So, eventhough some significant costs such as lease expense, service techs, fertilizer costs and overhead costs have decreased, the decrease in revenues due to the decrease in applications leave only a 1% contribution margin vs a 13% contribution in the before scenario. 3- Personal recommendation. It appears to me that the organization has already indicated that it wishes to back Amy Carter and the biological engineering and environment vision. Calling Amy the division’s thought leader. This new era project is a “hat trick” for the division and is the vision for Greenlawn’s future.
If the organization loses revenue in the short term, when can they expect to breakeven with the current revenues of the ten million. The expectation is that revenues will decrease to six million, but will then be capable of growing the customer base, whereby replacing the revenue lost by changing to the advanced new generation of products that are easier to apply, have lower costs and more importantly environmentally friendly. This environmentally friendly approach to Greenlawn’s business will keep the company at the cutting edge of technology in its field.
Maintaining its status and reputation as the nation’s largest lawn-care and landscape-services company. I would recommend either keeping it the same as before with the revenues at ten million, or reducing the fertilizer costs and selling the new generation of products in order to gain more customers. If more customers are gained due to environmentally friendly process than the revenues and contribution margin will increase. Should the organization change, they can expect a short term reduction in revenue, with the likeliness of long term sustainability for generations to come.