You are on page 1of 6

Brannigan Foods:

Strategic Marketing
Panning

Group No- 12
Amanjot| Janani| Nidhi| Prakriti

Brannigan Foods
Company
Competition
Context
100 year legacy
Small competitors
Soup division is the
Sales of the sector
entering the market
cash cow accounting
have been reducing
Walmarts private
1.4 cans avg per
for 40% of the
label soups growing
revenues
week consumption in
at 5%
RTE ,71% of the
US
Shelf space given by
Soup is a seasonal
revenues
Walmart reducing by
Anabelle acquired
buy
3%
5yr ago
Collaborator
Customers
s
Must ensure that
Sales of the sector
retailer goodwill
have been reducing
doesnt fall
Baby Boomer
Retailers would
generation, the
appreciate price cuts
patron of this sector
that may boost sales
are now retiring
Supermarkets sold
Health concerns on
62.9% of the
the rise
category

Industry Analysis- Processed


Food
Bargaining power of suppliers
Power of customers is HIGH
Demand for innovation and new
favors
Cheaper prices in demand

Rivalry among
existing soup
sellers

Threat of new entrants

Power of fast food chains and other


food satisfying quick, easy, tasty
and cheap is HIGH
Dramatic change in societys value
and demographic trends

Most companies in this industry are


large, mature and have large market
share
High entry barriers and the threat is
LOW
Huge investments for ads,
promotions and gaining shelf-space

Bargaining power of buyers


Threat of substitutes

Power of raw material supplier is


MEDIUM
Prices charged may increase due to
infation in case of non-existing of
prior relations

Alternative II- Claire Mackey


Proposition is to buy out small companies to enter healthier and convenient
segments
that have newA favors
that Brannigans
major and
investment
has to beproduct portfolio does not have
made in order to acquire a new
company
Sometimes the synergies between the
companies are not stable enough and
miscues in the lines of production
could occur
The past acquisition of Annabelles did
not meet the expectations, so the
board of directors might not look at it
with enthusiastic eyes

The acquisition might seem


positive since the investment in
R&D is literally null
If the brands that are acquired are
kept,
there
is
an
important
reduction in cannibalization effects

Important Pointers:
Minimum of 30% of sales to
be spent in ad & promotion
for a minimum of 3 years
Cost of acquisition refected
in the form of interest and
depreciation with a rate of 4%
Synergies (manufacturing
and operating ) could increase
the profits by 10% within 2
years
Retail Partner paradox
Retaining acquired brand
name: marketing expense is
high, retain >90% of acquired
brand shelf-space, reduce
cannibalization by 70%
Minimum of 10% ROI after 5
years of sales

Alternative I: Tiphas
Proposition: Invest in growing sectors like that of healthy soups and mealsin-a-pouch soups targeted at working mothers and professionals looking for a
fast but healthy meal
Cons
The growth in earning in the next
year is only 1%, i.e. less than the 3%
target
The growth in the next 5 years is
also short of the target 3%
So this doesnt seem to be achieving
the objective both in the short term
and long term

Pros
There is no cost of acquisition or
additional R&D
High growth is expected in the target
sector
Baby Boomer generation is the loyal
customer who now wants healthier
products so this directly caters to
their needs as well
This suggestion follows market trends

Marketing Mix

Promo
tion
A pull strategy may be employed through
discounts and offers
Media campaign to be mostly above the line
using television advertisements and social
media

Place

The RTE soup category is the most profitable


one and can be stated to be the cash cow
(based on the BCG matrix) of the company
The market is very mature as well as the
products, this is why based on Ansoffs
matrix, the strategy will focus on penetrating
the market
The branding strategy will consist of
implementing an umbrella brand that will give
Produc
emotional values to the products and brands
targeted to the different market segments t

Price