Revising

1. Did they provide a conclusion for the industry’s attractiveness (overall profitability)?

· The group provided a well-written conclusion that clearly summarized the outcome of their Porter’s 5 forces analysis. But it is more focused on the companies individually.

2. Include each of the five forces (Barriers to entry, bargaining power of buyers, bargaining power of suppliers, intensity of rivalry, and threat of substitutes).

a. Barriers to entry (if high should include a government or legal barrier)

There are low barriers and no government regulation. Switching costs are low and there is easy access to inputs.

b. Bargaining power of buyers and suppliers (specify who the buyers (e.g. household consumers; bottlers) and suppliers (e.g. key inputs: commodities; caramel) are)

The buyers are wholesalers and consumers. Listed stores are actually retailers. Are there wholesalers or do the shoes ship straight from manufactures to retailers. Consumers (as buyers) have strong power. Evidence is show in newly created mass customization of shoe designs to target each individual customer. Suppliers’ inputs are raw materials and labor. Suppliers’ power is weak. An overseas factory may rely completely on brand name athletic shoe company’s business to stay afloat. The raw materials are not unique or special so then can be sourced from a number of different suppliers. No detail on specific suppliers.

c. Threat of Substitutes (make sure they do not mention competitors here)

It started well by describing substitutes as other casual footwear since a large portion of athletic footwear is purchased for casual use. More focus and detail. Nike is mentioned as a competitor, should not be include in substitutes.

d. Intensity of Rivalry (do they make an assessment regarding a price war; provide appropriate evidence of pricing trends)

The rivalry is driven by which company can afford to get the expensive celebrity/designer partnership. The pricing in the market is mostly stable except for some special design shoes which are considered outliers. Some discussion of high entry barriers may fit better under the Barriers to Entry section.

3. Are their conclusions logically consistent? If the threats are high, do they conclude the industry is unattractive?

Logic is mostly consistent. No strong conclusion stated to draw attractiveness determination from.