Greg Marsh was eager for the global expansion of Onefinestay.

He wanted to establish
Onefinestay’s concept in each major city of the world. The expansion had to happen keeping in
mind either from the ‘guests’ point of view or the ‘hosts’ point of view. If both had to be kept in
mind, trade-offs would be involved. Test runs would have to be done in order to expand to
international cities; which happened in London, before opening up in New York.
There were two reasons that Marsh attributed for Onefinestay’s success for New York:
importance of referrals (word of mouth) and increased brand awareness. Also he realized of
having experienced brand managers for the localized markets in the respective cities.
The plans of expansion mentioned in the case study were:
A. Adding 10 new cities to the footprint by 2018: This would ensure the company’s global
strength in the international market and also of its ensuing success among its customers.
 Would lead to low customer acquisition costs as customer retention would
increase.
 Customer Lifetime Value would rise.
 Expanding to more markets would mean increasing the company’s brand value
since the customers won’t be restricted to only one city or country.
 Dependence on the already established markets would also decrease.
 However on the downside the marketing and operations would take a hit as there
would be a high involvement of both time and money.
 Maintaining uniformity in both product and service offerings would be hard to
maintain if expansion to increasing number of cities take place.

B. Opting for marketing penetration strategy in its existing locations (London, New
York, Paris and Los Angeles)
 Onefinestay could leverage on its present loyalty that it enjoyed in the above
mentioned cities.
 Taking advantage of its strong community by encouraging them to spread positive
word about Onefinestay i.e., building upon strong brand referrals.
 There won’t be any effect on the marketing and operations of the company as the
focus would entirely be on the existing stronghold in the current locations.
 Brand Value of the company would be on the rising side.
 On the supply side, increasing word of mouth could also lead to more home-
owners coming in, eventually leading to low acquiring costs.
 On the downside, the existing customer base would not be restricted to only these
cities. Thus potential revenue stream on the emerging markets (cities) would be a
lost opportunity.