Essay About Holland Sweetener Co. Vs. Nutrasweet And Net Income Of Monsanto Corporation

Bitter Competition: The Holland Sweetener Co. Vs. Nutrasweet (a)
Essay Preview: Bitter Competition: The Holland Sweetener Co. Vs. Nutrasweet (a)
Report this essay
Bitter Competition: The Holland Sweetener Co. Vs. Nutrasweet (A)
Bitter Competition: The Holland Sweetener Co. vs. NutraSweet (A)
1. How should Vermijs expect NutraSweet to respond in the Holland Sweetener Companys entry into the European and Canadian aspartame markets?
Vermijs could expect two responses from NutraSweet: try to “save” its monopoly by fighting and low the price and start a price-war with HSC; or accept the entrant and its pricing and finally share the market.

With the acquisition of Searle in the summer 1985 by the giant Monsanto, NutraSweet became a stronger brand. In 1986, the net income of Monsanto Corporation was $433M, and NutraSweet net sales rose to $711M.

With Monsanto support, NutraSweet was strong enough to conduct a price war, but the HSC had strong resources too: $412M of net income the same year, and net sales of $17.712M only in Europe and North America ($22. 530M in 1984), but also the chemical and technical know-how with Tosho patented process for manufacturing aspartame (considered

less costly and more flexible) and the HSCs European market knowledge and raw material supply. Added to a political goodwill ($17M from the European Investment Bank), Monsanto might beware of the DSM potential in the aspartame market. Furthermore, the cost of goods sold by HSC was more than twice higher in 1986 ($15.743M for $6.879M), in accordance with the net sales higher in the same proportion, providing more flexibility to HSC to lower it in case of price-war.

With a competitor with almost equivalent financial and technical resources, a price-war can conduct to a lose/lose game, both of NutraSweet and HSC would, at the end, make losses by decreasing always their prices, until one of the player exit the market, a risky situation for Monsanto, especially for the European market. But in the other hand, the size of HSC aspartame plant (500 tonne against more than 7000 estimated tonne) probably not allows it to make important economies of scale and serve the whole market and the multi-years

Discussion Questions1. How should Vermijs expect NutraSweet to respond to the Holland Sweetener Company’sentry into the European and Canadian aspartame markets?NutraSweet was able to maintain his worldwide monopoly position because it was secured by two key patents on aspartame in the Canadian and European market. But in 1987, NutraSweet’s patents were due to expire so HSC wanted to enter the market. During the secured times of NutraSweet, the company could create advantages to protect his market position.

Those advantages:-The two key patents, the ‘use’ patent obtained in 1970 and the ‘blend’ patent in 1973, so nobody could make the aspartame or use it.
-Economies of scale, cost advantages