• Based on our period 4 decisions, our net contribution increased to $790,000 however, we were at the fourth place in the market. We still left money on the table and our overall share of the market dropped.
• With reasonable product pricing and specification, we were hitting the market need, however we quickly found out that our sales force needs to be realigned to support our production and pricing strategy. The market continued to grow and our sales force was grossly overworked in both Channels. We decided to hire 2 additional sales people, one for each Channel. Sales commission was increased to 8% to push further sales, and the percentage of non-selling time in Channel 2 was increased to 15%.
• The features remained the same except …show more content…
We still left money on the table and our overall share of the market dropped. We were happy to see that entering into the market with a new product was a good decision as we did not meet any loss and it was helping us to increase our contribution. We continued to feel that our overall approach was good, however we need to continue to really fine tune our decisions
• We were successful with our existing product, VRDA4 which accounted for 25.8% of the market share. Our new product performed very well with DVCA4 selling out at 11,999 units, accounting for 66.7% of the market share. Our result showed that we didn’t charge enough for DVCA4 and sold ourselves short on profit. Overall not a bad product launch.
• For the VRDA4 product, we left the customer service, distribution intensity, and percentage of selling time alone. We also did not touch the product features or the production quantity.
• We slightly increased the product price in both Channel 1 and Channel 2 for VRDA4. After reviewing the reports and looking at the competitors’ pricing we felt there was room for a slight price increase.
• We left the sales force at the same level as last …show more content…
However our overall market share in the VRDA4 and DVCA4 markets dropped. In the last game decision we over produced the VRDA4 product and had to eat some transfer costs. Our drop in the VRDA4 market could be attributed to the increase in sales price and the lack of sales promotion. We also felt that our competitors were tweaking their strategy
• We reduced the wholesale price for VRDA4 and kept the Channel 2 price the same as last decision. We increased the sales promotion $ in both channels as well as we felt that spending in sales promotion was giving a slight boost to the sales
• Our drop in the DVCA4 market share can be contributed to our competitor making more products than they did in the first go around. We had missed opportunity in production.
• For the final game decision, we increased the number of sales people in both Channel 1 and Channel 2 by one person in each
• With reasonable product pricing and specification, we were hitting the market need, however we quickly found out that our sales force needs to be realigned to support our production and pricing strategy. The market continued to grow and our sales force was grossly overworked in both Channels. We decided to hire 2 additional sales people, one for each Channel. Sales commission was increased to 8% to push further sales, and the percentage of non-selling time in Channel 2 was increased to 15%.
• The features remained the same except …show more content…
We still left money on the table and our overall share of the market dropped. We were happy to see that entering into the market with a new product was a good decision as we did not meet any loss and it was helping us to increase our contribution. We continued to feel that our overall approach was good, however we need to continue to really fine tune our decisions
• We were successful with our existing product, VRDA4 which accounted for 25.8% of the market share. Our new product performed very well with DVCA4 selling out at 11,999 units, accounting for 66.7% of the market share. Our result showed that we didn’t charge enough for DVCA4 and sold ourselves short on profit. Overall not a bad product launch.
• For the VRDA4 product, we left the customer service, distribution intensity, and percentage of selling time alone. We also did not touch the product features or the production quantity.
• We slightly increased the product price in both Channel 1 and Channel 2 for VRDA4. After reviewing the reports and looking at the competitors’ pricing we felt there was room for a slight price increase.
• We left the sales force at the same level as last …show more content…
However our overall market share in the VRDA4 and DVCA4 markets dropped. In the last game decision we over produced the VRDA4 product and had to eat some transfer costs. Our drop in the VRDA4 market could be attributed to the increase in sales price and the lack of sales promotion. We also felt that our competitors were tweaking their strategy
• We reduced the wholesale price for VRDA4 and kept the Channel 2 price the same as last decision. We increased the sales promotion $ in both channels as well as we felt that spending in sales promotion was giving a slight boost to the sales
• Our drop in the DVCA4 market share can be contributed to our competitor making more products than they did in the first go around. We had missed opportunity in production.
• For the final game decision, we increased the number of sales people in both Channel 1 and Channel 2 by one person in each