B2P Case Study Essay

787 Words Jul 17th, 2012 4 Pages
B2P Case Study

Dr. Sharpin recognized the need for a fast, portable, and small testing solution that would deliver results in the field. As she started her project she had to decide which market would prove to be the most lucrative for her product: Australia, North America, or Europe. Though Dr. Sharpin began the project in 2007 in New Zealand, ultimately it was clear that she had to exploit the US and North American market. The 2007 media coverage of E. Coli and the market environment in the US, led Dr. Sharpin to choose the North American terrain. At that time, the end consumer was extremely concerned about E.Coli O157:H7 in beef. The concern of the end consumer created an opportunity in the market as food distributors recognized
…show more content…
So, B2P could employ a strategy of advertising that their testing method would allow testing of food even en route to a distributor. This could be coupled with a monitoring system, allowing for multiple checks instead of one, to provide more functionality to expand to other markets. B2P’s focus on commercial suppliers of food and food distributors will allow for incredible growth in urban areas that are densely populated (where one shipment from a single supplier can drastically effect the lives of many). Dr. Sharpin’s argument should be the following:
Federal food regulators have not been equipped with the necessary tools to enforce preventative controls, active monitoring, verification, corrective action, and accurate and reliable recordkeeping. Past legislation has grossly failed to protect consumers, and have ultimately left them defenseless against foodborne illnesses. Federal legislators and regulators have an obligation to protect consumers against the unknown and a food safety informatics system is the most efficient and reliable system to become proactive in preventing food safety outbreaks. A reactive state of response has proven to be detrimental, and costs an estimated $152 billion dollars and causes approximately 3,000 deaths in the U.S. each year. As producers, we cannot afford to continue in a reactive state of response, a proactive and technologically innovative food

Related Documents