Only $2.99/month

Terms in this set (100)

With beer sales dropping around the world, you should be ecstatic that sales of Yuengling (pronounced Ying-Ling) beer are up 225 percent in the last six years. But as you walk through the caves and tunnels of Yuengling's Eagle Brewery, carved into Sharp Mountain in 1831 to maintain a perfect 50-degree temperature for storing beer, you see not only the history of America's oldest brewery everywhere you turn, but also chipped paint, rusting pipes, and an aging plant that can't keep up with the growing demand for Yuengling beer. So far, thanks to hard work, dedicated workers, and some luck, you've doubled your production capacity from 250,000 to 500,000 barrels of beer a year, but if you push for more, the old brewery will break.
Yet with sales up so dramatically, the company faces a problem. Says CEO and owner Dick Yuengling, "We are sold out of beer. We run the risk of losing our customer base because we don't have any product on the shelves." Shortages are so bad that the advertising
budget has been cut from $3 to $2 a barrel. Yuengling explains, "You can't fuel the fire when we can't get them beer anyway." With production stuck at 500,000 barrels a year, Yuengling beer has become harder to find even as it has become more popular. Sales representative Diane Adams said, "It was a little hairy. People were up in arms." So, rather than sacrifice sales in its home market of Pennsylvania, where Yuengling has its largest market share (10 percent), the company has temporarily stopped shipping beer to distributors in Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. Since that strategy won't help Yuengling grow outside Pennsylvania, you still face the question of how to permanently increase beer production to meet the growing demand.
You've identified five options. The first is to add new storage and finishing tanks to Eagle Brewery to increase production capacity by 10 percent to 550,000 barrels a year. Though doable, this is only a short-term solution. Second, you could outsource production to another company. This would be more cost-effective, but would Yuengling beer produced in non-Yuengling factories taste different? For a specialty beer, this could be a substantial risk. Still, outsourcing would be affordable, and Yuengling has done it before, outsourcing production of its Black and Tan beer to Pabst Blue Ribbon's brewery in Lehigh, Pennsylvania, until Pabst closed that facility four years ago. The third option is to buy another brewery, but there aren't many for sale and those that are would be expensive and require significant upgrades. For example, it would cost $13 million to buy and $5 million to fix Stroh's 1.5 million-barrel brewery in Tampa, Florida, which is far from Yuengling's northeastern markets.
A fourth option is to build a new factory capable of producing 1.2 million barrels per year, but that would cost $50 million and take three years. The fifth and final option is simply to do nothing. The company is already very profitable, has low overhead costs, and is very efficient. In other words, by doing nothing the company could still make a lot of money without incurring the risks inherent in the other options. And risk is a real consideration because everyone in the company remembers that Yuengling was losing money just a few years ago.

Refer to Yuengling. In the first stage of the planning process for Yuengling, it should have ____.
Welcome to Yahoo! where you'll find a $100 million loss, plummeting advertising sales, a stock price that has fallen from an all-time high of $237 to less than $10 per share, and layoffs that cost 800 people—including the previous CEO—their jobs. At this once-phenomenally-successful company, so many basic things have gone wrong that the question is: Where do you start to fix it?
One key problem is the organizational structure: with just 3,200 employees, Yahoo! has forty-four different business units! Even General Electric, with 300,000 employees, has only 13. You think to yourself, "This is unmanageable. Too many people and no focus." Amazingly, despite having 44 business units, Yahoo! doesn't have a direct sales unit. No one, it turns out, is responsible for cultivating customers. Why not? Well, during the "go-go" days, customers were literally throwing themselves and their advertising dollars at the company. As one Yahoo! manager said, "The fish were jumping into the boat." Consequently, most orders took place via email. Yahoo! didn't have to establish relationships with customers because customers came to it. Unfortunately, this led to arrogance. Jeff Bell, a vice president at one of Yahoo!'s potential customers, DaimlerChrysler, said the message was, "Buy our stuff [meaning Yahoo!'s advertising], and shut up." Jeff Mallett, Yahoo!'s former president, said, "We ran Yahoo! to optimize market share. I make no apologies for that. If there was a company that didn't get it [Internet advertising], we moved on very quickly."
Another problem was the overly creative, freewheeling, spontaneous company culture in which everyone, including the CEO, worked in cubicles. The problem wasn't so much the cubicles, but what they came to represent: an overly informal culture with no controls. At Yahoo!, employees played soccer in a large open space outside the company boardroom, even while the board was meeting. Furthermore, no one had an overall perspective of what was best for the entire company. Consequently, said one Yahoo! vice president, "[Unit] managers would beg, borrow, and steal from the network [meaning the overall company] to help their own properties." Plus, if you had an idea, you pursued it without having to get anyone's feedback or approval. Yahoo!'s chief operating officer said, "Yahoo!'s original mission was to grow as fast as you can and put things out there and see what works." The more serious problem, he said, was that "nobody knew what would work."
The most amazing aspect of this culture was that, as one manager explained, "There was a fair amount of resistance toward the strategy of monetizing our businesses." In other words, the culture at Yahoo! was so informal, so unfocused, and so freewheeling that no one really worried about whether the company could charge for the services it provided and make a profit. "There was a fear," said this manager, "that if all of our efforts were put into profit making, we'd starve research and development and lose our innovation."

Refer to Yahoo!. What is one of the advantages of Yahoo's new organizational structure?