In order to make sure that the proposed merger is the best option for all parties involved, we have commissioned this study. This may well prove to be the best tool we have to determine if we should go forward.
John Rogerson
Vice President of Acquisitions
East Eyebrow, Inc.
***
From the face of Matt Judd, consultant and client
Re: the proposed merger of East Eyebrow, Inc. and Eyebrow Industries West
I must say, as probable recipient of the bulk of changes that might come along with this merger, I am underwhelmed. Here are the basics, as I see them.
Pro:
– Increased protection from forehead dust and other run-off
– Increased shade
– Establishment of a face-wide network
– Greater coverage = better service
Con:
– Taking an aesthetic step backwards
– Increased payroll, as non-overlapping territories means no redundancies and in fact, new hires to cover new ground
– Communications easily dispensed by a single eyebrow may be muddled when made by full brow.
– Increased opportunity for labor issues (pimples and ingrown hairs, for those executives not familiar with “on the ground” problems)
Further Questions for consideration:
– If glasses are an acquisition on the horizon, how will the single brow affect that?
– Does this put us in danger of running into anti-monopoly legislation?
– Much of our image is based on familiarity. Does this move make us look more or less like cruel despots?
– Is Middle America ready for the solo brow? Is Eastern Europe a sign of a growing global trend, or an anomaly?
Conclusions:
This merger, though perhaps inevitable in the future, is not the best option right now. Expansion is necessary for both East Eyebrow, Inc. and Eyebrow Industries West, but perhaps said expansion shouldn’t meet in the middle. The best solution for the present time is a significant expansion in separate directions.
Please see my follow-up study – Earbrows: the Wave of the Future.
Comments are closed.