Tweeter etc.

Team Members -
39204 Manish Sharma
39209 Mohit Narang
39271 Sankha Som
39281 Shreevallabh
39320 Vishesh Dahiya
39328 Abhishek Kakralia
Problem Statement:
Even with the use of Automatic Price Protection Strategy, Tweeter is being perceived
more expensive among customers.

Objective:
To determine effectiveness of Automatic Price Protection (APP) in Tweeters growth

Approach:
Analysis of Tweeters Price Competitiveness w.r.t. competitors by comparing prices of
common electronic products
Calculating number of products exclusive to Tweeter on which APP will not be effective
Calculating APP contribution across different Tweeter product mix and in overall sales,
thus calculating APP effectiveness
 Analysis of Tweeters Price Competitiveness w.r.t. competitors by
comparing prices of common electronic products

Colour Television Multi CD Player

Mean Price of Cam Corder Mean Price of Multi CD Player
Lechmere Circuit City Wiz Tweeter Lechmere Circuit City Wiz Tweeter
$554 $507 $563 $649 $229 $240 $229 $390

Lechmere Circuit City Wiz Lechmere Circuit City Wiz

No. of Common Brands with No. of Common Brands with
10 5 9 3 4 4
Tweeter Tweeter
Mean Price with Common Mean Price with Common
$675 $552 $666 $193 $255 $215
Brand Brand
Tweeter Mean Prize with Tweeter Mean Prize with
$668 $566 $676 $180 $258 $200
Common Brand Common Brand
 Analysis of Tweeters Price Competitiveness w.r.t. competitors by
comparing prices of common electronic products

Cam Corder Speakers

Mean Price of Cam Corder Mean Price of Cam Corder
Lechmere Circuit City Wiz Tweeter Lechmere Circuit City Wiz Tweeter
$740 $744 $738 $896 $243 $209 $323 $586

Lechmere Circuit City Wiz Lechmere Circuit City Wiz

No. of Common Brands with No. of Common Brands with
11 11 8 0 0 1
Tweeter Tweeter
Mean Price with Common Mean Price with Common
$893 $875 $805 $198
Brand Brand
Tweeter Mean Prize with Tweeter Mean Prize with
$895 $877 $806 $200
Common Brand Common Brand
Step 1 -
APP EFFECTIVENESS CALCULATION

People Aware about APP 284

Total People 1286
% People Aware about APP 22.1%

Entry Level Customer Base 5%

Price Biter Customer Base 20%
Total Customer Base 25%

APP Effectiveness 5.52%

 Step 2 -
APP Not applicable
% Products Adjusting
% Contribution APP Contribution in
No. of Products Due to Price Exclusive (APP Not for each
in Dollar Sales increased Revenue
Applicable) Category
Color TV 14 6 2 57% 45% 24%
CD Player 20 7 12 95% 85% 7%
Camcorder 13 11 1 92% 80% 4% 30.75%
Speaker 24 1 23 100% 90% 42%
Others 50% 23%

Total 71 25 38 89%

Expected Gross Revenue in 1996 due to

$65,571
increase in no. of shops Tweeter etc. Income Statement
Actual Increment in Revenue $82,400
Additional Increment $16,829 FY 1993 FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996
% Additional Increment 26% Gross
$43,714 $55,164 $70,305 $82,400
% Contribution of APP in additional Revenues
30.75%
increment
APP Effectiveness 7.89%
 Number of Checks Value of Checks
5,000 $200,000
4,500 $180,000
4,000 $160,000
3,500 $140,000
3,000 $120,000
2,500 $100,000
2,000 $80,000
1,500 $60,000
1,000 $40,000
500 $20,000
- $0
June
August

August

June

August

August

June

August

June

August
April

April

April

April
December

February

December

February

December

December

February

December

February

December
October

October

October

October

October

October
1993 1994 1995 1993 1994 1995

Total Refund $7,83,866

Combined Refunds in November, December) $4,53,624

Percentage Refunds during Sale Period 57.87%

THANK YOU