DOCSLIB.ORG

Channel Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Channel Management [TYPE THE COMPANY NAME ] CHANNEL MANAGEMENT 2012 Submitted By SURESHKUMAR.T BLESSON SAMRAJ.M PRASHANTH.R NIVEDHITHA SHUNMATHI [TYPE THE COMPANY ADDR ESS ] INTRODUCTION: What is channel management? The process by which a producer or supplier directs marketing activity by involving and motivating parties comprising its channel of distribution. Goals. Define the specific goals you have for each channel segment. Consider your goals for the channel as a whole as well as individual accounts. And, remember to consider your goals for both acquisition and retention. Policies. Construct well-defined polices for administering the accounts within this channel. Be sure to keep the unique characteristics of each segment in mind when defining policies for account set up, order management, product fulfillment, etc. Products. Identify which products in your offering are most suited for each segment and create appropriate messaging. Also, determine where your upsell opportunities lie. Sales/Marketing Programs. Design support programs for your channel that meet THEIR needs, not what your idea of their needs are. To do this, you should start by asking your customers within this segment, “how can we best support you in the selling and marketing of our products?” That being said, the standard considerations are product training, co-op advertising, seasonal promotions, and merchandising. Again, this is not a one-size fits all, so be diligent about addressing this segment’s SPECIFIC needs in these areas. Defining a channel management strategy for each segment allows you to be more effective within each segment, while gaining efficiency at the same time. Still, maintaining brand consistency across all channel segments is critical to your long-term success. So find a good balance between customization and brand consistency and you’ll be on your way to successful channel management. Channel Management Models:: There are five major methodologies that manufacturers/brands utilize when selling online ranging from complete channel destruction/disintermediation to the most robust and complete "closed-loop" solution being that offered by Reshape Commerce under our patented system and business model, all of which are discussed below. The Dead End Model - Do Nothing to Refer Consumers The "Dead End" Model will leave consumers with nowhere to go. Although most companies recognize the need for a methodology that offers consumers sources for their products, there still remain those who have not executed such a strategy. We can cite several examples of companies with tremendous websites featuring all of their products with no store locator or online sales. It will not shock you to learn that this model is a lose-lose proposition for all. For consumers, not being able to buy online is frustrating enough. But not even being able to find a distributor or retailer or get a phone number is quite another. Retailers lose the awareness that a website could provide and the business that results from it. The manufacturer or brand owner loses sales and something far more important - brand satisfaction. The Fumble Model - Refer but Lose Consumers The "Fumble Model" exists when a brand sends consumers to a channel partner in the hope that they will promote the brand with the same veracity as the brand does. While retailers are mostly concerned about selling "any brand," brands should only be concerned about selling "their brand". At many brand websites, consumers can search for nearby retailers by city, state, zip or name. These sites gives numerous options in an attempt to even the playing field for competitive retailers and give consumers more choice. Unfortunately, by using this model, brands may lose consumers to another brand - perhaps an online brand that can meet consumers' needs then and there. And no matter how you look at it, brands lose control of the branded experience that they've worked so hard to achieve. The Two Faced Model - Partially serve Consumers and Damage your Channel In this "Two Faced" model, consumers can purchase a limited selection of products from a brand website. The products may represent a segment of the brands entire line or be an entirely separate "online-only" offering. Regardless, consumers expect that the brand itself should offer its full suite of products. Consumers are rarely satisfied by being forced to choose from a limited selection and will often leave the brand website without purchasing. The result is a negative brand experience. At the same time, the distribution channel sees this type of online store as direct competition. Even if a brand sell different products online, distributors and retailers are now put in the position to compete with the brand for a finite number of consumer dollars. Brands often defend the strategy by claiming they are selling at full price, thereby not undercutting their distribution channel. The sad truth is that while this is accurate, the consumers who buy at full price from the brand would have been buying at full price from the brand's partner, making them the best type of consumer around. Furthermore, channel partners see such initiatives as a first step towards being totally circumvented by the brand, whether that is the intention or not. The result is that channel relationships worsen and focus on brand within retail establishments is diverted to other brands that appear more loyal to the distribution channel. The Broken Boomerang Model - Share but Lose Consumers Often called "product-to-product linking, a broken boomerang exemplifies this model. Brands "toss" consumers to the website of a retailer or other channel partner with the expectation that the consumer will boomerang back to them by purchasing the brand's product. Unfortunately, the boomerang breaks mid-air and the brand has little or no visibility into what happened to the consumer and no ongoing relationship with that consumer after the sale. In this model, consumers goes to brandname.com, shops for a product, and clicks on "buy online", taking them to icons of online retailers that are supposed to have the item in question IN STOCK. Consumers chooses a retailer and is taken to the product page at the retailer's website. Now at the retailer's site, consumers may be influenced by competing brands. Because these systems rely upon the retailer providing its complete and massive product inventory detail, often by location, there are countless examples where the desired product is not in stock, forcing consumers to search for alternatives. The result is a complete loss of the brand experience the manufacturer has worked so hard to deliver, the potential for a lost sale, the ultimate loss of the relationships between the manufacturer and consumers and all of the geo-demographic, psychological and purchasing data associated with consumers. Although this model works well for large brands who sell into large retail chains and department stores like Best Buy, Home Depot and Macy's, it does not accommodate special or custom orders which represents the largest number of products any brand offers. Because of this system complexity and magnitude, small brands and specialty The Auction Shill Model - Auction the Consumer off to the highest bidder The most insidious "channel management" method involves a brand offering product for sale at its website and allowing retailers to enter into a virtual battle for the consumer unrelated to their retailing skill, reputation, or customer service. Moreover, in this model, the unsuspecting consumer is forced to deal with a retailer not of their choosing. In this model, consumers go to brandname.com, shops for a product and adds it to the shopping cart. Once the sale is complete, an email or other electronic notification goes to the closest "x" number of "participating" "stocking" retailers. Participation means the retailer must be engaged in the system; stocking means the retailer must have current inventory in the product(s) being purchased by the consumer. Whichever "participating" "stocking" retailer first sees and claims the sale in this system wins the consumer and is expected to fulfill the order. Retailers carry but a fraction of the product catalog any single brand offers. The "closest" "participating" "stocking" retailer may be tens or hundreds of miles away from the consumer. The model disenfranchises the best retailers who provide a high degree of customer service by disallowing the consumer to choose that retailer. Nefarious retailers can cheat the system by ordering products they don't have in inventory to fulfill the order offers as they see them. The brand must assume responsibility for fulfillment in all products that no retailers carry or cancel the order altogether. Significantly, large retail chains and department stores like Best Buy, Home Depot and Macy's cannot partake in this system because it demands that fulfillment be done at the store level. The inefficiencies of such a model eliminate the desire of any of these large entities to invest in the substantial technology, personnel and logistics infrastructure on a store-by-store basis that would enable the use of such a system. Lastly, no retailer of any size should hyperlink their website to a brand utilizing this methodology as there is almost an infinite impossibility that such a retailer would receive the order being placed by a re-directed consumer at the brand website. Starbucks Corporation Starbucks Corporation is a Seattle, Washington-based coffee company. It roasts and sells whole bean coffees and coffee drinks through a national chain of retail outlets/restaurants. Originally only a seller of packaged, premium, roasted coffees, the bulk of the company's revenues now comes from its coffee bars, where people can purchase beverages and pastries in addition to coffee by the pound. Starbucks is credited with changing the way Americans view coffee, and its success has attracted the attention of investors nationwide.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Frommer's Seattle 2004
    01 541277 FM.qxd 11/17/03 9:37 AM Page i Seattle 2004 by Karl Samson Here’s what the critics say about Frommer’s: “Amazingly easy to use. Very portable, very complete.” —Booklist “Detailed, accurate, and easy-to-read information for all price ranges.” —Glamour Magazine “Hotel information is close to encyclopedic.” —Des Moines Sunday Register “Frommer’s Guides have a way of giving you a real feel for a place.” —Knight Ridder Newspapers 01 541277 FM.qxd 11/17/03 9:37 AM Page ii About the Author Karl Samson makes his home in the Northwest. He also covers the rest of Wash- ington for Frommer’s. In addition, Karl is the author of Frommer’s Arizona. Published by: Wiley Publishing, Inc. 111 River St. Hoboken, NJ 07030-5744 Copyright © 2004 Wiley Publishing, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval sys- tem or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photo- copying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except as permitted under Sections 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978/750-8400, fax 978/646-8600. Requests to the Publisher for per- mission should be addressed to the Legal Department, Wiley Publishing, Inc., 10475 Crosspoint Blvd., Indianapolis, IN 46256, 317/572-3447, fax 317/572-4447, E-Mail: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Starbucks' International Operations1
    1 | P a g e Business Internationalization STARBUCKS’ INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS1 Internationally, we are in our infancy. (Howard Schultz, Chairman & Chief Global Strategist – Starbucks, 2003) The expansion strategy internationally is not bullet-proof as it is in the U.S. (Mitchell J. Speiser, Analyst – Lehman Brothers, 2003) ALL’S NOT WELL WITH STARBUCKS In March 2003, Fortune came out with its annual list of “Fortune 500 companies”. For Howard Schultz (Schultz), Chairman of Starbucks Corp. (Starbucks), this list was special as Starbucks [was] featured in the list (position 465). It was a dream that come true for the Seattle-based entrepreneur. Though the U.S. economy was reeling under recession and many retail majors were reporting losses and applying for bankruptcy, Starbucks announced a 31% increase in its net earnings and a 23% increase in sales for the first quarter of 2003. Analyst felt that the success of Starbucks showed that a quality product speaks for itself and the fact that Starbucks spent less than 1% of its sales on advertising and marketing strengthened this view. In addition to be a popular brand among customers, Starbucks was also considered the best place to work due to its employee friendly policies (Starbucks was the first organization in the U.S. to offer stock options and health coverage to part-time employees also). However, analysts felt that the success of Starbucks was due to its profitable domestic operations. It was reported that most of Starbucks’ international operations were running into losses. In May 2003, Starbucks’ Japanese operations reported a loss of $3.9 million (Japan constituted the largest market for the company outside the U.S.), and the company also performed badly in Europe and the Middle East.
    [Show full text]
  • SCMS 2019 Annual Conference –Seattle
    CELEBRATING SIXTY YEARS SCMS 1959-2019 HOSTSCMS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 2019 Seattle, Washington MARCH 13–17 2 | SCMS 2019 Annual Conference –Seattle DINING NEAR THE CONFERENCE In the Hotel Fountain Wine Bar and Lounge Loulay Kitchen & Bar 1400 6th Ave. 600 Union St. Seattle, WA 98101 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 621–9000 (206) 402–4588 Lounge and wine bar with food thechefinthehat.com/loulay options Upscale, French inspired food, in a Average entrée: $11–30 newly renovated two-floor space Average entrée: $20–35 Daily Grill 629 Pike St. Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 624–8400 dailygrill.com Breakfast buffet and a la carte, happy hour, and lunch and dinner specials Average entrée: $15–30 Breakfast or Brunch Near the Hotel NYC Café Blue Water Taco Grill 1520 7th Ave. 515 Union St. Seattle, WA 98101 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 682–7011 (206) 588–4755 nycdeli7thave.com bluewatertacogrill.com Breakfast and deli sandwich Cheap breakfast burritos, other options with beer, wine, and snacks options for lunch and dinner Average entrée: $5–10 Average entrée: $5–10 Specialty’s Bakery Café Andaluca 1400 5th Ave. 407 Olive Way Seattle, WA 98101 Seattle, WA 98101 (877) 502–2837 (206) 382–6999 specialtys.com andaluca.com Breakfast and deli sandwiches, Sit down breakfast options soup and salad, and baked goods Average entrée: $15–20 Average entrée: $5–10 Host Committee Recommendations | 3 Lunch/Dinner Nearby Pike Place Chowder Mae Phim Thai 600 Pine St. 213 Pike St. Seattle, WA 98101 Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 838–5680 (206) 623–7453 pikeplacechowder.com maephimthai.com Various chowders and fried fish Yummy, cheap and fast Thai food entrees Average entrée: $10–15 Average entrée: $5–15 Shuckers Café Yumm 411 University St.
    [Show full text]
  • Starbucks Corporation (A)
    Revised June 30, 1997 Starbucks Corporation (A) Starbucks Corporation is a Seattle, Washington-based coffee company. It roasts and sells whole bean coffees and coffee drinks through a national chain of retail outlets/restaurants. Originally only a seller of packaged, premium, roasted coffees, the bulk of the company's revenues now comes from its coffee bars’ where people can purchase beverages and pastries in addition to coffee by the pound. Starbucks is credited with changing the way Americans view coffee, and its success has attracted the attention of investors nationwide. Starbucks has consistently been one of the fastest growing companies in the United States with over 1,006 retail outlets in 1996. Over a five-year period starting in 1991, net revenues increased at a compounded annual growth rate of 61 percent. In fiscal 1996, net revenues increased 50 percent to $696 million from $465 million for the same period the previous year (see Exhibit 1). Net earnings rose 61 percent to $42 million from the previous year’s $26 million. Sales for Starbucks have been continuing to grow steadily, and the company is still a darling of investors with a PE ratio of 58. To continue to grow at a rapid pace, the firm’s senior executives have been considering international expansion. Specifically, they are interested in Japan and other Asian countries, where Starbucks had little or no presence. Japan, the world’s third largest coffee consumer after the United States and Germany, represented both a challenge and a huge opportunity to the firm. To explore what changes in Starbucks strategy were required, and the questions that might arise during expansion, this case looks at the firm’s entry strategy into Japan and the nature of issues facing the firm during early 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origins of Starbucks
    Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov ESTTA Tracking number: ESTTA994667 Filing date: 08/13/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Notice of Opposition Notice is hereby given that the following party opposes registration of the indicated application. Opposer Information Name Starbucks Corporation Granted to Date 08/21/2019 of previous ex- tension Address 2401 UTAH AVENUE SOUTH SEATTLE, WA 98134 UNITED STATES Attorney informa- JULIA ANNE MATHESON tion HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 555 13TH STREET, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20004 UNITED STATES [email protected], [email protected], dct- [email protected], [email protected] 202-637-5600 Applicant Information Application No 88202494 Publication date 04/23/2019 Opposition Filing 08/13/2019 Opposition Peri- 08/21/2019 Date od Ends Applicant Mountains and Mermaids, LLC PO BOX 871882 Wasilla, AK 99687 UNITED STATES Goods/Services Affected by Opposition Class 030. First Use: 0 First Use In Commerce: 0 All goods and services in the class are opposed, namely: Coffee beans; Ground coffee beans Grounds for Opposition Priority and likelihood of confusion Trademark Act Section 2(d) Dilution by blurring Trademark Act Sections 2 and 43(c) Marks Cited by Opposer as Basis for Opposition U.S. Registration 1417602 Application Date 06/03/1985 No. Registration Date 11/18/1986 Foreign Priority NONE Date Word Mark STARBUCKS Design Mark Description of NONE Mark Goods/Services Class 030. First use: First Use: 1971/03/29 First Use In Commerce: 1971/03/29 COFFEE, TEA, SPICES, HERB TEA, CHOCOLATE, AND COCOA Class 031.
    [Show full text]
  • Baristas: the Artisan Precariat
    http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/ Research Commons at the University of Waikato Copyright Statement: The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand). The thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use: Any use you make of these documents or images must be for research or private study purposes only, and you may not make them available to any other person. Authors control the copyright of their thesis. You will recognise the author’s right to be identified as the author of the thesis, and due acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate. You will obtain the author’s permission before publishing any material from the thesis. Baristas: The Artisan Precariat A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Labour Studies at The University of Waikato by Gemma L Piercy 2018 i ABSTRACT My research on the work identit(ies) of baristas demonstrates that different workplaces, in conjunction with individual biographies, produce different kinds of work identities. Connected to these differences are the actual and perceived levels of skill and/or social status ascribed to workers within the service work triadic relationship (customers, co- workers/managers and workers). The higher the level of skill or social status, the greater the capacity of workers to experience more autonomy in their work and/or access improved working conditions. These findings are informed by my research approach, which incorporates three key methods: key informant interviews; observation/participant observation; life history interviews; all of which is underpinned by the mystory approach and autoethnography.
    [Show full text]
  • Market Finds Market Finds
    MARCH 2020 MARKET FINDS Fan favorites and hidden spots at Pike Place Market CHEERS TO ST. PATRICK’S DAY TREK TO TACOMA GEAR UP FOR COMIC CON March 2020 A classic Seattle skyline view from Queen Anne’s Kerry Park DEPARTMENTS THE GUIDE From the Editor 4 Shopping 20 Where/When 6 Attractions & Tours 26 Insider 10 Museums Stomping Grounds 12 & Galleries 30 Field Trip 15 Dining & Drinking 33 Maps 51 Entertainment 47 My Seattle 54 ON THE COVER FEATURE MARCH 2020 Sunset over Pike Place Market. MARKET FINDS Fan favorites and hidden Photo: Natalia Bratslavsky / spots at Pike Place Market 16 / In the Market Shutterstock No trip to Seattle is complete without a CHEERS TO ST. PATRICK’S DAY TREK TO TACOMA GEAR UP FOR COMIC CON stop at Pike Place Market, the city’s most enduring landmark. where-2020-03-mag.indd 1 2/17/20 3:13 PM BY HALEY SHAPLEY ADOBE STOCK where-seattle.com 3 FROM THE EDITOR March 2020 Publisher PAUL HEPPNER Editorial & Design HALEY SHAPLEY Editor in Chief SHAUN SWICK Art Director CIARA CAYA Copy Editor JENNY SUGDEN Production Manager ANA ALVIRA, STEVIE VAN BRONKHORST Production Artists and Graphic Designers Sales JULANN HILL Advertising Sales Director 206.443.0445 x 111 [email protected] CIARA CAYA Sales Coordinator Hospitality Relations & Distribution Lady Yum SUSAN PETERSON Distribution & Circulation Manager AMELIA HEPPNER Client Relations Associate & Concierge Liaison 206.443.0445 x 113 [email protected] Who Run the WhereTraveler Seattle 425 North 85th Street | Seattle, WA 98103 800.308.2898 | 206.443.0445 World? Girls [email protected] where-seattle.com 2020 is the centennial anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment, and sometimes it’s difficult to believe that ©2020 Encore Media Group.
    [Show full text]
  • If BRAND-X Was a Person, Who Would You Compare Him With"? the Person Should Consider 6 Human Traits Then: 1
    This is the framework to compare the brand with person. The typical question using this approach is: "if BRAND-X was a person, who would you compare him with"? The person should consider 6 human traits then: 1. Physique - the main features of the product 2. Personality - the human character and attitude 3. Relationship - includes beliefs and associations about the brand 4. Culture - the integral representation of the brand and the organization 5. Reflection - how the brand is reflected in the customer mind 6. Self-image - the relation of the customer and the brand (can use or buy the product) WHAT CAN BE DONE IN COFFEE BREWING INDUSRTY TO DIFFERENTIATE THEMSELVES? As coffee-brewing industry is competitive, companies need to differentiate themselves in order to survive. Line management is a significant issue for coffee houses as often the demand is concentrated in the early mornings. Starbucks In 1971, three friends passionate by fresh coffee opened the first Starbucks coffee in Seattle. They began to sell fresh roasted coffee beans and coffee machines. People came to their salon to savour ones of the best coffees of the world. In the beginning of the 80s, Howard Schultz (the actual CEO of Starbucks) joined the company and changes appeared. Indeed, after a trip in Italy, Howard decided to transpose in the USA the Italian tradition around coffee and make Starbucks not only a coffee salon where you share gourmet coffee but also an atmosphere that favours human relation. Today, with more than 15000 coffee shops in 50 countries, Starbucks became the largest worldwide coffee shop chain.
    [Show full text]
  • Coffee-Infused Coke? Yes Please!
    Global Journal of Business Pedagogy Volume 3, Number 3, 2019 COFFEE-INFUSED COKE? YES PLEASE! Ahmed Maamoun, University of Minnesota Duluth CASE DESCRIPTION The subject of coffee on its own boasts many different avenues for study and discussion. But when coffee is combined with the multi-national beverage corporation Coke, topics and options to approach a case become innumerable. Instructors will have plenty of opportunities to engage students and boost participation. This case is ideal for a junior or senior class on branding, marketing strategy, retailing, green marketing, or principles of marketing. It is designed to stimulate discussion about marketing and growth strategies, globalization, merges and acquisitions, positioning, and retail footprint. This case is an excellent vehicle for demonstrating how a single growth decision by a major player can send shockwaves through an entire industry. The case is designed to be taught in a 60-75 minute class, and is expected to require 3 hours of outside preparation by students. CASE SYNOPSIS Coffee is a majestic beverage that can quite possibly connect the world together. The Coca- Cola Company is the world’s largest beverage corporation, offering over 500 brands to consumers in 200 countries. However, Coca-Cola has not had a hot drink in its product mix, nor has it had a major retail footprint. With the growth in coffee and hot beverages, the company felt that the timing was right for it to make a thoughtful and significant investment in that category. In August 2018, Coca-Cola paid £3.9 or $5.1 billion to buy the U.K.-based coffee company, Costa, giving Coke its entry into the hot drink market.
    [Show full text]
  • Starbucks' International Operations1
    1 | P a g e Business Internationalization STARBUCKS’ INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS1 Internationally, we are in our infancy. (Howard Schultz, Chairman & Chief Global Strategist – Starbucks, 2003) The expansion strategy internationally is not bullet-proof as it is in the U.S. (Mitchell J. Speiser, Analyst – Lehman Brothers, 2003) ALL’S NOT WELL WITH STARBUCKS In March 2003, Fortune came out with its annual list of “Fortune 500 companies”. For Howard Schultz (Schultz), Chairman of Starbucks Corp. (Starbucks), this list was special as Starbucks [was] featured in the list (position 465). It was a dream that come true for the Seattle-based entrepreneur. Though the U.S. economy was reeling under recession and many retail majors were reporting losses and applying for bankruptcy, Starbucks announced a 31% increase in its net earnings and a 23% increase in sales for the first quarter of 2003. Analyst felt that the success of Starbucks showed that a quality product speaks for itself and the fact that Starbucks spent less than 1% of its sales on advertising and marketing strengthened this view. In addition to be a popular brand among customers, Starbucks was also considered the best place to work due to its employee friendly policies (Starbucks was the first organization in the U.S. to offer stock options and health coverage to part-time employees also). However, analysts felt that the success of Starbucks was due to its profitable domestic operations. It was reported that most of Starbucks’ international operations were running into losses. In May 2003, Starbucks’ Japanese operations reported a loss of $3.9 million (Japan constituted the largest market for the company outside the U.S.), and the company also performed badly in Europe and the Middle East.
    [Show full text]
  • Starbucks Corporation: Competing in a Global Market
    Revised April 7, 2003 Starbucks Corporation: Competing in a Global Market Starbucks Corporation is a Seattle, Washington-based coffee company. It buys, roasts, and sells whole bean specialty coffees and coffee drinks through an international chain of retail outlets. From its beginnings as a seller of packaged, premium specialty coffees, Starbucks has evolved into a firm known for its coffeehouses, where people can purchase beverages and food items as well as packaged whole bean and ground coffee. Starbucks is credited with changing the way Americans--and people around the world--view and consume coffee, and its success has attracted global attention. Starbucks has consistently been one of the fastest growing companies in the United States. Over a 10-year period starting in 1992, the company’s net revenues increased at a compounded annual growth rate of 20%, to $3.3 billion in fiscal 2002. Net earnings have grown at an annual compounded growth rate of 30% to $218 million in fiscal 2002, which is the highest reported net earnings figure in the company's history (See Exhibit 1). As Business Week tells it: On Wall Street, Starbucks is the last great growth story. Its stock, including four splits, has soared more than 2,200% over the past decade, surpassing Wal-Mart, General Electric, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, and IBM in total return. Now at $21 [September 2002], it is hovering near its all-time high of $23 in July [2002], before the overall market drop.1 To continue this rapid pace of growth, the firm’s senior executives are looking to expand internationally.
    [Show full text]
  • Starbucks Coffee Company*
    no. 1-0023 Starbucks Coffee Company* On an overcast February afternoon in 2000, Starbucks CEO Orin Smith gazed out of his office window in Seattle and contemplated what had just occurred at his company’s annual shareholder meeting. In prior years, the meeting had always been a fun, all-day affair where shareholders from around the country gathered to celebrate the company’s success. This year, however, Smith and other senior Starbucks executives heard an earful from the activist group Global Exchange. A human rights organization dedicated to promoting environmental, political, and social justice around the world, Global Exchange criticized Starbucks for profiting at the farmer’s expense by paying low prices and not buying “fair trade” beans. Not only did the activists disrupt the company’s annual meeting to the point that the convention hall security police asked the activists to leave, but they also threatened a national boycott if the company refused to sell and promote fair trade coffee. Although Smith strongly disagreed with using the shareholders meeting as a public forum, he knew there was a strong likelihood his company could face serious reprisals if it did not address the issues raised by Global Exchange. Fair trade began after World War II as religiously–affiliated, non-profit organizations purchased handmade products for resale from European producers. During the 1970s and 1980s, the concept evolved further into buying crafts from low-income, third-world producers at a “fair” price and selling those products in Western markets.1 Fair trade was an economic model based on fair labor compensation and mutual respect between producers and consumers.
    [Show full text]