable.
TheseconsumerswillgoforDMSifproductsareeasilyavailableandata
reliableprice.
Fromthepersonalinterviewofboothholders,itisobservedthatboothholders
aresatisfiedwithDMSandtheyareverymuchinterestedindistributionof
DMSproducts.Though,themargintheyaregettingislowascomparedto
otherdairybrands.
Gheeisdemandedbymostoftheconsumers,followingthatistonedmilkand
sweetdahi.Itisobserved,thatallproductsarenotavailableonDMS’sbooths.
ItisalsoobservedthatthosewhoareloyaltoDMS,theywaitforthe
availabilityofproductratherthanshiftingtowardsanothermilkbrand.
40

41. SUGGESTIONS
•DMS is advised to think upon its marketing strategies because DMS is not
known to many consumers in this region. A strong marketing strategy is
required to aware the consumers about DMS and its products.
•Ghee is the most demanded product of DMS among the consumers but it is
not available to the consumers, because of short supply. DMS should make
it available to the booths twice in a day to avoid non-availability to the
consumers and increase sales.
•As it is observed, that most of the consumers are purchasing milk products
from retailer’s shop, DMS should supply its products to retailers also. The
results can be positive and can increase DMS’s market share.
41

42. SUGGESTIONS
•Itissuggestedtorenovatetheboothsbecausetheirconditionispathetic.It
isadvisedtomaketheboothshygienic.
•ThereshouldbealistofDMS’sproductsandthenameofDMSiswritten
properlyonthebooths.
•Moreover,thequalityandtasteofDMSareleadingaboveallmilkbrands
inwestandsouthDelhi.Therequiredthingistomakeitavailabletothe
citizensofDelhiandgrabthemarketsharefromothercompetitivebrands.
42

43. REFERENCES
•Department of Animal Husbandry Annual Report 2013-2014, Dairying &
Fisheries; Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi. pp-
41-54
•Dhanabalan. M. (2009), “Productive Efficiency of Milk Production In
Tamil Nadu”, Indian Journal of Marketing, Volume XXXIX, Number 12,
P-21.
•K.G. and Banerjee G.D. (2006), “Opportunities and Challenges in The
Indian Dairy Industry”, Technological Change, Issue 9, Pp.24-26
•Kumar Rajeev and Prabhakar Raj, opportunities and challenges in indian
dairy industry supply chain: a literature review, Volume 2, Number 4,
October –December’ 2013
•Mandeep Singh and Joshi.A.S.(2008), “Economic Analysis of Crop
Production and Dairy Farming on Marginal and Small Farms in
Punjab” Agricultural Economics Research Review, Vol. 21, Issue: 2, P-
30.
43

44. REFERENCES
•Radha Krishnan, Nigam.S. and Shantanu Kumar (2008), “Contribution of
livestock in Indian Scenario”, Agricultural Situation in India, Issue 1, April,
Pp. 25-28.
•Waghmare P.R. and Hedgire D.N. (2007), “Econometric analysis of
integrated dairy development Programme in Parbhani District”, Agricultural
Situation in India, Issue 3, Pp. 97-101.
•http://www.dairyuniverseindia.com/Marketdate.html (Accessed on
17/8/2014)
44

45. THANK YOU!!
45