TEAM A:KAMIKAZE. Winner of the markstrat game

1. MARKSTRAT 2015
A.Y. 2014/2015 | 20206 – Strategic Marketing & Marketing Plan 2 | Class 10.1 25
TEAM A: THE KAMIKAZE

2. 26
OUR TEAM
Maria Elena Abate
Akira Aoyama
Silvia Arditi di Castelvetere
Paola Aulisa
Georges Ayoub
Tudor Baja
Elettra Benzi
Isabella Bernardi
Patrick Beyer
Anastasia Borisovkaya

3. 27
AGENDA
TEAM GOALS
TEAM STRATEGY
TARGETS
PRODUCTS
PRICE
ADVERTISING
PERFORMANCE
EXPECTATIONS

4. 28
“Risk more than others think is safe.
Dream more than others think is practical.”
Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks.
BE THE FIRST
INNOVATOR IN VODITE
BE THE LEADER IN
VODITE
EXPLOIT NEW
MARKET
OPPORTUNITIES
TEAM GOALS

5. 29
MARKET GROWTH
STRATEGY
“WINNING WITHOUT
FIGHTING”
L-T ORIENTATIONMARKET CREATION
TEAM STRATEGY

6. 30
Highest level of Brand Awareness: 64,8 %
Highest Forecasted size in 5 periods: 30,2 %
Not targeted by our competitors at the beginning
“MORE SAMA for SINGLES”
“ but also…ONE SAMA FOR AN OTHERS”
SONITE – SAMA
TARGETS
MISTAKE #1: We realised that in MDS we were closer to Others in terms of Performance and Economy
1 2 3
456

7. 31
Highest brand awareness: respectively 76% and 71,1 % in Period 0
They both fit better with the features of original SALT
“LET’S HANG OUT W/ HIGH EARNERS AND PROFESSIONALS”
1 2 3
5 46
SONITE – SALT
All of us agreed to not improve it, since our intentions were to
invest only in the most profitable market, VODITE
MISTAKE #2: We were not able to be consistent with just one target.
TARGETS

8. 32
VODITE – VALT
THE CHASM
INNOVATORS EARLY ADOPTERS FOLLOWERS
P 3 80 % 20% -
P 4 45 % 45% 10%
P 5 30 % 35% 35%
P 6 18 % 34% 48%
Fig. 1: ROGERS’S MODEL
TARGETS

9. 33
VODITE – VALT
TARGETS
80%
45%
30%
18%
20%
45%
35%
34%
6%
0
10%
48%
88%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
P
3
P
4
P
5
P
6
P11
Targets in %
INNOVATORS EARLY ADOPTERS FOLLOWERS

10. 34
VODITE – VALT
TARGETS
12
32
111
286
1348
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
P
3
P
4
P
5
P
6
P11
Targets in Numbers
INNOVATORS EARLY ADOPTERS FOLLOWERS

11. 35
SONITE – SAMA & SALT
PRODUCT
Fig. 2: SAMA
SAMA: DISINVEST
Once we sold all the remaining inventory, we decided to
withdraw it, since it was the least profitable product we
had in portfolio: low quality and low prices in the market
did not guarantee sufficient margins.
• Weight:
18
• Design:
3
• Volume:
75
• Max
Freq:
25
• Power:
12
Fig. 3: SALT
• Weight:
13
• Design:
8
• Volume:
40
• Max
Freq:
40
• Power:
75
Our investment were mainly focused on SALT, because of:
• Higher margins
• Higher ROI: 3,5 times higher than SAMA.

12. 36
SONITE – SALT
PRODUCT
…WHAT ABOUT SAL2?
Weight: 13
Design: 9
Power: 64
Max Freq: 32
Volume: 40
MISTAKE #4: It was never launched: we realised we did not have a great share which could
support our investment in terms of advertisement.
Fig. 4: SAL2

13. 37
VODITE – VALT
PRODUCT
Autonomy: 20
Diameter: 65
Design: 3
Weight: 75
Max Freq.: 6
Since we are Kamikaze group, we invested 7550 K$ to create VALT all in one period (period 2).
Given the fact we did not have any Research Study helping us to define the characteristics of the
product, we made some queries in order to come up with a suitable cost.
Main Result: KAMIKAZE’S MARKET SHARE in VODITE: 100%
Product Positioning Statement:
“Look like the innocent
flower…
but be the serpent
under't” (Macbeth )
Fig. 5: VALT

14. 38
VODITE – VAL2
Autonomy20:
Diameter: 65
Design: 3
Weight: 75
Max Freq.: 6
In period 3, we spent 2620 K$ in improving the overall characteristics of our VALT, still
without focusing on the preferences of any particular segment, in the attempt to “catch’em
all!” and given the fact that Research Studies about Vodite were not available yet. We took
this decision to check up with the product life cycle, even if we had no competition.
Fig. 6: VAL2
“A,B,C…
LET’S SPEND
MONEY ON R&D”
PRODUCT

15. 39
SONITE – SAMA & SALT
PRICE
MISTAKE #5: We decreased the price of Salt because of product obsolescence, but relatively
late we realised that we could sell the same even with higher price
250
200
179 178
500 509
460
418 414 410 410
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
Period 0 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6
SAMA SALT

16. 40
VODITE – VALT & VAL2
PRICE
MISTAKE #6: We did not exploit our Monopoly Position as much as we could, by not setting an excessively high price.
Furthermore, we slightly decreased because of a little uncertainty about new potential entrants in market. In retrospect,
we might have committed a pricing mistake since we should have set a higher price in the beginning and reduced it with
time to speed up adoption by followers. In period 6, we simply wanted to get as much margins as possible out of the
product keeping in mind the inverse effect of price on quantity demanded.
500
525
550
575
600
Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6
VALT
VALT
ENTRY
DETERRANCE
STRATEGY
To deter competitor from entering
the Vodite market, we launched the
product with a relatively low price.
We wanted for them not to be
profitable to enter the market
(stealing competitive positions from
us by setting a lower price.)

17. 41
SONITE – SAMA & SALT
ADVERTISING
1440
1855
85
85 100
0 0
2400
3200
150
400
237
800
500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
Period 0 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6
SAMA SALT
Fig. 7: ADVERTISING EXPENDITURE K$

18. 42
VODITE
ADVERTISING
3000
6000
7000
6000
2500
3500
4500
5500
6500
7500
Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6
VALT
Fig. 8: ADVERTISING EXPENDITURE K$

19. 43
PERFORMANCE
19,277
9,367 25,741
38,897
46,143
13,982
33,260
42,626
68,368
107,265
153,408
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
Period 0 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5
NMC (K$) CUMULATIVE NMC (K$)
Net Marketing Contribution

20. 44
Return On Investment
2.56
2.69
1.01
2.70
3.80
4.44
2.63 1.94
2.17
2.57
2.95
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
Period 0 Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5
ROI Cumulative ROI
PERFORMANCE

21. 45
Stock Price Index
1,000
1,110
860
1,214
1,638
1,785
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
A
PERFORMANCE

22. 46
Stock Price Index
-
250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1,750
2,000
2,250
P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
A E I O U
2nd
PERFORMANCE

23. 47
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
A E I O U
Net Marketing Contribution
4th
PERFORMANCE

24. 48
1.70
1.90
2.10
2.30
2.50
2.70
2.90
3.10
3.30
3.50
P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5
A E I O U
Return On Investment
3rd
PERFORMANCE

25. $70,620,000
+86%
8.26
+25%
3.69 $224,000,000
+52%
+46%
cNMC6
NMC6
ROI6
cROI6
EXPECTATIONS 49

26. THANK YOU !
50