Review the logic of Grupo Salinas’ 2009 divisional and business unit structure. What issues arise and can you propose a better structure?
What will be an ideal response?
Rapid acquisitions in the late 1990s and early 2000s has created a jumble of business divisions whose
logic is weak. Grupo Salinas’ 2009 divisional and business unit structure is much more rational, but still
raises questions:
- Should Italika be sold since it lacks synergy with other activities?
- Should Iusacell and Grupo Salinas be integrated and rationalised for greater efficiency, perhaps as a
single brand?
- TV Azteca and Azteca America should perhaps remain separate but with provision to share ideas
and develop programmes jointly to control costs
- The retail and finance groups need to exploit synergies (e.g. the latter providing loans for the
former’s customers) but are essentially different businesses and arguably should be separate
divisions
You might also like to view...
IFRS allows a category in the income statement for extraordinary gains and losses, while U.S. GAAP does not allow such a category.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
AIO stands for ________
A) activities, interests, and opinions B) abilities, interests, and opinions C) activities, interests, and organization memberships D) abilities, income, and opinions E) activities, income, and opinions
Answer the following statements true (T) or false (F)
A principle contains elements observable by empirical techniques.
Costs necessary and integral to the manufacture of finished products are ________ costs.
What will be an ideal response?