Proactive strategies, Reactive strategies, Uncategorized

Burger King’s acquisition of Tim Hortons. Proactive or Reactive?

Now take a look at this product development strategy. Proactive or Reactive?

About Ian W. McVitty

Teacher, Academic Advisor and Learner.


12 thoughts on “Burger King’s acquisition of Tim Hortons. Proactive or Reactive?

  1. This is neither a proactive or reactive strategy for product development, this is a Brazilian Capital Firm trying to save money by cutting costs and saving on tax dollars spent, while utilizing Burger King’s Capital and market-share to acquire Tim Hortons and cut the profit margin to a much higher and respectable than 25%. 3G capital is the owner of Burger King (70+ %), rest split by shareholders and private equity firms, and is known for drastically cutting expenses to the limit of spending $15/month on office expenses per employee, forbidding corporate travel, and buying American companies to see a profit by minimizing costs. CEO Shultz of Burger King states “its not really”, REALLY should not be in that sentence as a CEO releasing a public notice concerning. What he means is that it may be the driving reason but not the only reason stating that it will allow for growth, which it will by expanding internationally only to a 1/5 ratio to Canadian profits. This move will save the company 7% , Canada @ 20, Florida @ 27, saving them 139 million dollars a year! This is a reactive strategy to increase profits, both companies have released statements saying they do not plan to change anything concering products/service

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by sutton1010 | November 7, 2014, 3:45 am
  2. I believe it to be proactive because the companies are looking towards the future of where they want to see themselves because of this merge. As apposed to reactive, I have not heard a lot of great things from consumers on either side of the boarder, I believe this merge will create quite a struggle for 3G, lets hope they don’t need to cut jobs like they did with Heinz.

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by Kimberley McCullough | November 7, 2014, 12:19 pm
  3. Proactive

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by Liam Conroy | November 7, 2014, 2:13 pm
  4. Reactive! They are reacting to what the public wants, keeping both restaurants separate instead of combining products.

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by Victoria Flagler | November 7, 2014, 2:15 pm
  5. i feel like this is positive because they trying to expended and create better revenue. This will help with making sure they don’t start in the declining stage and stay in the mutuality stage. and the customers are over reacting because they are keeping the 2 company septet.

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by cordellia goulet | November 7, 2014, 2:15 pm
  6. Reactive, Burger King taking over, lets Burger King to get into the Canadian market as Tim Horton is popular here. The merge would increase popularity and profitability in the Canadian market.

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by MAHDER TESFAY | November 7, 2014, 2:26 pm
  7. I agree that it is reactive, they are trying to increase profits and make Tim Hortons an international brand, and have agreed that the products and services of both brands will be staying the same. Hopefully Tim Hortons has a good strategy and knows who their target market is going to be in the USA because people in the USA may be happy with what they’ve got ( as Nikki had said in class).

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by gile0045 | November 7, 2014, 2:29 pm
  8. This is definitely reactive strategy. Tim Horton’s is slowly being backed into a corner by American franchises True they aren’t as costly but as people are getting richer by the minute they seemingly prefer more expensive treats. So Tim Horton’s is basically taking a rearguard action. They are taking a defensive action. Economic times are on a down so they are getting behind a big name to ensure they won’t have any financial worries. True, a lot of Canadians won’t agree with an American firm buying them over but sometimes to survive, one must even take help from the enemy.


    Posted by Darryl Sequeira | October 31, 2015, 1:23 am
  9. Reactive strategy. The net income of Tim Hortons started decreasing in 2013 in comparison to previous years. This move of being merged with Burger King can prevent the possibility of further revenue decrease. Moreover, it will definitely bring Tim Hortons to higher revenue with help of American market, even if part of Canadian marker reduces.


    Posted by Anna Verozub | November 2, 2015, 3:34 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Ian W McVitty

Email: mcvitti@algonquincollege.com
Phone: (613) 727-4723
Drop By: H204C

Creative Commons Licenced

Creative Commons License
Hospitality Marketing One by Ian W. McVitty is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
%d bloggers like this: