1.

How could the promotion of UK Hoover have been better

designed? Be as specific as you can.
The promotion would have been better designed if they would
have used the words while supplies last or while stock still
available because the demand was too much to handle. They
didnt think out the possible outcomes of this promotion idea.
2. Given the fiasco that did occur, how do you think Maytag should
have responded?
I dont there is much you can do but provide what was promised.
You could stop the advertising of the free trips and say that the
promotion is over, but you still owe the people that bought the
appliances with the intention to claim their tickets. The most
logical path is to hire more trip agencies to help with the high
demand of the tickets.
3. Comment on the following statement: Firing the three top
executives of UK Hoover is unconscionable. It smacks of a
vendetta against European managers by an American parent.
After all, their only crime was a promotion that was too
successful.
That statement is wrong because the promotion was successful,
but it ended up costing the company. They were faced with bad
publicity by the press and with many lawsuits of customers that
never received the tickets that were promised. A marketing idea
is not only designed to sell a bunch of products, it has to be
designed to also bring value to your brand.
4. Do you think Leonard Hadley, the Maytag CEO for only two
months, should be soundly criticized for the U.K. situation? Why
or why not?
If he was the CEO at the moment that the fiasco occurred, I
believe that he should be criticized for his bad judgment or lack
of interest in what was going on in the company and held
accountable to a certain extent. As the case states: a company
spokesman said that operating divisions were primarily
responsible for planning promotional expenses, while the parent
may review such outlays. If theyre within parameters, it goes
through. This raises the issue of how loose a rein foreign
subsidiary should be allowed. If the parent reviews the outlays of
all its subsidiaries, they would have known about this promotion
before it even started and could have put a stop to it, but they
didnt review it, which means that he didnt do his job.
5. Why do you think this UK Hoover fiasco happened in the first
place? What went wrong?
The company was going into the Christmas period, where
vacuum cleaner sales are very low, so they desperately decided
to make this attempt to make sales in the period. They didnt
plan the possible outcomes of this promotion and resulted in a

way higher demand for the tickets. The airline tickets that were
promised had more value to the customers than the vacuum
cleaners.
6. Evaluate the decision to acquire Chicago Pacific Corporation
(CPC). Do it for the time it happened and for the present
moment when the facts are known. Defend your conclusions.
At the time it happened, the purchase of CPC was a strategic
business decision made by Maytag since CPC had the successful
Hoover products under its label. Hoover then became a division
of Maytag Corporation. Hoover was well known for its vacuum
cleaners and other appliances. Maytag used this strategy to
diversify its product line. At the time it was a good strategy,
buying a well-positioned product. Hoover had 13 plants in
international countries, and Maytag had no presence outside the
United States, so for Maytag it was also opening the doors to
international commerce.
7. Look for updated information on the Maytag case. Relate the
information you get to the events portrayed in this case.
The latest information I found was that the court cases went on
until 1998. This marketing disaster cost the company almost 50
million. The British division of Hoover was later sold to the Italian
manufacturer Candy.
Comprehensive Reaction:
I agree with Libnis position about the marketing mistakes, but I
differ about the position of acquiring CPC. The strategy on the time of
the purchase seemed logical to me to open the European market.
Raymond Lopez thinks that Maytags mistake was its timing. I differ
with him because it doesnt matter at what point in time the result
would have been the same because the cost of the airline ticket was
perceived higher by the public than that of the vacuum cleaners. I
support Desirees position that the company should have done an
intense risk assessment of the possible outcomes of the marketing
strategy. Xiomarilisse Cubas analysis was very interesting and gave
information that I didnt know about the present of Maytag. Finally, I
support Silkia Babilonias stance that the company should have set a
limit for the promotion. In my opinion, it would have been the most
logical position.