IMD-3-2053 © 2009
Nie, Winter; Ryans, Adrian; Lu, Abraham Hongze
After acquisition, Danfoss utilized a dual-brand technique and Holip was left as an independent company with its own sales and distribution network. The most vital synergy came from joint procurement of elements and Danfoss likewise benefited from Holip's low expense production ability by moving specific Danfoss-branded item lines to Holip. The (A) case explains the Danfoss scenario and problems and likewise explains Holip, its history, its company design and its method.
The details on Danfoss is fairly minimal. Much of this added info was not understood to Danfoss at the time of the (A1) case. Here there are specific problems with regard to double branding, the degree of combination in between Danfoss and the obtained business, and the retention of the essential Chinese supervisors in the gotten company. In November 2008 Jessen had to suggest exactly what Danfoss ought to do with the Holip company and whether the double brand name structure ought to be continued. The (A) case explains the Danfoss circumstance and problems and likewise explains Holip, its history, its company design and its method.
Subjects: Low cost competition; Mergers & acquisitions; M&A; Chinese entrepreneurs; Frequency converters; Multinationals competing in China; Pre-acquisition analysis; After acquisition integration; Dual-brand strategy
Settings: China; Frequency converters; Holip sales in 2004 €8.5 million; November 2005 – November 2008
Related Case Solutions & Analyses:
MapQuest
Donna Dubinsky and Apple Computer, Inc
Resuming Internationalization at Starbucks
Financing the Mozal Project
Fox Venture Partners
HemoShear, LLC: Series C Round Financing
International Economics, 4. Industrialization, Globalization, and Labor Markets
Dividend Policy at Fuyao Glass
Value Investing, Human Behavior – and Why You Should Ignore the Market
Perspective, Institutions and Basic Issues
