Flickering Fortune

ProHub Comment

This case reveals a classic tension between volume-driven sales incentives and profit optimization. The key insight is that despite improving unit economics (costs falling 37.5% to 10% annually), Vivid is leaving money on the table through excessive discounting driven by sales quotas, while customers demonstrate high willingness-to-pay due to product quality and switching costs.

Estimated Time 15 minutes
Difficulty Medium
Source Wharton
50 / 100
Your firm has been engaged by Vivid, a consumer electronics screen manufacturer, for a pricing optimization project. Vivid’s main product is HDTV (high-definition TV) screens. Its main customers are well-known TV manufacturers in Asia and the US, who buy other components, build the finished TVs and sell them to retailers who use global distribution channels to reach end-users.

Clarifying Information

  1. Objective: Client is looking at pricing in search of opportunities to grow revenue
  2. Patents: Vivid technology is patent-protected, and for manufacturers to switch suppliers would require costly plant reconfiguration
  3. Revenue trends: While sales volumes have been increasing, revenue has remained flat
  4. Competitive landscape: No insights available