Marvel harvard case
Marvel Enterprises, Inc.
1. In your view, what strategic direction should Marvel Enterprises’ Vice Chairman Peter
Cuneo and his colleagues pursue? Why? How?
I think that Cuneo and his colleagues should put their focus on characters less-known by the general public. I think they should try to incorporate them with larger characters to draw interest to them, similar to how the newest Dark Knight movie ended with Robin. Once they have a basis of characters then they could focus on more capital intense options to make more profit. Their big characters have made them a lot of money but it can only last for so long. The general public is more into the movie aspect then comics and their other profits are generated from the movies. How many sequels of a movie can be made before it is a bust? I believe if they tie in their famous characters with more developing characters they could branch out tremendously from there in all aspects of their business.
2. Why was Marvel’s turnaround so successful? Would you characterize that success as a fluke? Or do you view it as sustainable? Why? How?
I would not call Marvel’s success a fluke. I believe they struck gold and didn’t know it and then they took off from there. Most of what they did was licensing of characters they have had for decades. They weren’t spending major capital hoping to have a success. Instead they charged for their character’s and would make more if that company was successful. They had very little to lose as a bad movie or product would most likely not have a major negative effect on their comics sales, which is what they were most focused in, in the beginning. I believe this success can be sustainable as they created a huge market in many different categories so if they keep satisfying the markets needs and wants, there will be profit to be made.
3. How important are Marvel’s three divisions comic books, toys, and licensing to its past and future performance?
Comics were a huge part of
1. In your view, what strategic direction should Marvel Enterprises’ Vice Chairman Peter
Cuneo and his colleagues pursue? Why? How?
I think that Cuneo and his colleagues should put their focus on characters less-known by the general public. I think they should try to incorporate them with larger characters to draw interest to them, similar to how the newest Dark Knight movie ended with Robin. Once they have a basis of characters then they could focus on more capital intense options to make more profit. Their big characters have made them a lot of money but it can only last for so long. The general public is more into the movie aspect then comics and their other profits are generated from the movies. How many sequels of a movie can be made before it is a bust? I believe if they tie in their famous characters with more developing characters they could branch out tremendously from there in all aspects of their business.
2. Why was Marvel’s turnaround so successful? Would you characterize that success as a fluke? Or do you view it as sustainable? Why? How?
I would not call Marvel’s success a fluke. I believe they struck gold and didn’t know it and then they took off from there. Most of what they did was licensing of characters they have had for decades. They weren’t spending major capital hoping to have a success. Instead they charged for their character’s and would make more if that company was successful. They had very little to lose as a bad movie or product would most likely not have a major negative effect on their comics sales, which is what they were most focused in, in the beginning. I believe this success can be sustainable as they created a huge market in many different categories so if they keep satisfying the markets needs and wants, there will be profit to be made.
3. How important are Marvel’s three divisions comic books, toys, and licensing to its past and future performance?
Comics were a huge part of