Management Consulting/Case Study Questions on Bussiness Communication
hari shankar wrote at 2014-11-18 09:55:55
CASE 1 (20 Marks)
Kodak started selling photographic equipment on Japan 1889 and by the 1930s it had a dominant position in
the Japanese market. But after World War II, U.S occupation forces persuaded most U.S companies including
Kodak to leave Japan to give the war torn local industry a chance to recover. Kodak was effectively priced out
of the market by tariff barriers; over the next 35 years Fuji gained 70% share of the market while Kodak saw
its share slip to miserable 5%. During this period Kodak limited much of its activities in Japan.
This situation persisted until early 1980s when Fuji launched an aggressive export drive, attacking Kodak in
the north American and European markets. Deciding that a good offence is the best defense, in 1984 and the
next six year, Kodak outspent Fuji in Japan by a ratio of more than 3 to 1. It erected mammoth $ 1 million near
signs as land marks in many of the Japan’s big cities and also sponsored Sumo wrestling, Judo, and tennis
tournaments and even the Japanese team at the 1988 Seoul Olympics. Thus Kodak has put Fuji on defensive,
forcing it to divert resources from overseas to defend itself at home. By 1990’s, some of Fuji’s best executives
had been pulled back to Tokyo.
All this success, however , was apparently not enough for Kodak. In may 1995, Kodak filed a petition with the
US trade office, that accured the Japanese government and Fuji of “Unfair trading practices”. According to the
petition, the Japanese government helped to create a ‘ profile sanctuary’ for Fuji in Japan by systematically
denying Kodak access to Japanese distribution channels for consumer film and paper. Kodak claims Fuji has
effectively shut Kodak products out of four distributors that have a 70% share of the photo distribution market.
Fuji has an equity position in two of the distributors, gives large year –end relates and cash payments to all
four distributors as a reward for their loyalty to Fuji, and owns stakes in the banks that finance them. Kodak
also claims that Fuji uses similar tactics to control 430 wholesale photo furnishing labs in Japan to which it is
the exclusive supplier. Moreover Kodak’s petition claims that the Japanese government has actively
encourages these practices.
But Fuji a similar counter arguments relating to Kodak in U.S. and states bluntly that Kodak’s charges are a
clear case of the pot calling the kettle back.
(a) What was the critical catalyst that led Kodak to start taking the Japanese market seriously?
(b) From the evidence given in the case do you think Kodak’s charges of unfair trading practices against Fuji
are valid? Support your answer.
SAMI wrote at 2015-01-06 18:46:46
Nestle has launched quality street ,lion and after 8 choclates imported from Europe. Qualtty Street is an assortment of chocolates priced at Rs. 7 5 for 218 gm. After Eight is a popular adult chocolate priced at Rs.25 for 20 gm and Lion is a caramel wafer bar priced at Rs. 20 for a 45 gm bar. (Kit Kat )is priced at Rs. 6 for a 17 gm bar and has a chocolaty taste while Lion has a crunchy taste). The brands have different tastes and will appeal to different target segments (though the target segment is one which may have already been exposed to these brands during visits abroad). These brands have been introduced in metros in upmarket stores which sell brands bears the label "lmported by Nestle India Ltd." indicating that they may be better than smuggled ones (which may be stale).
1 Suggest suitable media /media vehicles for promoting these brands. Give reasons in support of your answer
2 What business communication media you will utilize if you have to launch a soap in rural India?