Internal Analysis using RBV of California Pizza Kitchen Essay

Internal Analysis using RBV of California Pizza Kitchen - Essay Example The internal analysis yielded interesting findings which can help the chain develop strategies to overcome its financial worries. The chain has experienced success abroad and should focus on its innovative pizzas, toppings and salads to increase customer base. Service in the USA needs to be improved and an increase in sales is necessary to reach performance objectives. Opportunities in the form of recovering economic conditions and an increasing trend to eat out will help the chain but it needs to augment its brand image. In order to increase the value of the firm, it is looking for sale and merger options which will help in salvaging shareholder wealth. California pizza kitchen may benefit from a merger or takeover but presently it needs to focus less on expansion and more on increasing sales at current outlets. Introduction California Pizza Kitchen was started in 1985 by lawyers Rick Rosenfield and Larry Flax. The Kitchen introduced pizza flavors from all over the world and focused on cooking in wood burning ovens, gourmet pizzas and creative salads. The chain is famous for its unique and innovative creations and has over 230 locations in the USA and nine other countries. CPK has also licensed to distribute CPK frozen pizzas in groceries and supermarkets. In 1992 Pepsi Co purchased 67% of CPK’s stock and undertook rapid expansion which resulted in high losses for the company. In 1997, Pepsi’s share was bought by a private equity firm Bruckmann, Rosser, Sherril and Company but the company’s performance did not improve. In 2003, the original duo regained control of the company resulting in an improvement in the company’s performance. . ... The report focuses on an analysis of the organization’s resources and its strength and weaknesses. An internal analysis will lead the development of the SWOT matrix for the company. California Pizza Kitchen: Financial analysis: The economic value of California Pizza Kitchen using the formula for economic value added and the inputs provided by wikiwealth.com (California Pizza Kitchen, 2010): NOPAT – c.K $ 19M- 0.09*285M = - $6.65 M The economic value added for the company is negative in 2010, which shows that the value is not being created and that the cost of capital is too high. A comparison with other competitors shows that although the industry WACC is also 9%, California Pizza Kitchen is not as leveraged as its competitors. The return on equity is -3% which is lower than the industry average on -6%. Revenue growth and profit margins stand around 9% lower than the industry averages of 11% but cash flow margin positive whereas the industry margin is negative. Revenue growth in the fourth quarter of 2009 fell by 5.8% and sales are expected to keep dropping till 2012.The financial performance of the company improved after 2003 but has deteriorated in recent years and it needs to focus on further revenue growth. Competitors such as Red Robin Gourmet Burgers and Texas Roadhouse are performing better financially but CPK falls in the middle of the pack and is performing much better than others with investors forecasting a potential increase of 45% in the enterprise value. (California Pizza Kitchen, 2010) Resources: The tangible resources available to the organization include its diversified and high quality menu that caters to different tastes. The pizza toppings and salads are a combination from

Navigation Incident NO.2 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Navigation Incident NO.2 - Essay Example This factor can be noticed after knowing about the collision of Argyle Express and ro-ro passenger Cargo ferry Plymouth Venturer on 31st April 2004 at 10:22. The collision was there because of reduced visibility; however, there was less damage as both the vessels were turning away from each other at the impact moment. The vessel type of Argyle Express was Passenger/ ro-ro cargo ferry, twin hull while Plymouth Venturer was Passenger/ ro-ro cargo ferry and both the vessels had experiences of daily travelling. LOA of Plymouth Venturer was 150m, gross tonnage was 16010, service speed was 23 knots while the engine power was 1992 KW, 2 x diesels. LOA of Argyle Express was 80m, gross tonnage was 4246, service speed was 40 knots while the engine power was 22000 KW, 4 x diesels. Discussion Argyle Express and ro-ro passenger Cargo ferry Plymouth Venturer had adopted proper watchful strategies as both had master, mate and rating lookout on the bridge. Two radars were also there to report about any incoming vessel but their distance was only six miles. According to the rule 7b, â€Å"Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational, including long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk of collision and radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects† (COLREG 1972). ... According to the rule 19b given in COLREG (1972), â€Å"Every vessel shall proceed at a safe speed adapted to the prevailing circumstances and conditions of restricted visibility. A power-driven vessel shall have her engines ready for immediate manoeuvre.† and according to rule 6 and 6i in COLREG (1972), â€Å"Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions. In determining a safe speed the following factors shall be among those taken into account: (a) By all vessels: (i) the state of visibility†. Therefore, both the vessels surpassed the speed limit without paying any heed to the poor visibility conditions and without considering the rules designed for such conditions. Both the vessels were aware of each other’s entering and departure from supervising VTS communications; however, there was no commu nication between the two vessels due to which, there was a collision. Both were knowledgeable about the movement of other vessel but no one felt the need to communicate with other. After gaining knowledge about Argyle Express movement from bridge team and approaching collision conditions, Plymouth Venturer changed its course only 7 degrees to starboard. This much alteration of path was not sufficient as stated in rule 8b, â€Å"Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should