Approaching the MKC1200 STP essay
Student Academic Success
For the STP assessment task you are required to write an academic essay. You will be expected to write in an academic style and follow essay writing
conventions. In addition to the assignment guidance already provided to you as part of the unit, you are encouraged to make use of the following online
The following paragraph, based on a previous MKC1200 essay topic, highlights the elements of academic writing introduced in the online modules. There
is a clear structure, a logical flow of ideas, correctly referenced sources to support the writing and critical discussion that links theory and the product.
Reflect on your own writing as you work on the STP essay and prior to submission.
o Use evidence (textbook/journal articles) to support my writing?
o Correctly reference using the APA referencing style?
o Clearly structure YOUR writing (Introduction, body (paragraphs), conclusion)?
o Maintain an academic style of writing (formal, discipline-specific language, etc)?
o Link theory to the product during discussion?
o Proofread my writing and checked spelling and grammar?
For assistance with your writing skills, book an online consultation with a learning adviser: https://www.monash.edu/students/study-support/learning
The price element of the marketing mix refers to the pricing strategy of the firm and the
factors which affect it. The price itself is the money exchanged for the product either at
list price, credit terms, period payments, discounted or with allowances. Factors affecting
price include the elasticity of demand for the good, profit margins and perceived customer
value (Smith, 2012). The Sonicare currently retails for $170 on Philips’ Australian website
and can go lower depending on where it is bought (Philips, 2012). It is important to
examine the price of Sonicare relative to its biggest competitor in Interdental Flosser’s,
Oral B’s Waterpik. The Waterpik also requires you to replace nozzles periodically and
their nozzles are cheaper at $20 compared to Philip’s nozzles of $30. In total terms the
Sonicare requires a bigger outlay of money to purchase and maintain, making it the more
costly investment. We can see that Sonicare justifies the higher price by offering superior
technology which makes them a ‘product quality leader’ (Taylor & Jones, 2010) in the
market for interdental flossers. Sonicare’s technological superiority is evident in several
ways, for example Sonicare has a greater water capacity than the Waterpik and a longer
maximum battery life. Therefore, Philips is able to command a higher price despite the
fact that the Waterpik may in fact be more efficient in removing plaque as suggested by
an independent study (Harrison, 2012) due to customer perceived superiority. Price is
also used to create the brand image (Chan, 2009) that Philips is superior in technology.
Philips has not priced the Airfloss significantly higher than its competitor. This may be
because of internal objectives within Philips, such as their ambitions to develop a
presence in ‘growth geographies’ such as China, India and Brazil (Philips, 2012).
Remaining in a competitive price range with their competitors ensures that Philips will not
alienate a growing middle-class market due to their price sensitivity (Kennedy, 2013).
Consequently, in relation to price, the Sonicare is competitive in its market, meets
expectations around perceived quality and is positioned for growth in emerging market
Type of service: Academic Paper Writing
Type of assignment: Essay
Number of sources: 8
Academic level: Freshman (college 1st year)
Paper format: APA
Line spacing: Double
Language style: AU English