Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (81370)	11/19/1998 4:41:00 PM
From: jhg_in_kc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Chuz, to continue yor fighting brand analogy: IBM buys Gateway, and sells its old inventory as IBM Direct build to order--its fighting brand. How would this help them? Forgive me I am slow today. jhg

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (81370)	11/19/1998 6:44:00 PM
From: rudedog	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 176387

Chuz - basically you establish two separate brand identities This was exactly the strategy behind CPQ's creation of the Presario brand in '94. They wanted to develop a 'fighting brand' to take on Packard-Bell, at that time the top dog, without cutting into the Deskpro commercial lines. The strategy worked in the consumer space, and they have done well at positioning the brands as separate value propositions. I think they planned to do exactly the same thing with Gateway. I have heard that there were two separate attempts to do a deal (one was widely reported in the press when Gateway's CEO 'told all' after negotiations fell apart). The new SMB line, with it's current sub-brand positioning, could get elevated to a full brand to pursue this same strategy in the direct space. I don't know if they will do that but it would be logical. Thanks for a thought-provoking post.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (81370)	11/19/1998 9:44:00 PM
From: On the QT	Respond to of 176387

Good Evening Chuzz, I can relate to your example. That kind of thing goes on with private labeling and brand packaging on the shelf level in the supermarket. I can remember our Institutional Brokers complaining that our Retail Brokers were infringing on their allocated shelf space and vice versa. Private labeling of the same substance under the cover of brand packaging selling side by side in competition separated only by brand acceptance and price. For Accent International, it represented the best of both worlds and was a dilemma. From their point of view more Monosodium Glutamate was being sold yes, at different pricing points, but collectively representing a greater share of a finite market in the smaller sense (the supermarket shelf and the supermarket warehouse). For me it was a balancing act, trying to accomplish our company goals and from my point of view, allowing our retail and institutional brokers to work in harmony, pushing if you will in the same direction. Our short term and long term interests to some degree were at odds. Many times the brokers pushed at each other each fighting not only the common enemy (other MSG manufacturers and the spice category in general)but one another to meet company objectives. This was further made more challenging because the very same brokers also represented other principals who, while were not direct competitors of product, were competitors in terms of the time and effort. It was for Accent International a challenge to have these food brokers put forth a sometimes greater effort then normally expected towards implementing our mutual goals. Credibility and feasibility was always a factor in our implementation of our principal objectives. At some level we were able to create that win-win ideal but it was not easily accomplished. In a sense VAR's also have divided time and effort loyalties while bringing to the marketplace in certain areas an additional plus for the manufacturer. Compaq's understanding and implementation of their short and long term objectives will be well served if they can create a comprehensive plan that continues to take advantage of the strength of such a relationship. The win-win amongst the partners are part and parcel similarly served. It can be done. How fast and to what degree successfully realized? Just how well will Compaq balance their existing sales force, direct and channel partners? Regards, QT