Analysis Of Clipboard Company 's Product Portfolio

Although the company did show an increased gross profit of $8,255,000 with $6,358,000 less Net Sales in 2013 versus 2012, that increase is due to the reduction in product Cost of Goods Sold by $14,613,000. Since increases in product price will negatively affect sales, one of management’s primary goals is to keep prices stable. This objective is achieved through implementation of cost cutting programs, investing in more efficient equipment, and automation of more steps in the production process.

Continuing the work and analysis begun in the first three SLPs, we again project ourselves back in time to the year 2012. I am in responsible for decisions on product development and pricing for the next four years for our line of tablets. I will show the score, financials and market data at the end of the four year period from my previous time discussions. Finally we can make a detailed discussion and analysis of the data using CVP analysis, and will explain why I recommend specific pricing and research and development (R&D) costs for the next four year period.

Total contribution needed to cover the old fixed costs + new fixed cost + profit is just the three factors added together.

Thus a sales reduction of 33.33% percent at initial price of $10 is equivalent to losses brought about by a price reduction of 1.5.

Breakeven Analysis for Product Tylenol Approach 1 - Same price as Tylenol Approach 2a - Cheaper than Tylenol Approach 2b - Cheaper w/lowered trade cost $ $ $ $ Unit Cost (Variable Cost) 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Trade Cost (Selling Price to Retailers) $ 1.69 $ 1.69 $ 1.05 $ 0.70 Fixed Cost (Advertising) 2,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 Break-Even Quantity [Fixed Cost/(Trade Cost-Unit Cost)] 1,834,862 5,504,587 13,333,333 60,000,000 Contribution Margin (Unit) 64% 64% 43% 14%

Although the shelves are selling well, the total profit of the company is a concern. An engineer suggested that the current production of model S should be cut back because Model S shelves are sold for $1800 per unit but their costs are $1839. Therefore, company is losing money on each one. But

Yoda Inc (Firm M) produces two Sonite (advanced electronics device) brands of consumer electronic devices called Mojo and Moon. Yoda competes with two other firms in this market space – Firms T and R. The various brands differentiate themselves among three main categories: economy (price/cost), performance (such as battery life and processing power), and convenience (such as features and display size). Within this market, designing a product that best meets consumer needs is critical for success.

After analyzing the results from the previous quarter, it was determined that the prices set for each segment were not sufficient. Product sales priority were also not properly adjusted. With the R&D investments, sales priorities needed to be changed for the main focus to become the most profitable market segments. Prices were not competitive which in turned decreased revenue, market share, and profitability. To become more competitive we altered the prices in each market segment. The Workhorse product was the first to change, the price was lowered to $2500 in an attempt to increase sales; at this price Team 4 was still making a profit on this product, as well as making the price much more competitive. The Workhorse sales priority was also lowered to 3rd in Americas and 4th in APAC and EMEA. This product was not selling as well as we had hoped, and was no longer as profitable as it once was which led to this decision. Next, the Innovator product’s price was adjusted; this involved a price increase to $4100. This price was adjusted to include the new

MicroPharma will receive 75% of sales in the U.S. and only 10% from sales overseas. v. A firm receives profit for the 10 years after if launches its product in 2003, starting from year 2004. During first years, the sales are increasing in an arithmetic progression starting from 0 in 2003 and reaching the peak in 2008. Since all numbers are in constant dollars, the total sales equal to the sum of sales in each year. If MegaPharma decides not to buy rights or license from MicroPharma, there is 50% chance of successful Phase 2 and 80% chance of successful Phase 3 (conditional on success of Phase 2), and 100% of success in FDA Review. Thus, MegaPharma has 40% chances that the the compound will be approved. If it passes Phase 2, Phase 3, and Review, MegaPharma will spend $52 million. Total MegaPharma’s anticipated sales of the compound are equal to 100 + 200 + 300 + 400 + 500 + 500 + 500 + 500 + 500 + 500 = 4000 million, total revenue is 75% × 4000 = 3000 million, if MegaPharma is the only supplier. If both MegaPharma and MicroPharma are on the market, the anticipated revenue is only a half: $1500 million. Total MicroPharma’s anticipated sales in the US are equal to $3660 million, and the revenue is $2745 million; anticipated sales overseas are equal to $3660 million and the revenue is $366 million, thus, 3111, if MicroPharma is the monopoly and 3111/2 if it has to share the market with

In a video “Cabinet of Curiosities” by David Nicholls published from YouTube on December 5, 2012, Nicholls introduced his cabinet that he created for an exhibition at Canterbury Museum in 2003. His purpose of showing his cabinet was he wanted people to realize that we cannot believe everything we see is true. Therefore, he let viewers decide which objects are counterfeit objects and real objects. From his cabinet, I think that “the death mask of a Samoan villager” which “consider as a local hero for saving people from growing in a hurricane in 1874” is probably a counterfeit object and “a dried rose” that “was given to Elizabeth Taylor by Richard Burton in 1958” are real objects. A story of Samoan hero might be fiction so that “the death

Because of the supplies decrease from s1 to s2, profit shift from profit1 to profit2.

"Suppose you own a McDonald’s franchise; a teenage cook makes ten hamburgers per hour for you, and each hamburger is sold for $2. Your hourly business revenue from hiring that cook is $20, i.e., price times the cook’s output. Suppose all other costs add up to $12 per hour of production, and the minimum wage you pay the cook is $5 per hour. Then your hourly profit from hiring that cook is $3 [$20 - $5 - $12]. Now suppose all costs a prices double, that is, a hamburger fetches $4, the minimum wage becomes $10, and other costs rise to $24.

This strategy was based on the CVP analysis that indicated that the company needs to discontinue the X5 for the 2015 year, and needs to lower the price on the X7. The decision to raise the price for the X6 is based on the understanding the for this premium product, the market can probably support a higher price.

In the first year of the simulation, it is clear to see that the X7 has entered into the market recently given the fact that it is operating at a loss. The two other products are less discernible in regards to their development; however since they are on an upward slope they are either in the growth or maturity phases. The decision was made in the first year to devoted 60% of the R&D budget to the X7 since it is developing while holding the price constant. This returned a result that stated that the price was higher than the competitors which will have to be addressed in the next round. Also, it was noted that the X5

Susan, Vice President of Product Innovation at MEM, needs to make a choice of whether to launch the product into the market by developing the new technology. She also needs an approximation of the total market shared by MEM for this product, and the likely profits for MEM from following this new technology.