51237542 b2b marketing case study

8/3/2019 51237542 B2B Marketing Case Study

1/14

Metal products Indialimited

By :- Ashok RanaChurchill MishraChandan Kumar Kuldeep Katiyar


2/14

Case Overview MPIL was setup for improving the

distribution in South MPIL lost its market share North

Karnataka MPIL was solely dependent on

Bangalore Metal Trader for

distribution New entrants operated with the sub

dealers of MPIL


3/14

Metal Products IndiaLimited (MPIL) Established in 1987 at the out skirts

of Bangalore. Set up by parent company Madhya

Bharat Metal Sections Limited(MBMS) in Bhilai

Manufacturers of mild steel mostly

used in construction, furniture, rollingshutters and industrial sheds.


4/14

Metal Industry

Complete market size was of 40,000metric tones (MT)

Annual growth rate of 6 percent Major Players

Karnataka Metal Sections (KMS) Adarsh Metals (AM) Mahavir Metal Sections (MMS)


5/14

Comparison with others On the basis of product quality On basis of pricing & discounting On the basis of distribution &

availability On the basis of brand name &

reputation of the company


6/14

Characteristics Of Environment Previously MPIL was market leader

in south India environment was favorable for MPIL Business was quite attractive Later on new entrant increased the

competition


7/14

Distribution Channel of MPIL

Distribution through existing dealersof MBMS

Appointed new dealers atVijayawada, Calicut and Erode

MPIL decided prices for its dealers Manufacturer gave discount of 3% to

7% depending on volume Dealers further marked up the prices

by 7% to 8%

Direct dealing with OEMs and


8/14

Market Structure Bangalore Metal Traders (BMT) was

largest dealer in South India with off take of 2000 MT per annum

BMT had more than 50% of marketshare in Karnataka

Transactional Relationship/Mutual

Understanding MPIL didnt appoint dealers at other

centers in Karnataka BMT didnt dealt with other

manufacturers


9/14

Market Structure Cont Karnataka Metal Sections (KMS)

operated Bangalore market throughKavery Agency

More than 80% of market was shared by MPIL & KMS


10/14


11/14

Apparent Problem Loosing sub dealers in north

Karnataka Loss in market share Strategies adopted by competitors i.e.

new entrants Discount rate for the sub dealers Distribution network


12/14

Recommendation MPIL should not solely depend on

BMT MPIL should promote their product

through hardware to capture themarket of north Karnataka

Restructuring of discount in interest

of sub dealers Applying condition to deal only with

MPIL products

Assigning of new dealer in differentareas of south India


13/14

Problems With SuggestedRecommendation

Might loose the some business withBMT

Cant offer high margin as AM andMMS

Time constraint in appointing newsub dealers

Cost involved in stud in market b


14/14

THANK

YOU

51237542 b2b marketing case study

Documents