30 Jan Tinglesa is a supermarket chain that wants to open its stores in South Florida. Therefore, they must do a market analysis of
Tinglesa is a supermarket chain that wants to open its stores in South Florida. Therefore, they must do a market analysis of their main competition.
The task to do (in Excel template indicate with a cross and make a brief comment on why you think that)
Tab 5 force Industry Analysis (no)
Tab PESTLE (only what is in blue)
politics
Stability
corruption
Foreign Trade Policy
Tax Policy
Funding Grants
regulation
employment law
Consumer Protection Laws
Tab Competitive Analysis (NO)
Tab Strengths-Weaknesses (YES, indicate with a cross and brief comment)
Tab SWOT (Fill Ranking with brief comment)
Tab TOWS (Fill with brief comment)
Attached photo of what we are doing in class for your guidance
5 Forces Industry Analysis-0
| Walmart | |||||||||||
| Rossana Nieves | |||||||||||
| Instructions: (Only fill out columns C & D) | |||||||||||
| Column C: is your answer 5 Force Determinant (Low, Medium, High) | |||||||||||
| Column D: is the importance factor (1=low, 2=medium, 3=high) – don't leave blank | FOR TINGLESA | ||||||||||
| Columns E,F,G are formulas (DON'T Change) | |||||||||||
| Comments column is free to write | |||||||||||
| INPUT | DON'T CHANGE | Comments | INV | Opportunity | Threat | N/A | |||||
| 5F Answer | Importance | Threat of New Entrants | |||||||||
| Barriers to Entry Factors | L,M,H | 1,2,3 | LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH | X | |||||
| – Economies of Scale | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Products positioned in the market/low prices/ brand reputation | * | X | |||
| – Product Differentiation, brand loyal base | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Products positioned in the market/low prices/ brand reputation | * | X | |||
| – Switching cost | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | X | ||||||
| – 1st Mover Advantage | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | First in low prices | * | X | |||
| – Access to Distribution Channels | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Great access | * | X | |||
| – Intelectual Property, Gov. Regulation | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Own brand | * | X | |||
| – Barriers to exit | H | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | Highly specialized assets | * | X | |||
| – Response from leaders | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | * | X | ||||
| – Industry Growth | M | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | Solw grow R/S – Fast online grow | * | X | |||
| – Capital Requirements | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | * | |||||
| – Other | |||||||||||
| Total | 23 | 2 | 0 | LOW | |||||||
| 5F Answer | Importance | Bargaining Power | |||||||||
| Bargaining Power of Suppliers | L,M,H | 1,2,3 | LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH | ||||||
| – Concentration of suppliers vs. industry players | L | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Walmart is one of the main players to whom they supply products or services | X | ||||
| – Switching cost of buyers | H | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | For most suppliers, Walmart is their main buyer. | X | ||||
| – Differentiation of inputs | L | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | A little degree of differentiation between suppliers, low bargaining power | X | ||||
| – Few substitutes for inputs | L | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | Greater the number of available substitutes the less bargaining power | * | X | |||
| – Threat of forward integration | L | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | A large number of suppliers that guarantee the final product | X | ||||
| – Supplier dependance on heavily on indusry players | L | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | Supplier Diversity Program (mitigates dependency on a single supplier) | * | X | |||
| – Other | |||||||||||
| Total | 9 | 0 | 3 | LOW | |||||||
| 5F Answer | Importance | Bargaining Power | |||||||||
| Bargaining Power of Buyers | L,M,H | 1,2,3 | LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH | ||||||
| – Concentration of buyers | L | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Large population of consumers ( no pressure) | X | ||||
| – Switching costs | L | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | Low consumer switching cost, Other rivalry | * | X | |||
| – Undiffentiated productS, commoditization | M | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | Alternative providers are easy to find and competitors are pitted against each other | X | ||||
| – Threat of backward integration | L | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Not demand concessions or discounts | X | ||||
| – Industry purchase is large fraction of input cost | L | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | X | |||||
| – High profit customers | M | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | X | |||||
| – Quality is not valued by customer | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Search for low prices at medium quality | * | X | |||
| Total | 12 | 4 | 3 | LOW | |||||||
| 5F Answer | Importance | Intensity of Rivalry | |||||||||
| Rivalry among existing firms | L,M,H | 1,2,3 | LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH | ||||||
| – Compete on Price | H | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | strong online competition Amazon/ Target, and Grocey chains is very high | X | ||||
| – Fixed costs are high | H | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | X | |||||
| – High unused capacity | M | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | A lot of traffic people at certain times | X | ||||
| – Perishable products | H | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | X | |||||
| – Competitors are many and similarly sized | M | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | Few retail sotres/ stron online competition | X | ||||
| – Industry growth is slow | M | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | Solw grow R/S – Fast online grow | X | ||||
| – Exit barriers are high | H | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | Highly specialized assets, which can be difficult to sell or relocate | X | ||||
| – Low chance of "collusion" | 0 | 0 | 0 | X | |||||||
| – Brand Identity | H | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Low prices in the minds of consumers | * | X | |||
| Total | 3 | 6 | 10 | HIGH | |||||||
| 5F Answer | Importance | Threat of Potential Substitute | |||||||||
| Threat of Potential Substitutes | L,M,H | 1,2,3 | LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH | ||||||
| – Closeness of substitute, easy to switch | L | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | Few substitutes that offer a wide range of products/ fast online grow | X | ||||
| – Performance : Price Relationship | L | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | Few substitutes that offer prices as low | X | ||||
| – Other | |||||||||||
| Total | 5 | 0 | 0 | LOW | |||||||
| Source: Competitive Strategy by Michael Porter, Harvard Business School | https://s3.amazonaws.com/he-assets-prod/interactives/057_porters_forces_framework/Launch.html | ||||||||||
| WALMART |
https://s3.amazonaws.com/he-assets-prod/interactives/057_porters_forces_framework/Launch.html
PESTLE
| Rossana Nieves | |||||
| FOR TINGLESA | |||||
| Political | Opportunity | Threat | N/A | Comment | |
| Stability | X | ||||
| Corruption | X | ||||
| Foreign Trade Policy | X | ||||
| Tax Policy | X | ||||
| Funding Grants | X | ||||
| Economic | |||||
| Growth | X | Unstable economy | |||
| Interest Rates | x | Anticipate rising interest rates | |||
| Inflation | x | High infection | |||
| Disposable Income | x | Not very clear, could be an opportunity | |||
| Labor Costs | x | Scarcity of labor | |||
| Social | |||||
| Population Growth | x | Low population gowth rate | |||
| Demographich Changes | X | Consumers shift towards eating healthier foods | |||
| Cultural Changes | x | More vegan and vegetarian consumers, | |||
| Consumer Trends/Views | x | tendency to respect the environment ( organic foods) | |||
| Workforce Trends | Workplace design trends: Sustainable layouts. | ||||
| Technological | |||||
| Emerging Technologies | x | Apps, social media can develop a new business | |||
| Maturing Technologies | x | ||||
| Patents | x | Development of a new brand | |||
| Production | x | Development of a new brand | |||
| Research & Development | x | Environmentally friendly products | |||
| Legal | |||||
| Regulation | |||||
| Employment Laws | |||||
| Consumer Protection Laws | |||||
| Tax Policies | x | Deduct of part of business startup costs | |||
| Anti-trust Laws | |||||
| Environment | |||||
| Climate Change | X | Affect economies, increase resource scarcity and dramatically impact business | |||
| Envitromental Policies | X | Environmental, social and corporate governance criteria | |||
| Availability of Input | x | ||||
| Corporate Social Resp. | X | Improving labour policies/ Philanthropic responsibilities | |||
| Other | |||||
| Health (Pandemic) | X | Reduced hours/scarcity of labor |
Competitive Analysis 0
| Most Important Attributes in Category | Company A | Competitor 1 | Competitor 2 | Competitor 3 | Competitor 4 | Competitor 5 | Competitor 6 | Evidence | ||||
| Target | BJs | Publix | Winn Dixie | Aldi | Amazon | 5 | Best | |||||
| 4 | Very good | |||||||||||
| 3 | good – average | |||||||||||
| 2 | below average | |||||||||||
| 1 | worst | |||||||||||
Strengths-Weaknesses
| Coke-Costa | ||||
| Internal Capabilities | Strength | Weakness | N/A | |
| Innovation | ||||
| Proprietary Technology | ||||
| New Product Introductions | ||||
| R&D | ||||
| Patents | ||||
| Entrepreneurial | ||||
| Supply Chain | ||||
| Production Cost | ||||
| Economies of Scale | ||||
| Effiencies | ||||
| Vertical Integration | ||||
| Workforce | ||||
| Capacity | ||||
| Outsourcing | ||||
| Finance – Access to Capital | ||||
| Financial Resources | ||||
| Profitability | ||||
| Cash Available | ||||
| Financing Capacity | ||||
| Parent Company financing | ||||
| Management | ||||
| CEO, C-Suite | ||||
| Know-how | ||||
| Culture | ||||
| Turnover | ||||
| Experience | ||||
| Marketing | ||||
| Brand Equity / Image | ||||
| Marketing Know-how | ||||
| Product Breadth/Depth, Quality | ||||
| Place – Distribution Channels | ||||
| Promotions – Advertising, Digital Media | ||||
| Brand Awareness | ||||
| Brand Loyalty | ||||
| Customer Service | ||||
| Size of Customer base | ||||
| Market Penetration | ||||
| Sales Force | ||||
| Source: Based on "Strategic Market Management" by David Aaker, Christine Moorman |
SWOT-0
| Choose the Top 5 | |||||
| Rank | Strengths | Rank | Weaknesses | 1 | |
| 1 | 1 | ||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||
| Opportunities | Threats | ||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||
| 5 | 5 |
TOWS-0
| Strengths | Weaknesses | |||
| Opportunities | ||||
| Threats |
