Student Name: Claire Gordon
Tutor Name: Lucy Orr
2.0 Factual Reflection: Summary of Marketing Outcomes 4
2.1 The marketing objectives in the original plan with the outcomes recorded against each objective 4
2.2 Sales and Production Outcomes 6
2.2.1 Sales price (per unit) 6
2.2.2 Total number of units produced 6
2.2.3 Total number of units sold 6
2.2.4 Stock on hand (left-over inventory) 6
2.3 Final Profit and Loss Statement 7
2.4 Market Share Calculations 7
3.0 Procedural Reflection: Key Issues arising from the QUTopia Simulation 8
4.0 Justificatory Reflection: Problem Identification 10
4.1 Unable to identify Competition 11
4.2 Lack of Demand 12
4.3 Pricing Strategy 13
5.1 Competition 15
5.1.1 Solution 1: Differentiation between Slate & Rose, and Punny Pots…… 15
5.1.2 Solution 2: Collaboration with Punny Pots 16
5.2 Product Demand 17
5.3 Pricing Strategy 18
6.0 Critical Reflection: Recommendations for future 19
6.1 Competition 19
6.2 Demand 19
8.0 References 22
9.0 Appendices 24
1.0 Executive Summary
The purpose of this reflective case study is to evaluate the performance of Slate & Rose over market days 1 and 2. The report will analyse what factors of the business and its choices were successful, and determine what have been done better in future. Slate & Rose provides a product that aims to enhance a home’s atmosphere and sophistication. The product specialises in a unique concrete candleholder ornaments. Slate & Rose set out 5 objectives, which the business aimed to achieve over the two QUTopia market days. After analysis, it was found that 2/5 of these objectives were achieved, with two very close to being achieved. These objectives included:
1. Achieve 25% homewares market share (Not achieved)
2. Achieve 25% customer loyalty (Achieved)
3. Achieve 20% profitability (Not achieved)
4. Reclaim 10 Facebook coupons (Not achieved)
5. Achieve 10% engagement from social media platform (Not achieved)
Due to a number of circumstances, Slate & Rose was unable to achieve 4 out of 5 objectives. Whilst the business only achieved 4.8% of the homewares market share, Slate & Rose achieved 27.49% of market share in relation to its direct competitors. Customer loyalty objectives were achieved, as 26% of customers were repeat. The objective of reclaiming Facebook vouchers was revoked and therefore not measured. Finally, Slate & Rose had 9.3% customer engagement via Facebook.
Problems that occurred during market days included the inability to determine direct customers, the lack of demand due to numerous homewares business and an incorrect pricing strategy used. From different solutions were introduced which can eradicate the issue, and furthermore recommendations are made for future improvement.
2.0 Factual Reflection: Summary of Marketing Outcomes
2.1 The marketing objectives in the original plan with the outcomes recorded against each objective
In the launch of Slate & Rose, there were 5 key objectives set out which the business aimed to achieve. The first objective included achieving 25% of homewares market share, and whilst this particular objective was not achieve, Slate & Rose did achieve a competitor market share of 27.49%. The second objective aimed to achieve 25% market share, which was accomplished with 5 return customers. Due to higher expenses 20% profitability was not achieved as set out by the third objective, coming in at 19.21% profitability. The fourth objective measured the use of Facebook coupons, however this strategy was revoked and therefore was not measured. The final strategy aimed to achieve 10% engagement from social media platforms, however data revealed on 9.3% of engagement occurred and therefore the objective was not achieved.
Marketing Objectives
1. Achieve 25% homewares market share.
Within the homewares marketplace there are two companies in direct competition. Additionally, there are at least one company that is indirectly competing with Slate & Rose. 25% is a realistic goal to achieve.
Once the market results are posted by the Mayor of QUTopia a market share analysis will be able to be conducted.
Homeware Market share= 4.86%
Competitors market share= 27.49%
2. Achieve 25% customer loyalty (repeat purchases)
Repeat purchases indicate customers approval and appreciation of the product. It proves the quality and shows there is more than once space that is appropriate for Slate & Rose homewares. Additionally family and friends of the customer may ask the customer to purchase a product for them.
Two of Sale & Roses’ concrete creations will be sitting on the display table with utensils such as paddle pop sticks or straws in one of them.
On the second market day Slate & Rose employees will be instructed to ask customers if they have purchased from the company before. If they have, one utensil will be moved from the full container to the empty container. Once the day is over sales will be able to be compared with the amount of paddle pop sticks. The percentage of repeat purchases will indicate customer loyalty.
5 return customers
5/19=0.26 or 26%
3. Achieve 20% profitability
The aim of every business is to turn over a profit and Slate & Rose aims to make a 20% profit. It is unlikely the company will be able to achieve a large profitability margin, however the company is confident it will be profitable.
The company will be able to consolidate its earning after Day 2 of Market Day. Once the final revenue is known the expenses will be costed out and the profitability will be revealed.
19.21% profitability
4. Reclaim 10 Facebook coupons
While profitability is the main goal within the company, community engagement is highly sort after. Facebook coupons will indicate the amount of individuals that have seen the company’s Facebook page and have taken an interest even before a physical interaction.
On Market Day 1 and 2, employees will be accepting coupons that have been posted onto the Slate & Rose Facebook page. At the end of both market days the total amount of Facebook coupons will be counted.
On revision of our feedback from the assessment one marketing plan, the group decided to revoke the coupons due to the premium nature of the product.
5. Achieve 10% engagement from social media platform (Facebook)
While total reach is an interesting and valuable metric engagement is far more indicative of the effect Slate & Rose’s social media has.
Each post made to Slate & Rose’s social media will have a number of individuals reached. This number will be the denominator while the amount of likes; shares and other engagements will be the denominator. A minimum of 10% or 0.1 is the required result necessary to achieve this goal.
104/1120
=0.93
=9.3%
2.2 Sales and Production Outcomes
2.2.1 Sales price (per unit)
The sales price per unit was $55 as seen in the profit and loss statement in figure 1.
2.2.2 Total number of units produced
The total number of units produced was 48.
2.2.3 Total number of units sold
The total number of units sold was 41.
2.2.4 Stock on hand (left-over inventory)
The total left over inventory was 7.
2.3 Final Profit and Loss Statement
Figure 1: Profit and Loss Statement
2.4 Market Share Calculations
Figure 3: Market Share and Competitor Analysis (all homewares)
3.0 Procedural Reflection: Key Issues arising from the QUTopia Simulation
1. Financial Situation
What happened?
After market days were conducted, it was identified that Slate & Rose did not achieve the profit targets of 20%, and instead achieved19.21% profitability, which was still very close to the overall goal. Assumptions made in original forecasts predicted that the price per unit would be $65, which was found to be incorrect as results showed products were sold for $55 per product. It was also predicted that the profit made by Slate & Rose would be $750. However, after analysis it was found the real profit made was $440. Whilst the original budget and break-even analysis summary were not correct, they were also close to the actual results recorded after market days. Financially, Slate & Rose didn’t find any financial issues that were unexpected. However, as the stall only had 11 customers on the first day it was a concern whether Slate & Rose would be able to break-even if there weren’t more customers on the second market day, and this brought about the idea of introducing bundles.
Were the outcomes positive or negative?
The outcomes were positive. Whilst Slate & Rose didn’t achieve 20% profitability, 19.21% profitability was achieved, very close to the goal. Financially there were no concerns during market days and everything went accordingly.
2.Company Analysis
What happened?
Slate & Rose members got on extremely well. This was due to each member having the same drive and goals to achieve success, as well as all be equally involved in this process. Shayne Rase (marketing manager) had a very large leadership role within the team. She was always organized, and ensured that everything was according to plan. Everyone had their set roles within the group according to their position (e.g. Distribution manager). Shayne set out tasks for each person to achieve, and when it came to market day each team member contributed and worked together as a team. Deadlines were mostly met, however sometimes deadlines were set too early and couldn’t be achieved at that time. Due to assignments and other commitments, we would discuss as a group a more appropriate time that would suits the group. Tasks were allocated fairly, depending on people’s strengths and availability. When it came to designing and making the products, everyone had an allocated task to ensure effectiveness and accuracy, to overall improve the product quality. There were no team difficulties in the process, everyone had clear communication and worked together in a team environment to ensure success for the business.
Were the outcomes positive or negative?
The outcomes of the company were very positive, the group worked very well together and were able to have clear communication at all times. Due to great leadership, there were set tasks and goals that needed to be achieved within certain time frames which contributed to the success of the business.
3. Marketing System
What happened?
The SMART objectives were a good measure set out by the team to achieve goals. They were all realistic, and with the right promotion and pricing could be achieved. They set goals, which Slate & Rose aimed to achieve, and used appropriate measures to do so. Everything went to plan before and during market day. There were no serious issues that came about that threatened the success of Slate & Rose. All marketing strategies and systems were used effectively to ensure that no issues arose. Slate & Rose did source its materials, from the business ‘Scotty’s earth moving’. The business provided the concrete needed to create the pots, and molds were sourced from cafes ‘Pineapple Express’ and ‘Tree House Café’. Marketing mix strategies included Product, Price, Place and Promotion. All of these elements worked well, as they all contributed to the success of Slate & Rose. There were no inconsistencies in the marketing mix, as all elements were constructed together in order to ensure that they all followed the same guidelines. The Product section in the marketing mix was most important however, as it ensured analyzing all options for Slate & Rose’s products, to determine what will work best.
Were the outcomes positive or negative?
The outcomes of Slate & Rose’s marketing systems were positive. Each component was carefully thought out to ensure success and consistency.
4. Customer Analysis
What happened?
The customers gained throughout both market days were as expected after analyzing the potential target market. Slate & Rose’s target market was identified to be young, trendy female students either self-dependent or living at home. Whist we could not measure their current living situations, majority of customers fit the age and gender bracket of young females. Customers bought the product because it is unique and sophisticated. It adds a nice element to any living space, and the colours and designs were very appealing to young females (as seen in appendix 1). The customer demand was as a result influenced, as sales on the first day were not as expected due to customers having more options of product, and some at lower prices.
Were the outcomes positive or negative?
The outcomes for our customer analysis were very positive. Slate & Rose were able to correctly identify out customers, however due to competitors were not able to correctly estimate the demand.
5. Competitor Analysis
What happened?
It was found to be very difficult to identify all of Slate & Rose’s competitors prior to market day. When they business names and descriptions were released, there were only 2 direct competitors selling concrete products. Upon market day, there was found to be a direct competitor located in the stall next to Slate & Rose, as well as many other concrete businesses (as seen in appendix 2,3,4,5). We weren’t able to successfully anticipate competitor activity, as Slate & Rose was not aware of all the direct competitors. As seen in Figure 2 (market share calculations), Slate & Rose performed well amongst its competitors. Whilst it did not gain the largest profit, it did sell the most amount of units compared to the other three competitors. This indicates that Slate & Rose performed well in order to sell a larger amount of products. The original intention for Slate & Rose was to be a niche player, selling a unique product that no other businesses offered. However, after market day it became apparent that Slate & Rose was instead a market follower, and there were many other concrete businesses, and even more homewares businesses. This was not the result intended for Slate & Rose, however they were still able to achieve success. The main strengths for Slate & Rose included the consistent design and feel towards the business, and signature colours that could be identified with Slate & Rose. Weaknesses included the amount of competitors, with a direct competitor located next to the stall.
Were the outcomes positive or negative?
The outcomes in terms of competitors were negative. Unfortunately, upon release of business name and descriptions, many businesses had not identified they were selling concrete pots, and therefore Slate & Rose was not aware of how many direct competitors would be involved in the market day.
4.0 Justificatory Reflection: Problem Identification
Reflection from professional experiences may be the most important source of professional development and improvement (Jasper, 2003). The aim of this reflection is to identify three key issues from the above table that arose during the QUTopia stimulation. Whilst there was a lot of success for Slate & Rose, and the identified issues did not have large effects on the business, these issues could still be identified and determined where it went wrong. It was found the main issue was the miscalculation of direct competitors, influencing the demand for our product, as there were more options of homewares for customers to choose from. This is turn reflected on the pricing of Slate & Rose, as in order to achieve profitability and still sell products, there had to be a change in pricing strategies. This reflection will be split into three sections, where each issue will be further analysed and links will be shown throughout all three key issues.
4.1 Unable to identify Competition
One of the major issues identified with Slate & Rose, was the lack of identification of major competitors. It is crucial that in order to create a competitive advantage and generate superior performance, businesses must first identify rivals (Porter, 1980). In launch of Slate & Rose, there were only 2 other identified businesses selling concrete business. It was assumed from social media posts and pictures, that no other direct competitor would have patterned concrete pots similar to Slate & Rose, as each business appeared to be using concrete in different ways, giving Slate & Rose a competitive edge. As each product was assumed different, there was no competitor strategy applied, however competitor identification is important for a competitor strategy (Porac & Thomas, 1990). As there was no strategy for Slate & Rose to differentiate itself from competitors, this influenced a lack of interest towards the product. It was made apparent after the first market day, that there were more concrete businesses than Slate & Rose had been aware of.
One competitor, Punny Pots (as seen in appendix 2) was located in the stall next to Slate & Rose. The main problem behind this came down the descriptions that were provided on the business registration. Punny Pots was described as a ‘unique take on small gardens and pot plants; aiming to provide nature and flavour to students living in small spaces and on a budget’. Whilst this information was not incorrect, it was not associated with large concrete pots similar to Slate & Rose. Therefore, it was not assumed that Punny Pots would be the largest competitor, and that using a competitive strategy would be useful for Slate & Rose, as they provide an edge over rivals in securing customers and defending against competitive forces (Porter, M.E, 1985).
4.2 Lack of Demand
The concept of demand is critically important to successful business development (Don Hofstrand, 2007). With a large amount of homewares products on offer, and 3 direct competitors, it threatened the demand of Slate & Rose’s products. Due to there being 4 concrete business in total in QUTopia, it was critical for Slate & Rose to be differentiated in order for people for find these products more appealing over competitors. Slate & Rose was able to put a lot of thought into the product, looking at past business success to determine what had been successful before. There was consideration into what the colours the target market currently found appealing, in order to determine what would be in high demand for potential customers. As seen in figure three, there were 19 identified homewares business in the QUTopian market. This resulted in a potentially high demand for homewares product, however this meant that all 19 businesses were competing for the attention of customers.
After the first market day, Slate & Rose had a total of 14 sales. The number of sales was lower than anticipated, which indicated that the demand for Slate & Rose’s products was not at a high level. In order to break even, 28 products needed to be sold in total. It was made evident that with the amount of homewares business, there was a lack of demand to purchase Slate & Roses’ products in particular. There are a number of factors that can affect the demand of Slate & Roses’ product, including the price of the produce, price of competitors, and taste of the individual (Saritha Pujari, 2015). However with this lack of demand, it threatened the business financially. However it was during the second market day that Slate & Rose sold 19 products, allowing the business to break even and obtain a profit. As seen in figure 3, homewares made a large combined profit, with all businesses ranging in prices. It was evident that businesses selling homewares products at lower prices obtained higher sales. Bo Home was one example of this, selling 96 products at $34.
4.3 Pricing Strategy
After the first market day occurred, it was found that due to a lack of demand, it was unlikely that the business would break even if more products weren’t sold on the second market day. Price is a major parameter that can affect the company’s revenue significantly (Alexandre Solgui, 2010). There needed to be a pricing change on the second day in order to ensure that the business could break even. Even thought Slate & Rose’s products as classified as premium products, with the amount of competition it resulted in the products being priced a lot higher than competitors.
It was on the second market day that Slate & Rose implemented a price bundling as seen in Appendix 6. Bundling is an effective method to encourage customers to purchase more than one product, encouraging product trial and giving an edge over competitors (Grewal .D, 2016).
There was an evident link found between these three issues. As soon as Slate & Rose was unable to identify all of the direct competitors, it created a large issue as there was little differentiation between the two businesses, and customers were confused as to whether both stalls operated together. As well as there being a total of 19 homewares business, there were a significant amount of competitors that Slate & Rose faced. With so many homewares businesses, it also impacted the demand for Slate & Roses products. There were several products through the QUTopian markets which consumers could chose from that would satisfy the same need. As price was one of the main factors that influenced demand, homewares businesses with cheaper products were most successful, and Slate & Rose struggled to compete as prices were premium. As a result this saw the introduction of price bundling in order to sell more products, however altered the average price per unit.
5.0 Critical Reflection: Statement and Evaluation of Alternatives
After identifying the three main issues Slate & Rose encountered, there are alternative solutions that can be applied. These solutions aim to eradicate the problem, and overall improve the success of Slate & Rose.
Problem Identified
Alternative Solutions
Competitors - The inability to identify all of the direct competitors of Slate & Rose.
1. Create differentiation between Slate & Rose and its direct competitor, Punny Pots.
2. Collaborate with competitors as a means to combine efforts.
Product Demand - The lack of demand for Slate & Rose due to several other homewares businesses meeting the same needs.
1. Using Moving Averages identify trends in order to make future conclusions
2. Using Facebook as a way for customers to pre-order products.
Pricing Strategy - Lack of sales on market day 1 indicated that Slate & Rose would not break even and therefore pricing needed to be altered to boost sales.
1. Bundling Strategy
5.1 Competition
Understanding competitors helps an organisation develop a long-term advantage (Bergen & Peteraf, 2002). One of the biggest issues was the confusion that Slate & Rose, and Punny Pots were one combined business.
5.1.1 Solution 1: Differentiation between Slate & Rose, and Punny Pots.
The first solution that Slate & Rose could have applied is the differentiating the two companies. Small business, such as Slate & Rose, can implement differentiation strategies, which can be achieved in product appearance but also service offering (Martin S. Bressler, 2008).
Advantages: Allows the business to stand out against its competitors using methods such as decoration, distinctive colours and greater stall design. By using Slate & Rose’s logos around all of the stall as well as the light pink colour, it would have erased any thoughts that Slate & Rose may have been collaborated with Punny Pots.
Disadvantages: Requires more marketing materials as a means to completely differentiate Slate & Rose from other organisations.
5.1.2 Solution 2: Collaboration with Punny Pots
Another strategy Slate & Rose can apply is the possibility to collaborate with Punny Pots instead of competing against them.
Advantages: Business collaborations are an effective method in multiplying the profitability results, as well as combining resources, skills and expertise’s (Teresa Turiera, 2013). With both company’s using concrete as the main product resource, teams would be able to combine materials and skills to provide high quality products. As well, being located next to each other during market day would allow for greater space and opportunity to advertise products differently to other businesses.
Disadvantages: Although business collaboration will combine resources and improve profits, Slate & Rose and Punny Pots may not share the same business goals. Whilst Slate & Rose aims for success and providing quality products, Punny Pots may not show this same initiative and therefore business may clash.
5.2 Product Demand
It is important for Slate & Rose to understand the demand for the product, in order to correctly predict finances and provide an appropriate amount of products to meed consumer needs.
5.2.1 Solution 1: Moving Averages
Investors and traders have long been using moving averages as an aid to analysing price trends (Clif Droke, 2001). A moving average looks at trends calculated from past prices.
Advantages: Using this as a solution for Slate & Rose would allow them to forecast future sales based on sales from marketing day 1.
Disadvantages: One problem associated with a moving average is that it may lag behind a trend. The is subject to change between the two market days, and therefore even though Slate & Rose may have achieved a certain amount of sales does not mean this will reflect the second market day. There can be changes in people’s profits, and the amount of foot traffic in the area.
5.2.2 Solution 2: Facebook Pre-ordering
Another method to understand the demand for product is through pre-ordering for Slate & Roses products.
Advantages: Pre-ordering using Facebook is both beneficial for the customer, and the business. It allows the customer to have piece of mind, knowing the have secured a product, as well as choosing the exact product they wish the purchase. As well, it allows the business to understand how many people are willing to pre-order the product, and have a look into the demand for a product.
5.3 Pricing Strategy
5.3.1 Solution 1: Bundling Strategy
A solution to the pricing problem found with Slate and Rose saw the introduction of bundling pricing as a new pricing strategy.
Advantages: Bundling pricing is an effective way to invite customers to purchase more than one product. As a result, this leads to more sales made by the business and overall increase the amount of units sold contributing towards the product.
Disadvantages: However the issue that arises with using bundling as a pricing strategy, is that it decreases the overall unit price. Slate & Rose went from having an anticipated selling price of $65, to $55. In turn, this had an impact on whether the business would achieve its profitability objective of 20%.
6.0 Critical Reflection: Recommendations for future
In order to correct the problems that occurred for Slate & Rose, the following recommendations should be considered for future reference.
6.1 Competition
It is imperative to a business to stand out against its competitors, and this was something that Slate & Rose did not critically consider. In future, it would be recommended that there be further thought and consideration put into the market stall to create a large differentiation between its competitors. As mentioned previously, our direct competitor was located in the stall next to us, and there was found to be confusion between customers as to whether we were separate businesses or the same one. Some other stalls used creative methods such as backings and timer framing to add a new element to their stall. This is something Slate & Rose could have implemented, which would have allowed for more decoration space and perhaps set up a clear distinction between our stall, and Punny Pots located next to us.
6.2 Demand
One issue found with Slate & Rose was that we weren’t able to make an assumption on the demand that there would be on our product. A recommendation for Slate & Rose in future is the use of market research prior to market days. In particular, qualitative research would be most appropriate for Slate & Rose as research methods can include focus groups or surveys (Joseph F Hair, 2013). By using marketing techniques such as online surveys, it would have allowed us to have a better understanding on the amount of sales we would achieve based on information provided by potential customers. These surveys could have been prompted using discounts for our products on market days. However in order for this recommendation to work there would need to be a larger online presence of our business. Even though we did use social media as a tool to promote our business, it was not utilised to its full potential. In future, Slate & Rose should look at improving its online presence and as a result will be able to engage with consumers enough to promote the participation in online surveys.
6.3 Pricing Strategy
Even though Slate & Rose broke even on the second market day, there were concerns after the first market day that this would not occur. After completing the first day, the team reviewed our sales and items sold and worked out methods that would be effective in order to increase sales in market day 2. This included the introduction of price bundling. This was an effective method to use, as there were a total of 12 units sold through 5 bundles. The recommendation made to Slate & Rose in terms of pricing would be to implement price bundling for both market days. As the product materials were sourced and came at no extra cost to the business, we could have looked at making more products in order to have more products available for purchase. Therefore, more product options would have been available for consumers to chose to add into a bundle, and as a result increase the total sales and profits of Slate & Rose.
8.0 References
Alexandre Dolgui, Jean-Marie Proth (2010). Annual Reviews in Control: Pricing Strategies and Models. Page 1-2.
Bergen, M.E., & Peteraf, M.A. (2002). Competitor identification and competitor analysis: A broad-based managerial approach. Managerial and Decision Economics, 23, 157–169.
Clif Droke (2001). Moving Averages Simplified. Marketplace Books. Page 11.
Don Hofstrand (2007). Product Demand. AG Marketing Resource Center. Retreived from:
Grewal, D., Levy, M., Mathews, S., Harrigan, P. and Bucic, T. (2016). Marketing. North Ryde: McGraw-Hill Education,
Hair, Joseph F. (2013). Marketing Research (4th Edition). New South Wales, NSW: McGraw-Hill Education
Jasper M. 2003. Beginning Reflective Practice (Foundations in Nursing and Health Care). Cheltenham: Nelson Thames.
Martin S. Bressler (2008). How Small Businesses Master the art of Competition through Superior Competitive Advantage. Southeastern Oklaoma State University. Page 2.
Porac, J.F., & Thomas, H. (1990). Taxonomic mental models in competitor definition. Academy of Management Review, 15(2), 224–240.
Porter, M.E. (1980). Competitive Strategy. New York: Free Press.
Porter, M.E. (1885). Competitive Advantage. New York: Free Press. Chapters 3,4,5,7,14,15.
Saritha Pujari, 2015). 5 Major Factors Affecting the Demand of a Product. Retrieved from:
9.0 Appendices
Appendix 1: Slate & Rose products
Appendix 2: Direct Competitor ‘Punny Pots’ located directly next to Slate & Rose.
Appendix 3: Competitor of Slate & Rose
Appendix 4: Competitor of Slate & Rose
Appendix 5: Competitor of Slate & Rose
Appendix 6: Price Bundling