WhatsApp 
Olympus B Case Study Solution
Olympus B Case Study Help
Olympus B Case Study Analysis
The following area concentrates on the of marketing for Olympus B where the company's customers, competitors and core proficiencies have actually assessed in order to validate whether the decision to launch Case Study Help under Olympus B brand would be a possible alternative or not. We have first of all looked at the type of clients that Olympus B deals in while an evaluation of the competitive environment and the company's weak points and strengths follows. Embedded in the 3C analysis is the justification for not releasing Case Study Help under Olympus B name.
Both the groups utilize Olympus B high performance adhesives while the company is not only included in the production of these adhesives however likewise markets them to these customer groups. We would be focusing on the customers of instantaneous adhesives for this analysis because the market for the latter has a lower capacity for Olympus B compared to that of immediate adhesives.
The total market for instantaneous adhesives is approximately 890,000 in the US in 1978 which covers both client groups which have been identified earlier.If we look at a breakdown of Olympus B possible market or consumer groups, we can see that the business sells to OEMs (Initial Equipment Makers), Do-it-Yourself consumers, repair and revamping business (MRO) and makers handling products made of leather, wood, metal and plastic. This diversity in consumers suggests that Olympus B can target has numerous options in regards to segmenting the market for its new product particularly as each of these groups would be requiring the same type of item with particular modifications in packaging, need or quantity. The customer is not price delicate or brand name mindful so releasing a low priced dispenser under Olympus B name is not a recommended option.
Olympus B is not simply a maker of adhesives but delights in market leadership in the immediate adhesive market. The business has its own competent and competent sales force which adds worth to sales by training the business's network of 250 suppliers for helping with the sale of adhesives.
Core competences are not limited to adhesive manufacturing just as Olympus B likewise specializes in making adhesive giving equipment to facilitate the use of its products. This dual production strategy provides Olympus B an edge over rivals given that none of the rivals of dispensing devices makes instant adhesives. Furthermore, none of these rivals sells directly to the customer either and utilizes suppliers for connecting to clients. While we are looking at the strengths of Olympus B, it is essential to highlight the company's weak points as well.
The business's sales staff is skilled in training suppliers, the fact stays that the sales team is not trained in offering devices so there is a possibility of relying greatly on distributors when promoting adhesive devices. It should likewise be kept in mind that the suppliers are revealing unwillingness when it comes to selling devices that needs servicing which increases the obstacles of offering devices under a specific brand name.
If we look at Olympus B line of product in adhesive devices particularly, the company has actually products aimed at the luxury of the marketplace. The possibility of sales cannibalization exists if Olympus B sells Case Study Help under the very same portfolio. Provided the truth that Case Study Help is priced lower than Olympus B high-end product line, sales cannibalization would absolutely be impacting Olympus B sales income if the adhesive equipment is offered under the business's brand name.
We can see sales cannibalization impacting Olympus B 27A Pencil Applicator which is priced at $275. If Case Study Help is launched under the company's brand name, there is another possible threat which might lower Olympus B profits. The reality that $175000 has actually been spent in promoting SuperBonder recommends that it is not a good time for launching a dispenser which can highlight the fact that SuperBonder can get logged and Case Study Help is the anti-clogging solution for the instantaneous adhesive.
In addition, if we take a look at the marketplace in general, the adhesives market does not show brand orientation or price awareness which gives us 2 additional reasons for not launching a low priced product under the business's trademark name.
The competitive environment of Olympus B would be studied via Porter's five forces analysis which would highlight the degree of competition in the market.
Bargaining Power of Buyer: The Bargaining power of the buyer in this market is low particularly as the purchaser has low knowledge about the item. While business like Olympus B have handled to train suppliers concerning adhesives, the last consumer is dependent on suppliers. Approximately 72% of sales are made straight by producers and suppliers for immediate adhesives so the purchaser has a low bargaining power.
Bargaining Power of Supplier: Given the reality that the adhesive market is dominated by 3 players, it could be said that the provider delights in a greater bargaining power compared to the buyer. The truth remains that the provider does not have much influence over the buyer at this point especially as the purchaser does not reveal brand recognition or price sensitivity. When it comes to the adhesive market while the purchaser and the maker do not have a major control over the real sales, this indicates that the supplier has the greater power.
Threat of new entrants: The competitive environment with its low brand name commitment and the ease of entry shown by foreign Japanese competitors in the immediate adhesive market suggests that the market enables ease of entry. However, if we look at Olympus B in particular, the business has double abilities in regards to being a manufacturer of instantaneous adhesives and adhesive dispensers. Possible risks in devices dispensing market are low which reveals the possibility of developing brand name awareness in not just immediate adhesives however also in giving adhesives as none of the market players has handled to position itself in dual capabilities.
Threat of Substitutes: The danger of substitutes in the instantaneous adhesive industry is low while the dispenser market in particular has replacements like Glumetic suggestion applicators, built-in applicators, pencil applicators and advanced consoles. The truth remains that if Olympus B presented Case Study Help, it would be delighting in sales cannibalization for its own products. (see appendix 1 for framework).
Despite the fact that our 3C analysis has actually given various factors for not launching Case Study Help under Olympus B name, we have actually a suggested marketing mix for Case Study Help given listed below if Olympus B chooses to proceed with the launch.
Product & Target Market: The target market chosen for Case Study Help is 'Motor vehicle services' for a number of reasons. There are presently 89257 facilities in this sector and a high use of roughly 58900 pounds. is being used by 36.1 % of the market. This market has an additional growth capacity of 10.1% which may be a good enough specific niche market sector for Case Study Help. Not just would a portable dispenser deal convenience to this particular market, the truth that the Do-it-Yourself market can likewise be targeted if a potable low priced adhesive is being cost usage with SuperBonder. The product would be sold without the 'glumetic idea' and 'vari-drop' so that the customer can choose whether he wishes to choose either of the two devices or not.
Price: The suggested cost of Case Study Help has actually been kept at $175 to the end user whether it is offered through distributors or through direct selling. This price would not include the cost of the 'vari suggestion' or the 'glumetic suggestion'. A price below $250 would not need approvals from the senior management in case a mechanic at an automobile maintenance store requires to buy the item on his own. This would increase the possibility of influencing mechanics to acquire the product for usage in their everyday maintenance tasks.
Olympus B would only be getting $157 per unit as displayed in appendix 2 which offers a breakdown of gross profitability and net success for Olympus B for launching Case Study Help.
Place: A circulation model where Olympus B directly sends the item to the local supplier and keeps a 10% drop shipment allowance for the supplier would be utilized by Olympus B. Because the sales group is currently participated in offering immediate adhesives and they do not have expertise in offering dispensers, including them in the selling procedure would be expensive specifically as each sales call expenses around $120. The suppliers are currently offering dispensers so selling Case Study Help through them would be a favorable alternative.
Promotion: Although a low advertising spending plan must have been designated to Case Study Help but the reality that the dispenser is a development and it needs to be marketed well in order to cover the capital expenses incurred for production, the recommended marketing strategy costing $51816 is advised for at first introducing the product in the market. The planned advertisements in magazines would be targeted at mechanics in automobile maintenance stores. (Recommended text for the advertisement is displayed in appendix 3 while the 4Ps are summed up in appendix 4).
