Beat the Market Game Report Essay

However, GameStop is still at a disadvantage, because there are such a large number of competitors in the industry. Buyer’s bargaining power are high, since there is no brand loyalty in the industry. Customers are very well aware of the market price of a product and will look for the best deals they can find. Suppliers have high bargaining power since suppliers can choose to integrate forward and sell their products themselves. The success of the retail gaming industry is very dependent on the availability of supplier’s goods. Additionally, since there are low barriers of entrance, substitute products and new entrants often appear in the market. Since most competitors in the industry do not have a strong presence, the expected retaliation towards new entrants is low. An increasing popularity of smartphone games and social media games such as Farmville on Facebook, allows customers to play against friends. Although these social media games do not offer the same experience as a video game, the fact that virtually no switching cost is associated with switching to a competitor’s game and since they are so cheap compared to video game disk and consoles, can easily drive customers from video gaming to online gaming. (Exhibit 2)

While companies that make up an oligopoly are competitors, they are acutely aware of the processes, systems, and actions of the other companies; therefore, the decisions and actions of one company usually influence and are influenced by the actions and decisions of other companies. These decisions and actions tend to restrict and limit the goods and services that are offered and can also lead to higher prices for

In these circumstances, the cost structures are not the same as with the competitive industry and so we cannot say that the oligopolistic firm results in higher prices than if a competitive market structure were to be adopted. In fact going along the theory of the downward sloping cost curve we can come to the conclusion that it would be the other way around and consumers would

There are a lot of things that I learned about the the Stock Market Game. In fact, I helped a basketball player named Bob Robinson invest in stocks for his financial plan for the future. I am interested in helping this person because of how good he is at basketball and because of who he plays for. He plays for Golden State which is one of my favorite basketball teams. He was also interested in investing in stocks which was why I helped this basketball player learn about having a diversified, long-term financial plan.

From playing the stock market game, a major lesson I learned is that the stock market is volatile. Even though there are outside factors that influence the value of a stock, the price, too, fluctuates for little reason. A stock's price resembles a yoyo, spiraling up and down on daily basis. Because of this reason, there is no such thing as a "guarantee" investment. Buying Apple or Amazon stock does not assure profits. When playing this simulated game, it was easy to win money, but easier to lose. Losses, which come with investing in the stock market, are not a bad thing. It is both a valuable learning experience and a motivator. Throughout my time participating in this simulation, I lost a ton of money, but it taught me that the stock market doesn't not bend to anyone's rules. It takes a level-headed, strategic mind to play a fickle game such as the stock market.

The trading game was a pretty valuable experience for me. It taught me how the market worked and helped me understand risk. I should have always kept an amount of cash in my account so that I could be more flexible if the situation got worse. I learned how to be disciplined and to reevaluate my position in order to see my mistakes. I

Lost profit because of reduced cost (11% price drop for 40% of sales) is shown

As I mentioned earlier, if you are selling a product that is required by law or is a necessity (inelastic) no matter how much the price changes, the demand stays the same. If you are selling a product that is not a necessity (elastic) a change in price will influence demand. Unless you have an exceptional advantage, your pricing will likely mirror your competitors. Obviously, there are exceptions with this as economic theory is just that.

I have 100 thousand dollars to invest in the stock market that I will disperse among six different companies. Each of the companies that I have chosen to invest in are different types of companies so that all my money is not in one type of market. The companies that I chose consist of GW Pharmaceuticals, Callaway, Genesco, Citigroup inc., McDonalds, and Ball Corporation. Each of these companies are different market types and they are at different stages of growth. Through purchasing 100 thousand dollar’s worth of stock, I intend on these stocks doubling my money within two years.

Strategic Issue: Throughout the case, it becomes clear that competition may be hindering your product from leading the market. A limited amount of compact company resources and the constant technological advancements may prevent the company from performing to the best of its capabilities. In order to address this issue, we recommend that you investigate our recommendations to increase market share by implementing the strategies that will be discussed in this memorandum.

While playing the BSG I found the best strategy was the best-cost provider strategy. Using the best-cost strategy allowed me to continue using a decent amount of superior material while also offering prices that were below or around the same price as my competitors. My shoes where not the highest quality or most expensive, but it was also made with a small amount of superior material so it was also not the cheapest made shoe available. This strategy worked best because it attracted buyers who wanted a good quality shoe but did not want to pay high quality prices. Since there were so many companies offering the same product, offering a medium-quality product at a lower price helped my company to gain more customers and market share. A focused differentiation strategy worked least well. Concentrating on one niche results in a company missing out on potential customers. Competitors working outside of the niche will eventually find ways to match the firm’s capabilities in serving the target niche. If the wants and needs of the target market start to switch over time, entry into the focused market can become easier for competitors as people look for different products and services.

In order to succeed in the market, all industries participants must have a develop strategy as we can see from current situation, the market conditions are changing. Sometimes it is very difficult to handle these changes. So these changes should be monitored and reacted upon to get success in the market.

Some of Our competitors use this type of pricing strategy as well. Therefore, it will be illogical to use a low-cost strategy for our products and services when some our competitors use the premium price strategy. In addition, the products and services they offer aren’t of the same quality and value as ours and their profits aren’t inhibited. Due to the aforementioned considerations and specifics, this strategy is

Recommend Article Article Comments Print Article Share this article on Facebook Share this article on Twitter Share this article on Google+ Share this article on Linkedin Share this article on StumbleUpon Share this article on Delicious Share this article on Digg Share this article on Reddit Share this article on Pinterest

To comply with the cost-leader competitive strategy of Digby, we lower the MTBF, improve automation and enlarge economies of scale to reduce material and labour variable costs. By that, we are able to entitle a higher contribution margin. Only focusing on costs, we miss the nature of competitive strategy. Porter (1997) suggests cost leadership competitive strategy allows sufficient price flexibility to those price-sensitive segments- Traditional and Low End. It is acknowledged that price and demand has a negative correlation (Marshall 1920). A drop in price of a product lower than its competitors can boost customer demand for the product. However in practice, we fail to lower our price and this Though we did generate large profit from these high contribution margin segments, Digby on one side violates the nature of cost leadership competitive strategy, and on the other side fails to maintain our competitive advantages to actually dominate the market. This is the reason for our loss of market share in Traditional segment in round 6. Compared to price variation in Traditional in 2020, nearly all businesses set a similar price in 2021, and we lose 12 % of market share (Digby 2020-2021). If we realise the strategy violation and arrange the price competitively early, we may award larger market share to dominate the market and gain the monopoly power.