dq2 week 6

From the first e activity speculate how the

Info iconThis preview shows pages 3–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
From the first e-Activity, speculate how the monopolist could be more efficient in the long-run considering new competition has entered the marketplace. DQ2 "Oligopoly" Please respond to the following: From the second e-Activity, assess the marketing and pricing strategies, for example rebates, to determine the goal(s) of the marketing and pricing strategies for one of the companies you researched. Make one recommendation for changes that the company should make to better maximize profits. The Internet has made shopping for airline tickets efficient for the consumer. As a result, the industry overall is price sensitive. Suggest how the airlines can maximize profits while avoiding price wars. During the late twentieth century, the 10 largest publicly traded apparel and accessory companies experienced an increase in market share of nearly 5 percent. Part of this growth can be attributed to increased demand for these companies' products. The remaining growth was a result of acquisitions and consolidations. As large department store retailers merged, they consolidated their buying functions. Larger manufacturers
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
benefited from this because it became more efficient for a lower number of buyers to use one vendor rather than several. In response, growth-oriented handbag and purse manufacturers increased their acquisition activity in search of new brands and broader product offerings. In addition, the enormous growth of large mass merchandisers was driving the industry to consolidate. From 1981 through 1991, Sears, the nation's largest retailer, saw its sales increase rapidly, as did Wal-Mart and Kmart. Historically, many brand-name manufacturers sold their goods only to department stores, but they soon began selling nearly identical merchandise to mass merchandisers and catalogues in order to participate in the phenomenal growth experienced by those sales channels. Not surprisingly, this affected the manufacturers' relationships with the department stores, who seek exclusivity in their products. To remedy the situation, many manufacturers began to produce several different categories of brand names, each of which was distributed through a different type of retailer. Each retailer had brand exclusivity within its own category. One of the industry leaders in the mid-2000s was Coach, Inc., in New York City, which had sales of $3.2 billion in 2009, reflecting a 23 percent increase over 2005. In the mid- 2000s Coach sold its goods in 19 countries other than the United States and had 4,200 employees. One of Coach's reasons for success, according to Business Week Online, was that it worked to make handbags a category that required multiple purchases for multiple uses, including weekend bags, evening bags, casual bags, travel bags, and so on. Other industry leaders were Pyramid Handbags Inc., Jaclyn Inc., AD Sutton and Sons, Koret Inc., JLN Inc., Ima Fashions Inc., Chaus Accessories, LANA MARKS Boutique, Nine West Accessories Inc., Ponte Vecchio International, and Michael Stevens Limited.
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page3 / 5

From the first e Activity speculate how the monopolist...

This preview shows document pages 3 - 5. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online