Search

Competition among multinationals these days is likely to be a three-dimensional game of global chess: The moves an organization makes in one market are designed to achieve goals in another in ways that aren't immediately apparent to its rivals. The authors--all management professors--call this approach "competing under strategic interdependence," or CSI. And where this interdependence exists, the complexity of the situation can quickly overwhelm ordinary analysis. Indeed, most business strategists are terrible at anticipating the consequences of interdependent choices, and they're even worse at using interdependency to their advantage. In this article, the authors offer a process for mapping the competitive landscape and anticipating how your company's moves in one market can influence its competitive interactions in others. They outline the six types of CSI campaign onslaughts, contests, guerriila campaigns, feints, gambits, and harvesting--available to any multiproductor multimarket corporation that wants to compete skillfully. They cite real-world examples such as the U.S. pricing battle Philip Morris waged with R.J. Reynolds--not to gain market share in the domestic cigarette market but to divert R.J. Reynolds's resources and attention from the opportunities Philip Morris was pursuing in Eastern Europe. And, using data they collected from their studies of consumer-products companies Procter & Gamble and Unilever, the authors describe how to create CSI tables and bubble charts that present a graphical look at the competitive landscape and that may uncover previously hidden opportunities. The CSl mapping process isn't just for global corporations, the authors explain. Smaller organizations that compete with a portfolio of products in just one national or regional market may find it just as useful for planning their next business moves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reports on the increasing number of courtroom victories over big tobacco firms in the U.S. The shredding of the industry's aura of invincibility; Information sharing in the Tobacco Trial Lawyers' Association; The anti-tobacco subculture in the U.S.; The use of tobacco scientists in the courtroom; The effect on the stocks of Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds.

The article reports on the appeal of tobacco companies against the Commission of the European Communities in European Community Court of First Instance. These companies filed an appeal includes R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings Inc., RJR Acquisition Corp., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco International Inc., and Philip Morris International Inc. Appellants requested the Court to set aside the annulment of the decision of the Commission of the European Communities.

The article reports on the marketing tactics of cigarette makers Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds relevant to antismoking campaigns in the U.S. Both companies launched initiatives and campaigns to improve their image and keep smokers smoking. These companies are also expected to get involved in a trial that accuses cigarette companies of making products they know cause illness and death.

The article presents information about American Brands Inc. The peewee of the big three in tobacco has a mere $7 billion revenues, compared with R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.'s $13 billion and Philip Morris Cos. Inc.'s $14 billion. But in the dangerous art of diversifying there are measures of success more important than size. Look at the non-tobacco figures. American Brands' operating margin there is 10.9%, Reynolds' 7.8%, Philip Morris' just 4.6%. At American Brands there are life insurance, Pinkerton detectives, and office shredding machines.

This article discusses a meeting between members of the Pennsylvania Association of the Attorney General and tobacco executives from Philip Morris, Brown and Williamson, Lorillard, and R.J. Reynolds. The 1998 settlement of tobacco litigation called for the big tobacco companies to hand over 40 cents a pack to state treasuries to create programs of public interest. This meeting between executives was in effort to plot against smaller tobacco companies who did not fall under that rule of payment.

Provides environment-related news briefs as of May 1, 2001 in Europe. Cigarette smuggling charges against tobacco companies Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds filed by the European Union Commission; Conflict of interest charged against Evgeni Adamov, the Russian Minister for Nuclear Power; Financial performance of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development company.

Focuses on the marketing and manufacturing of tobacco products in the United States. Impact of a Florida legislative decision against the tobacco industry; Price of stocks for such companies as Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds; Correlation between tobacco revenue and that of department stores like Loews and Nordstrom.

Reviews business news for the week of August 20-26, 1995. The debut of Windows '95 which is easier to use than previous versions and offers access to the Internet; Rare apology of ABC on-air for stating R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris had added extra nicotine to their cigarettes; Announcement that Upjohn was merging with the Swedish drug company Pharmacia AB.

This article reports on the decline in profit margins of Western cigarette makers in the overseas market as of May 1993. On April 20, Philip Morris Cos. reported international tobacco income in the first quarter increased 18 per cent, to $675 million on a 17 per cent revenue increase. London, England-based cigarette marketer BAT Industries PLC and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco International Inc. expect similar gains. Tobacco companies face challenges in both developed and new markets. In Western Europe and Japan, excise taxes are high and antismoking ordinances are starting to multiply. Government monopolies opposes American-style cigarettes or discount brands. Thus making market-share growth for the U.S. companies to be moderate. Analysts figure Philip Morris and Reynolds make a profit of 2.5 cents a pack which needs upfront investments in manufacturing and marketing.

Reports the advertising efforts of tobacco companies such as Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds after its compliance with the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement in the United States (U.S.). Allegation of U.S. states against the tobacco industry; Compromise agreed upon by top cigarette companies; Advertising tactic of companies which was concentrated on retail cigarette outlets.

This article focuses on the attempt by the United States government to sue tobacco companies to recover health-care costs. America's federal government charges its top cigarette makers--Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson (an arm of British American Tobacco that is now merging with Reynolds), Lorillard and Liggett Group--plus a British arm of BAT, with lying to the public about the hazards of smoking, of trying to fiddle or hide the scientific evidence, of deliberately getting people addicted to nicotine, of selling knowingly to people below smoking age, of pushing low-tar cigarettes as safer than others, while knowing they were not. In 1998, the four biggest reached a deal--the "master settlement agreement" (MSA)--with 46 state governments that accused them of pushing up the states' health-care costs. They agreed to pay $206 billion over the first 25 years, via a levy that is by now almost 50 cents a pack. Problem solved. Not so. The Clinton administration soon launched a federal suit, heavily reliant on a law meant to help the government recover health-care costs if someone injures a soldier. The judge threw out this part of the case, but left in another, based on the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970. This law, originally aimed at the mob, makes normal business a crime when it is part of an illegal conspiracy. That is what the tobacco men were up to, says the government, when they met on December 15th, 1953 in a doubtless smoke-filled room in a New York hotel, and schemed to mislead the public about the risks of smoking. And lo, Philip Morris has volunteered the cigarette makers to pay the cost--but only in return for FDA regulation. And Philip Morris would not weep at a ban on cigarettes that appeal to the young: Brown & Williamson and R.J. Reynolds have invested in sweet-flavored brands, which do just that.

Reports on tobacco companies, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Phillip Morris USA Inc., Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. and U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Co.'s agreement to withdraw their advertising from magazines that are circulated in schools in the United States. Violation of the 1998 legal agreement between states and tobacco companies; Penalty for a tobacco company that refused to remove its advertising from school editions of periodicals; Background of the case.

Discusses the trend among cigarette companies to expand their operations in the overseas market through mergers. Acquisitions among firms to surpass Philip Morris' dominance of the market; Austria Tabak's purchase of the cigarette business of Swedish Match; Gallaher's acquisition of the rights to RJ Reynolds products in Great Britain. INSET: EU smoking on the rise again.

Focuses on United States House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich and the lawsuit filed by the Philip Morris Co. and R.J. Reynolds against the American Broadcasting Company. Allegations of Gingrich's infidelity towards his wife; Gingrich's sexual indiscretions; Interviews with Gingrich in which he denies the allegations towards him; Details of the lawsuit.

The article discusses the class-action case against Philip Morris USA, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, and other tobacco companies that U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein has allowed to move forward. The suit alleges that the industry misled smokers of so-called light cigarettes for decades by fraudulently marketing lights as healthier than regular smokes, when manufacturers knew they weren't. Plaintiffs' attorneys are seeking damages that could run up to $200 billion.

Focuses on a deal created by the U.S. Senate to pair a tobacco farmer buyout with a legislation giving the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) more regulatory power over tobacco products. Stance of Philip Morris USA on the deal; Information on the low-smoke cigarette developed by Philip Morris USA and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Overview of the FDA bill.

Reports on the move of Phillip Morris and R.J. Reynolds to intensify their cigarette marketing efforts. Amount to be spent by Phillip in 2002; Product lineup of R.J.; Factors affecting the cigarette industry.

Criticizes the pact signed by Philip Morris and RJR Reynolds with the United States government allowing the government to collect additional taxes in cigarette profits. Increase in the price of cigarettes; Author's views on the alleged compassion of the government to cigarette smokers.

The article reports that the U.S. Department of Justice has ruled that the tobacco industry is guilty of civil fraud and racketeering. An overview of the case is presented. Gladys Kessler, the U.S. District Judge, has found that the defendants including Philip Morris USA Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., conspired to hide information about the health risks associated with smoking.

The article reports on the launching of Philip Morris USA Inc.'s Marlboro Special Blends cigarettes. The cigarette brand is believed to be projected as rival for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.'s Turkish Gold brand. The Marlboro brand is in an all-black packaging and is aimed at the stylish, status-smoke market.

This article presents marketing and advertising developments in the U.S. cigarette industry as of September 1993. The $45 billion cigarette industry is still in chaos after the price cuts and promotional changes initiated by market leader Philip Morris USA. In an effort to boost sales of its Marlboro brand, Philip Morris launched a major promotional campaign for the cigarette and discounted it from 70 cents to 40 cents per pack. Indeed, Prices of Marlboro and all Philip Morris's other premium cigarettes were lowered to what previously had been the level of mid-priced brand. The move was followed by RJR and most other competitors, creating a confusion as brands which were previously separated mainly by price were suddenly positioned in the single-discount tier. This could bring about the elimination of some brands, and new advertising campaigns to differentiate products. It could also force smaller companies that market cheaper discount products to rethink their strategy.

Focuses on marketing for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. Changes being made by the company in the way it approaches marketing from brand management to agency relationships to new-product development; Comments on competitors Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., and Lorillard.

The article reports the United States government has asked Philip Morris USA Inc. and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. to retire their Marlboro Man and Joe Camel advertising campaigns respectively. The government told the tobacco companies to give up the campaigns to show their good faith under the agreement negotiated by state attorneys general with the tobacco industry.

Reports on the advertising campaign of R.J. Reynolds' Camel cigarettes which takes on rival Philip Morris' Marlboro. Campaign theme; Competitive smokers as target; Market share of Camel and Marlboro as of June 1994; Greater amount spent by Marlboro on advertising; Importance of a cigarette's quality and taste; Reynolds' history of taking on Marlboro.

Reports that Capital Cities/ABC has made an on-air apology as part of the settlement of its suits with the Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds. Details of the settlement; Background of the dispute; Issue of apology.

Reports that ABC News settled its lawsuits with Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds with an apology that was aired on August 21, 1995. `Day One' reports that cigarettes were spiked with nicotine as cause of lawsuits; Renewal of employment agreements of ABC with `Day One's' John Martin and Walt Bogdanich.