I'm not sure that I follow and perhaps what I'm about to say...

I'm not sure that I follow and perhaps what I'm about to say just highlights my naiveté but if what you are saying about TCCC is true then TCCC investing in these other markets must not fit in with the rational concept of investing. Would they actually invest money and not care about the success of the franchises and therefore risk losing money on the investment? They would still hold considerable power without the equity investment. Are they happy to see brand value fall if the franchises are not successful? I agree that they aren't spending every waking minute thinking about how to help CCL or any other franchise but it's not hard to see that in the long run, the better the franchises are doing, the better TCCC are doing, by way of increased concentrate sales and higher value of equity investments and dividends paid.

I went and had a look at the 2013 TCCC annual report. I found a few interesting points under 'Risk Factors'.  

We rely on our bottling partners for a significant portion of our business. If we are unable to maintain good relationships with our bottling partners, our business could suffer. We generate a significant portion of our net operating revenues by selling concentrates and syrups to independent bottling partners....

If our bottling partners’ financial condition deteriorates, our business and financial results could be affected. We derive a significant portion of our net operating revenues from sales of concentrates and syrups to independent bottling partners and, therefore, the success of our business depends on our bottling partners’ financial strength and profitability....

It goes on to say that 58% of revenue is generated outside the US. These foreign markets, like Australia (well more like Indonesia) are only going to become more and more important.  

Back on page 7 it says this

Investments in Bottling Operations

Most of our branded beverage products outside of North America are manufactured, sold and distributed by independent bottling partners. However, from time to time we acquire or take control of bottling or canning operations, often in underperforming markets where we believe we can use our resources and expertise to improve performance. Owning such a controlling interest enables us to compensate for limited local resources; help focus the bottler’s sales and marketing programs; assist in the development of the bottler’s business and information systems; and establish an appropriate capital structure for the bottler.

It goes on to say this...which is what MelbourneBoy was saying

In line with our long-term bottling strategy, we may periodically consider options for divesting or reducing our ownership interest in a Company-owned or -controlled bottler. One such option is to combine our interest in a particular bottler with the interests of others to form strategic business alliances. Another option is to sell our interest in a bottling operation to one of our other bottling partners in which we have an equity method investment. In both of these situations, our Company continues to participate in the bottler’s results of operations through our share of the strategic business alliance’s or equity method investee’s earnings or losses.

I have only recently started looking at this stock and am not familiar with the history and so I could be missing a lot here, but it seems irrational for TCCC to not want to see the franchises do well. It seems silly for them to not help the franchises because ultimately their success will flow back to TCCC anyway.