ORIGINAL STRATEGIC VISION

YEARS 10-13
Vision Statement
Our vision is to lead the athletic footwear industry by
creating distinct athletic footwear to enhance player
performance through efficient operations and high
quality materials and high models
Strategic Goals
Our goal is to provide our customers with a quality
product by employing a strong consistent process and to
empower employees in quality control
To promote a respectful and diverse work environment
where our employees bring their best into every shoe
created
REVISED STRATEGIC VISION YEAR
14-16
Vision Statement
Our vision is to lead the athletic footwear industry by
creating distinct athletic footwear to enhance player
performance through efficient operations and low
quality materials and high models
Strategic Goals
Our goal is to provide our customers with a quality
product by employing a strong consistent process and to
empower employees in quality control
To promote a respectful and diverse work environment
where our employees bring their best into every shoe
created
FUTURE PERFORMANCE TARGETS

Year 17 YEAR 18
Earnings per Share Earnings per Share
$11.75 EPS $13.00 EPS
Return on Equity 33% Return on Equity 36%
Credit Rating A Credit Rating A+
Image Rating 72 Image Rating 73
ANNUAL TOTAL REVENUES
ANNUAL EARNINGS PER SHARE
ANNUAL RETURN ON EQUITY
ANNUAL CREDIT RATING
YEAR-END STOCK PRICES
ANNUAL IMAGE RATING
MARKET STRATEGIES OVERVIEW

Wholesale Market INTERNET MARKET

Low SQ rating Low SQ Rating
High number of models
High number of models
Competitive prices
Advertising costs consistent No free shipping
and low Advertising costs
Utilized retail outlets
consistent and low
Offered retail support
Internet price 40%
Increased celebrity appeal
Wholesale price 40% less than
more than wholesale
internet price price
North America Region
NA Plant
Operation average 100% capacity
2,000 pair capacity
Higher compensation
Lower rejection rates

Internet
Strategy change year 14
Increased profits from $3,128 to $7,642 in last three years
Pairs sold increased from 147 to 385 in last three years
Operating Margin made gains and losses
Wholesale
Strategy change year 14
Increased profits $20,837 to $26,133 in last three years
Pairs sold steady increase
Operating Margin increased steadily
Latin America Region
LA Plant
Operation at full 100% capacity
3,000 pair capacity
Lower compensation
Rejection rate kept low

Internet
Strategy change year 14
Increased profits $2,440 to $3,612
Increased pairs sold 95 to 249
Profit Margin average 29%

Wholesale
Strategy change year 14
Increased profits $2,675 to $12,973
Increased pairs sold 1,582 to 1,653
Profit Margin increased fro 4% to 20%
Asia Pacific Region
AP Plant
Operation near full capacity 90-120%
6,000 pair capacity
Lower compensation
Rejection rates kept low

Internet
Strategy change year 14
Increased profits $2,900 to $6,405
Pairs sold increased 89 to 310
Profit Margin decreased 39% to 32%

Wholesale
Strategy change year 14
Increased profits $11,423 to $23,707
Pairs sold increased 1,650 to 1,891
Profit Margin increased 17% to 28%
PRIVATE LABEL
Additional capacity was purchased that would go towards
private label sales
Lost out on private label sales by almost .50
Lowered our private label sales by $4, in hopes of winning
bids
PRODUCTION STRATEGY
Incentive pay was issued to workers
Capacity was purchased in EA
This turned out to be a mistake
Expensive production & shipping tariffs
FINANCE STRATEGY
Small dividends were issued and increased every year.
Loan for NA, EA, and LA capacity purchase
Capacity was sold off in NA in year 16
Loans established in years when credit rating was at its
highest and paid high interest loans off during that time.
 Internet Competition
Team B was our major competitor in the internet
market

This was not our strongest area, but we decided to

focus on the wholesale market and out perform Team B

Our team and team B had same high quality and high
models strategy

Our prices and models were the same and to compete

with Team B we needed to differentiate our company

We changed strategy and decided to go with a low

quality and high models

New strategy was profitable and with low competition

 Wholesale Competition
Team B was our major competitor in the
wholesale market

Team B had more of the wholesale market share

during some years

Our team took advantage of Team Bs decisions:

Internet and wholesale prices too close
Purchased extra capacity
Strategy was similar to other teams
We changed strategy and decided to go with a
low quality and high models

New strategy was profitable and with low

competition
PRIVATE LABEL COMPETITION
Goal to have lowest price per pair
100% win was great
Less that 100% win was always helpful in reducing our
inventory
Our profits increased each time our Private Labels were
sold
All other teams were our competition
Began to exit Private label by year 16
YEAR 17 AND 18 PRODUCTION
DECISIONS
PRIVATE LABEL
Branded Production PRODUCTION
Low Quality/ High Models Operations in LA plants
AP plant 3 star, same Minimum star SQ rating
number of models
Lower styling/ features
LA plant 4 star, more
models, +.05 incentive pay costs
Modest capacity increase in Out bid competition
LA plant
YEARS 17 AND 18 MARKETING
DECISIONS
Wholesale marketing Internet marketing
SQ rating at 3 & 4 star SQ rating at 3 & 4 star
More focus on LA market More focus on LA market
More retail outlets Increase number of models
Lower prices Keep advertising costs low
More models Increase celebrity appeal
More celebrity appeal No free shipping
FUTURE RESULTS
Outperform competition by
Focusing on our Low SQ / High Models strategy
Increasing profits
Out perform High SQ/ High Models strategy due to high competition

Results
Team B will struggle with competition in High SQ/ High Models
strategy
Our product will be have more coverage throughout the regions and
markets
LESSONS LEARNED
Produce in regions with higher profit margins
Offering labor compensation rates
Manage capacity well
Do not purchase capacity in Europe-Africa region
Win Private-Label bids
Change strategies when market is saturated with same
strategy