A Research Paper on Estee Lauder

overmuch can be said for the ships come with that gave us an array of fragrances, cosmetics, and clothes a want the years. Este laudator Companies along with the its affiliates perplex come a long way from starting surface as a small tax return on Saks Fifth Avenue in New York City in the late forties.The companion grew out to become a market place draw in the cosmetics market in the fall in States. With sales amounting up to $ 6 billion in 2006, the quite small company that Joseph lauder and his wife started is a typical success story emulated the world over.However, intrigues and controversies abound as the company that is still dominated by the lauder family at make faces a dilemma whether to directly face the conflicts head on or just hold on and do business the usual way.SituationIn February of 2001, a pro-Palestinian convocation led a ostracise on all Estee Lauder Companies products after allegations of pro-Israel activities that were d whizz by Ronald Lauder, t he current CEO of Estee Lauder Companies. The boycott cost a decrement in the profits of the entire group of companies while at the same time affecting the image of the company as a whole because of the incident. Steps of remarketing strategies were done by the company so as to offset the negative effect of the boycott on the image of the entire company.This was preceded by a long standing court-ordered battle of Ronald Lauder with Vladimir Zelezny and the Czech Republic in 1999 which has resulted to a cede out to the Estee Lauder knob executive by the Czech businessman which incidentally was elected as senator of Czech Republic.In addition, Estee lauder is facing the pressures of answer claims that the ingredients in some of its cosmetics offerings are cancerous and should not be exchange in the market. Likewise, the company also has to address the growing number of congenital alternative cosmetics in the market that is slowly feeding up its market shares.ConflictThe boyc ott was received by the public with mixed reactions. Most of the Moslem population ad deferd to the group that started the boycott and saw Ronald Lauder as an alleged(a) Zionist who, though a businessman, is really supportive of the Israeli melody of Palestine. The argument here is the statutoryity and intent of Mr. Lauder to make much(prenominal) statements without considering the fact that he represents a large multinational company and anything that comes out of his mouth could affect the image and impression on the company that he leads.On the other hand, the actions that the head executive made towards political guinea pigs are viewed by some groups, grouchyly by Pro-Israeli groups as an exercise if his right of put down speech and free actions. This was even answered by an anti-boycott which is geared to contradict the allegations that the chief executive of Estee Lauder did was the appropriate thing to do.The primary conflict here not exactly the question of whether R onald Lauder did something that would please a legitimate group of people or not but the negative effects that the incident entailed on the image of the company, as well as Mr. Lauder himself. The effects can be exemplified by a significant decrease in the stock prices of Estee Lauder in the stock markets in 2001 which amounted to a continuous bearish descent and cost the company losses along the way.Estee Lauders marketing efforts have also been significantly impact by the perception towards Ronald Lauder. As a matter of fact, telecommunication ventures of the company in Europe, RSL Communications went bankrupt the same year after the incident. The trading operations of the telecoms company are mainly based in Europe and the United States.Furthermore, what happened in the media venture between Ronald Lauder and his Czech partner, Vladimir Zelezny resulted to a legal suit after the latter failed to release the license for the local mesh Nova which was under Lauders Central Europ ean Media Enterprises (CME). This further impact the image of the CEO and led to the bankruptcy of CME in 2000. This however was equilibrise by the damage fees that were awarded in favor of Ronald Lauder in 2003.Furthermore, the issue of Estee Lauder fooling customers over synthetic and toxic ingredients over their cosmetics is one serious conflict that the company is trying hard to face. For instance, a hatch by Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., chair of the Cancer Prevention Coalition in Chicago, indicated in one of his reports that most of the products that Estee Lauder sells in the market today carry certain carcinogens which could cause cancer through continuous use.He furthered that the products in particular that Origins released recently which claims to optimize skin defense against skin age accelerators have been deemed confusing and that the marketing strategy used here by Estee Lauder clearly hides the truth to its clients.In the same study that was published by Dr. Epstei n, he claims that ingredients such as Limonene, PEG-100, among others are known carcinogens all of which are present in the current product lines that the cosmetics company sells in the market. Also, the study includes the posture of Parabens and Bisabolol, both of which are known to disrupt endocrine functions of the body and chatter skin respectively.With the growing market for more natural and animal-friendly cosmetics slowly eating up the market, Estee Lauder has to rethink its current marketing strategy and institutionalise more on the product development of its cosmetic product lines in order to cope up with the high growth in occupy in the market.