Tiffany Pham Lena Sidhu Long Hoang Ellen Vu Slendertone

History Bio-medical Research Ltd (BRM) Galway, Ireland Manufactures and markets medical products under the Neurotech brand Company first toning belt cleared by United State food and drug administration (FDA) & classified under European Medical Device Directive (present-day) BMR provides medical grade EMS technology products for clinical environments to help with muscle disorders

Executive Summary Problem Distribution Problems Lack of Research Target Market Mishaps Recommendation Keep Product Line More market research Redevelop French Market Slower entry into new markets

The Problem Slendertone does not have an image of legitimacy yet. The brand image is not uniform and the distribution channels are adding to the problem of image uniformity. Is the consumer thinking about the product in the way that the company intended?

SWOT Analysis Strengths Product Quality Brand Recognition Identified Target Markets Weaknesses No extensive market analysis Not market-oriented Not enough testing on recent items Brand Image not uniform Opportunities Medical grade products (legitimacy) Wider range of ages (20-60) Diversify product range Threats Not market leader in France Low barriers to entry in EMS market Legal action against false claims

Identification of Alternatives Alternative (1) Keep product same (Electronic Muscle Stimulation) Slowly enter new markets Redevelop French Market More consumer research/market analysis Tailor Advertisements Advertise as a form of “muscle therapy through stimulation” Alternative (2) Go completely into health/medical market Pass tests to be medical grade product Increase credibility Alternative (3) Continue with O’Donohoe plan Group years of age together Branch into non-EMS products

Criteria for Analysis Which consumers will respond best to product? Which advertising will consumers respond best to? Which type of distribution is best for Slendertone? Is EMS the best area for Slendertone to position itself in? Reason behind different responses from different markets Brand image uniformity

Evaluation of Alternatives Alternative (1) Save money on product line Easier to adjust if there is a problem Brand image uniformity will be harder to keep Expensive to create multiple advertisements Alternative (2) Credibility will go up significantly More health benefits for customers Expensive to revamp products Risk if products don’t pass medical standards More serious competitive threats Alternative (3) New product area could have higher profit margins If 20 – 60 respond similarly to ads, money could be saved Branching into new area is risky Brand image could go down or be diluted Research and development costs for new lines are also a big cost

Recommendation We recommend alternative (1). The product line has been renamed to be simpler and easier to understand. Research and understanding the market is key, not trying to put everyone under one “blanket.” Risk is mitigated when each market is studied carefully and entered cautiously. Profits may not shoot up, but they will likely be steady and predictable.

Questions?