Li & Fung 2006


Published on

ppt on "Li & Fung 2006" case study.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Li & Fung 2006

  1. 1. Li & Fung 2006
  2. 2. What factors contributed to Li & Fung’s success in the past? <ul><li>Intense planning & scrutiny of core sourcing business </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Two Primary plans </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Not owning any piece of the supply chain Acquisition of competitors </li></ul><ul><li>Cost Savings from the efficiencies 1. Broadened customer base </li></ul><ul><li>Sophisticated value-added services 2. Better management team </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>3. Enhanced product Offerings </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>4. Portfolio balance </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. Value Equation Maximize profits Profits V - P P - C C
  4. 4. Changes that they made to deal with the sweeping changes in their client industries <ul><li>Expanded its range of product (1937) </li></ul><ul><li>Offices beyond Hong Kong ( 1979) </li></ul><ul><li>Family owned business to professionaly managed company </li></ul><ul><li>Mergers and acquisitions </li></ul><ul><li>3- Yr. business planning ( eg cyclical fashion industry) </li></ul><ul><li>Experience and expertise-dedicated team, just in Time Coordination, timely information (to keep stores “fresh) </li></ul><ul><li>Including IT ( Customer Centric) </li></ul><ul><li>Moving up in the value chain </li></ul><ul><li>Eating into soft $ 3 </li></ul><ul><li>Onshore US supply chain strategy </li></ul>
  5. 5. Business Model
  6. 6. Geographic Markets <ul><li>Europe was Fragmented and less homogenous than US. </li></ul><ul><li>European Retailers were not used to sophistication. </li></ul><ul><li>Retailers had own offices, difficult to garner business. </li></ul><ul><li>Multiple agents and supply chains, business was smaller </li></ul><ul><li>Buyers opted to diversify so they had more no of vendors. </li></ul>
  7. 7. Product/Services <ul><li>Longer lead time & more labor intensive </li></ul><ul><li>Hard goods Customer price less in comparison to soft goods. </li></ul><ul><li>Garmented industry crowded and less opportunity for growth, whereas it is possible in hard goods. </li></ul>
  8. 8. Issues & Recommendations <ul><li>Major Issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Overreliance on US Market </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Diversified European Market </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Global Saturation of demand for soft goods </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Unbalanced Portfolio </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Value Proposition <ul><li>Key Parameters for tapping Potential Value </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced Markdown </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Quality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lead time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Optimum Pricing </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Brand Management (Three Pronged Strategy for Value Addition) </li></ul><ul><li>Propel Virtual JIT Coordination Concept </li></ul><ul><li>Customer Centric Focus </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IT Advantage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Customized Supply Chain Consulting </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Product Portfolio
  11. 11. Product Focus <ul><li>Issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Global Saturation of demand for Soft Goods </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Focus </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hard goods need to be diffused primarily </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Target Large Hard Goods Companies also </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Eg: Nike, Tommy Hilfiger etc.. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Geographic Resolution <ul><li>Issues </li></ul><ul><ul><li>European market is highly fragmented </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Outsourcing is not preferred in European markets </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Resolution </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Focus on Global Players majorly dealing with markets like India, China and the like. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Location advantage also inherent in above places </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Recommendations <ul><li>Go for forward and backward integration. </li></ul><ul><li>Capture markets in growing economies. </li></ul><ul><li>From consumers to industrial products also. </li></ul><ul><li>Start an onshore in Europe taking the learning from the US market. </li></ul>
  14. 14. Comparison Year 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Profit %age 3.64 9.02 2.35 2.37 2.8 3.18 3.54 3.44 2.16 2.9 2.84 3.24 3.22 Growth in sales   13.8 50.45 35.78 6.64 7.24 13.86 53.35 31.80 13.17 14.34 10.65 17.9
  15. 15. Thank You!