Mr. Marchionne will attempt to integrate Fiat and Chrysler by developing Fiat’s newer models with Chrysler for a number of brands, as well as sharing parts, platforms and plants to become a more efficient manufacturer. Another attempt by Mr. Marchionne is to take advantage of Chrysler's dealership network in the U.S. to sell its own cars and reduce its exposure to Europe. The integration of Fiat and Chrysler will augment its economies of scale to have an advantage in competing against their rivals in the global market.

Mr. Durban's reputation is known for being savvy with technology. This reputation was given to him because of his deal to take Dell private. If it becomes approved by Dell shareholders, it would be the largest corporation privatization since the financial crisis. Mr. Durban works for Sliver Lake Partners, a private-equity firm which focuses on investing exclusively in the tech industry, saw value in Dell's software and services operations, which allows him to gain knowledge about technologies. Another reputation that Mr. Durban is known for is being a “deal junkie”. He invested in companies, such as Zynga, Groupon, and Skype and all have turned out successful. Mr. Durban urges all investors to make calculated financial decisions rather than emotional ones.

The approach is Alcatel-Lucent taking to stabilizing the organization is by pursuing a plan called, “Project Secular”, which allows the company to buy time by mortgaging key assets. This plan raised the company’s stock up more than 50%. According to advisors and clients, the company will eventually seek deeper changes since this plan wasn’t enough to keep the company moving forward. Another approach that Alcatel-Lucent needs to take is creating new innovations within their technology department. In the article, it seems as if Alcatel is discovering that it can't keep up in the global tech race. One of their clients, France Telecom, said that they were waiting for Alcatel to come up with a strategy. Also, a network telecom, France Bouygues, stated that Alcatel “didn’t have the technology” and that it ”couldn’t keep up”. The strategy for Alcatel is to plan new wireless networks, make the equipment and then be the outsourcing company to maintain the whole thing.

Snapple’s initial success came from its value as the “alternative drink”- it was made from more natural ingredients but still sold nationwide. It appealed to those wanting juice or iced tea instead of caffeinated cold beverages, and was especially successful in cafes and delis. They benefited from successful advertising campaigns and expanded rapidly throughout the early 90s.
Gatorade was successful due to its innovation in the sports drink market; nothing like it had existed on a national scale beforehand. Backed by nearly all major national sports leagues and even Michael Jordan, Gatorade became a necessity for athletes and sports-enthusiasts everywhere. Both Snapple and Gatorade were acquired by Quaker Oats, but with different results.
Quaker overestimated Snapple’s value and paid over three times what the company was actually worth at the time of the acquisition. The acquisition could have been successful and Snapple could have been worth its high price tag, but Quaker overhauled the Snapple image. It tried to make Snapple more mainstream by offering it in the supermarkets that also offered Gatorade. For many of Snapple’s customers, their purchases of Snapple were impulsive and were usually made at delis, not grocery stores. Snapple’s comparatively high price made it less appealing to consumers to buy in large volume. By diverting Snapple’s image of a high-quality exclusive and natural fruit juice to that of a mass-market drink, Snapple’s sales dropped sharply. Furthermore, Quaker forced Snapple to abandon its unique marketing and advertising strategy and adopt a more mainstream approach. Given the emergence of other natural fruit drinks in the market around this time, Snapple’s sales continued to decline until it was eventually acquired by Triarc.
Triarc’s first order of business after acquiring Snapple was to revert back to its original advertising strategy, which included Wendy Kaufman as its spokeswoman. Additionally, Snapple should also return to its roots in terms of marketing and distribution. Instead of being just another fruit juice at the supermarket, Snapple should aim to be sold at delis, cafes, and organic foods stores- especially local one. It should revamp its image to that of a natural and exclusive juice that is marketed to people who are into organic and natural food, rather than the mass market. If possible, Snapple should also target the younger generation that is into the natural-foods craze as well. Lastly, Snapple should consider potentially reintroducing some of its original flavors in an effort to attract some of its original customers who were first introduced to Snapple in the late 80s.

The author was informative about Snapple’s foundation in the introduction, but didn’t list out the main points to guide us through the essay. I felt like the author just answered the questions in a paragraph form. In spite of the way the intro was written, I felt that the author supported his/her knowledge by providing reasons for Snapple successful beginnings and their predicament leading towards the end. I like how the author contributed great points for Triarc’s next approach on bringing back Snapple. Most importantly, the essay convinced me that the author knows what he/she was talking about and can address each questions with a great argument

Snapple became successful by serving a niche market. Under Unadulterated Food Products, Inc., they sold to many independent outlets and few convenient stores. They created a name for themselves as a small-scale beverage and a healthy option to other drinks available at the time. However, after being taken over by Quaker, they brand lost the qualities that made it unique and began to suffer with sales. At the end of the case Triarc buys Snapple, and I believe that it can become successful again by returning to business practices that helped establish it as a competitor for other beverage companies. By bringing back the iconic advertisers, focusing distribution to its original targets, and expanding their product line, I believe that Snapple can become a successful brand.

Snapple, like Gatorade was successful to begin with because it served to a market that hadn’t been reached on a major scale yet. For consumers, Snapple offered a healthy option to beverages like soda at a time when health concerns related to drinks are becoming prominent. According to the case study, the company marketed the drink as “new age” and used the slogan “Made from the Best Stuff on Earth” (Snapple Beverages). Gatorade on the other had was very successful as the first sports drink of its kind, and with backing from the NFL, NBA, and MLB, they were getting plenty of advertising. In order to help Snapple become successful again, I believe that they should refocus on there original targets and expand their customer base by returning to promoting the healthy advantages of their product versus the alternative. Begin selling to small delis and convenience stores again. There could even be a possible entrance into the fast food market given they build up a large enough customer base.

Along with this refocusing plan, Snapple should bring back the iconic advertising that helped make it a recognizable brand. In 1994, Quaker Oats purchased Snapple for $1.7 billion dollars. Did they overvalue the Snapple name? No. During 1994, Snapple’s product was doubling in sales and brought in $675 million (Snapple Beverages). At that rate of growth the acquisition of the product for $1.7 billion had the opportunity to reap long-term benefits and profits for Quaker Oats. However, immediately upon their purchase, Quaker Oats dropped the iconic advertising that helped define the brand and in a way, broke the familiarity that customers had with the product. This significantly attributed to the fall in value for the company, and some of the icons, Howard stern for example, began anti-Snapple campaigns that didn’t help its image. This would suggest that the acquisition of Snapple by Quaker Oats was a good idea, and maybe it wasn’t even poorly executed, but they changed certain things about Snapple that made it appeal to so many people which in turn lead to a major drop in value. By bringing back the iconic advertisers like Wendy Kaufman, Snapple could reestablish the familiarity it had with its customers, which would lead to more sales.

With the value of Snapple falling by over half in a matter of 27 months, It was a great time for someone to come in and buy out still a known name for a discounted price. Triarc, if they can manage Snapple better than Quaker Oats, could cause the value to rise substantially and receive a great return on their investment. I think a brilliant move was rehiring Wendy Kaufman as a spokes person and releasing a new flavor of the drink. Bringing Kaufman back brought back the comfort and trust it had established in its earlier life, and by bringing forth a new product they diversified and gave people who had been buyers in the past a reason to come back and try the new drink. In my introduction I claimed that Triarc could make Snapple a successful brand. According to an article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal in 2012, Snapple “is becoming a fore-runner in the U.S. beverage market..and can potentially pay off big in years to come” (Glazer). It seem like they were successful.

The author did a fabulous job on stating his/her main points in the introduction. The paper is well concise and went straight to the point on addressing the issues. It was easy to read and was consistent with their argument for the case. Sources were used to provide information from an outside source. The author convinced me that their information was correct and did an excellent job on convincing me to understand his/her side of the argument. I was interested in the case study because it had solid facts and brought up valid points and had good detail throughout the paper.

In this case study response all of the questions were answered that were required. In the introduction, I was able to clearly understand the theme of the overall response. All of the points were understood throughout the response, which made the theme understandable. It was very easy to read and the transitions were perfectly written. The author definitely used the appropriate format that was required for the majority of the response. I agreed with the author on the points and ideas that they made. There were many valid points for the reason as to why Snapple was not successful during the time it was acquired by Quaker. The report was interesting because it gave me more insight and backed up what I wrote on my report as well. Overall, I enjoyed reading the report.

To answer the case study’s main question, I think Triarc can make Snapple a successful brand for a number of key reasons. One, Snapple already has a developed customer base. Their marketing techniques with Wendy Kaufman and Howard Stern were effective when Snapple was pre-Quaker owned, and now with the new management from Triarc, Kaufman and Stern are now back on board for their marketing and advertising schemes. Secondly, Snapple provides a decent value proposition to its customers. Snapple product lines are very extensive with all of the flavors they offer. Also, Snapple was the pioneer of the tea-product industry, which helps to encourage brand loyalty from its customers (CASE 1). Finally, I think Triarc can turn Snapple around, as Snapple has a very unique distribution system that Quaker failed to utilize properly. The case report mentions a BusinessWeek writer who warns Quaker of its inadequacies in handling Snapple, and states that Quaker needs to “bring Snapple into Supermarkets” and to “convince Snapple’s 300-plus distributors to carry Gatorade to their customers” rather than just carrying Snapple products. If Triarc can accomplish these two things, and can continue to utilize the already established effective marketing strategies to keep and grow their market, then it will be successful.

Snapple and Gatorade were both successful in a sense because they offered products at a time when they hadn’t really existed. We learned in class about “disruptive technologies.” I think this concept can be applied to these two drink companies, as their products were “disruptive” in a sense that they were products that not many people had tried to sell before in markets, and once they started selling their products, competitors began to sprout up, like Coke and their Poweraid (CASE 2). Both Snapple and Gatorade were pioneers and were able to provide products that customers found valuable. The companies were also very successful because of their effective marketing schemes. Snapple had big company images like Wendy Kaufman and Howard Stern, who also served as huge media outlets for them to gain publicity and endorsement (CASE 2). Gatorade advertised through commercials with Michael Jordan and through sponsoring all major sport leagues in the country (CASE 2).

I do not think Quaker overestimated Snapple’s value, I just think Quaker was overconfident in handling the unique distribution system Snapple had developed. For instance, in 1994, Snapple stock price was at a high of $32.25, just months before Quaker company acquired Snapple (Collins). Clearly the independent distributor system of Snapple was what caused the Quaker company to have such a difficult time in making the company a success. This leads into my conclusion that Quaker acquiring Snapple was not a bad idea but poor execution. Snapple had the customer base, the value proposition, the publicity, the advertising and marketing schemes – but Quaker just failed to deliver.

Works Cited

Collins, Glenn. "COMPANY REPORTS; Quaker Oats to Acquire Snapple." New York Times, n.d. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/03/business/company-reports-quaker-oats-to-acquire-snapple.html>;.

Great job listing out key points on how to make Snapple a successful brand. These key points set the tone in the essay. Overall, the essay answered all of the questions that were required. The author definitely used an appropriate format in the essay that allows me to follow what he/she is trying to argue about. The argument is fairly well supported with data. The author demonstrated his/her overall understanding of the case by being opinionated in their arguments. The essay was fun to read because the author gave valid arguments from his/her own perspective for me to believe that Snapple is a great product and can enhance its reputation by executing it in a more, strategic way.