TMC: Hydra Division

This case and its companion case, “Dayton Foundry” (UVA-QA-0788), are a supply chain negotiation, for which there is a narrow zone of potential agreement. Localization results in this area is a challenge because of the differences in raw material costs (actual and perceived), possibly extreme opening offers, lack of commitment to do a deal, and different interpretations of history. The difference in raw material costs may be an opportunity for mutually beneficial agreements can be reached. The cases ar … Read more »

This case and its companion case, “Dayton Foundry” (UVA-QA-0788), are a supply chain negotiation, for which there is a narrow zone of potential agreement. Localization results in this area is a challenge because of the differences in raw material costs (actual and perceived), possibly extreme opening offers, lack of commitment to do a deal, and different interpretations of history. The difference in raw material costs may be an opportunity for mutually beneficial agreements can be reached. “RMC: Hydra Department” The cases are updated versions. (UVA-QA-0399) and “Akron Foundry” (UVA-QA-0398), the contract is for December 2011 and the aluminum price data are for 2010 and 2011
«Hide

from
Sherwood C. Frey
Source: Darden School of Business
7 pages.
Release date: 30 April 2012. Prod #: UV6348-PDF-ENG
TMC: Hydra Department HBR case solution