The New Deal Essay examples -- American History, Politics, Poverty

The New Deal was created to make the United States a more convenient country to Americans in need. It was created during Franklin D. Roosevelt’s first term of presidency in the year 1933. The New Deal was a chain of programs that were made to help the United States deal with poverty going on during that time. Poverty had a major affect on Americans; lack of employment, depression, homeless, and more. Many times families will feel like they were useless to their own family, because they couldn’t provide them with anything. According to Franklin D. Roosevelt (2009, para. 1), the New Deal was determined to three steps Relief, Recovery, and Reform; each one had their own significance. Like everything in history everything has a cause, therefore so did the New Deal. Sometimes the outcome of that cause is significant and carries down to different generations. A great example is the New Deal, because although the programs were done years ago some still exist today and many people benefit from it. The main cause of the New Deal was the stock market crash, which is known as the Great Depression. On October 29, 1929 also known as Black Tuesday, the world turned upside down (Charles Scaliger, 2008, p.34, para. 1). He says this, because it is the day the stock market crashed and everything started happening. There was a major increase in unemployment, lack of consumer buying, loss of homes, and farms as mortgages failed, and strikes and riots when workers could no longer earn a family wage (Phyllis J. Day, 2009, p.284). All of these outcomes from the crash affected not only the United States, but also the world, because no one had money to buy things to raise economy. According to Phyllis Day (2009, p. 284, para. 3), t... ...s and more. Although it served different races, racism was still a problem, because it was not forbidden to be prejudice, but just to avoid it. Basically the idea was do not get caught discriminating, which was not right, because many people of different color were in the same shoes like the others. An idea President Roosevelt had, which was the total opposite from President Hoover was control of production. The program National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) showed the major difference the two presidents had. While President Hoover believed in raising prices, so economy can grow, President Roosevelt believed otherwise. This program said companies were not to raise prices, just because economy was bad. Having this program lead to Unionization, because now the court was actually on the workers side, rather than the employees (Phyllis Day, 2009, p. 289).

Cola Wars Continue: Coke vs. Pepsi in the 1990s Essay

Question 1 The concentration producing industry has one buyer and through its value chain. Instead, costs for advertising, promotion, market research, and bottler relations were significant. On the other hand, bottling industry is the mid-way player in the soft drink industry. There are two suppliers and one buyer involved in its value chain (Exhibit 1). Whether two industries are profitable depends on soft drink consumption, which had increased for more than 20 years and plateaued in the 1990s. The economics of the CP and bottling is very different from each other in terms of number and size of rivals, and the scope of competitive rivalry. There are two giants competing head to head on the CP industry, smaller national producers, such as Seven-Up and Dr Pepper, are relatively trivial. There are a lot of players of same size in the bottling industry. Unlike the furious competition between Pepsi and Coke, no sense of competition can be felt in bottling industry. Reasons are that, first, Pepsi and Coke control the majority of bottlers in 1990s; second, intrabrand competition is restricted by the franchise agreement, which is protected by ‘Soft Drink Interbrand Competition Act’. From the view of capital requirement, it is easier for others to enter the CP industry than to enter the bottling industry, since comparing to $30-$50 million dollars requirement to establish a bottling plant covering only one 80th of ability to serve the entire US market, the requirement for one CP plant with a nation-wide capacity is only $5-$10 million dollars. In addition, brand loyalty is low in the CP industry since consumers are sensitive to price and there is little switching cost. There are many substitutes for soft drinks, such as tea, beer, and milk. There is no substitutes existing in the bottling industry, and no customer loyalty and switching costs for bottlers since they could only use packages authorized by the franchiser, which means no distributors can tell the difference of the same brand provided by two bottlers, and easily switch among different bottlers. Cost and financial structures of a CP and a bottler illustrate that high cost of sales is one of the major reasons behind the relative low profitability of the bottling industry. The ratio of cost of sales over net sales is 40% higher than that of CP. One possible reason is that bottlers heavily depend on CPs, and thus, CPs use bottlers to diversify expenses. Another reason is that bottlers hold much more inventory than CPs do since bottlers receive soft drink concentrates according to its processing capacity, while they sell products based on selling capability. Also, bottlers have plant and equipment that are ten times more than that of CPs, and a good will that is roughly 45 times more, which means that bottlers have to deduct more depreciation from gross profit than CPs do. One of the reasons why bottlers are backward integrated by CPs is that, as the Cola-war heating up, small bottlers were no longer able to handle CPs’ goals and thus they would not be chosen as Pepsi and Coke’s partners. Most of them were merged or driven out of the market by larger ones adopting the DSD method, which is the only delivery category that provides a positive net profit per unit. Other driving forces for Pepsi and Coke to integrate bottlers are that, by doing this, they can narrow down the number of packagers they deal with, lower costs of negotiation with bottlers, and set up barriers to find buyers for other smaller national CPs. Question 2 Bargaining power of buyers is the weakest competitive force for CPs. On the other hand, the strongest competitive force for the bottling industry is bargaining power of suppliers because of the interactional relationship between the two industries in question. Both of the two industries would like to weak each other’s bargaining power, however, CPs take the initiative in the negotiation. First, it is CPs who build franchise networks. CPs understand how the bottling process works, while the bottlers don’t know how to run a soft drink brand. Second, CPs negotiate with bottlers’ other suppliers to secure reliable supply, faster  delivery, and low price. Also, franchise agreement between CPs and bottlers has been becoming more favorable to CPs. So it is safe to say that bottlers have been affiliated to CPs to a deeper degree than CPs to bottlers. Finally, the bottling industry does not have giants who are able to penetrate into the CP industry. On the other hand, the CP industry has Pepsi and Coke to integrate bottlers. Threat of new entrants is the second weakest force for the CP industry. One of the major reasons is that it is difficult to access a bottler since like Pepsi and Coke are taking control of most of the packagers. Another reason is, although capital required to establish a soft drink concentrate plant with the capacity of serving the entire US market is low, costs for advertising, promotion, market research and bottler relations are a heavy burden and specialized know-how, such as brand management, is a natural barrier to penetrators. However, the fact that customers’ loyalty is becoming weaker makes the force not as weak as bargaining power of buyers. The bargaining power of suppliers to CPs also seems weak in the case since, as the advent of diet soft drinks, the expiration of the patent to aspartame, and oversupply of aluminum on the world market, suppliers to CPs are losing bargaining power. However, there is no detail of suppliers industry given to provide us with confidence to say that it is the weakest force. Threat of substitutes, and competitive rivalry among the incumbents are relatively weak for the CP industry. Comparing to its substitutes, such as beer, milk, and bottled water, soft drink is and will continue to be performing outstandingly (Exhibit 2). Type of competition in the CP industry is duopoly, two giants, Pepsi and Coke are competing with each other head to head. Other CPs are confined to a market share that is lower than 30%. The unsystematic competition makes competitive rivalry less intense when consider the industry as a whole. Threat to new entrants for bottling industry is weak since, unlike the CP industry, bottling industry has a high capital requirement, from $30 to $50  million, to build a plant of five lines with one 85th to one 80th of the national volume. There is even no profit margin for small bottlers because they are not big enough to be engaged in the DSD to make a positive profit. Bargaining power of buyers is the third weakest force for the bottling industry. To bottlers, they receive volumes of concentrates at the level of their processing capacity; while at the other end of value chain, number of cases they can sell depends on bottlers’ marketing capability. To retailers, they don’t have switch costs since Pepsi Cola from bottler ‘A’ is the same as that from bottler ‘B’. However, continual brand availability and maintenance is crucial to CPs, they don’t want to see that too much inventory held by packagers erode relationship with each other. So, CPs have to help bottlers work on marketing and how to deal with retailers. Threat of substitutes, and competitive rivalry among the incumbents are the weakest. First, there are no substitutes for packages. Second, there is no competition among bottlers in that not only is intrabrand competition restricted, but also competition among brands are concerned by CPs since the bottlers are heavily controlled by concentrate suppliers nowadays. Question 3 The reason why the Cola-War does not escalate out of control is that both of Pepsi and Coke understand the importance of keeping its rival alive. Strategically, they are vital to each other’s maintenance. There are three possible results of the Cola-war, monopoly, duopoly, and near prefect competition. All players in this industry are dreaming to be the king of monopoly. However, under current situation, it is difficult to defeat each other without harming themselves for both of Pepsi and Coke. Launching plans and actions aiming at eliminating its competitor will probably result in the third result, near prefect competition, in which the industry would only have players bearing the same size as nowadays Seven-Up and Dr Pepper. Obviously, duopoly is the best and easiest choice for the big two. First, as risk avoiders, they can maintain current size and dominant position in the market, keep small national brands at an inferior level. Second, they can keep business environment nearly unchanged. The duopoly situation has been lasting for more than two decades. It is the one they are familiar to. No matter whoever is driven out of business or both of them lose the dominant position, they have to re-evaluate the industry and re-plan their strategic plan. Third, they can lower the possibility of making mistakes by observing what each other are doing. Based on above reasons, Pepsi and Coke choose not to wage a war that is out of control. Methods Coke and Pepsi adopt to keep the war within ‘bounds’ are focusing on key success factors, following each other’s actions selectively, and realizing gap in international market. There are three KSFs in this industry, brand differentiation, relationship with packagers, and developing new beverages. Focusing on KSFs enable both of Pepsi and Coke stay in the right track leading to higher level competition of duopoly. Following each other’s actions selectively prevents them from distracting to dangerous actions. They both followed closely each other’s actions based on KSFs, such as launching marketing plans, vertical integrating bottlers, and develop new products. They also distinguish bad actions from good ones. For instance, Pepsi gave its employees one-day brake when it received the information that Coke decided to change its Coca-Cola’s formula. Pepsi has admitted that Coke is much stronger on international market. It is very important that it uses ‘guerilla warfare’ in selected international market instead a frontal attack with Coke everywhere, which would entrap Pepsi in the quicksands of international market. Question 4 Over the last century, firms specialized in tobacco, food, and restaurant, such as Philip Morris, Hicks & Haas, Triarc, R.J. Reynolds, and Cadbury Schweppes, tried to penetrate into the soft drink industry through purchasing small national CPs like Dr Pepper, Seven-Up, and Royal Crown Cola, however, few of them survived. Reasons for this fact fell with the faulty strategic planning process. Those who entered but do not end up with success failed to recognize three key success factors in this industry in the beginning, building brand recognition, developing packaging networks, and changing distribution channels. First, Pepsi successfully competed with Coke through adopting brand differentiation. In responding to Pepsi’s attack, Coke spent even more money on advertising, which gained two companies world wide fame, heated up the war between them, and shaped their capacity to remain as top players. However, other CPs did not cash in on the brand differentiation strategy, which can be illustrated by a compare of dollar amount spending on advertising by brand in the US. (Exhibit 3) Second, there was no evidence that small national CPs tried to secure packagers to build their bottling network. Instead, they had to resort to bottlers owned by Pepsi and Coke, while small bottlers do not have the capacity to handle national distribution. Costs for new entrants to maintain bottler relations or organize small bottlers are so high that may eat up gross profit. Finally, as discount retailers such as Wal-Mart and K mart prospered during the 1990s, CPs are facing pressures on lowering their wholesale price. Besides, it seems only Pepsi and Coke were involved in Door-Store Delivery method, CPs that sell products to private label and warehouse would be facing less distributors due to negative net profit/unit.

One Laptop Per Child Essay

1. Why are Microsoft, Intel, and other leading for profit companies interested in low-cost computers for the developing world? In 2005, Nicholas Negroponte, the founder of MIT’s Media Labs, announced the One Laptop per Child (OLPC) program at the World Economic Forum. The concept was simple and appealing. Innovate a $100 laptop and distribute it to children in the developing world’s governments. The vision was for bridging the digital divide between developed and developing nations. The OLPC was a nonprofit project for the developing nation’s school going students’ for their better education. The OLPC created buzz from its first day of announcement for its low cost and its non profit initiative for developing country’s children. Though the company like Microsoft and Intel is leading profit for organization they interested in OLPC project. Because the project was for the developing countries school going student who don’t have enough opportunity to learn like developed county’s children and don’t have ability to afford the technology device for higher price. So as the leading organization Microsoft and Intel have the social responsibility for the developing country’s children and they also see the opportunity to do social welfare with establishing branding in people minds. On the other hand the OLPC was started with their rivalry organization like Linux and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). So if the OLPC project succeeds the organization like Linux and AMD can create threat for their leading monopoly business. So from their social responsibility point of view and for the marketing of their own brand names into people minds they interested in low cost computes for the developing world. 2. Do you agree with Negroponte’s decision to partner with Microsoft? Yes I do agree with the Negroponte’s Partnership decision with company like Microsoft which is very much trusted and reliable name in this computer sector for their operating system and software. The OLPC project was an ambitious vision for Negroponte to educate the developing world’s school going children by providing low cost laptop computer. As he announced the lap top will be low cost and price will be the $ 100 dollar for each so he uses the Linux operating system which is non-proprietary and available for free to anyone who wants to use. But it didn’t work, In 2008 OLPC faced disappointing sales because the country’s like Libya and Nigeria who pledges to buy about one million for each country’s people both backed off those pledges and the cost increase $180 to $190 range. So the brand name like Linux was not reliable for the mass population of the world and they felt insecure with that operating system. On the other hand some potential buyers worried about the lack of Microsoft’s windows operating system. So as the OLPC didn’t succeed the way it was estimated so Negroponte needed to collaborate with the Microsoft to increase its sales and add more customer satisfaction by the Microsoft brand name. 3. Assess the thinking behind the â€Å"give one, get one† promotion. Do you think this is a good marketing tactic? In November 2007, in an effort to increase production, OLPC announced the promotion of† Give One, Get One†. The OLPC team started this promotion to grab the market attention of their nonprofit ambitious project. Because prior to the initiative’s launch, the OLPC had been a fascinating demonstration of hardware and software ingenuity, but actual unit sales and donations had been far smaller than originally predicted. The G1G1 program was designed to change that, offering individual consumers the chance to buy two laptops for $399. Though the tactic of â€Å"Give One, Get One† is aggressive marketing strategies in order to gain market share and capitalize on its competitive strengths. Though the aggressive marketing tactic like Give one, Get One always not good for the all types of products. But the OLPC project had strong competent like Intel Classmate. So to grab the attention of mass people and gain maximum market share and achieve the goal of developing country’s poor children education this marketing tactic was good for the project. Because OLPC announced two weeks give one get one promotion first but for its huge response to the markets they increased their promotional offer time.

Free Essays on Herland

Gilman’s Use of Masculine and Feminine Traits in Herland Throughout the story, Gilman shows the ideas of masculine and feminine traits in the early 1900’s. The all women civilization she creates in the story certainly shows the effects of the early 1900’s society has on masculine and feminine traits. Her interpretations of society brings allot to question. The most emphasized is that how both men and women are looked at in her created society and of 1915’s society. Some of the traits that Gilman shows have gradually progressed since her time. Herland reflects on the conception of society’s idea of masculinity and femininity in 1915. During Gilman’s time in the United States, it was an on going epic of constant gain for woman’s rights. She had used her idea of the equilibrium between masculine and feminine traits. She did this by taking away both of the traits, making sure that everyone would be equal. She had thought that by only having women in Herland and taking the sex appeal away from society. These women have no clue of trying to impress the other sex . Nor do they have any clue of what women of that time were thought to do. In the article Sex Before Gender by Bernice Habusman explains it all. She discusses that when the men come to Herland they believe in the very feminine nature that Gilman finds so destructive. This is extremely true. The three men are shocked by their none feminine nature. Habusman goes on to explain that the men believe that they can make the women express t he feminine traits that the women express in their society. Here I think that Gilman is trying to show that men have a tendency to take control over women. What they have to realize is that it has been two thousand years since these women have not been familure with sex in general as with dealing with men I do agree with some of the ideas of masculine and feminine traits of the early 1900’s. What has to be rea... Free Essays on Herland Free Essays on Herland Gilman’s Use of Masculine and Feminine Traits in Herland Throughout the story, Gilman shows the ideas of masculine and feminine traits in the early 1900’s. The all women civilization she creates in the story certainly shows the effects of the early 1900’s society has on masculine and feminine traits. Her interpretations of society brings allot to question. The most emphasized is that how both men and women are looked at in her created society and of 1915’s society. Some of the traits that Gilman shows have gradually progressed since her time. Herland reflects on the conception of society’s idea of masculinity and femininity in 1915. During Gilman’s time in the United States, it was an on going epic of constant gain for woman’s rights. She had used her idea of the equilibrium between masculine and feminine traits. She did this by taking away both of the traits, making sure that everyone would be equal. She had thought that by only having women in Herland and taking the sex appeal away from society. These women have no clue of trying to impress the other sex . Nor do they have any clue of what women of that time were thought to do. In the article Sex Before Gender by Bernice Habusman explains it all. She discusses that when the men come to Herland they believe in the very feminine nature that Gilman finds so destructive. This is extremely true. The three men are shocked by their none feminine nature. Habusman goes on to explain that the men believe that they can make the women express t he feminine traits that the women express in their society. Here I think that Gilman is trying to show that men have a tendency to take control over women. What they have to realize is that it has been two thousand years since these women have not been familure with sex in general as with dealing with men I do agree with some of the ideas of masculine and feminine traits of the early 1900’s. What has to be rea...

Mezhirich - Paleolithic Ukraine Mammoth Bone Settlement

Mezhirich - Paleolithic Ukraine Mammoth Bone Settlement The archaeological site of Mezhirich (sometimes spelled Mezhyrich) is an Upper Paleolithic (Epigravettian) site located in the Middle Dnepr (or Dneiper) Valley region of Ukraine near Kiev, and it is one of the best-preserved sites of its type excavated to date. Mezhirich is a large open-air site where several mammoth bone huts with hearths and pit features were used between about 14,000-15,000 years ago. Mezhirich is located approximately 15 kilometers (10 miles) west of the Dnieper river in central Ukraine, located on top of a promontory overlooking the confluence of the Ros and Rosava Rivers, 98 meters (321 feet) above sea level. Buried beneath about 2.7-3.4 m (8.8-11.2 ft) of calcareous loess were the remains of four oval to circular huts, with surface areas of between 12 to 24 square meters (120-240 square feet) each. The dwellings are separated from one another between 10-24 m (40-80 ft), and they are arranged in a V-shaped pattern on the promontory top. Mammoth Bones as Structural Material The main structural elements of the walls of these buildings are stacked mammoth bone, including skulls, long bones (mostly humeri and femora), innominates, and scapulae. At least three of the huts were occupied at approximately the same time. About 149 individual mammoths are believed to be represented at the site, either as building material (for the structures) or as food (from refuse found in nearby pits) or as fuel (as burned bone in nearby hearths). Features at Mezhirich About 10 large pits, with diameters between 2-3 m (6.5-10 ft) and depths between .7-1.1 m (2.3-3.6 ft) were found surrounding the mammoth-bone structures at Mezhirich, filled with bone and ash, and are believed to have been used as either meat storage facilities, refuse pits or both. Internal and external hearths surround the dwellings, and these are filled with burnt mammoth bone. Tool workshop areas were identified at the site. Stone tools are dominated by microliths, while bone and ivory tools include needles, awls, ​perforators, and polishers. Items of personal ornamentation include shell and amber beads, and ivory pins. Several examples of mobiliary or portable art recovered from the site of Mezhirich include stylized anthropomorphic figurines and ivory engravings. The majority of animal bone found at the site are mammoth and hare  but smaller elements of wooly rhinoceros, horse, reindeer, bison, brown bear, cave lion, wolverine, wolf, and fox are also represented  and were probably butchered and consumed on site. Radiocarbon Dates Mezhirich has been the focus of a suite of radiocarbon dates, primarily because while there are numerous hearths at the site and an abundance of bone charcoal, there is almost no wood charcoal. Recent archaeobotanical studies suggest that taphonomic processes which selectively removed wood charcoal may be the reason for the lack of wood, rather than reflecting deliberate bone selection by the occupants. Like other Dnepr River basin mammoth bone settlements, Mezhirich was first thought to have been occupied between 18,000 and 12,000 years ago, based on early radiocarbon dates. More recent ​​Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) radiocarbon dates suggest a shorter chronology for all mammoth bone settlements, between 15,000 and 14,000 years ago. Six AMS radiocarbon dates from Mezhirich returned calibrated dates between 14,850 and 14,315 BCE. Excavation History Mezhirich was discovered in 1965 by a local farmer, and excavated between 1966 and 1989 by a series of archaeologists from the Ukraine and Russia. Joint international excavations were conducted by scholars from Ukraine, Russia, the UK, and the US well into the 1990s. Sources Cunliffe B. Upper Paleolithic economy and society. In Prehistoric Europe: An Illustrated History. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998. Marquer L, Lebreton V, Otto T, Valladas H, Haesaerts P, Messager E, Nuzhnyi D, and Pà ©an S. Charcoal scarcity in Epigravettian settlements with mammoth bone dwellings: the taphonomic evidence from Mezhyrich (Ukraine). Journal of Archaeological Science, 2012, 39(1):109-120. Soffer O, Adovasio JM, Kornietz NL, Velichko AA, Gribchenko YN, Lenz BR, and Suntsov VY. Cultural stratigraphy at Mezhirich, an Upper Palaeolithic site in Ukraine with multiple occupations. Antiquity , 1997, 71:48-62. Svoboda J, Pà ©an S, and Wojtal P. Mammoth bone deposits and subsistence practices during Mid-Upper Palaeolithic in Central Europe: three cases from Moravia and Poland. Quaternary International, 2005, 126–128:209-221. Alternate Spellings: Mejiriche, Mezhyrich

Risk Management Overview Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Risk Management Overview - Essay Example Risk Management is a systematic process of managing risk exposures. Risk and uncertainties affect business and investment in a number of ways. There are two possible outcomes for the risks- may be gains or loss (Merna and Al-Thani, 2008, p. 4). Fig-1 gives background information about these two possible outcomes of risks. Risk management considers not only the threats but also the opportunities that are possible gains out of risks. Risk can be taken positively or negatively. Perceiving it in positive way will be an approach to manage it and if that it is done effectively, risk can be utilized. If it is ignored and no management activities are performed, it will bring loss instead of gains. An organization can be said to have good organization wide risk management system if its risk management activities are starting from the very starting point of the projects, if risk management is integrated with other managerial function and finally if all stakeholders are actively involved in the risk management processes (Cooper, Grey, and Raymond, 2005, p. 15). According to Culp (2001), risk management is an organizational process that is separated in to five general activities that are 1) identifying the risks and determine the tolerance, 2) measure risks, 3) monitor and report risks, 4) control risks, and 5) oversee, audit, tune and re-align the risk management process (p. 210). This is depicted in the figure- 2. Risk management process comprises of set of actions taken by individuals or firms as an endeavor to alter the risks arising from their business. Each stages like identification an control are ultimately a forward-looking process as the main target is to manage risks and thus to achieve overall business success. Risk management and its functional areas may deal with both insurable and non-insurable risks like risk due to bad management or risk due to fashion change etc. According to Merna and Al-Thani

Improvements of the marketing planning process in the pharmaceutical Essay

Improvements of the marketing planning process in the pharmaceutical company - Essay Example Product group should be appealing to the contemporary market. Assuming social responsibility, and employing competent and trained labour forces are also important. Production should be doen in compliance with the EU directives.More aggresive acquisition, promotion and advertising should be undertaken. Company Introduction ACTAVIS AD (formerly known as BALKANPHARMA) a generic pharmaceutical company was founded in 1999 due to privatizations of its three manufacturing sites at Dupnitza, Troyan and Razgrad, with a manufacturing tradition of half a century. It the Bulgarian branch of the MNC generic pharmaceutical group ACTAVIS HF (earlier PHARMACO). The group head quartered in Iceland has its operations in more then 25 countries. Actavis AD is the leading generic pharmaceutical company in Bulgaria enjoying substantial market share both in terms of value and volume. Currently operation and production have been segregated from marketing and sales and Actavis represents the marketing and sales aspect. The ratio of domestic sales and export sales is also significant (51%/49%). It continues to enjoy the traditional favored position both in the domestic market as well as in USSR. The entire capital and is owned by the mother concern and Actavis is the biggest tax payer in Bulgaria. It is the driving force in th e Bulgarian domestic pharmaceutical market. Several restructuring has taken place to divert it focus from the safe and closed market to the more competitive open market. Ongoing efforts to incorporate the Good Manufacturing Practices into its manufacturing facilities are on. To counter foreign and domestic competition various aspects are being developed. ACTAVIS AD in 2002 became the only European pharmaceutical company with a... An analysis of   the market status of Actavis AD   within the Bulgarian pharmaceutical industry, along the significant economic   determinants operating in all markets, namely, supply and demand, barriers to entry and the pricing of goods, production cost and profit, aids in understanding the company’s market status and in devising future strategies.Within the Bulgarian pharmaceutical sector the demand is mostly created by the public funds, namely National Health Reimbursement Fund; hospitals and Ministry of Health centralized tenders. The demand market is differentiated along three parameters, namely those goods which are reimbursed and those which are free sales ones; those which are for sale in hospitals and those which are sold at pharmacies; those which are patented and those which are generic. There is a possibility to enhance the demand in the pharmaceutical market. The supply market can best be represented by the volume in the pharmaceutical market. The market su pply volumes merely indicate the part of the demands which has been satisfied, the actual sales. Actavis Ad enjoys significant market volume (35% in terms of market volume share and 18% in terms of market value share). It emerges as the clear leader outrunning its major business rival Sopharma by 8% in terms of market value share. Despite the small size of the Bulgarian pharmaceutical market(Polish market being ten times bigger) Actavis has recorded a significantly high growth rate attributed to it’s ever expanding portfolio in generic products, commitment.