Aol Goes Far East
MKTG 410
Week 6
Case Study
AOL Goes Far East
1. Was Mitsui the best partner for AOL to enter the Japanese market? If so, why? If not, who (or what kind of company) would make a better partner? Why?
Mitsiu being an established company in Japan, had the expertise and history to become a joint venture, but not with AOL. Even though the company is well established as an MNC in 60 countries and respected by Japanese corporations and consumers for their goods and services. (Kotabe) The companies' product portfolio did not possess the familiarity to deal with internet technology and ISP even though they had a technology department. They had the ambition to join in with AOL but did not have the structure to deal with a global internet giant. Jack Davies led expansions in Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Latin America and Sweden. All of these joint ventures, shared partnerships with media entertainment, telecommunication and multimedia companies, which increased AOL's net income. (Kotabe) Mr. Davies when identifying potential JV candidates should have sought a Japanese company with mutual interests as an internet service provider with internet capabilities to include technology. Instead of looking at Mitsius history Jack Davies should have researched NTT DoCoMo, which spun off of Nippon telephone and telegraph in 1992. The company was a better candidate to accommodate AOL. This would have saved AOL millions, instead of failing miserably with Mitsiu. NTT DoCoMo had the resources and customer base to help AOL Japan become a successful joint venture.
2. Do you think the current JV structure should continue into the foreseeable future? No, I do not think so, with the events that occurred and the blunders that happened. John Barber should have ensured that he had a more diversified employee base. Instead when Mitsiu president elects taking control of AOL Japan, Mr. Barber should have sent the president to the AOL in Fairfax, Virginia
Week 6
Case Study
AOL Goes Far East
1. Was Mitsui the best partner for AOL to enter the Japanese market? If so, why? If not, who (or what kind of company) would make a better partner? Why?
Mitsiu being an established company in Japan, had the expertise and history to become a joint venture, but not with AOL. Even though the company is well established as an MNC in 60 countries and respected by Japanese corporations and consumers for their goods and services. (Kotabe) The companies' product portfolio did not possess the familiarity to deal with internet technology and ISP even though they had a technology department. They had the ambition to join in with AOL but did not have the structure to deal with a global internet giant. Jack Davies led expansions in Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Latin America and Sweden. All of these joint ventures, shared partnerships with media entertainment, telecommunication and multimedia companies, which increased AOL's net income. (Kotabe) Mr. Davies when identifying potential JV candidates should have sought a Japanese company with mutual interests as an internet service provider with internet capabilities to include technology. Instead of looking at Mitsius history Jack Davies should have researched NTT DoCoMo, which spun off of Nippon telephone and telegraph in 1992. The company was a better candidate to accommodate AOL. This would have saved AOL millions, instead of failing miserably with Mitsiu. NTT DoCoMo had the resources and customer base to help AOL Japan become a successful joint venture.
2. Do you think the current JV structure should continue into the foreseeable future? No, I do not think so, with the events that occurred and the blunders that happened. John Barber should have ensured that he had a more diversified employee base. Instead when Mitsiu president elects taking control of AOL Japan, Mr. Barber should have sent the president to the AOL in Fairfax, Virginia