Why two organisations do not want to create same revenue?

[Hina]

What do u think why two organisations do not want to create same revenue?

[John J. S]

Too many variables to answer that question. a tiny company has to seriously increase its size to reach a certain revenue stream. There may not be sufficient profit to justify the increase in size?

[Who]

Is this question supposed to make sense?

cos I got news for you - it dont.

[Kiron Kang]

Read the article. (BOTTOM HALF OF ARTICLE BELOW) Ran out of word count, so see your other question, FOR TOP HALF OF ARTICLE).

Conclusions drawn from article, why two organisations do not want to create the same revenue?

Cautionary tale. 1. Increase revenue. 2. Investors want growth/expansion. 3.employees want to be part of the ''in'' thing.

Lessons learnt: Never forget ''Before focusing on growth, companies must first ensure that the fundamentals of its business are sound.''

1. Unhealthy & risky decisions are taken by management in an attempt to grow the business. Aggressive growth targets result in deep discounting. Thinking, is based on the reasoning,
buy in bulk, so the unit cost will be lower. If this does not happen, then the business fails. So it is far better to grow a business in a sustainable manner. Then it will Survive & thrive.

2. Deep discounting kills profit margins/profitability. So need to acquire more and more customers. Lesson it is cheaper to retain loyal customers then to keep chasing fickle, new disloyal customers. Fickle customers are always disloyal. And very costly to acquire. Unless a business can make money from them, by offering a service like Amazon, those customers are a poison pill. Customer Lifetime value has to be higher then the 'cost of buying' that customer, in the first place. Amazon customers price compare first, then go to Amazon. Amazon' founder said his company stock was not for 'orphans and widows', because it is high risk.

3. It is better to stand out, from the crowd. By being Diffferent from the rest, a business can foster stronger roots to its loyal customers. Loyal customers don't ditch and switch. So more profitable.

.. ''unique “personality,” wonderful product curation, and a fanatical focus on customer service. At first, it capitalized on these strengths, building an authentic voice on its company blog and social media channels, donating food for every purchase, and launching a relevant loyalty program that went beyond simply rewarding the transaction.
....thinking about segmentation, personalization, and creating additional engagement opportunities. Specifically, it should have tailored its communications to its top quartile (means in the top pecent) of members to focus on exclusivity and recognition (not more discounts) and created and incentivized additional customer engagement opportunities (things like writing reviews, connecting their social media accounts, referring their friends, etc.)''.

4. Need bigger sales & marketing budget to grow bigger. Need to justify expenditure.

Remainder of the ARTICLE

Unfortunately, though, as an organization it had already assumed a culture of discounting. Even its loyalty program fell victim, essentially becoming nothing more than a rebate program rather than a strategic commitment to increasing customer lifetime value. Ecomom should (TAKE NOTE) have been thinking about segmentation, personalization, and creating additional engagement opportunities. Specifically, it should have tailored its communications to its top quartile (means in the top pecent) of members to focus on exclusivity and recognition (not more discounts) and created and incentivized additional customer engagement opportunities (things like writing reviews, connecting their social media accounts, referring their friends, etc.)

Less tragic, but no less impactful versions of the Ecomom story are currently playing out across the retail landscape. Retailers who desire to build long-term sustainable businesses need to be bold and stop pandering to short-term growth targets by perpetuating a culture of rampant discounting.

The price of getting this wrong is just too high