Panganiban, Denniel Keanu N.

BSCPE2A

1. Would you consider Encyclopedia Britannica's decision to discontinue the

printing of hardbound volumes strategic move? Why or why not?

 They did the right thing by changing their medium, making it accessible to
everyone because it is on the internet, and I believe it is better just to be on the
internet now that we live in the current day and most people utilize the internet.

2. What were the disruptors that made the company arrive at this decision?
Research if necessary.

 Our digital education services company has grown at a 17% compound annual
rate over the past five years, and we have a 95% renewal rate, whereas sales of
the print version of the encyclopedia have continuously decreased, from 6,000 in
2006 to roughly 2,200 in 2011. Basic cost-benefit analysis failed to show that
producing the bound volumes was beneficial. Sincerely, it was a pain. The
management team had to decide in February 2012 whether to start the next
updated printing and all the associated work, or to stop printing altogether. We
went with the latter.

3. Do you think that people will still use Encyclopedia Britannica even if it is not in
hardbound anymore? Provide points that prove that people would prefer
Encyclopedia Britannica over Wikipedia and other way around.

 Yes, whether it is free to use, not printed, or just accessible online is the key
question. Due to its paywall, The Britannica is not a threat to Wikipedia's
supremacy. Despite this, it nevertheless enjoys a strong reputation as a brand
and a high level of confidence. If it can create a workable income model based
on advertising, sponsorship, or academic credit, a free to use Britannica might be
a real rival to Wikipedia. Britannica is still one of the most well-respected
reference works available, but Wikipedia has evolved to eclipse the encyclopedia
in the Internet Age. Indeed, Britannica is a reliable source more trustworthy than
Wikipedia.