Meeting Of Senior Managers Has Been Called To Discuss

A Meeting Of Senior Managers Has Been Called To Discuss the Pricing S

A meeting of senior managers has been called to discuss the pricing strategy for a new product. The discussion will focus on estimating sales and evaluating different pricing options based on potential demand levels. Historically, new products have struggled to meet sales targets, affecting overall profitability. Consequently, the company is considering multiple sales targets rather than a single goal to better assess risks and opportunities.

Two primary strategies are under consideration. The first involves setting a selling price of $170 with annual fixed costs of $20,000,000. Management favors this approach to reduce costs and achieve competitive pricing. The second strategy proposes increasing the selling price to $200, accompanied by higher fixed costs of $25,000,000, with an emphasis on boosting advertising and promotional efforts. The marketing department advocates this strategy to enhance market penetration and visibility.

The demand for the product is uncertain but can be estimated through three demand levels with associated probabilities. These demand levels are 150,000 units (probability 0.25), 180,000 units (probability 0.50), and 200,000 units (probability 0.25). Variable costs are estimated at $35 per unit. The company’s primary financial goals are to at least break even and achieve a profit exceeding $4 million. It is crucial to analyze whether these pricing strategies can meet these financial objectives considering the demand uncertainty.

Paper For Above instruction

The decision-making process regarding pricing strategies for a new product requires careful financial analysis, especially in the context of uncertain demand and varying fixed costs. The complexity increases when management considers multiple scenarios with different demand levels and probability distributions. This paper evaluates two proposed strategies, calculates their break-even points, assesses the likelihood of achieving a target profit of $4 million, and discusses the applicability of advanced financial performance measures like ROI and residual income in this context.

Financial Analysis of the Proposed Strategies

The first strategy involves a unit selling price of $170, fixed costs of $20,000,000, and a variable cost of $35 per unit. The contribution margin per unit is calculated as:

Contribution Margin = Selling Price - Variable Cost = $170 - $35 = $135

Next, the break-even point in units, which occurs when total revenue equals total costs, can be determined by dividing fixed costs by contribution margin:

Break-even units = Fixed costs / Contribution margin = $20,000,000 / $135 ≈ 148,148 units

This indicates that to break even under this strategy, sales must exceed approximately 148,148 units. Analyzing demand scenarios, the lowest estimated demand is 150,000 units, which slightly exceeds the break-even point, suggesting a marginal chance of profitability dependent on actual demand realization. At this demand, profit would be:

Profit = (Units sold Contribution margin) - Fixed costs = (150,000 $135) - $20,000,000 = $20,250,000 - $20,000,000 = $250,000

This profit is well below the targeted $4,000,000 profit threshold. Increasing demand to the median estimate of 180,000 units yields:

Profit = (180,000 * $135) - $20,000,000 = $24,300,000 - $20,000,000 = $4,300,000

which exceeds the target. At the highest demand of 200,000 units, profit reaches:

Profit = (200,000 * $135) - $20,000,000 = $27,000,000 - $20,000,000 = $7,000,000

Hence, under the lower demand scenario, the profit is below targets, but the median and high-demand scenarios meet or surpass the $4 million goal, especially considering the associated probabilities of 0.25, 0.50, and 0.25, respectively.

Similarly, evaluating the second strategy, with a selling price of $200, fixed costs of $25,000,000, and the same variable cost per unit, the contribution margin per unit is:

Contribution margin = $200 - $35 = $165

The break-even point in units is:

Break-even units = $25,000,000 / $165 ≈ 151,515 units

At this sales level, profit in the lowest demand scenario (150,000 units) would be negative:

Profit = (150,000 * $165) - $25,000,000 = $24,750,000 - $25,000,000 = -$250,000

which is below zero, indicating a loss. At median demand (180,000 units):

Profit = (180,000 * $165) - $25,000,000 = $29,700,000 - $25,000,000 = $4,700,000

and at high demand (200,000 units):

Profit = (200,000 * $165) - $25,000,000 = $33,000,000 - $25,000,000 = $8,000,000

Thus, except for the lowest demand, the second strategy can achieve the profit target, especially given the probabilities. The probability-weighted expected profit can be approximated by summing the products of profits and their corresponding probabilities:

Expected profit (Strategy 1):

= (0.25 $250,000) + (0.50 $4,300,000) + (0.25 * $7,000,000) = $62,500 + $2,150,000 + $1,750,000 = $3,962,500

Expected profit (Strategy 2):

= (0.25 -$250,000) + (0.50 $4,700,000) + (0.25 * $8,000,000) = -$62,500 + $2,350,000 + $2,000,000 = $4,287,500

From this analysis, Strategy 2 presents a higher likelihood of surpassing the target profit, especially considering demand variability. However, it also involves higher fixed costs and risks of losses at lower demand levels.

Margin of Safety and Decision-Making

The margin of safety (MOS) indicates how much projected sales can drop before the company reaches its break-even point. It is calculated as:

MOS = (Expected demand - Break-even demand) / Expected demand

For Strategy 1, the expected demand, weighted by probabilities, is:

Expected demand = (0.25 150,000) + (0.50 180,000) + (0.25 * 200,000) = 37,500 + 90,000 + 50,000 = 177,500 units

Since the break-even units are approximately 148,148, the margin of safety is:

MOS = (177,500 - 148,148) / 177,500 ≈ 29,352 / 177,500 ≈ 0.165, or 16.5%

This indicates that sales can decline by 16.5% before the company reaches the break-even point under Strategy 1. For Strategy 2, the expected demand is the same, but the break-even point is higher, making the margin of safety narrower (approximating as needed). The relatively small MOS suggests some risk if sales fall below projections.

Assessing the Overall Feasibility

Given the analysis, Strategy 2 appears more favorable in terms of expected profits and likelihood of exceeding the $4 million profit target. However, the risk of losses at very low demand levels must be considered, alongside the higher fixed costs and marketing investments. The company must evaluate its risk appetite, considering the potential for negative profit in worst-case scenarios.

Additionally, the probability considerations inform management of the risks and expected payoff, assisting in strategic decisions. The company’s emphasis on advertising and promotional efforts under Strategy 2 could help shift demand toward higher levels, increasing expected profitability. Conversely, Strategy 1 offers a safer, more conservative approach with lower fixed costs but less potential upside.

Application of ROI and Residual Income

Return on Investment (ROI) and residual income are valuable financial metrics for evaluating investment decisions, especially in large diversified firms with multiple products. ROI measures profitability relative to investment cost, while residual income considers net income exceeding a minimum required return, often accounting for the cost of capital.

In this context, applying ROI involves calculating the expected net income from each strategy relative to the investment in the project (initial costs, advertising, etc.). For example, if the company invests in R&D, marketing, and production, the expected profits can be translated into ROI to determine if they surpass the company’s hurdle rate. Residual income, on the other hand, would mean subtracting a capital charge from the net income to assess if the project adds value over and above the required return on capital.

Both measures would enhance decision-making, especially for large corporations managing diverse portfolios. They enable comparing projects with different risk profiles and investment sizes, assisting in selecting those with the best risk-return trade-off. In this case, incorporating ROI and residual income calculations would provide a more comprehensive evaluation beyond simple break-even or profit targets, considering the company's cost of capital and strategic priorities.

Conclusion

Analyzing the two proposed strategies reveals that Strategy 2, despite higher fixed costs, offers a greater probability of achieving and exceeding the target profit of $4 million, particularly if demand surpasses expectations. The method illustrates the importance of considering demand variability, break-even analysis, and profit thresholds in product pricing decisions. Furthermore, integrating advanced financial performance measures like ROI and residual income would offer additional insights into the value added by each strategy, supporting more informed and strategic decision-making. Overall, given the calculated expectations and risk considerations, the company should favor Strategy 2, provided it can manage the associated risks and invest in demand-stimulating activities such as marketing and promotional campaigns.

References

• Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2016). Financial Management: Theory & Practice (15th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Ghemici, A., & Duca, D. (2014). Investment analysis: qualitative and quantitative methods. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 109, 147-151.
• Horngren, C. T., Sundem, G. L., Stratton, W. O., Burgstahler, D., & Schatzberg, J. (2013). Introduction to Management Accounting. Pearson.
• Heisinger, K. (2013). Managerial Finance. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Khan, M. Y., & Jain, P. K. (2009). Financial Management. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
• Ross, S. A., Westerfield, R. W., & Jaffe, J. (2013). Corporate Finance (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Shim, J. K., & Siegel, J. G. (2009). Budgeting and Financial Management for Nonprofit Organizations. Wiley.
• Brigham, E. F., & Houston, J. F. (2020). Fundamentals of Financial Management (15th ed.). Cengage.
• Block, S. B., & Hirt, G. A. (2018). Foundations of Financial Management. McGraw-Hill Education.
• DeFusco, R. A., McVoed, R. A., & Chapman, S. N. (2014). Management Accounting: Principles and Applications. Cengage Learning.