1. | | | | The case revolves around the Regal Carnation Hotel, located in Guam. Partly narrated by Steve McKenzie, he described his experience with the Regal Carnation Hotel. In his description of the situation, the “me too” approach to hotel management led to poor service, false representation, and a pricing plan that does not match the value of the hotel. The hotel industry in Guam has important statistical information that will lead to an effective analysis.
Over a period of years, Guam has experienced a boost to its tourism industry. The year 1967 was the beginning of that upward trend. that includes support from the United States. However, the decline of the Japanese economy in the 1900’s and onward severely damaged the economy of Guam. How many of us can attest to looking up a product or service online, seeing its respective pictures, only to find out that the actual product is dissimilar to the original picture? The excess room inventory in the hotel industry paired with the decline in the general tourism of Guam could only lead to failure. In other words, supply greatly outnumbered demand. Additionally, applying a “Me-too” approach to hotel operations in such conditions can have limited success. Research has shown that piggy backing on others in the industry can often lead to failure, because companies employing this tactic rarely see the need to differentiate with a product or service. It can be assumed that a “me too” company’s sole intention is to capitalize on the success of another company and the upward trend of a fad. McKenzie clearly observed and often commented on the issues he saw, like the unkempt meeting room and aged furniture. This brings out another aspect of a “me too” company in that usually those who employ this tactic place reinvestment in a lower priority. Could the Regal Carnation benefit from a shift in focus? We find that the