Strategies to Fight Ad-sponsored Rivals

Ramon  Casadesus-Masanell; Feng  Zhu

Article | Management Science | September 2010

Strategies to Fight Ad-sponsored Rivals

by Ramon Casadesus-Masanell and Feng Zhu

Abstract

We analyze the optimal strategy of a high-quality incumbent that faces a low-quality ad-sponsored competitor. In addition to competing through adjustments of tactical variables such as price or the number of ads a product carries, we allow the incumbent to consider changes in its business model. We consider four alternative business models, a subscription-based model, an ad-sponsored model, a mixed model in which the incumbent offers a product that is both subscription-based and ad-sponsored, and a dual model in which the incumbent offers two products, one based on the ad-sponsored model and the other based on the mixed-business model. We show that the optimal response to an ad-sponsored rival often entails business model reconfigurations. We also find that when there is an ad-sponsored entrant, the incumbent is more likely to prefer to compete through the subscription-based or the ad-sponsored model, rather than the mixed or the dual model, because of cannibalization and endogenous vertical differentiation concerns. We discuss how our study helps improve our understanding of notions of strategy, business model, and tactics in the field of strategy.

Keywords: strategy; business models; tactics; advertising; pricing; Business Model; Advertising; Competition; Quality; Price; Product Marketing;

Format: Print

16 pages

Find at Harvard Purchase

Citation:

Casadesus-Masanell, Ramon, and Feng Zhu. "Strategies to Fight Ad-sponsored Rivals." Management Science 56, no. 9 (September 2010): 1484–1499.

Case | HBS Case Collection | September 2019 (Revised May 2020)

Keroche (A): Fighting for Share in the Kenyan Alcoholic Drinks Market

Ramon Casadesus-Masanell and Pippa Tubman Armerding

This case discusses the challenges faced by Kenyan alcoholic drinks producer Keroche Industries Limited in 2003, when the Kenyan government accused the company of manufacturing and selling substandard alcoholic drinks, revoked its liquor licenses, and shut down its manufacturing facility. At the same time, the multinational East Africa Breweries Limited (EABL) was planning to enter the same low-income market as Keroche. The husband and wife duo Tabitha and Joseph Karanja had founded Keroche in 1997 with the aim of providing Kenya’s low-income consumers with a cheap and safe alcoholic drink alternative, since these consumers frequently turned to unregulated, informally brewed alcohol that could blind or even kill those who drank it. However, the government was now claiming that Keroche, too, produced substandard drinks. Tabitha Karanja was convinced that EABL was behind these government attacks. The case describes the history of Keroche and EABL, and asks what Tabitha Karanja might do now to combat the allegations of the government and respond to the factory closing.

Keywords: Keroche; alcohol; wine; manufacturing; informal market; regulation; illicit; illegal; shutdown; factory; low-income consumers; multinational; local; government; allegations; accusations; negative press; EABL; Tusker; beer; SAB; chang'aa; Naivasha; Rift Valley; East Africa; lawsuit; legal battle; Business Ventures; Business Exit or Shutdown; Business Growth and Maturation; Business Startups; Production; Safety; Quality; Distribution; Small Business; Family Business; Crime and Corruption; Customer Focus and Relationships; Decisions; Income; Demographics; Geographic Scope; Geographic Location; Goods and Commodities; Government Legislation; Growth and Development; Business History; Lawsuits and Litigation; Laws and Statutes; Lawfulness; Goals and Objectives; Consumer Behavior; Market Entry and Exit; Problems and Challenges; Social Issues; Poverty; Strategy; Competition; Entrepreneurship; Manufacturing Industry; Food and Beverage Industry; Kenya; Nairobi; Africa;

Citation:

Casadesus-Masanell, Ramon, and Pippa Tubman Armerding. "Keroche (A): Fighting for Share in the Kenyan Alcoholic Drinks Market." Harvard Business School Case 720-390, September 2019. (Revised May 2020.) View Details

Cite View Details Educators Purchase

This case discusses the Kenyan government’s decision to increase excise taxes on wines in 2007. The tax increase would cause an average increase in price of 367% on Keroche’s fortified wines. Meanwhile, Keroche’s competitor EABL had effectively lobbied the government for its Senator beer to receive a zero-tax rating. Since Keroche’s wines targeted low-income consumers, Tabitha Karanja knew they would no longer be able to buy its products after the price hike. To make matters worse, Keroche was in the middle of building a brewery, with plans to enter the beer business in 2008. Now Tabitha Karanja had to decide how to react to this tax increase. One option was to lobby the government for a repeal of the tax increase (a long and costly process). Another was to abandon the wine business altogether, either in favor of the vodka Keroche already produced or another alcoholic drink.

This case describes Keroche co-founder Tabitha Karanja’s decision to exit the wine business following the Kenyan government’s 2007 increase in excise taxes on wine. In August 2007, Keroche introduced the vodka drink Viena Ice as a replacement for its fortified wines, and in August 2008, it entered the beer market with the launch of its Summit Lager premium beer. The case describes the success of Keroche’s products in the Kenyan beer market, despite an initial intense advertising campaign by Keroche competitor EABL for its own Tusker beer.

Faculty & Research

Strategies to Fight Ad-sponsored Rivals

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors