PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT TEAM Yimin Lai Brian Loyal Kazuhiro Nakagawa FALL 2005 Kim-Yen Nguyen Timothy

Rogers Courtney Todd

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. MISSION STATEMENT.......................................................................................................................................4 2. CUSTOMER NEEDS ANALSYIS........................................................................................................................4 3. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................................................5 3.1 THE BUSSMASTER FRAME ........................................................................................................................5 3.2 THE SLIDING BIN SYSTEM .........................................................................................................................7 3.3 THE INSERTABLE DISH RACKS ..................................................................................................................8 4. MARKETING.........................................................................................................................................................9 4.1 MARKET OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................................9 4. 2 MARKET SEGMENTATION .........................................................................................................................9 4.3 MARKETING PLAN ...................................................................................................................................11 5. COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS ..............................................................................................................................12 6. MANUFACTURING............................................................................................................................................14 6.1 BILL OF MATERIALS ...............................................................................................................................14 6.2 OVERSEAS MANUFACTURING ..................................................................................................................15 6.3 FINAL ASSEMBLY ....................................................................................................................................16 7. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................................16 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 COSTS ......................................................................................................................................................16 REVENUE .................................................................................................................................................18 PROFITABILITY ........................................................................................................................................20 SCENARIO ANALYSIS ...............................................................................................................................22 RISK ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................23

8. FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS ..........................................................................................................................25 9. CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................................................................26 APPENDIX A: MECHANICAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................27 APPENDIX B: BUSSMASTER USAGE ANALYSIS............................................................................................28 APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ..........................................................................................................30 APPENDIX D: INTERVIEWS ...............................................................................................................................31 APPENDIX E: OSHA GUIDELINES ....................................................................................................................37 APPENDIX F: CUSTOMER NEEDS HIERARCHY ...........................................................................................38 APPENDIX G: EXHIBITS FOR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS................................................................................39

Page 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The BussMaster Team has developed an innovative, practical and improved bussing system for the restaurant industry. The trade name BussMaster will serve as brand name for the product and will be part of the product line of Rubbermaid Commercial Products, a division of Newell Rubbermaid. Newell Rubbermaid Inc. is a global marketer of consumer and commercial products with 2004 sales of $6.6 billion and a large family of powerful brand names. This all-in-one system will fill a latent customer need in the marketplace for an efficient and versatile bussing system. While there are several competitors who sell carts, there are none who offer an integrative bussing system that is complete with a cart, racks and bins. This is quite advantageous for the BussMaster, providing additional breathing room to establish itself as the premier brand of authentic bussing systems. The purpose of the BussMaster is to eliminate the weight burden on the busboys, while also decreasing the time it takes to clear and prepare a table for the next customer. Thus, the cart will improve customer service and restaurant sales increasing turnaround time. The BussMaster will also provide a labor savings to restaurants be reducing the number of required bussing staff. An additional benefit is the BussMaster dish rack, which is compatible with standard dishwashers so it does not interrupt the current bussing and dishwashing process. The specially designed rack and bin system improves sanitation by having a separate drainage compartment that conceals leftover food. The BussMaster is equipped to clean multiple tables and expedite back-of-the-house operations. The product is also intended to help prevent slip and fall injuries that trigger OSHA lawsuits. We project unit sales of 1,346 in year one of product launch, which will increase to a volume of 2,243 by the end of year two. This will place sales revenue for both the cart and dish/bin sales at $922,742 for the second year, using a price point of $349.99 for both direct sales to chains and wholesale market. Management predicts sales of $1.3 million by year three. Year two is our forecasted breakeven point, and the BussMaster can expect to earn profits of $653,943 before taxes. The NPV analysis with a 15% discount rate reveals that the BussMaster will be valued at close to $6 million within ten years. The BussMaster is a manufacturing division of Newell Rubbermaid dedicated to protecting restaurant workers from injury and improving current restaurant performance via its efficient, versatile bussing system. We intend to make quality tested products, and earn sufficient profits to generate a fair return for our parent company and its investors. The BussMaster seeks to foster the enjoyment of the dining experience for both guests and restaurant staff. We intend to grow business and establish our brand as a premier leader and innovator in the restaurant supply industry. We intend to finance continued growth both internally and externally and to develop and develop additional products once our brand is established. We will conduct our business in accordance with strong values and ethics, and strive to maintain a fair and creative work environment that respects ideas and hard work of our employees. The Product Development Team believes the BussMaster will be perceived by the restaurant industry as an innovative, improved bussing system to be implemented as the new standard for table bussing and dishwashing. We strongly urge senior management buy-in and prompt investment of $371,609 to successfully launch the BussMaster while the market is vacant.

Page 3

1. MISSION STATEMENT
The objective of the BussMaster Team, a division of Newell Rubbermaid, is to introduce a versatile, improved bussing system for the efficient and sanitary removal of dirty dishes and utensils from public dining areas. The BussMaster Team’s key business goals are the following: increase turnover time which results in increased establishment sales; serve as standard restaurant device because it is compatible with industry’s current bussing and dishwashing system; capture 20-30% of market share before competitors enter market; and eliminate need to hire additional staff to cover peak hours. The primary market is defined as wholesale restaurant suppliers, independent restaurant owners, and restaurant franchisors and/or franchisees. These segments are willing to pay a higher price for our product to improve the current bussing system in their establishment. The secondary market is restaurant managers and staff, and the end customer. This segment is more in tune and hands-on with operations in a restaurant, and know what is necessary to improve the overall dining experience. The primary assumptions and constraints include the following: Compatibility with commercial dishwashers and current bussing system Light, durable components Aesthetically pleasing design Compact and portable Overseas manufacturing of low cost components and final assembly preparation User-friendly Easy to clean Stakeholders in this product include buyers for wholesale restaurant suppliers, restaurant managers and staff, franchisors and franchisees, end customers, sales team, and manufacturing operations.

2. CUSTOMER NEEDS ANALSYIS
In developing this product, the BussMaster team set about to identify a set of customer needs. Both fieldwork and consultation with OSHA documents were used to establish a series of functional designs in the final product. In terms of fieldwork, a series of interviews were conducted in the San Diego area at various restaurants. The interview protocols included questions about the bussing process they currently use, what they liked and disliked about the current process, if they have considered a cart and the reasons for and against it. (Appendix C) From these interviews, we then interpreted these needs (Appendix D) and constructed a customer needs hierarchy (Appendix E) by combining them with the safety considerations that OSHA specified (Appendix F). Several key issues emerged, in particular where we can provide the most value for customers as well as our most likely target markets:

Page 4

The BussMaster satisfies the dimensional specs of a restaurant. The BussMaster provides plenty of room to store tableware. The BussMaster integrates the current bussing process. The BussMaster is easier to set up and use. The BussMaster satisfies OSHA safety requirements. The BussMaster fits the aesthetic needs of the restaurant. We were also able to better define our target market, because aesthetics, volume, and space dimensions place restraint on purchasing our product. Thus at a preliminary glance we’d likely target high volume, one level restaurants who do not care much for aesthetics.

3. PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
The BussMaster (Figure 1) is a slim restaurant utility cart with several sliding buss-bins mounted within its frame. Its special features include: A low-profile design for maximum maneuverability Increased storages space for removing dishware and table waste An optional system of specialized dish racks for dish faster dishware organization and cleaning The BussMaster dramatically increases the table-clearing capacity of a single worker, due to its multiple bins. This translates to real labor savings of approximately $0.03 per customer. What’s more, the cart’s maneuverable design means these savings can be realized in any restaurant layout. The BussMaster itself looks similar to many other utility carts, only considerably thinner and only waist-high. It consists of three functional parts: a sturdy outer frame, a pair of sliding bussbins, and several insertable dish racks. 3.1 The BussMaster Frame A lightweight wire frame provides structure to the BussMaster. This box-shaped skeleton suspends the sliding bins between its support poles and provides locations to hang dishrags, cleaning solution, and other tools. Frame specifications: Frame measures 13.25” W x 22” L x 32” H Angled tubular handle extends out 45 degrees Attached top shelf Sliding bins are mounted on rails 4-inch wheels that rotate 360 degrees w/ brakes 320 lb capacity per unit

Page 5

The slim chrome frame measures only 13.25 inches wide and 32 inches tall, allowing the BussMaster to fit easily between crowed tables at a busy restaurant. An angled tubular handle extends out at 45 degrees from the top of the cart, allowing workers to easily push or pull the device. This is attached to the top shelf, supported by four steel poles at each corner. The sliding bins are mounted to rails attached between each pair of poles, suspended above the cart base. This whole assembly sits upon four, 4-inch, fully rotatable wheels. Due to its solid-core, steel construction, the BussMaster has the strength to withstand even the toughest restaurant conditions. The poles, handle, and wheels are fastened with a secure contact fit, and the bin rails are bolted to the frame, allowing easy manufacture and transport. The cart base and top can each hold up to 250 lbs. The frame’s greatest strength, though, lies in its small size. Its 13-inch cross-section is 2 inches smaller than the width of the bussing bins themselves, and anywhere from 2 inches to 8 inches smaller that its thinnest competitors. This means that wherever a worker can walk – through narrow aisles, between crowded tables and chairs, next to cramped catering stations – the BussMaster can roll. Despite its low profile, the cart still offers greater bin accessibility than its competitors due to its system of sliding bins.

Page 6

3.2 The Sliding Bin System The BussMaster is capable of carrying three standard size buss-bins, one resting on top of the frame and two suspended from inner rails. The rail-mounted bins are capable of extending over 13 inches outward from the cart. This provides maximum accessibility to the bin’s contents. Each sliding bin is mounted to a pair of side rails (Figure 2). These permit the bin’s smooth rolling action and also allow it to be removed from the frame entirely. The side rails are manufactured from stainless steel, and are mechanically bolted to the outer face of the hi-gloss plastic bin lip. Due to the high cost of cart failure, it is essential that the bin mountings hold up under repeated dish loadings. To ensure this, the slides themselves are rated for weights up to 75 lbs, twice that of a 35-lb, fully loaded buss-bin. Similarly, the cart must withstand the

Figure 2: The sliding bins can extend over 13 inches outward from the cart frame. This provides workers greater accessibility to the bin contents.

tipping force of a full, extended bin without tumbling over. A full mechanical analysis of the situation (Appendix A) allowed the design team to optimize the frame weight so as to support an extended, fully loaded bin. The extendable bin system provides an increase in a worker’s table bussing capacity. This translates to overall labor savings of $0.03 per customer. A breakdown of this utility analysis may be found in Appendix B. These savings are increased further by the use of the insertable dish racks.

Page 7

3.3 The Insertable Dish Racks Included with the BussMaster (and available for separate purchase) are several custom dish racks that fit within each buss bin. Although these reduce the carrying capacity of the cart, the improved dish organization substantially accelerates the washing procedure. Rack specifications: Dimensions 14” W x 18” L x 4” H Fits snuggly in bus bins Rack bottoms have wide mesh for drainage Racks sit 1.75” above bottom for drainage (see Figure 3a) Rack pegs allow for multiple loading configurations Racks are injection-molded from polyurethane Dishwasher safe In most restaurants, dishes spend a large portion of their life stacked on kitchen counters, waiting for dishwashers to sort, rinse, and load them into washing machines. The BussMaster racks shorten this pipeline by allowing the bussing worker to organize cleared dishes while removing them from a table. During each trip: • • • Dishware is removed from tables and placed between the pegs of a rack Once the worker has finished clearing the table, he or she slides the bin back within the frame and wheels the cart back to the kitchen From here, the dishwasher opens the cart and removes the rack and dishes from each bin

Figure 3: a) The dish rack inserts into each bussing-bin, arranging dishware as they’re cleared. b) After rinsing, a dishwasher loads the entire rack directly into the washing machine.

Usually, with an unorganized bin, the dishwasher must now reach for each dirty item, rinse, and load them individually into a washing machine rack. With the BussMaster racks, though, the dishwasher rinses an entire bin of dishes at once, and then places the rack directly in the washing machine (Figure 3.b). This saves considerable time, more than making up for any lost cart bussing capacity. An organizational device would not be of much use, though, if it forced bussers to jumble dirty dishes around in front of customers on the serving floor. Utility testing showed that this is not a concern with the BussMaster, as loading into a bin rack is over 90% as rapid as using an empty bin (Appendix B).

Page 8

Do not be deceived by the BussMaster’s design simplicity. This highly optimized restaurant tool provides managers concrete benefits in several segments of their bussing process: The small cart profile allows workers to maneuver it to any space on the server floor, without requiring reorganization of the restaurant layout Workers can quickly load several tables worth of dirty dishes into the BussMaster’s several bins, cutting down trips and overall labor costs Usage of the insertable bin rack further streamlines the bussing process by simplifying the work of kitchen dishwashers

4. MARKETING
4.1 Market Overview National restaurant chains and independently owned restaurants provide a large market for the BussMaster. According to the National Restaurant Association, there are approximately 900,000 restaurant locations nationwide with projected 2005 sales at $476 billion.1 People are dining out more than they have in the past because of time constraints due to busy lives revolving around work and family. On average, the typical American consumes 4.2 meals per week in a commercial setting.2 The hospitality industry is also a potential market for the BussMaster. Hotels and resorts are expanding their services and have established dining facilities for guests as well as banquet and catering services for special events and meetings. The American Hotel and Lodging Association estimates at the end of 2004, there were 47,598 properties nationwide.3 4. 2 Market Segmentation Primary Target Market Our primary target market will focus on family/mid-scale restaurant chains and independentlyowned restaurants. Restaurants that fall into this category include casual dining, diners and buffets. There are approximately 22,600 family/mid-scale and 52,200 independently-owned restaurants nationwide. The key characteristics of our primary target market segmentation are quick service, high volume, large dining spaces and inexpensive home meal replacement. A distinguishing characteristic of family/mid-scale and independently-owned restaurants is that aesthetics is less
1

National Restaurant Association 2005 Industry Fact Sheet http://www.restaurant.org/pdfs/research/2005factsheet.pdf 2 Restaurant USA Online (published by the National Restaurant Association), November 2000 http://www.restaurant.org/rusa/magArticle.cfm?ArticleID=138 3 American Hotel and Lodging Association 2004 Industry Profile http://www.ahla.com/pdf/Lodging-Ind-Profile-2004.pdf

Page 9

important to management. This distinguishing characteristic is the main driver of our primary target market segmentation. Primary target market includes: Chains Dennys International House of Pancakes (IHOP) Souplantation Todai Local Independents Jasmine Seafood Taste of Thai Leucadia Pizzeria Secondary Target Market Our secondary target market includes casual dining chains and mid-scale hotel chains. There are approximately 45,200 casual dining restaurants and 22,000 mid-scale hotel chains nationwide. Restaurants that fall into this category include bar and grills, themed restaurants and ethnic restaurants. Hotels that fall into this category have room rates that range from $50 to $100 per night. The key characteristics of our secondary target market are similar to our primary target market. They include quick service, high volume, large dining spaces and reasonable prices. These shared characteristics are the main driver for this market segmentation. Casual dining chains and mid-scale hotel chains differ from our primary target market because management is concerned with aesthetics, culture and style. Secondary target market includes: Restaurants TGI Fridays Chili’s Chevy’s Fresh Mex Olive Garden BJ’s Restaurant and Brewry Hotels Holiday Inn Double Tree Embassy Suites Marriott Best Western

Page 10

4.3 Marketing Plan We construct the following marketing matrix for the BussMaster. With a startup budget of $200,000 and follow-up expenses of 3% of gross revenue, we hope to achieve 20% penetration in our primary target markets and 15% penetration in our secondary market by year 10. Sales figures are to be checked quarterly to ensure project performance. Contingency planning would call for increases in advertising and sales expenses should market penetration be slower than expected.

Product Mix: Given the wide range of restaurants we are targeting, there needs to be flexibility in the BussMaster design features, particularly for the secondary markets which have strong aesthetics concerns. We propose to allow a degree of customization for different market segments to be more accepting of the product. For color schemes we offer the entire palette of colors (up to 17 configurations) besides the standard black and chrome, as well as tailor made color schemes (leopard colored, etc.) for themed restaurant. For rack configuration we offer the option of several different pegs to allow for different organizational schemes for segmented markets. For very high volume segments, we allow the option of no pegs at all to allow for ease of throwing in tableware. For accessories we have built onto the cart S-hook to place a variety of kitchen products, such as towels, menus, and gloves.

Page 11

Pricing Mix: The pricing mix is determined by two factors: competitor’s pricing points and cost-saving rents the BussMaster generates. In looking at competitor products which are simply utility carts, we established a market acceptable range of $200-$550 for the BussMaster. We plan to capture 10% of the cost savings projected for a restaurant in a year (50000 customers) in the price scheme, and thus price our product at $349.99. For future pricing developments, we will also consider bundling sells and price the packages accordingly for each restaurant. Placing Mix (Distributional Channels): The distributional method we have chosen is to sell in bulk to restaurant chains, hotel chains, and restaurant supply stores and distributors. Direct selling is the most fitting method for the BussMaster as we plan on capturing several major restaurant chains and wholesalers through negotiations by our salesforce. Promotional Mix: With ramp up marketing of $200,000, we plan on working with an independent market research firm to do both concept and market testing. As well as having them design print ads in trade magazines and industry trade shows. We have identified several key trade magazines for our advertising campaign: National Restaurant News, Foodservice, and Chain Leader. Another promotional method during ramp-up is to provide free samples for some chains to test our product and gain market recognition.

5. COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS
Direct Competitive Products Currently, the utility and service cart industry is highly competitive since most of the leading commercial and restaurant manufacturing companies produce their own line of carts. There are a broad range of products ranging from price points as low as $150 to over $500. The carts are made of a variety of materials including metals such as stainless steel and aluminum to heavy duty plastics such as polyethylene and polypropylene. There are also a wide variety of innovative features available including shelf lips to contain spillage, adjustable shelves, on board accessories, foldable sections for storage and concealment panels. Although there are several utility and service carts on the market, most function as a standalone unit rather than an integrative system with dish racks and bins like the BussMaster.

Page 12

Leading Commercial and Restaurant Manufacturing Companies: Cambro Carlisle Food Service Products (Division of Carlisle Manufacturing) Lakeside Manufacturing (Division of Harrison Supply Company) Admiral Craft Equipment PVI Food Service (Division of Prairie View Industries) Vollrath Examples of Competitive Products:
ALL-PURPOSE CART Manufacturer: Cambro 3 shelves with lips 1 pc molded polyethylene Bolted 5” castors 500 lb capacity per unit Dimensions: 33 1/8”x 20”x 33 5/8” Retail Price: $545.00

BC SERIES UTILITY CART

Manufacturer: Metro 3 18”x28” shelves Heavy duty plastic Open base 4 swivel tread casters 400 lb capacity per unit Retail Price: $196.00

SERVICE CARTS SERIES Manufacturer: Carlisle FSP 3 heavy duty shelves 5” non-marking castors 500 lb capacity per unit Optional accessories: Retail Price: $371.35

FOLD N GO CART Manufacturer: Carlisle FSP 3 31.5”x 18.5” shelves Polyethylene shelves ¾” Aluminum legs 350 lb capacity per unit Retail Price: $399.95 WIRE SHELF CART Manufacturer: AdCraft 3 wire shelves Heavy chrome plated cart 220 lb capacity per unit Shipped knocked down Dimensions: 18” x 36” x 37.5” Retail Price: $131.75

UTILITY CART Manufacturer: Lakeside 3 18”x27” shelves 22 gauge stainless steel cart 3 ½” swivel castors 300 lb capacity per unit Retail Price: $270.00

Indirect Competitive Products There are several products on the market produced by the leading commercial and restaurant supply manufacturers that can be used in the bussing process. The price points of these products range from under $10 to around $50, depending on materials, features and intended uses. Products in this category can include bins, trash cans, trays and dish racks.

Page 13

Examples of indirect competitive products:
Brute 32 Gallon Trash Can

Manufacturer: Rubbermaid Professional grade plastic Strong snap on lip Built-in handles Removal bottom dolly 4 non marking castors Retail Price: $45.00

Bus Box Manufacturer: Cambro Heavy duty hi-gloss plastic Rim for easy carrying Dimensions: 15-5/16"x19-15/16"x4 15/16" Retail Price: $4.50

TRAY Manufacturer: Cambro Polypropylene tray Non slip polytread surface 10-9/16" x 13-5/8" diameter Dishwasher safe Retail Price: $9.65

FLAT BACK BUCKET Manufacturer: Rubbermaid Durable plastic w/ handle Dimensions: 11.5”H x 25”W Diameter 16.25” 20 lb capacity Retail Price: $16.00

6. MANUFACTURING
6.1 Bill of Materials Production requires the following bill of materials for assembly:
Component Cart Frame Poles+ Extra Weight Shelves Bus Bins Wheels w/ Brakes Wheels w/out Brakes Caps Wheel Insert Sockets Rails for Bins Customized Dishwasher Bin Handle Standard PVC Clamps 2 pc Materials Hot Rolled Mild Steel (A36) Stainless steel (S302) Standard Plastic Gray Rubber Wheels Rubber Wheels Standard Black Plastic Caster Sockets Standard Metal 14" rails Polypropylene plastic Standard PVC Piping Unit 28.2 lbs 5.5 lbs 2 pc 2 pc 2 pc 4 pc 4 pc 4 2 pc 2 ft

Page 14

Materials will be sourced from third-parties in China and will be shipped to our overseas production facilities. Procurement of raw materials will be handled by the production facilities but will have to meet standard guidelines set by Rubbermaid. 6.2 Overseas Manufacturing Rubbermaid plans to outsource all the manufacturing and final assembly preparation to Rubbermaid production plants in low-wage China, and then export the finished goods back to Rubbermaid’s warehouse in Culver City, CA. The finished goods can be compressed into breakdown kits consisting of two flat side panels and three flat shelving units that fit into one flat knockdown box to minimize shipping costs and labor necessary for final assembly. At the factory, the product will be placed on pallets and loaded into a container and then transported to the port. The container will be on water for roughly 15 days while it sails to the U.S., and then trucked to its final assembly site. The cost of ocean freight from China to the U.S. is $2,500 to $3,000 per container. For a $12 casting, the total incremental transportation cost is $1.10. This is compared to transportation costs of $.30 for a typical Mexican supplier shipping to the U.S. Financial assessment of China sourcing should then be made on the total landed cost of a product-which includes the manufacturing cost differential as well as the full logistics cost. China is the optimal manufacturing place of the world providing a sound base for outsourcing strengthened by risk mitigation, raw material savings, and high labor content. China offers savings up to five times as compared to the United States, an increasing concern as the BussMaster experiences significantly high production and labor costs in the U.S. The BussMaster Team does not have a patent on the product, so we are not concerned with producing key components in-house to protect confidentiality.

Page 15

6.3 Final Assembly Once the knocked down kits are shipped from China to the Port of Long Beach and/or Port of Los Angeles, the containers will be trucked to the Rubbermaid’s final assembly facility in Culver City, CA. Rubbermaid workers will assemble the pre-fabricated parts and prepare the units for shipping to the end customer. The final product will be shipped via ground freight using logistic carriers such as FedEx, UPS and DHL.

7. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
7.1 Costs Production Costs Production of the BussMaster requires two separate production processes: the production of the cart itself, and production of the custom-sized plastic dishwasher bins. Our production strategy is to minimize total production costs through an optimal combination of outsourcing and in-house manufacturing. The cart will be produced using an outsourcing strategy. All components for the cart will be sourced from existing Rubbermaid suppliers in China, who will pre-assemble the components and ship them directly to our manufacturing facility in the Culver City, CA as knocked-down kits. Rubbermaid personnel will perform final assembly and handling operations, which includes final assembly of the cart, quality assurance testing, and dock loading. This strategy allows us to maximize the use of cheap Chinese labor while minimizing shipping costs. Using this method, we estimate a unit production cost for each cart of $68.19. As shown in Table 1 of Appendix G, our primary cost drivers are materials costs and assembly and handling. All of the materials will be sourced in China and priced FOB Culver City, which includes the labor costs for pre-assembly and ocean shipping freight. To estimate these costs, we took the estimated U.S. retail price minus and a standard wholesale discount, and then applied a 60% volume purchase discount. As shown in Table 2 of Appendix G, this results in a materials cost of $41.40 for each cart. Assembly and handling costs are estimated to be $1.22 per cart. This estimate is based on three assumptions. The first is that the California assembly labor rate is $17 per hour plus a 30% benefits premium, or $22 per man-hour. The second is that each knockeddown kit will require 120 seconds for assembly and 80 seconds for handling, in sum 200 seconds, in other words, we can make 18 carts per man-hour. Finally, we estimate from prior experience that 60% of total direct cost is allocated for factory overhead under Rubbermaid’s activity-based-costing (ABC) system. Alternatively, our strategy for producing the custom-sized plastic dishwasher bins is to leverage Rubbermaid’s core competency in plastics fabrication and produce these in-house at our existing manufacturing facility. Using this method, we estimate a unit production cost for each bin of $4.79. As shown in Table 3 of Appendix G, we assume a materials cost of $2 per unit to source the polypropylene plastic material used to cast the bin. Additionally, we estimate that each bin

Page 16

requires 60 seconds for assembling and 80 seconds for handling, in sum 140 seconds. Assuming a labor rate of $22 per man-hour, we can make 25 dish bins per man-hour, and therefore, the assembly and handling costs for each bin is $0.88. Finally, we assume a fixed asset capital investment of $15,000 for the purchase of a custom injection molding cast. Given our sales projections for the project, the injection cast is expected to produce over 130,000 bins during its life, which equates to a unit cost of $0.11 per bin. Capital Costs The BussMaster project requires up-front capital cost expenditures of $320,000. These expenditures include the purchase of fixed assets, incremental development costs, and ramp-up costs. As demonstrated in the previous section, production costs for the BussMaster are largely variable, and require little fixed asset capital investment. The project requires a single up-front fixed asset capital investment of $15,000 for the purchase of a custom injection molding cast at the beginning of the project (Year 0). This investment will be depreciated using Rubbermaid’s modified accelerated cost recovery system (MACRS) over its estimated useful life of 7 years, and is presumed to have zero salvage value at the end of this period. Therefore, a second fixed asset capital investment of $15,000 will be made in Year 8 to replace the injection mold. The capital investment and depreciation schedule are highlighted in yellow in Table 4 below:

The marketing group has recommended several design changes and feature enhancements that it feels are necessary in order to bring the BussMaster to market. Therefore, we estimate that we will incur an additional $80,000 of production costs in Year 0, which is equivalent to the annual salary of a Rubbermaid Sr. products engineer plus minor incidentals. Finally, we estimate that the BussMaster will require ramp-up costs of $240,000 to bring the product to market. This is composed of two major activities. First, the marketing group has requested a budget of roughly $200,000 to hire a professional market research firm and conduct additional concept/product testing. Secondly, based on the launch of similar Rubbermaid products in the past, we estimate an additional $40,000 will be required to train customer service, sales and manufacturing personnel on the new product.

Page 17

COGS Following one year of incremental product design and ramp-up activities, we estimate sales to begin in the 1st quarter of Year 1. Our cost of goods sold (COGS) will be primarily driven by advertisement expenses, customer support costs, and salesperson compensation. Rubbermaid has a strong installed based among restaurant and hotel chains, which helps to reduce advertising costs. However, since this is a new kind of cart being sold as an innovative bussing system, we conservatively estimated advertisement costs to be 3% of gross sales revenue. For example, we will require $3,000 of advertising spend to generate $100,000 of sales revenue. Also, the marketing group feels that high quality customer support will be crucial to achieving a high customer repurchase rate. Therefore, based on Rubbermaid’s experience with similar products we estimate that customer support costs will equal 1% of gross sales revenue. Finally, we estimate that an average salesperson’s compensation (including base salary + commission) is $60,000 per year, and each sales person is able to sell 4,000 units per year (i.e. 3-4 restaurant/hotel chains). Therefore, selling 8,000 units is assumed to require 2 salespersons and compensation of $120,000. Actual figures for all three COGS expenses based on actual sales (discussed in next section) are highlighted in Table 5 below:

7.2 Revenue Pricing Based on competitive analysis and conjoint studies performed by the marketing group, we believe we can achieve a price point of $349.99 for the BussMaster cart and $29.99 for the dish bins. As discussed previously, Rubbermaid sells through two distinct distribution channels. Our sales to family independent restaurants occur through wholesale restaurant supply stores. The prices given represent our wholesale pricing, and assumes these prices are low enough to allow a retail markup of approximately 40% by the wholesaler. Conversely, when selling directly to restaurant and hotel chains, Rubbermaid is essentially acting as the retailer, which allows the company to capture the entire profit from a sale. However, because chain sales involve large volume orders, we must provide a volume discount, which we estimate to be 40%. Therefore, we can use the same price point for both market segments. Sales The BussMaster will be sold in two distinct market segments. Based on assumptions from marketing, we have assumed that sales to the primary segment (Family/Midscale & Family Page 18

Independents) will achieve a maximum steady state market penetration rate of 20% by year 10, and that sales to the secondary segment (Casual Dining, Hotel & Resort) will achieve a maximum 15% market share. Because the BussMaster will be sold as a new kind of cart and an innovative bussing system, we assume a slow adoption rate during the first two years of sales that grows quickly and progressively towards steady state share in year 10. The graph below shows the “S-curves” derived for both market segments:

Market Penetration by Segmant
25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0 2 4 Year 6 8 10 Primary Segement: Family Midscale & Family Independents Secondary Segment: Casual Dining, Hotel & Resort

Our pro-forma sales projections are given in Table 6 below. As this table demonstrates, cart sales are split into two categories: new buyers and repeat purchasers. Moreover in each category there are two distinct distribution channels. For example, we estimate Year 1 primary and secondary market penetration rates of 0.3% and 0.2% respectively. This means that 68 primary target restaurant chains, 0.3% of 22,600 units, and 134 secondary ones, 0.2% of 67,200 units (note: there are 45,200 casual dining chains and 22,000 hotel chains) purchase our bussing cart. The marketing team has estimated that each chain restaurant or hotel will purchase an average of four carts; therefore, the total volume of carts sold would be 1,346 units, resulting in Year 1 chain store sales revenue of $306,591. Likewise, the marketing team has estimated that each family independent restaurant will purchase an average of three carts per restaurant. Therefore, we estimate Year 1 wholesale sales revenue of $164,425, resulting in total new cart sales in Year 1 of $471,017. The second section of Table 6 accounts for repeat cart sales. The engineering group estimates the cart will have an average useful life of three years, at which time it will need to be replaced. Rubbermaid customers are very brand-loyal, and after reviewing past Rubbermaid sales data for similar products, the marketing group believes that it can achieve a customer repurchase rate of 75%. Therefore, repeat purchases are expected to begin in Year 4 and amount to 75% of the sales volume in yeart-3. For example, the volume of chain store repeat purchase sales in year 4 is 657 units, or 75% of the 876 units sold in Year 1.

Page 19

The final section of Table 6 accounts for dish bin sales. At this time, the marketing team does not intend to market the dish bins as a separate product. Therefore, dish bin sales will be driven by restaurants that have purchased the cart and wish to purchase bins as spares, or as replacements for bins that have been lost or damaged. To calculate bin sales, we have assumed that every restaurant that purchases the cart will purchase spare and/or replacement bins at a rate of 4 per year. This produces additional revenue of $82,628 in Year 1. Therefore, total sales in Year are $553,645.

7.3 Profitability Income Statement Table 7 below shows a pro-forma income statement for the first 10 years of the BussMaster project. In addition to the costs and revenue assumptions discussed previously, the income statement reflects the following additional assumptions: Working capital costs are estimated conservatively based on similar Rubbermaid projects to equal 10% of gross sales revenue Project profits are “rolled up” into Rubbermaid’s consolidated financial statements and will be taxed at Rubbermaid’s 35% corporate tax rate

Page 20

This project is deemed to be an average-risk project; therefore, all cash flows have been discounted using Rubbermaid’s standard discount rate of 15% (risk-adjusted cost of capital) The income statement shows this to be a highly profitable project. Due to our low production costs compared to our relatively high sales price, we enjoy a high markup compared to similar products (contribution margin = 79%). This helps to generate $255,077 in profits from Year 1 sales revenue of $553,645. Based on these projections, the BussMaster will reach the break-even point within two years, and will generate over $3 million in after tax profits in year 10.

Cash Flows Table 7 below shows pro-forma cash flows for the first 10 years of the BussMaster project. Because this project only requires a small initial up-front investment and lacks significant fixed costs of production, the project actually produces a small positive net cash flow at the end of the first year of sales. While this is not a typical result of similar Rubbermaid projects, we feel this is both realistic and speaks to the inherent profitability of the project. Cash flows continue to increase from Years 2-10, resulting in a Year 10 net cash flow of $3,953,470, or a discounted cash flow of $778,544. Applying the project discount rate of 15%, we find that the low initial up-front investment of $320,000 generates a positive net present value of $5,887,200 in the first ten years of the project. This represents an internal rate of return (IRR) of 152%, which is far above Rubbermaid’s hurdle rate of 15%. Therefore, the project is highly profitable from both an NPV and an IRR perspective.

Page 21

7.4 Scenario Analysis The profitability analysis given above is built on a “base case” scenario. The assumptions used in building the base case were derived from a variety of sources that Rubbermaid deem to be reliable. These sources included Rubbermaid accounting, engineering, and marketing personnel as well as senior management; analysis of historical data on similar Rubbermaid products and projects; macroeconomic forecasting; and results of customer surveys and other market research. To mitigate the risk of error, the project team adopted conservative estimates whenever possible. However, it is certainly possible that one or more project assumptions could prove to be incorrect, and have a material impact on the financial performance of the project. Therefore, we have carefully analyzed our assumptions and performed sensitivity analysis to determine how changes in these assumptions might impact project profitability. Given the current stable macroeconomic environment in the US, we feel that inflation poses little risk to the project, and that changes in interest rates or in the US political environment have very little chance of significantly affecting Rubbermaid’s cost of capital or corporate tax rate over the next eight years. The results of our sensitivity analysis showed that the project is most at risk from changes in assumptions related to market share, product price, and manufacturing cost. Market Share The largest risk faced by the BussMaster project is that it fails to achieve the forecasted market penetration rates of 20% for the primary segment and 15% for the secondary segment. We performed a sensitivity analysis comparing base case sales revenue and NPV with pessimistic assumptions (primary market share = 10%; secondary market share = 7.5%) and optimistic assumptions (primary market share = 30%; secondary market share = 20%). As shown in the graph below, the impact of a 50% decrease (or 50% increase) in steady state market share causes a significant variation in project lifetime revenue within a range of several million dollars:

Page 22

Inpact of Changes in Market Share on Sales Revenue
18,000,000 16,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 2 4 Year 6 8 10 Base Scenario+ 20% Steady State Market Share Optimistic Scenario+ 30% Steady State Market Share Pessimistic Scenario+ 10% Steady State Market Share

The market share assumptions also have a significant impact on project NVP, as shown in Table 9 below: Table 9: Market Share Sensitivity Project NPV: Pessimistic $2,841,372 Base Case $5,887,200 Optimistic $8,958,373

However, it is worthwhile to note that even in the pessimistic case where Rubbermaid fails to achieve 50% of forecasted market share, the project is still profitable and worth doing. Product Price and Production Costs A second risk factor is that Rubbermaid’s estimated price point is wrong. As with any new product, it is likely that Rubbermaid may need to reduce its price in order to stimulate sales demand, or conversely, it will be able to raise its price and capture a higher contribution margin. Furthermore, changes in estimated production costs are just as likely, and exert the opposite effect to price changes on revenues and NPV. Therefore, we performed several sensitivity experiments with various levels of pricing and production costs. Our findings were similar to the market share experiment. Significant reductions (or increases) to pricing and/or production costs did exert a material affect on sales and project NPV. However, all reasonable estimates of pricing and production costs resulted in continued project profitability, providing additional evidence that the project is worth pursuing. 7.5 Risk Analysis In addition to financial risks, we have carefully identified and analyzed various market and technical risks faced by the project. At this time, we do not feel that the BussMaster faces any significant technical risks. The basic product design has been completed, and the product has been successfully tested with target users. Although engineering activities will continue for the Page 23

next year to implement enhancements designed to make the product more competitive in the marketplace, these activities do not involve the resolution of any technical issues that could be classified as “high” or even “moderate” risks. However, the project does face two market risks that we feel rank as being “high” or “moderate” and warrant a risk mitigation plan. These are: lower-than-expected market share and early entrance of a new competitor. Lower-Than-Expected Market Share As demonstrated in the Scenario Analysis section, the level of market share achieved by the BussMaster has a significant impact on project profitability. While it is extremely unlikely that market share would actually turn out to be so small that the project would become unprofitable, nevertheless any reduction in estimated market share will significantly detract from the bottom line. Therefore, we have developed a contingency plan for this event. We will closely monitor cart sales in Year 1. If after the first two quarters of sales, sales turn out to be significantly less than forecast, we will put a full-time industrial designer and a full-time engineer back on the project to implement design changes recommended by the marketing team in an effort to make the product more attractive to the target market. Several ideas for such product enhancements have already been developed and are discussed elsewhere in this document. In addition, feedback from potential customers who actually considered the product but decided not to buy it will be carefully weighed. The additional cost of the industrial designer (annual salary = $90,000), the engineer (annual salary = $70,000), and incidentals such as revision of marketing materials and additional training costs ($25,000) are estimated not to exceed $200,000, a cost that is insignificant compared to the lost profits of resulting from any material decline in market share. However, this would require additional capital investment in Year 1 and push back the project breakeven point from Year 2 to Year 3. Early Entrance of a New Competitor Rubbermaid has taken all possible measures to maintain secrecy surrounding the development of the BussMaster as to not tip off its competitors. We expect there to be a lag time of at least 1.5 years from product introduction to the entry of a truly competitive product. By this time, the BussMaster is expected to have achieved significant first mover advantage in terms of both market share and mind share, which combined with Rubbermaid’s strong brand loyalty and an estimated 75% customer repurchase rate, should serve to largely negate the impact of competitor sales. However, we recognizes there is a strong possibility that a competitor may be, unbeknownst to Rubbermaid, already in the process of developing a similar product. Moreover, it is possible that a competitor or a nimble start-up could copy our design and introduce a competitive product much sooner than expected, particularly if sales of the BussMaster exceed expectations. In either event, Rubbermaid would be forced to counter this competitive threat and defend its market share by increasing its advertising spend and hiring additional salespeople. In doing so, we would essentially adopt a strategy of trying to “outsell” the competition, which would likely result in an advertising/sales war and detract somewhat from project profitability. However,

Page 24

Rubbermaid should be prepared to take this step for two reasons. First, we presume Rubbermaid’s higher-than-normal contribution margin will exceed that of its competitors, limiting the amount of advertising & sales expense its competitors will be willing to incur. Secondly, additional advertising and sales can be viewed as an investment in Rubbermaid’s brand equity, that will “spill over” and help increase sales of other Rubbermaid foodservice products.

8. FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS
Future Development Plans are divided into two categories: short-term improvements that focus on product design and functionality, and long-term improvements that primarily focus on improving the manufacturing process while still allocating limited resources towards continuous design and functionality developments. Short Term The BussMaster Team has plans to implement the following product extensions before production and launch: Introduce variety of colors to match restaurant décor Attach hang-on silverware bin to avoid spillage Increase capacity of unit Attach side panels to conceal and contain cargo Attach brush on base of cart to act as broom Limit range of cart colors to two (black and gray) Improve overall performance via additional product interviews and testing Long Term Pending a successful product launch, the BussMaster Team plans to implement the following improvements after five years: Construct cart with high density structural plastic to avoid potential rust, dents, cracks, or chips Design and insert BussMaster brand of dish racks, bus tubs, accessory line, etc. Enclosed bus tubs Solid top shelf base design with small lips to prevent spillage Add Microban® antimicrobial product protection Shrink manufacturing costs by at least 20% Make product environmentally friendly by using all biodegradable products and accessories Identify and develop accessories for BussMaster product line Incorporate 3D CAD tools and plastic molding analysis tools

Page 25

9. CONCLUSION
The BussMaster Team thoroughly believes the BussMaster will capture full market potential at launch for the following three reasons: it is compatible with the restaurant industry’s standard bussing and dishwashing system, no need to hire additional busboys to cover peak hours or execute additional product training, and increased turnover results in increased sales and satisfaction for the establishment. Our Product Development Team only needs $371,609 to successfully launch the BussMaster to be allocated in the following areas in launch period and Year 1: 1) 2) Development Costs Ramp-up Costs Market Research and Concept Testing Training: Sales and Personnel Advertising Salesteam Commission Purchase Custom Injection Molding Cast $ 80,000 $ 240,000 $ 200,000 $ 40,000 $ 16,609 $ 20,000 $ 15,000 per machine

3) 4) 5)

Total Seed Money!!! $ 371,609.00

Page 26

Appendix A: Mechanical Analysis
Problem In normal operations, a worker may extend the BussMaster’s sliding bins several times in a shift. Every time an extended bin bears a load, it generates a rotational force that must be counterbalanced. Failure to do so will result in tipping. Analysis A moment-balance calculation reveals that the extended bin and frame are exactly balanced over the inner wheels (Right wheels in figure A1) when the bin mass is 86% that of the cart. Assuming a maximum load of 35 lbs per cart4, this presents 2 situations: 1) One bin full, others empty In this case, the mass of the frame is the only counterbalance to the extended bin. Therefore, the cart must weigh no less than: (35)/(0.86) = 40.5 lbs 2) Multiple bins full Here, the extended bin is counterbalanced by not only the frame, but also by any bins connected to the cart. In this case, the frame must weigh no less than 40.5 – (mass of one or more bins) Clearly, the “worst-case” is the first situation. To address this, the BussMaster components together weigh a total of 46 lbs: 4 cold-rolled steel poles 2 wire mesh shelves 4 industrial grade wheels 1 0.25 cold-rolled steel plate (fastened to bottom) Total cart weight 16 lbs 5 lbs 5 lbs 20 lbs 46 lbs

4

This is a fairly conservative value. Most measurements put the weight of a bin filled to overflowing with ceramic plates at somewhere between 30 and 33 lbs.

Page 27

Appendix B: BussMaster Usage Analysis
a) Bussing Speed with Empty Bins To quantify the increase in bussing speed provided by the BussMaster, and translate this to a cost savings value, dish-loading speeds were measured using an empty bin. For the test, a standard buss-bin was placed on a kitchen counter. 12 plates in 2 stacks were placed next to this, six 11” dinner plates in one stack and six 8” bread plates in the other. During each test run, a volunteer used a single hand to load all of the dishes, one-at-a-time into the bin. This was repeated over three test runs. From this, an average loading time of 1.52 seconds per dish was determined. A breakdown of total time and labor savings follows:
Bussing Method Customer Capacity Load Time Per Dish (sec) Dishes Per Customer Load Time Per Customer Total Load Time Per Trip (sec) Travel Time Per Trip (sec) Total Table Clearing Time (load+travel) Table Clearing Time Per Customer Customers Cleared Per Hour Increased Customers Cleared Per Hour Wash Prep Time Per Customer, Per Trip (sec) Total Wash Prep Time Per Trip (sec) Total Time Per Trip (clearing time + Wash Prep) Total Time Per Customer (sec) Labor Cost Per Trip ($5.15/hour) Labor Cost Per Customer Savings Per Customer Over Current Method Labor Savings Per 100 Customers Bin Cart w/ 3 Cart w/2 bins bins 16 8 1.52 4 6.08 48.64 300 348.64 43.58 82 1.52 4 6.08 97.28 300 397.28 24.83 144 62 12.72 203.52 600.8 37.55 $ $ $ $ 0.86 0.05 0.03 2.68 $ $ $ $

24

1.52 4 6.08 145.92 300 445.92 18.58 193 111 12.72 305.28 751.2 31.3 1.07 0.04 0.04 3.58

12.72 101.76 450.4 56.3 $ 0.64 $ 0.08

Therefore, using the BussMaster at its maximum capacity will save approximately $3.58 per 100 customers, and support an additional 111 customers per hour.

Page 28

b) Bussing Speed with Dish Racks The value of a dish-organizing system would be reduced if it substantially reduced the bussing speed of workers. Using a procedure identical to that of part a), the time required to load 12 dishes into the BussMaster dish rack was recorded. This time, plus the time spent in the kitchen moving dishes from the cart to a washing machine rack was compared to that of an empty bin. A breakdown of total time and labor savings follows:
Bussing Method Customer Capacity Load Time Per Dish (sec) Dishes Per Customer Load Time Per Customer Total Load Time Per Trip (sec) Travel Time Per Trip (sec) Total Table Clearing Time (load+travel) Table Clearing Time Per Customer Customers Cleared Per Hour Increased Customers Cleared Per Hour Wash Prep Time Per Customer, Per Trip (sec) Total Wash Prep Time Per Trip (sec) Total Time Per Trip (clearing time + Wash Prep) Total Time Per Customer (sec) Bin 8 1.52 4 6.08 48.64 300 348.64 43.58 82 Cart w/ 3 bins Cart w/ 3 racks 24 12 1.66 4 6.64 79.68 300 379.68 31.64 113 31 0 0 379.68 31.64

1.52 4 6.08 145.92 300 445.92 18.58 193 111 12.72 305.28 751.2 31.3

12.72 101.76 450.4 56.3

Labor Cost Per Trip ($5.15/hour) Labor Cost Per Customer Savings Per Customer Over Current Method Labor Savings Per 100 Customers

$ 0.64 $ 0.08

$ $ $ $

1.07 0.04 0.04 3.58

$ $ $ $

0.54 0.05 0.04 3.53

The data indicates that the total labor savings from using 3 bins with dish racks is approximately the same as that of using only the empty bins. Although the rack configuration increases customer turnover to a lesser degree than the multiple empty bin configuration, it has the advantage of providing labor savings during all restaurant shifts, busy or slow. Indeed, a restaurant may benefit by changing the cart configuration to best suit the crowd.

Page 29

Appendix C: Interview Protocol
Here are the questions that we asked during our interview process: Interview Guidelines What kind of products do you use to buss tables these days? Why? What is the process you use to buss tables and wash dishes? What do you like about existing bussing products? What do you dislike about existing bussing products? What are some complaints that staff have about bussing tables? What issues would you consider when purchase bussing products? Does your restaurant use a cart for bussing? Why or Why not?

Page 30

Appendix D: Interviews
INTERVIEW 1 Date: 10/17/2005 Location & Position: Ming’s Chinese Buffet (Busboy) Summary: Bussing cart is parked at the corner of the room Busboys place plates in cart, dishwashers wheel cart to back, restack dishes in rack, then washes use the product pretty much all the time during business hours too ugly to push around the restaurant big tub is quick to dump plates into big enough to accommodate all the different plates no way to divide things up plates sometimes fall over and break not much thought has been put into purchasing this because it’s the only thing around Lessons Learned: In looking at the whole bussing process, the products need to be accessible to waiters, busboys, and dishwashers. The cart needs to fit aesthetic needs of the restaurant and have the plates be loaded easily. An issue raised is that the cart needs to organize the tableware better, and have a weight control to not be too heavy after loaded. Finally, a latent need we gathered from this interview is that the product needs to be similar to the products they are using today to be accepted into the purchasing decision.

INTERVIEW 2 Date: 10/17/2005 Location & Position: Denny’s (Busboy) Summary: Uses a bus bin The bus bin gets very heavy when full Back hurts at the end of shift Sometimes have trouble finding a place to set down bus bin Wish there was an easier way to keep glasses separate from big plates The bus bin is quick because the plates can be thrown in directly

Lessons Learned:

Page 31

Weight issue is a major concern for busboys, and it would be nice to have something that minimizes the maximum total weight that could be lifted. Capacity is important, as well as the ability to separate different types of tableware.

INTERVIEW 3 Date: 10/24/2005 Location & Position: Outback Steakhouse (Busboy) Summary: After customers have finished eating, a worker must clear the dishes off of their table and sanitize the surface dishes are then taken in back, washed in a steam-washer “Bussing bins are a miracle”. They allow you to pick up several tables-worth of dishes at a time. Minimize mess It’s hard to find a place to set the bin down. Use “A seat or something”. Also, bussing is hard work. “People think it’s easier than it is” “You’re basically doing bi*ch work all day” Lessons Learned: Bussing bins are an integral part of the bussing system but often times have no place to be set down, perhaps our cart could be a moving platform for the bussing bins, have to think of someway to have the bins easily accessible while on the cart.

INTERVIEW 4 Date: 10/17/2005 Location & Position: Ruby Tuesday’s (Manager) Summary: easier to just dump everything from a table into a big tub rather than make several trips to the kitchen are ugly, bulky, heavy, unsanitary Helped busboys but noticed the weight due to overloading Lessons Learned: Again speed seems important for the busboys and the open space of tubs offer a natural choice for people. Our design needs to have large opening spaces for easy entry of tableware.

Page 32

INTERVIEW 5 Date: 11/3/2005 Location & Title: Soup Plantation (GM) Summary: Use Trays (“Professional”, “polished”, “looks better”) Busboys are eager to overload their trays Faster table services is an area that needs improvement Flow of the patrons is very important Carts need to be held up to “our standards” (cultural) Willing to pay a high price, their tray cart price= $700 Have tried many bussing carts, but couldn’t find a match Major problem with those carts: Too big and got in the way Lessons Learned: Restaurants do have a need for faster table services and this oftentimes lead to busboys overloading their trays. Soup Plantation has tried carts but it’s a problem of not finding the right size that fits their need, they are willing to pay a very high price for such a device. There are concerns over the aesthetics of the carts themselves, perhaps we need to target a market segment where looks aren’t as important.

INTERVIEW 6 Date: 11/3/2005 Location & Title: El Torito (Manager) Summary: Use BIG trays (looks nicer, cleaner, company policy) Use tubs in bars where it’s busier, and also it’s a longer way to the kitchen There exist safety concerns in bars with the high volume and thus the tub is better Spends time organizing things, usually place cups in trays and hold the plates in the other hand Recommend that we visit Gordon Birsch Lessons Learned: Bar n Grill Restaurants have a need for carts in their bars, where looks aren’t as important and the tubs are hidden from view. They also need them there for busier times and lessen safety risks. The current bussing system does indeed spend sometime organizing the tableware on the trays.

Page 33

INTERVIEW 7 Date: 11/3/2005 Location & Title: Buca di Beppo (Host) Summary: Use trays (sanitary, 2 story restaurant) Sometimes overload trays, too unstable Around 6 to 7 busboys work per night Stack up cups on tray, left hand holds plates Carts might be too big and get in the way Used to work at TGIF, have better need for carts because of larger space Lessons Learned: Spatial constraints seem to be an important issue for people to not choose carts, again redirecting our target market. There does seem to be a potential labor saving solution for these restaurants however with carts, as they have to hire 6-7 busboys a night. Again we see the theme of organizing while bussing, something that seems ingrained in the current bussing system.

INTERVIEW 8 Date: 11/4/2005 Location: Gordon Birsch (Busboy) Summary: Use trays for larger tables Cart would be “nice” It would be nice if could keep bins in the corner somewhere and take the bins one by one to different tables At bars they do use bins, because of constant turnover, and the far trip to the kitchen Bussing takes some time organizing because if place things off center on the tray it will tip over Lessons Learned: There is a need for carts in these large dining spaces, but it’s important to have them function as “bussing stations” where the bins could be taken off and taken to tables individually. Constant turnover and trips to the kitchen is the key driver for buying carts, and again organization seems ingrained in the bussing process.

Page 34

INTERVIEW 9 11/4/2005 Location and Title: Chevy’s (Waitress & Busboy) Summary: Use black bins on carts and trays Need something that separate and store silverware and dishes There are some weight issues with the bins as they tend to be overloaded Need to speed up the dish washing process Would be nice to have Lessons Learned: A good value proposition we’d have would be to focus on streamlining certain aspects of the bussing process, as clean-up requires both getting the dishes off the floor as well as washing them in the back. It would be beneficial to design a product that could speed up the process overall.

INTERVIEW 10 Date: 11/04/05 Location & Position: Vietnamese Restaurant (Busboy) Summary: Use carts (easier, quicker, cleaner) Long tables allow the carts to move around easily The utility cart used cost less than 100 dollars An area of improvement is an even smaller cart Lessons Learned: Asian restaurants already have the carts built in their bussing culture and they are not as concerned about the aesthetics of things. While they like their carts today, they also wanted an even smaller cart that navigate better through their floor space.

Page 35

INTERVIEW 11 Date: 11/04/2005 Location & Position: IHOP (Buswoman) Summary: Use utility carts Hard to put fully loaded bins into cart Had to balance the bin on knees, very hard Is it possible to have a slideable bin? It would be nice to have disinfectants and organizer in the bins. Lessons Learned: Again this re-affirms our target market in the cheaper casual dining restaurants, they took a strong liking to our idea. They bring up an important point that the cart and bins need better integration between them, because it seemed hard to move the bins in and out of the carts. There also seems to be a latent need for organization of dishes.

Page 36

Appendix E: OSHA Guidelines
OSHA Worker Safety Guidelines for Clean-up except5

Employer Solutions
Employers have the primary responsibility for protecting the safety and health of their workers. Employees are responsible for following the safe work practices of their employers. Consider implementing recommended safe work practices, including: During Table Clean-up: • Provide workers with containers to be used where possible to carry dirty dishes. Employees must be warned not to overfill containers, or they will have to lift or carry excessive weight. • Provide small rather than large containers, to limit the amount of dirty dishes that can be stacked and carried at one time.
Bussing table with container

If space permits, provide carts to put dirty dishes and heavy bussing containers on, rather having workers carry them. • Choose carts with large wheels that roll easily, to prevent strain/sprain injuries to employees from pushing or pulling heavy carts.

If space permits, decrease the distance workers must carry containers. Provide close "stations" to put bussing containers on that are located near the serving and clean-up area, so that the teen worker doesn't have to return dirty dishes all the way into the kitchen area.

Bussing cart with wheels

5

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/youth/restaurant/cleanup_slips.html

Page 37

Appendix F: Customer Needs Hierarchy
The BussMaster satisfies the dimensional specs of a restaurant
*** The BM is easy to use in crowded conditions

The BussMaster provides plenty of room to store tableware.
*** The BM has sufficient capacity to bus multiple tables

The BussMaster integrates the current bussing process
*** ** The BM is accessible to waiters, busboys, and dishwashers. The BM can support itself or fit easily on restaurant surfaces

The BussMaster is easier to use.
*** *** ** * The BM allows for better integration between cart and bin The BM allows the easy entry of tableware The BM is readily usable by people with little training The BM controls slippage issues.

The BussMaster organizes the tableware. ***
** The BM separates plates, glassware, and utensils. The BM can accommodate many different shapes and sizes of dishes and utensils

The BussMaster is light to use.
*** ** The BM reduces the maximum weight when fully loaded The BM controls the amount of weight loaded onto it

The BussMaster is sanitary to use.
*** ** The BM can hold grime and food waste without wear The BM reduces spillage

The BussMaster fits the aesthetic needs of the restaurant
*** ** ** The BM conceals the leftovers from customers. The BM allows the operator to retain a professional appearance while using device The BM is similar in appearance to existing products

Page 38

Appendix G: Exhibits for Economic Analysis

Page 39

Page 40

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.