•Do not introduce proposed new products at proposed prices because they are projected to be way less profitable than your existing one. •Produce the aerosol 5.5 oz package at a higher price, $3.95. Results of the research did not show that price was attractive for people or that it kept customers away in fact people were attracted to product for features. Projections on sales were for size and type of containers, not for price. Keeping sale projections as they are and increasing price of the 5.5 oz package will be more profitable. More people showed more interest in the 5.5oz over the 10oz plus looking at competitors’ products it will be easier to get away with this price for 5.5 oz because of less competition close to that amount of oz. Also, it helps keeping the image of quality. Could also consider producing the 10oz at a higher price maybe at 6.95, which is the highest competitor price for a gel and that one had less ounces. Could justify by differentiation on quality and features. This option will be very profitable of priced like this. •Consider developing your own retail distribution methods so you can cut on rack jobbers variable costs. •By using the preliminary tests of market will reduce the need for a market research but we will still need to test market response to new product in new prices. It shows that it would not be so costly and could easily be afforded by the increase profits from the new product packaging release. •Ms. Masters could win Ms. Courtwright respect by showing serious consideration of the complete proposal and discussing with her areas of improvement to the proposal. Also by recognizing areas of excellence in the plan and attributing the credit of those to Ms. Courtwright, where she deserves it.
Based on: Soft and Silky Shaving Gel Case by Professor Roger A. Kerin, of the Edwin L. Cox School of Business, Southern Methodist University.