The Beach Carrier Essay Sample

Q1: What is the nature of the merchandise? What are its strengths and failings? A1: The Beach Carrier is a new merchandise construct developed by Mary Ricci. It is a big. lightweight. lasting bag that is designed to transport everything required for a twenty-four hours at the beach. including a chair. The Beach Carrier can be folded down to a 12-inch by 12-inch square for easy storage when non in usage. It comes with an adjustable strap and various-sized pockets for transporting all types of points to the beach or other out-of-door activities ( i. e. concerts. field daies. and barbeques ) .

The Beach Carrier possesses several strengths relative to competitory merchandises in the market. including the followers: 1. First. the overall merchandise construct of a individual bag that can transport all of the things needed for a twenty-four hours at the beach is a discriminator. 2. Second. the Beach Carrier can be easy handled and stored when non in usage as it can be folded down to a 12-inch by 12-inch square. 3. The Beach Carrier is big and roommate and contains multiple compartments and different-sized pockets. It can suit transporting points changing in size from a bottle of sunblock to a beach chair or ski boots. 4. It is manufactured in a lightweight. tear-resistant. fade-proof cloth that dries rapidly and is therefore suited for a scope of out-of-door activities. 5. The Beach Carrier will be offered in a assortment of fluorescent and conservative colourss. where competitory merchandises are merely sold in three colourss. 6. The merchandising monetary value of the Beach Carrier will run from $ 12. 99 to $ 14. 99 versus a scope of $ 16. 95 to $ 59. 99 for similar. competitory merchandises.

Some of the failings of the Beach Carrier include the undermentioned: 1. The Beach Carrier is 36-inch by 36-inch when in usage and this size was perceived to be much larger than necessary by many members of a focal point group. 2. The Beach Carrier’s overall size may be more cumbrous to manage comparative to its top two rivals. the “Caddy-Shack” and the “Wonder Wheeler” . The “Caddy-Shack” is a backpack-type merchandise. while the “Wonder Wheeler” has oversized wheels. 3. The “Wonder Wheeler” is capable of transporting the most points and therefore the Beach Carrier is non the market leader in transporting capableness. 4. The fluorescent colourss of the Beach Carrier are diaphanous and considered “trendy” . decreasing the sensed quality of the bag.

Q2: What are the restrictions to the premises Ricci has made in finding the market potency? What risks do these show? A2: In measuring the market potency for the Beach Carrier. there are several premises that Ricci made that could significantly impact the overall market portion possible. These include the undermentioned: 1. First of all. Mary Ricci has made the general and often-popular premise that “bigger is better” . However. a 36-inch by 36-inch bag is immense and would be highly heavy if wholly filled. Peoples may prefer to hold a smaller bag and restrict the points that they bring to the beach or on another excursion. 2. Second. the Beach Carrier utilizes an adjustable shoulder strap for transporting and Mary has assumed that this method would non be viewed as a negative when compared to the “Caddy Shack” ( backpack-type ) or the “Wonder Wheel” ( outsize wheels ) . However. many consumers would probably see these other transporting methods as an advantage. particularly if one is packing tonss of material including chairs and umbrellas.

3. Following. Mary based her market research on all people who use suntan and/or sunblock merchandises. This may be a important exaggeration of the market as many people who use these merchandises will ne’er hold a demand for a big bag. This could dramatically alter the break-even point. 4. Further. Ricci based the market potency on the premise that all adult females who purchase sunscreen merchandises would be the mark purchasers of the Beach Carrier. Again. this seems to be a blemished premise and she would hold likely been better off seeking to happen out the current gross revenues of either the “Caddy Shack” or the “Wonder Wheel” . In my sentiment. this besides appears to be an overestimation of the market potency and could negatively impact the break-even point. 5. In add-on. Ricci has assumed that adult females buy new beach bags every 3rd twelvemonth but all three merchandises in this market infinite. particularly the Beach Carrier. promote their degree of lastingness. Therefore. the turnover of bags may non be every bit frequent as the historical information suggest and therefore the market potency may once more be overstated. 6. Finally. it does non look that Ricci’s fiscal analysis has taken into history the fact that the Beach Carrier will be a extremely seasonal merchandise. Therefore. she must account for this fluctuation in production. stock list care. start-up support. and overall hard currency flow every bit good as finding when best to establish the merchandise.

Q3: How can Ricci protect her merchandise design?
A3: In order to the merchandise design and overall concern construct of the Beach Carrier. Mary Ricci should retain a patent lawyer to carry on a patent hunt. If the merchandise design of the Beach Carrier is determined to be patentable. Mary and her legal advocate should use for a public-service corporation patent and/or design patent. Until patent protections are in topographic point. Ricci must forbear from advancing the merchandise with exposures and/or elaborate merchandise descriptions. In add-on. Mary should avoid sharing any inside informations of the Beach Carrier with other concern people and should non come in into any concern relationship sing this merchandise without inadvertence from her lawyer. Further. Ricci could register the “Beach Carrier” under a hallmark to protect rivals from utilizing this phrase. Finally. Ricci needs to develop a elaborate Selling Plan within her Business to detail how she will present this engineering to the market in order to capitalise on any “first-mover” advantages.

Q4: Is the funding sufficient to fund the axial rotation out of the Beach Carrier as planned? Why or why non? A4: Per the instance survey. it is ill-defined precisely how much initial funding that Mary Ricci is seeking for this venture. However. the article stresses that Ricci lacks capital and is sing a small-business loan in the scope of $ 30. 000 ( and much less than the needed $ 250. 000 for marketing the merchandise through traditional retail channels ) . This minimal sum forms the footing of her analysis as she is extremely focused on merely funding the fixed costs for the first stage ( 3 month period ) of the rollout for the mail-order plan. While the overall construct of the rollout program is an first-class illustration of experimentation and risk-mitigation. this degree of support is deficient to back up the Beach Carrier launch as planned.

First of all. support in this scope is merely focused on covering the fixed costs for the first three months of the roll-out. It does non include any of the necessary seed capital to get down the venture including patent and hallmark filing. securing legal advocate. puting up corporate administration certification. initial set-up costs for fabrication and operations. hiring and preparation employees. carry oning fabrication tests. and deploying the mail-order selling program ( catalogs and particular involvement magazines ) . A conservative estimation of this seed capital could easy be in surplus of $ 100. 000.

Second. Ricci is trying to be conservative by ciphering that her break-even point can be achieved by capturing merely one-quarter of her mark gross revenues end. However. this premise is besides flawed because it is improbable that the Beach Carrier will come in the market and instantly set up a steady market portion – even with a end of less than 1 % of the “market” . In add-on. it was already pointed out in Question # 2 that there is a strong possibility that Ricci may hold ab initio overestimated the market potency. and the true market potency is significantly less. The combined consequence of presuming an immediate gaining control of 0. 25 % of the “market” and an exaggeration of the market potency could intend that the Beach Carrier could fall short of this break-even point and extra support would be required to cover the spread in the few stages.

Finally. Ricci is entirely focused on funding the first stage of fixed costs with the initial loan but is non sing the timing of the payments for the staying three stages of the roll-out. The entire fixed costs for the first twelvemonth of operation are $ 111. 199. It is extremely improbable that the hard currency flow from operations will be collected in the first stage to cover the fixed costs in each subsequent stage. Therefore. Ricci should strongly see obtaining adequate capital to fund the fixed costs for at least the first twelvemonth of operation. Therefore. it is my sentiment that the entire capital that Ricci should be seeking is in the vicinity of $ 300. 000 to genuinely give the Beach Carrier a opportunity for success.