Case Memo Bitter Competition: the Holland Sweetener

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 310
  • Published : January 28, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
ad

|From: |Wei Li (No.2012960642) | |Date: |Jan 20, 2013 |

Case Memo
Bitter Competition: The Holland Sweetener
Company versus NutraSweet

- 1. How should Vermijs expect NutraSweet to respond to the Holland Sweetener Company’s entry into the European and Canadian aspartame markets? (1) Baseline: Product: aspartame was a strong substitute of saccharin with better flavor and low calories, especially for diet soft drink. There was no other competitive product at that time. Market: Aspartame had a great potential market. |Mkt scale/Ton |US |EU |Canada |Japan |Total | |1982 |220 |30 |100 |5 |370 | |1986 |5100 |430 |120 |40 |5730 |

* NutraSweet had a capability of 5,000 tons. (Not including capability from Japanese JV) Competition: NutraSweet (NS) was patent owner of aspartame and market leader of aspartame in US since 1970. NutraSweet monopolized aspartame market in US, European and Canadian in 1986 before HSC entered aspartame market in Europe. NS’s patent protection in Europe would expire in 1987 and 1992 in U.S. (2) Strategy of Holland Sweetener Company (HSC)

Vermijs had his expectation based on its own strategy and situation NS faced. HSC had an improve aspartame products with lower produce cost and better performance of stability (supposed it was true.) HSC established Japanese JV to provide cost advantage. HSC started at Europe and Canada, which were not totally monopolized by NS. Also these markets had rigid...
tracking img