WhatsApp

Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C Case Study Help Checklist

Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C Case Study Help Checklist

Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C Case Study Solution
Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C Case Study Help
Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C Case Study Analysis



3 C Analyses for Evaluating Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C decision to launch Case Study Solution


The following area concentrates on the 3Cs of marketing for Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C where the company's clients, competitors and core competencies have assessed in order to validate whether the choice to release Case Study Help under Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C trademark name would be a feasible alternative or not. We have firstly looked at the type of clients that Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C deals in while an examination of the competitive environment and the company's weak points and strengths follows. Embedded in the 3C analysis is the validation for not releasing Case Study Help under Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C name.
Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C Case Study Solution

Customer Analysis

Both the groups utilize Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C high efficiency adhesives while the business is not only included in the production of these adhesives but likewise markets them to these customer groups. We would be focusing on the customers of instant adhesives for this analysis considering that the market for the latter has a lower capacity for Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C compared to that of instantaneous adhesives.

The total market for instantaneous adhesives is around 890,000 in the US in 1978 which covers both customer groups which have actually been recognized earlier.If we take a look at a breakdown of Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C possible market or client groups, we can see that the business sells to OEMs (Initial Equipment Makers), Do-it-Yourself clients, repair work and revamping business (MRO) and producers dealing in items made from leather, metal, wood and plastic. This variety in clients recommends that Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C can target has different alternatives in regards to segmenting the market for its brand-new product specifically as each of these groups would be needing the exact same type of item with respective modifications in packaging, demand or amount. The consumer is not rate delicate or brand name mindful so releasing a low priced dispenser under Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C name is not an advised alternative.

Company Analysis

Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C is not just a producer of adhesives but takes pleasure in market management in the immediate adhesive market. The company has its own knowledgeable and certified sales force which includes worth to sales by training the company's network of 250 suppliers for helping with the sale of adhesives.

Core proficiencies are not limited to adhesive manufacturing just as Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C likewise specializes in making adhesive dispensing equipment to assist in the use of its items. This dual production method gives Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C an edge over competitors because none of the competitors of giving devices makes instantaneous adhesives. Furthermore, none of these rivals sells straight to the consumer either and utilizes suppliers for connecting to customers. While we are taking a look at the strengths of Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C, it is essential to highlight the business's weak points also.

The business's sales personnel is proficient in training distributors, the reality remains that the sales team is not trained in offering equipment so there is a possibility of relying heavily on suppliers when promoting adhesive equipment. However, it must also be kept in mind that the suppliers are revealing unwillingness when it concerns selling devices that needs servicing which increases the challenges of offering devices under a specific brand.

The company has actually items intended at the high end of the market if we look at Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C item line in adhesive devices particularly. The possibility of sales cannibalization exists if Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C sells Case Study Help under the very same portfolio. Offered the truth that Case Study Help is priced lower than Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C high-end product line, sales cannibalization would certainly be impacting Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C sales profits if the adhesive devices is offered under the business's brand.

We can see sales cannibalization affecting Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C 27A Pencil Applicator which is priced at $275. If Case Study Help is released under the business's brand name, there is another possible danger which could lower Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C income. The fact that $175000 has 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.

Additionally, if we look at the marketplace in general, the adhesives market does disappoint brand name orientation or price consciousness which offers us two additional reasons for not launching a low priced product under the company's brand.

Competitor Analysis

The competitive environment of Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C would be studied through Porter's five forces analysis which would highlight the degree of rivalry in the market.


Degree of Rivalry:

Presently we can see that the adhesive market has a high growth potential due to the existence of fragmented sections with Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C delighting in leadership and a combined market share of 75% with two other market players, Eastman and Permabond. While industry competition in between these gamers could be called 'extreme' as the consumer is not brand name conscious and each of these players has prominence in terms of market share, the fact still stays that the industry is not filled and still has several market sectors which can be targeted as prospective specific niche markets even when launching an adhesive. However, we can even explain the fact that sales cannibalization might be resulting in industry competition in the adhesive dispenser market while the market for instant adhesives offers growth capacity.


Bargaining Power of Buyer: The Bargaining power of the purchaser in this industry is low especially as the purchaser has low understanding about the item. While business like Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C have actually managed to train distributors concerning adhesives, the last consumer is dependent on distributors. Around 72% of sales are made straight by makers and distributors for instantaneous adhesives so the buyer has a low bargaining power.

Bargaining Power of Supplier: Offered the reality that the adhesive market is controlled by 3 players, it could be said that the supplier takes pleasure in a higher bargaining power compared to the purchaser. Nevertheless, the truth stays that the supplier does not have much influence over the buyer at this moment specifically as the purchaser does not show brand recognition or cost sensitivity. This suggests that the distributor has the higher power when it pertains to the adhesive market while the purchaser and the maker do not have a major control over the real sales.

Threat of new entrants: The competitive environment with its low brand loyalty and the ease of entry revealed by foreign Japanese rivals in the instant adhesive market suggests that the marketplace allows ease of entry. If we look at Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C in particular, the company has dual capabilities in terms of being a manufacturer of adhesive dispensers and instantaneous adhesives. Prospective hazards in devices dispensing market are low which shows the possibility of creating brand awareness in not only immediate adhesives however also in dispensing adhesives as none of the market gamers has managed to place itself in dual capabilities.

Hazard of Substitutes: The risk of substitutes in the instantaneous adhesive industry is low while the dispenser market in particular has substitutes like Glumetic pointer applicators, inbuilt applicators, pencil applicators and sophisticated consoles. The truth stays that if Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C presented Case Study Help, it would be enjoying sales cannibalization for its own items. (see appendix 1 for structure).


4 P Analysis: A suggested Marketing Mix for Case Study Help

Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C Case Study Help


Despite the fact that our 3C analysis has provided numerous factors for not introducing Case Study Help under Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C name, we have actually a suggested marketing mix for Case Study Help given listed below if Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C decides to proceed with the launch.

Product & Target Market: The target audience chosen for Case Study Help is 'Automobile services' for a variety of reasons. There are currently 89257 facilities in this sector and a high usage of approximately 58900 lbs. is being utilized by 36.1 % of the marketplace. This market has an extra growth potential of 10.1% which might be a good enough specific niche market section for Case Study Help. Not just would a portable dispenser deal convenience to this specific market, the reality that the Diy market can likewise be targeted if a safe and clean low priced adhesive is being cost usage with SuperBonder. The product would be sold without the 'glumetic suggestion' and 'vari-drop' so that the consumer can decide whether he wants to opt for either of the two devices or not.

Price: The recommended price of Case Study Help has actually been kept at $175 to the end user whether it is sold through distributors or by means of direct selling. A price listed below $250 would not need approvals from the senior management in case a mechanic at a motor vehicle maintenance store requires to buy the item on his own.

Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C would only be getting $157 per unit as displayed in appendix 2 which gives a breakdown of gross profitability and net success for Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C for introducing Case Study Help.

Place: A distribution design where Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C straight sends the item to the local supplier and keeps a 10% drop delivery allowance for the distributor would be used by Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C. Since the sales team is already taken part in selling immediate adhesives and they do not have knowledge in selling dispensers, involving them in the selling process would be pricey specifically as each sales call expenses approximately $120. The suppliers are already selling dispensers so selling Case Study Help through them would be a favorable alternative.

Promotion: Although a low promotional budget should have been assigned to Case Study Help but the fact that the dispenser is an innovation and it needs to be marketed well in order to cover the capital costs incurred for production, the recommended advertising plan costing $51816 is suggested for at first introducing the product in the market. The planned advertisements in magazines would be targeted at mechanics in vehicle maintenance shops. (Recommended text for the ad is shown in appendix 3 while the 4Ps are summarized in appendix 4).


Limitations: Arguments for forgoing the launch Case Study Analysis
Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C Case Study Analysis

Although a recommended plan of action in the form of a marketing mix has actually been discussed for Case Study Help, the fact still remains that the item would not complement Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C line of product. We have a look at appendix 2, we can see how the overall gross success for the two designs is expected to be around $49377 if 250 units of each model are produced annually as per the plan. The preliminary planned advertising is around $52000 per year which would be putting a strain on the company's resources leaving Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C with a negative net income if the costs are allocated to Case Study Help only.

The reality that Manville Corp Fiber Glass Group C has actually already incurred an initial financial investment of $48000 in the form of capital expense and prototype development indicates that the profits from Case Study Help is not enough to carry out the danger of sales cannibalization. Other than that, we can see that a low priced dispenser for a market revealing low flexibility of need is not a preferable option specifically of it is affecting the sale of the company's income generating models.



Executive Summary Porters Five Forces Analysis Pestel Analysis Financial Analysis
Generic Strategy Vrine Analysis