Racycles Company Tactical Marketing Decisions Analysis - Free Essay Example

Introduction

Racycles has four products, including Bike4all, Rockstar, Skyrocket-Pro, and Skyrocket lite. Bike4all, if for recreation, Rockstar is for mountain and Skyrocket and Skyrocket lite are for speed. The competitors of Racycles are Real Tech Bike, Biker Power, and Wheeled Wonders. Racycles makes use of a tactical mix marketing strategy to compete in the market and to promote the brand.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Performance Report

The performance report is reflective of the decisions made by the Company. The total performance of Racycles is 66.793, third against the competitors. The overall performance is further broken down into financial performance, market performance, and market effectiveness. Racycles also came third in business performance, standing at 67.628. In marketing performance, Racycles Company was third with a score of 42.00. Racycles were runners-up in marketing effectiveness, standing at 90.750. Racycles is third in market shares with 21%. Racycles sold a total of 8,471 units racking in $8,885,800 in sales revenue. The rebates were $318,200, and the cost of sold goods stand at $4,279,166. The gross margin is, therefore, $4,288,434.

Racycles saw an increasing trend in gross profit from the 1st quarter to the 6th quarter from 97,287 to 4,288,434. It is the same for operating expenses and operating profit which increased from $71,235 to $1,583,314 and $26,052 to $2,705,120 respectively. The cumulative division net profit is, therefore, $6,486,088. The Skyrocket pro is the most profitable of the Racycles product, with a brand profit of $1,343,709. Bike4All, Skyrocket-lite, Rockstar and Bike4All 2.o turned in profits of $243,519, $2,554, $928,645 and $639,703 respectively. Skyrocket-pro also had the highest profit per unit, standing at $535, while Bike4All, Skyrocket-lite, Rockstar, and Bike4All-2.0 were $298, $9, $332 and $313 respectively. Against the competitors, Racycles came third in total brand demand at $15,568.

Racycles utilized marketing mix strategy by focusing on the four main variables in the product, price, distribution, and promotion, and products are the goods by Racycles Company including Bike4All, Skyrocket Pro, and Skyrocket lite, Rockstar and Bike4All 2.0. Racycles Company sets the price for every product and the most profitable one being Skyrocket Pro with a margin of $535. Racycles utilizes the world market to distribute its products, and the main places include New York City, Rio de Janeiro, Amsterdam, and Bangalore cities. Racycles Company has promotion activities in all these cities to create brand awareness, consequently improving sales.

Racycles utilized different marketing tools for products, price, place, and promotion, and products were made with different designs, brand names creating a variety of choices for the customers (Dadzie et al., 2017). Products were built for speed, recreation, and for the mountain. Racycles looked for different locations to sell products, and it is essential to expand the reach of the Company and generate more revenue. Racycles utilizes different promotion strategies like advertising and sales promotion, and it resulted in substantial internet searches; for example, bikes for recreating resulted in 10,664 interactions.

Impact and Analysis

Racycles utilized the marketing mix strategy to achieve its goals and to give customers value for their money. The marketing mix strategy combines all the four variables to strengthen the Racycles in the market including product, place, promotion and price (Adnin Nasution et al., 2018). However, according to the performance, Racycles is on average third position against its competitors. It is because the marketing mix strategy has some weaknesses (Erdil & Özdemir, 2016). It does not detail all the activities in marketing.

An example is how it does not give more information on services as they are generally products (Varadarajan, 2020). Another example of essential marketing activity is packaging, which plays a massive role in the success of the strategy and the Company wholly (Fernandes, 2018). The marketing mix strategy focuses on the seller and not the buyer. The buyer is key to the success of the business as their preferences need high priority consideration (Steenkamp, 2017).

The customer’s preferences can be considered in four different ways. Instead of products, they can be customer solutions (Siakalli et al., 2016). A customer needs a solution to a task or problem they have in an activity or from another product (Deebhijarn, 2017). The cost should be adjusted to fit customer needs as they should be aware of what it will cost them if they dispose of the product after using it (Roy & Schramm, 2019). The place of distribution should be convenient and easily accessible to the customer (Othman et al., 2020). Promotion should be a mutual activity and not one way. The customers should have a chance to give feedback about the product under the showcase (Othman et al., 2019). Therefore, advertising should be considered more as a form of communication.

Racycles should take a portfolio approach. It means creating a competitive set of products in the Company (Murshid et al., 2016). Racycles’ highest performing product financially is the Skyrocket Pro. A portfolio approach is a form of tactical marketing mix which aims at creating products to compete with the most profitable one closely (Kraus et al., 2016). Without a competitive portfolio of products, the Company is set to go through a “Death Spiral.” (Koo et al., 2016) It is when a company continues to produce products that have lower profits and cannot compete with the main profitable product in the Company (Išoraite, 2015). The Company can continue generating revenue, but it is not sustainable in the long term.

Conclusion

In a tactical marketing mix strategy, creating a competitive portfolio of products is essential to maintain profitability in the long term. The marketing strategy is good, but the combination of products matters most. The profitability is measured against the margin of contribution. It is the profitability against the cost of production of the product. The Company can create a good algorithm of product combination by doing away with products with fewer profit margins and concentrating on the most profitable ones. However, the Company should take into consideration the value of the products offered to clients. It means that clearing less profitable products is decided after analyzing the value of the product to customers. It is because customers prefer what is valuable to them before checking the prices and other variables.

References

Adnin Nasution, F., Fauzi, A., & Matondang, N. (2018). Building customer loyalty through marketing mix strategy with satisfactory as intervening variable. KnE Social Sciences, 3(10). https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i10.3372

Dadzie, K. Q., Amponsah, D. K., Dadzie, C. A., & Winston, E. M. (2017). How firms implement marketing strategies in emerging markets: An empirical assessment of the 4a marketing mix framework. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 25(3), 234-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2017.1311220

Deebhijarn, S. (2017). The relationship between selected marketing mix and brand equity of ready to drink (RTD). International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 6(12), 1687-1692. https://doi.org/10.21275/art20179148

Erdil, T. S., & Özdemir, O. (2016). The determinants of relationship between marketing mix strategy and drivers of export performance in foreign markets: An application on Turkish clothing industry. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, 546-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.067

Fernandes, A. A. (2018). The mediation effect of customer satisfaction in the relationship between service quality, service orientation, and marketing mix strategy to customer loyalty. Journal of Management Development, 37(1), 76-87. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmd-12-2016-0315

Išoraite, M. (2015). Analysis of marketing mix: Nivea case study. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 3(2), 173-185. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2015.3.2(5)

Koo, K. R., Kim, S. J., & Kim, K. H. (2016). The effects of internal marketing capability on export marketing strategy, B2B marketing mix and export performance. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, 26(1), 51-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2015.1122956

Kraus, S., Meier, F., Eggers, F., Bouncken, R. B., & Schuessler, F. (2016). Standardisation vs. adaption: A conjoint experiment on the influence of psychic, cultural and geographical distance on international marketing mix decisions. European J. of International Management, 10(2), 127. https://doi.org/10.1504/ejim.2016.074468

Murshid, M. A., Mohaidin, Z., Yen Nee, G., & Fernando, Y. (2016). Physician perceived value as a mediating variable between marketing mix strategy and physician satisfaction. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 28(5), 780-806. https://doi.org/10.1108/apjml-09-2015-0142

Othman, B. A., Harun, A., Rashid, W. N., Nazeer, S., Kassim, A. W., & Kadhim, K. G. (2019). The influences of service marketing mix on customer loyalty towards Umrah travel agents: Evidence from Malaysia. Management Science Letters, 865-876. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.3.002

Othman, B. A., Harun, A., De Almeida, N. M., & Sadq, Z. M. (2020). The effects on customer satisfaction and customer loyalty by integrating marketing communication and after sale service into the traditional marketing mix model of Umrah travel services in Malaysia. Journal of Islamic Marketing, ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/jima-09-2019-0198

Roy, A., & Schramm, M. E. (2019). The relationship between competitive pricing and direct-to-consumer advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, JAR-2019-025. https://doi.org/10.2501/jar-2019-025

Siakalli, M., Masouras, A., & Papademetriou, C. (2016). E-MarkEting in the hotel industry: Marketing mix strategies. Strategic Innovative Marketing, 123-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33865-1_15

Steenkamp, J. (2017). Global marketing mix decisions: Global integration, not standardization. Global Brand Strategy, 75-109. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94994-6_4

Varadarajan, R. (2020). Customer information resources advantage, marketing strategy and business performance: A market resources-based view. Industrial Marketing Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.03.003