Company M has launched an Operating system for a personal computer in 1990. During the time, Company M hold 90 percent of the market share. Their long-term relationship with the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) creates terrific barriers for the newcomers. The demand for the microprocessor of Company I would increase whenever Company M introduces a new operating system. Company M remains highly profitable. The strategy of Company M has killed innovation. Hence, they failed to commercialize the category-defining products. For past years, Company G is the leading search engine and online advertising company. This is due to the top-down strategy of Company M, which killed innovation. Many of the products of Company M failed against the products of Company G and Company A due to their strategy. To determine: Why Company M failed to commercialize the products or services.

Question

Want to see the full answer?

Answer 1

Question

Chapter MC, Problem 4.2DQ

Summary Introduction

Case summary:

Company M has launched an Operating system for a personal computer in 1990. During the time, Company M hold 90 percent of the market share. Their long-term relationship with the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) creates terrific barriers for the newcomers. The demand for the microprocessor of Company I would increase whenever Company M introduces a new operating system. Company M remains highly profitable. The strategy of Company M has killed innovation. Hence, they failed to commercialize the category-defining products.

For past years, Company G is the leading search engine and online advertising company. This is due to the top-down strategy of Company M, which killed innovation. Many of the products of Company M failed against the products of Company G and Company A due to their strategy.

To determine: Why Company M failed to commercialize the products or services.

Expert Solution & Answer

Want to see the full answer?

Check out a sample textbook solution

See solution

Students have asked these similar questions

Response to isaiah Describe the conflicting motivations in the mixed motive nature of negotiation? It is important to understand that in mixed motive negotiations, these type of negotiations combine a number of aspects containing both that of integrative and distributive approaches. In addition to this, these types of negotiations aim to create additional value for all of the parties involved in the negotiation bargaining process, but one must understand that these may not be enough for everyone within the process to get everything they want out of these negotiations. Thus, and based upon the aforementioned information, there will always be some type of conflicting motivations based upon the mixed motive nature of negotiation. What are some options available during negotiation with a ZOPA? One of the options within the Zone of Possible Agreement is to always go back to the negotiation table and continue to try to work out any additional values that will benefit both sides of the…

What are some options available during negotiation with a ZOPA?

Describe the conflicting motivations in the mixed motive nature of negotiation.