Luxury Hampers (LH) In 2015 Loretta bought LH, an established food hamper business. A hamper is a gift box or basket containing food and drink. Loretta purchased the business for $500000 using a combination of personal savings and venture capital. Loretta set a short-term objective of profit maximisation and planned for rapid expansion within a five-year period. LH buys high-quality food and drink products directly from manufacturers and packages the products into hampers to sell as luxury gifts. Timeline of LH 2015-2017 Focus on business efficiency improvement using better inventory control and management of costs. Marketing changes from targeting individual customers to targeting national corporate customers. LH develops online marketing capabilities. 2018 Loretta identifies PS (an international luxury gift supplier) as a suitable target for takeover. Loretta prepares a SWOT analysis for LH and PS [Appendix 1]. After the takeover, LH uses the brand name of LH nationally, but uses the PS brand name internationally to retain brand awareness. 2019-2020 Investment into rapid development of international corporate customers. 2021 All products now sold using the LH brand. Loretta is asked to present financial data about the impact of the takeover of PS at the annual general meeting (AGM) [Appendix 2]. 2022 LH receives increasing numbers of negative online reviews [Appendix 3]. Outdated IT systems and quality control procedures identified as problems. Developing an operations strategy In 2023, a cyber-attack corrupted 75% of LH's IT systems and data. Incomplete supplier data was recovered. However, all customer data was lost. This led to cancelled orders and LH experienced considerable damage to its reputation. LH's shareholders called an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) and Loretta was replaced as Managing Director by Sanjay, the Operations Director. Sanjay has identified several problems which need to be solved in both the short and long-term. He considers there are several opportunities to improve LH's operational efficiency. Sanjay knows a new operations strategy must be developed with an appropriate budget. The strategy will have clear objectives to increase data security and improve customer service. [Appendix 1: Extracts from 2018 SWOT analysis for LH and PS] LH Strengths • Efficient inventory control • Experience of online marketing to national corporate customers Weaknesses • Limited number of local suppliers • No international brand awareness PS Strengths • Established international luxury brand awareness • Short trade receivables period (15 days) • Wide range of reliable national suppliers Weaknesses • Lack of online expertise as it sells direct to luxury retailers • Inefficient inventory control • Consistently low dividend per share [Appendix 2: Extracts from LH's financial data presented 2021] After takeover of PS 2020 | 2019 Revenue ($m) | 61 | 56 Operating profit margin (%) | 11 | 19 Gearing (%) | 85 | 80 Trade receivables (days) | 25 | 30 Acid test ratio | 0.2:1 | 0.2:1 Dividend per share ($) | 0.5 | 1 Before takeover of PS 2017 | 2016 30 | 25 32 | 29 10 | 15 50 | 7 0.7:1 | 0.7:1 5 | 4 [Appendix 3: Extracts from online reviews in 2022] 'Although the packaging was excellent and the hamper was delivered on time, the contents were not what I ordered! Not happy and not using LH again!' 'LH over-promised on delivery times. I wanted to provide New Year hampers for all of my senior managers across Europe and they were delivered after the festival period.' 'Impossible to contact LH customer service. Ordered from someone much better!' Answer both questions. Evaluate whether LH made the correct strategic decision to take over PS.
This question uses a diagram from the original paper, which isn't shown here. Open the full paper from the past papers archive to see it.
Mark scheme
Marking points from the official mark scheme (May/June 2023). The mark or mark type is shown in brackets.
- A01 Knowledge and understanding (max 3s), including:
- Strategy - a plan of action to achieve a long-term aim
- Developing business strategies – SWOT analysis
- Business growth – external growth – takeover and mergers
- Ratios - liquidity, profitability and financial efficiency
- Quality management – meeting customer expectations and quality control
- Any understanding of other terms, ratios or concepts in the case or appendices.
- AO2 Application (as 1 mark (max 2 s)):
- Purchase of international luxury gift supplier
- Brand name of PS used to retain international brand awareness
- Elements from SWOT analysis
- Elements from financial data
- Use of online review extracts
- Any use of the case that is in context of the answer.
- AO3 Analysis:
- OPM increasing by about 10% 2016 to 2017 which signifies Loretta's short term profit maximisation plan was working and therefore may have produced sufficient profits for investment opportunities.
- Gearing reduced by 33% which allowed for borrowing for investment in the international growth markets which would satisfy Loretta's 5 year rapid expansion target to be met.
- Acid test ratio of 0.7 (low for a stock intensive operation) signified that stock management systems were effective which would neutralise PS's inefficient inventory control and improve the low DPS if it was a result of poor operating margins.
- Increasing dividends may have left less available for expansion.
- Trade receivables increased by over 7x, showing that corporate buyers want longer/better payment terms which decreases cashflow/increases financial risk.
- The business was bought for international brand awareness in 2018 however by 2021 the name was dropped which indicates that the investment into the brand may have failed.
- PS wide range of national suppliers would have negated LH weakness of a limited number of regional suppliers therefore increasing choice, however an acid test ratio drop of 0.5 between 2017 and 2019 implies that too much stock was held which could have affected the cashflow and may have been a reason for lack of investment into cyber security.
- The rapid development of international corporate clients in 2019–20 increased gearing by 8x over 2 years and increased further by 5% indicating that cashflow was poor and debts were high, which may have negatively impacted the dividend per share and caused shareholder unrest which may be a reason Loretta had to present figures and may have contributed to her replacement in 2023.
- AO4 Evaluation:
- Evaluation will largely depend on the points raised in the analysis of the data of LH.
- The efficiencies of LH didn't lead to synergies with PH who lacked economies of scale and meant that the original objective of profit maximisation was ignored, however this may have been expected with the rapid expansion that was planned.
- To what extent did the high gearing and reducing profit margins and falling DPS in 2019–20 lead to the cyber-attack? Was there a lack of investment into online security?
- The takeover of PS has had a significant negative impact on the financial position of LH, which may be an issue for a rapidly expanding, relatively new company.
- Overall judgement required about the balance between the accounting and qualitative elements of LH's strategic decision making.
- Accept all valid responses.
Write your answer and get it marked
On Oracle Prep you can write or photograph your own answer and have it marked by AI against this mark scheme, with feedback on what you missed.
Sign up free →