Product details

By continuing to use our site you consent to the use of cookies as described in our privacy policy unless you have disabled them.
You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.
Case
-
Reference no. 594-046-1
Subject category: Marketing
Authors: Valerie Bence
Published by: Cranfield School of Management
Published in: 1994

Abstract

This case has been written to illustrate the problems encountered by Nutrasweet and its parent company, Monsanto, when faced with the expiry of patents (in December 1992) which protected the production of aspartame, an artificial sweetener. This meant that Nutrasweet would lose its position of being almost a monopoly producer in the home market (USA), and be open to competition from other aspartame producers, as well as from many types of new generic artificial sweeteners. The case looks at the development of marketing strategies over a long period of time, aimed at lessening the impact of losing patent protection on its major product.
Location:
Other setting(s):
Events leading up to loss of patent protection (1992), subsequent position of company post 1992

About

Abstract

This case has been written to illustrate the problems encountered by Nutrasweet and its parent company, Monsanto, when faced with the expiry of patents (in December 1992) which protected the production of aspartame, an artificial sweetener. This meant that Nutrasweet would lose its position of being almost a monopoly producer in the home market (USA), and be open to competition from other aspartame producers, as well as from many types of new generic artificial sweeteners. The case looks at the development of marketing strategies over a long period of time, aimed at lessening the impact of losing patent protection on its major product.

Settings

Location:
Other setting(s):
Events leading up to loss of patent protection (1992), subsequent position of company post 1992

Related