Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
After the deep dive into Quirkys business model which included an extensive analysis of the current competitive landscape and market positioning a detailed SWOT and benchmark analysis was done on Quirky as well as its direct and indirect competitors. This enabled the team to achieve an unparalleled vantage point that not only allowed us a deeper understanding of the inner workings of Quirkys business but also helped us elucidate ways to secure a competitive edge in the future. We summarize our main findings in the following sections. Despite having such a unique business model focused on harnessing the power of the community and embracing its culture Quirky demonstrably suffers from a lack of brand awareness. While most members have undeniable passion towards Quirky and its culture the firm remains a widely unknown startup. The marketing campaigns devoted to promoting the brand are quirky and fun with a focus on the companys image but ultimately fail to convey a clear strong message leaving the targeted audience confused and longing for more. This weakness is even more perceptible when one considers how clear some competitors like Innocentive or Kickstarter have presented their message and how these companies succeeded in lev- eraging social media to increase their visibility. Through further examination of the landscape we were able to identify another potential threat for Quirky one that revolves around its difficulty of scalability. Quirkys broad range of products separates the firms strategy from that of most competitors who choose to tap into niche markets instead. Innocentive targets engineers as their customer segments while Tongal focuses on videos for advertising purposes. Such a fo- cus allows these firms to scale their operations and to be competitive in those specific sectors. A broad product offering is hampering Quirkys efforts to scale and grow and is weighing on its performance versus its competitors. Finally we believe that Quirkys community is the core of its business. We have identified community man- agement within Quirky as another crucial problem to address. Crowdsourcing companies rely on their com- munities to survive and it is in their best interest to grow an engaged rich interconnected and committed community. Direct and indirect competitors of Quirky have had better success in energizing their communi- ties and were able to leverage a stronger base hence achieving further growth and expansion. We believe that Quirky should go beyond sharing its message and culture with its community but rather actively work to weave closer ties within the community. Quirky needs ot creasing its level of engagement and its overall level of activity and participation. Competitive Analysis