Q1. What are the main differences between Sony and Bacro's strategies with regards to rolling out their products before August 1989 to the projector market (i.e. you need to compare and contrast the chronological order and scanning speed/prices/other characteristics of the models that both players introduced to the market before August 1989)? Why did the two actors adopt such different strategies before August 1989? Barco launched its first projector BV1 (16 kHz scan rate and price of $11,250) in the video segment in 1982. But soon Barco decided to enter the computer application market and by the end of 1983, the BD1 was launched (16-18 kHz scan rate and priced at $13,500) in the data segment. In 1984, Barco introduced two more projectors BV2 (scan rate 16–18 kHz and priced at $9,875) and BD2 (scan rate 16–25 kHz and priced $14,750) respectively in the segments video and data. 1985 saw Sony's entry into the industrial projection market with its 1020 video model. The 1020 was slower than the Barco projectors available at the time, but its focus was sharper, indicating a tube of best quality. In 1985, Barco launched the BD3 (scan rate of 16 to 32 kHz and priced at $17,000), then in 1986, Barco introduced BDHR, its first projector in the graphics segment (scan rate of 16 to 45 KHz and priced at $17,375). In June 1987, Barco offered the BG400 for the graphics segment (scan rate up to 72 kHz, initially priced at $25,000, later reduced to $24,000). The same year, Barco also introduced the BD400 (scan rate of 16 to 45 kHz and priced at $14,500) and the following year it released the BD600 (scan rate of 16 to 45 kHz and priced at of $12,000) and the BV600 (16 kHz slew rate). & priced at $8,750). Barco's main strategy was to work in the middle of paper......higher scanning speed is always welcome. So, the 75kHz projector would definitely be appreciated by customers, especially at a much lower price of $15,000, a savings of $9,000 compared to Barco's BG400. Customers would buy a cheaper projector with higher product performance. The issue of “price signal quality” may not be a major concern here, as Sony has a strong reputation and a recognized brand in the market. Additionally, Sony would be able to resolve this issue by physically demonstrating the projector's performance at a trade show and Infocomm show. This would weaken the correlation between price and quality in the customer's mind. As the projectors are purchased for industrial use, snob value isn't really an issue here. Barco cannot afford to engage in price wars and Sony is in a position to deliver the final blow to Barco. Merger is therefore possible in this case.