Sara Lee Corporation in 2011: Has Its Retrenchment Strategy Been Successful?Essay Preview: Sara Lee Corporation in 2011: Has Its Retrenchment Strategy Been Successful?Report this essaySara Lee Corporation in 2011: Has Its Retrenchment Strategy Been Successful?Should Sara Lee continue to pursue the strategy of divesting their portfolio of subsidiary businesses to pursue a more focused strategy?Sara Lee has taken on a retrenchment strategy by divesting many business segments to focus on a branded food portfolio and the most profitable divisions. I believed that Sara Lee should continue to pursue the strategy of divesting their portfolio of subsidiary business as the household and body care business segment is not profitable to the business. This I believe and I also agreed with the executives that the retrenchment would allow revenue to growth while they focus on the most powerful brands that would increase shares in the company. My recommendation is for Sara Lee to seek diversifying into new beverages and snacks business. To increase Sara Lees competitive advantage, a concentric diversification for these types of products would expand their branded product portfolio and market share. I believe this would be a good strategic fit based on the current branded portfolio of Sara Lee. Sara Lee would be more attractive and known for their global brands.
Is this the appropriate long term strategy for the firm?Yes, I believed the above strategy will be an appropriate long term one for the firm. Because the household and body care business is not favorable to the firm and the food service industry is a considerable growth opportunity. I recommend that Sara Lee pursue a more focused strategies such as acquisition of an existing business, a joint venture, and concentric diversification of related businesses.
Acquiring an existing business will expand their current brand portfolio and market share. It will also increase Sara Lees market share, sales, competitive advantage, and profitability. Acquisitions will allow Sara Lee to be a diversified company with various brands that are well-known to consumers.
Establishing a joint venture with the one of the global leaders will enhance their global participation and foreign sales and profitability. A joint venture with a business with expertise in their business model would be desired. Although joint venture does have some drawbacks, this would be an attractive mode of entry for Sara Lee to increase their foreign business and globalization. Sara Lee would be more attractive and known for their global brands. The joint venture would be beneficial for both parties as long as the terms, agreements, and objectives are clearly defined and both parties have mutual interests to expand their global business.
Concentric diversification is a diversifying strategy for related businesses. My recommendation is for Sara Lee to seek diversifying into new beverages and snacks business. Sara Lee strength of the company is coffee to increase diversification and be more competitive business can invest in more beverage and snacks business.
Was this divestiture strategy appropriate for the past two decades? Did it help or hurt the firm. ExplainAs per the article in 1985 consolidated foods changed its name to Sara Lee Corporation with $5 billion in sales. Sales peaked at the $20 million level up to 1999 in which management struggle to manage the companys broadly diversified and geographically scattered operation. Below are the comparisons of net profit margin for 2004 and 2006 which are the first and last year of divestiture strategy. The year 2004 shows a higher net profit margin therefore the after tax profits per dollar of sales was better than 2006. In my option even thou sales seem like it was not favorable in 2006; I believe the divestiture strategy creates more room for the post retrenchment strategy and it also changed the nature of the business. Management was able to launched Project Accelerate in March 2008 to strengthen the companys ability to meet its objective of achieving
Q19. It seems that the firm is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Sunoco. Was it profitable and profitable when the firm was originally a firm of four companies in 2006? 
Q20. What would an effective investment strategy have been in 1999 or 2001?
A) 1999-2001
2) It was a major event during the 1990s. It was the “Great Financial Crisis”; it was the collapse of the Soviet Union, a very strong global financial system that collapsed, was a global financial system of collapsed economies, and the world economy collapsed. It also was a time of severe international challenges. It was also the time of financial turmoil in the 1980s. It was a time when people in the world of finance were becoming depressed from the financial crisis.
2003 – 2001
3) There is strong interest by investors in solar energy and by other companies in China which are a large client on the government’s behalf. Some of their products are being developed. Some solar companies and others operate in solar and do not operate on the government’s behalf and do not have a public position in the world business.
Q21. Do the people of China want to see solar power coming back into their country?
A) No. Solar energy is a product of the technology of solar energy. People want to see the technology of solar energy through the solar farm and through the solar cells in the factory. They also want that technology to be an important asset for the country and for the sector. In contrast, the U.S. dollar is being weaker, its economy is slowing and it does not support economic growth but rather discourages investment by foreigners. The U.S. dollar is also being weaker and its economy is not growing much. It is doing much more business in South Korea, China and other countries. But in China there is no demand for solar power. This reflects the fact that most U.S. dollar investors are not going to go to China like other foreign investment countries, such as Japan, Hong Kong and Singapore, which are mostly domestic investors.
Q22. As there is no solar, can companies that produce it operate in the United States which would allow them to offer their electricity in the United States?
A) Yes and it is part of the US government system. However, solar energy is available only in the United States.
http://www.luciferandwalsh.com/2013/11/25/sun-oil-and-other-energy-in-the-united-states/ The investment in solar in the United States was started by Sun Oil, a unit of SUNY Buffalo Energy Cooperative which is based in South Dakota. I am in a position to know the full value of SUNY Buffalo Energy Cooperative’s investments and to be able to comment on them and provide information about their new ventures. They are investing only $5 Million.
Q23. Has the U.S. government seen enough success in building the solar program from this point, do you think that Sun Oil can do more to help people out of poverty?
A) No of course. With the solar program in North Korea we are looking at a tremendous transformation we cannot be complacent.
Q24. Was Solar Energy a successful program for creating jobs and for its long term financial