Eduqas A-level Business COMPONENT 3
paper 3 business in 06/june and I'm genuinely struggling with it.
Does anyone have last min tips?
Does anyone have last min tips?
Reply 1
Original post by ssrrsx
paper 3 business in 06/june and I'm genuinely struggling with it.
Does anyone have last min tips?
Does anyone have last min tips?
im just gonna blurt through the c3 content and do a paper to ensure my timings are still good
Reply 2
Original post by ssrrsx
paper 3 business in 06/june and I'm genuinely struggling with it.
Does anyone have last min tips?
Does anyone have last min tips?
1) Do section B first
2) Follow a good 20 mark structure (ideally one that’s consistently 18/20 or better
3) Be concise since timing is very important so don’t overwrite on section A (especially on the 8 and 10 mark questions)
Reply 3
Original post by TomcSixthForm
1) Do section B first
2) Follow a good 20 mark structure (ideally one that’s consistently 18/20 or better
3) Be concise since timing is very important so don’t overwrite on section A (especially on the 8 and 10 mark questions)
2) Follow a good 20 mark structure (ideally one that’s consistently 18/20 or better
3) Be concise since timing is very important so don’t overwrite on section A (especially on the 8 and 10 mark questions)
was just wondering what 20 mark structure u used ?
Reply 4
Original post by Aaron 7
was just wondering what 20 mark structure u used ?
Intro
Para 1
Para 2 (Eval)
Para 3
Para (4 Eval)
Conclusion
The Quality of your writing is what will get you the top marks but to score over 14/20
1)Evaluation has to occur through out your essay ( not just the conclusion)
2) The argument must be balanced
3) analysis and Eval must be in-depth (use context and theory to support your arguments)
4) Conclusion needs a clear judgment to be made and cannot just repeat what was previously mentioned in your essay.
Reply 5
Original post by Aaron 7
was just wondering what 20 mark structure u used ?
If you want I can send a 16/20 a 18/20 and a 20/20 essay so you can see the comparison
Reply 6
Original post by TomcSixthForm
Intro
Para 1
Para 2 (Eval)
Para 3
Para (4 Eval)
Conclusion
The Quality of your writing is what will get you the top marks but to score over 14/20
1)Evaluation has to occur through out your essay ( not just the conclusion)
2) The argument must be balanced
3) analysis and Eval must be in-depth (use context and theory to support your arguments)
4) Conclusion needs a clear judgment to be made and cannot just repeat what was previously mentioned in your essay.
Para 1
Para 2 (Eval)
Para 3
Para (4 Eval)
Conclusion
The Quality of your writing is what will get you the top marks but to score over 14/20
1)Evaluation has to occur through out your essay ( not just the conclusion)
2) The argument must be balanced
3) analysis and Eval must be in-depth (use context and theory to support your arguments)
4) Conclusion needs a clear judgment to be made and cannot just repeat what was previously mentioned in your essay.
ah yh i use 4 paragraphs i see some people say 2 tho so wasnt sure
Reply 7
Original post by TomcSixthForm
If you want I can send a 16/20 a 18/20 and a 20/20 essay so you can see the comparison
16/20 Essay
Q1.Global Brands should maintain the same marketing mix in every country to be competitive
A global brand refers to a highly recognisable brand around the globe, with these typically being TNC's, e.g., Apple, which has stores in over 100 countries. To remain competitive, a tool known as the marketing mix could be used by businesses to plan and execute a marketing plan using the four key elements: product, price, place, and promotion.
One reason why global brands should maintain the same marketing mix in every country could be due to the cost-saving element. This is because maintaining the same marketing mix means that less money would need to be invested in the design and planning of marketing since the product, price, and promotion are homogeneous. This would allow firms to be more efficient and put out more advertisements as they would save money by keeping the marketing mix homogeneous, allowing them to buy the best advertisement slots through marketing economies of scale due to the increase in money they have. On top of this, the savings would allow purchasing economies of scale to occur as they have more money to buy in bulk. This could potentially allow a higher volume of advertisements to be released globally, allowing faster growth for TNCs and global businesses.
However, it could be argued that a global brand maintaining the same marketing mix may face losses in reality. This is because maintaining elements such as price among different countries for a global business would make it largely excludable due to the varying incomes between nations. For example, developed economies such as the UK would have a much higher standard of living and a higher rate of disposable income compared to those from developing economies such as Nigeria, meaning that a firm that maintains the same price for both countries would see a significantly lower demand in Nigeria as the price of a good would be significantly more expensive relative to the disposable income they possess. As a result of this, you could argue that price discrimination may be better for a business to stay competitive as it allows them to target a wider audience by offering poorer nations lower prices to attract customers, which may be better for-profit maximisation as it will increase sales. Additionally, developing countries and LICs are typically cheaper in relation to rent and wages, meaning they are likely to still be profitable.
Secondly, global brands may also want to maintain a fixed marketing mix to ensure consumers get what they expect. This is because consumers expect the service and quality to meet their desired standard. If a global brand such as Subway maintains the same marketing mix, it may become easier for them to control the quality and experience of each store despite being located in different locations. This uniformity is likely to help retain customers as the layout of stores between nations such as the US and UK is largely similar and you know what you are getting when you go there. Despite this, this is likely only going to be successful in similar countries since the quality of labour and resources must be to a similar standard, suggesting that in poorer nations the store may be of lower quality as the labour there is likely to be less trained compared to the UK labour market. Suggesting that for global brands, maintaining the same marketing mix may only work for countries that are similar and may not work for those that are widely different.
Another reason why global brands should not maintain the same marketing mix between nations to stay competitive could be that they may not effectively tailor to the culture and local preferences of the foreign nations they're set up in. As a result, it could be argued that having different marketing mixes may be better, as you can use Glocalization to make a business more relevant to the local area, for example, by running localised campaigns and using local models, e.g. Nike uses local sports stars. In China, India, and Brazil rather than international sports stars, as it helps the brand seem more acceptable within those nations as their own role models would be the ones modelling for the brand. Which would increase sales, leading to higher revenue and therefore profit, which could be reinvested to stimulate further growth. Which will allow global brands to compete against the leading brands in other nations.
To conclude, firms should not use the same marketing mix to stay competitive as it makes firms inflexible, meaning dynamic efficiency is unlikely to occur, implying that in the long term, the competitiveness of a global brand or TNC may be reduced as consumer tastes will change and adaptation would be required to retain these customers. Despite this, maintaining the same marketing mix between similar nations may not be bad as it reduces the cost to the firm as less staff would be required as they could share a marketing team to plan out the marketing mix for numerous similar countries. However, this would be ineffective for countries that are largely different as consumer tastes and habits would not match as well as incomes, so the marketing may be ineffective in practice, meaning they will become less competitive as the marketing would not work. As a result, a global brand should split the countries it operates in into tiers and build management and marketing departments among them, meaning some countries may share the same marketing mix plan, reducing staff costs and allowing money to be better used elsewhere. Meanwhile, for nations such as developing countries where such a plan may not work, separate marketing mixes could be used instead.
Reply 8
Original post by TomcSixthForm
16/20 Essay
Q1.Global Brands should maintain the same marketing mix in every country to be competitive
A global brand refers to a highly recognisable brand around the globe, with these typically being TNC's, e.g., Apple, which has stores in over 100 countries. To remain competitive, a tool known as the marketing mix could be used by businesses to plan and execute a marketing plan using the four key elements: product, price, place, and promotion.
One reason why global brands should maintain the same marketing mix in every country could be due to the cost-saving element. This is because maintaining the same marketing mix means that less money would need to be invested in the design and planning of marketing since the product, price, and promotion are homogeneous. This would allow firms to be more efficient and put out more advertisements as they would save money by keeping the marketing mix homogeneous, allowing them to buy the best advertisement slots through marketing economies of scale due to the increase in money they have. On top of this, the savings would allow purchasing economies of scale to occur as they have more money to buy in bulk. This could potentially allow a higher volume of advertisements to be released globally, allowing faster growth for TNCs and global businesses.
However, it could be argued that a global brand maintaining the same marketing mix may face losses in reality. This is because maintaining elements such as price among different countries for a global business would make it largely excludable due to the varying incomes between nations. For example, developed economies such as the UK would have a much higher standard of living and a higher rate of disposable income compared to those from developing economies such as Nigeria, meaning that a firm that maintains the same price for both countries would see a significantly lower demand in Nigeria as the price of a good would be significantly more expensive relative to the disposable income they possess. As a result of this, you could argue that price discrimination may be better for a business to stay competitive as it allows them to target a wider audience by offering poorer nations lower prices to attract customers, which may be better for-profit maximisation as it will increase sales. Additionally, developing countries and LICs are typically cheaper in relation to rent and wages, meaning they are likely to still be profitable.
Secondly, global brands may also want to maintain a fixed marketing mix to ensure consumers get what they expect. This is because consumers expect the service and quality to meet their desired standard. If a global brand such as Subway maintains the same marketing mix, it may become easier for them to control the quality and experience of each store despite being located in different locations. This uniformity is likely to help retain customers as the layout of stores between nations such as the US and UK is largely similar and you know what you are getting when you go there. Despite this, this is likely only going to be successful in similar countries since the quality of labour and resources must be to a similar standard, suggesting that in poorer nations the store may be of lower quality as the labour there is likely to be less trained compared to the UK labour market. Suggesting that for global brands, maintaining the same marketing mix may only work for countries that are similar and may not work for those that are widely different.
Another reason why global brands should not maintain the same marketing mix between nations to stay competitive could be that they may not effectively tailor to the culture and local preferences of the foreign nations they're set up in. As a result, it could be argued that having different marketing mixes may be better, as you can use Glocalization to make a business more relevant to the local area, for example, by running localised campaigns and using local models, e.g. Nike uses local sports stars. In China, India, and Brazil rather than international sports stars, as it helps the brand seem more acceptable within those nations as their own role models would be the ones modelling for the brand. Which would increase sales, leading to higher revenue and therefore profit, which could be reinvested to stimulate further growth. Which will allow global brands to compete against the leading brands in other nations.
To conclude, firms should not use the same marketing mix to stay competitive as it makes firms inflexible, meaning dynamic efficiency is unlikely to occur, implying that in the long term, the competitiveness of a global brand or TNC may be reduced as consumer tastes will change and adaptation would be required to retain these customers. Despite this, maintaining the same marketing mix between similar nations may not be bad as it reduces the cost to the firm as less staff would be required as they could share a marketing team to plan out the marketing mix for numerous similar countries. However, this would be ineffective for countries that are largely different as consumer tastes and habits would not match as well as incomes, so the marketing may be ineffective in practice, meaning they will become less competitive as the marketing would not work. As a result, a global brand should split the countries it operates in into tiers and build management and marketing departments among them, meaning some countries may share the same marketing mix plan, reducing staff costs and allowing money to be better used elsewhere. Meanwhile, for nations such as developing countries where such a plan may not work, separate marketing mixes could be used instead.
Q1.Global Brands should maintain the same marketing mix in every country to be competitive
A global brand refers to a highly recognisable brand around the globe, with these typically being TNC's, e.g., Apple, which has stores in over 100 countries. To remain competitive, a tool known as the marketing mix could be used by businesses to plan and execute a marketing plan using the four key elements: product, price, place, and promotion.
One reason why global brands should maintain the same marketing mix in every country could be due to the cost-saving element. This is because maintaining the same marketing mix means that less money would need to be invested in the design and planning of marketing since the product, price, and promotion are homogeneous. This would allow firms to be more efficient and put out more advertisements as they would save money by keeping the marketing mix homogeneous, allowing them to buy the best advertisement slots through marketing economies of scale due to the increase in money they have. On top of this, the savings would allow purchasing economies of scale to occur as they have more money to buy in bulk. This could potentially allow a higher volume of advertisements to be released globally, allowing faster growth for TNCs and global businesses.
However, it could be argued that a global brand maintaining the same marketing mix may face losses in reality. This is because maintaining elements such as price among different countries for a global business would make it largely excludable due to the varying incomes between nations. For example, developed economies such as the UK would have a much higher standard of living and a higher rate of disposable income compared to those from developing economies such as Nigeria, meaning that a firm that maintains the same price for both countries would see a significantly lower demand in Nigeria as the price of a good would be significantly more expensive relative to the disposable income they possess. As a result of this, you could argue that price discrimination may be better for a business to stay competitive as it allows them to target a wider audience by offering poorer nations lower prices to attract customers, which may be better for-profit maximisation as it will increase sales. Additionally, developing countries and LICs are typically cheaper in relation to rent and wages, meaning they are likely to still be profitable.
Secondly, global brands may also want to maintain a fixed marketing mix to ensure consumers get what they expect. This is because consumers expect the service and quality to meet their desired standard. If a global brand such as Subway maintains the same marketing mix, it may become easier for them to control the quality and experience of each store despite being located in different locations. This uniformity is likely to help retain customers as the layout of stores between nations such as the US and UK is largely similar and you know what you are getting when you go there. Despite this, this is likely only going to be successful in similar countries since the quality of labour and resources must be to a similar standard, suggesting that in poorer nations the store may be of lower quality as the labour there is likely to be less trained compared to the UK labour market. Suggesting that for global brands, maintaining the same marketing mix may only work for countries that are similar and may not work for those that are widely different.
Another reason why global brands should not maintain the same marketing mix between nations to stay competitive could be that they may not effectively tailor to the culture and local preferences of the foreign nations they're set up in. As a result, it could be argued that having different marketing mixes may be better, as you can use Glocalization to make a business more relevant to the local area, for example, by running localised campaigns and using local models, e.g. Nike uses local sports stars. In China, India, and Brazil rather than international sports stars, as it helps the brand seem more acceptable within those nations as their own role models would be the ones modelling for the brand. Which would increase sales, leading to higher revenue and therefore profit, which could be reinvested to stimulate further growth. Which will allow global brands to compete against the leading brands in other nations.
To conclude, firms should not use the same marketing mix to stay competitive as it makes firms inflexible, meaning dynamic efficiency is unlikely to occur, implying that in the long term, the competitiveness of a global brand or TNC may be reduced as consumer tastes will change and adaptation would be required to retain these customers. Despite this, maintaining the same marketing mix between similar nations may not be bad as it reduces the cost to the firm as less staff would be required as they could share a marketing team to plan out the marketing mix for numerous similar countries. However, this would be ineffective for countries that are largely different as consumer tastes and habits would not match as well as incomes, so the marketing may be ineffective in practice, meaning they will become less competitive as the marketing would not work. As a result, a global brand should split the countries it operates in into tiers and build management and marketing departments among them, meaning some countries may share the same marketing mix plan, reducing staff costs and allowing money to be better used elsewhere. Meanwhile, for nations such as developing countries where such a plan may not work, separate marketing mixes could be used instead.
I sent the wrong essay. This one was 14/20 (I added the 16/20 part). The structure was good, though, but my chains of reasoning were rushed and required more explanation. I also needed more context to reach in-depth analysis to get over 5/8 for AO3.*( I’ll send the right ones tomorrow)
Reply 9
Original post by TomcSixthForm
If you want I can send a 16/20 a 18/20 and a 20/20 essay so you can see the comparison
Reply 10
Original post by TomcSixthForm
I sent the wrong essay. This one was 14/20 (I added the 16/20 part). The structure was good, though, but my chains of reasoning were rushed and required more explanation. I also needed more context to reach in-depth analysis to get over 5/8 for AO3.*( I’ll send the right ones tomorrow)
alr cheers
Reply 11
Original post by TomcSixthForm
I sent the wrong essay. This one was 14/20 (I added the 16/20 part). The structure was good, though, but my chains of reasoning were rushed and required more explanation. I also needed more context to reach in-depth analysis to get over 5/8 for AO3.*( I’ll send the right ones tomorrow)
yh good essay just hoping i can keep to the timings for it
Reply 12
How did you guys find the paper I thought it was a pretty nice
Reply 13
Original post by TomcSixthForm
How did you guys find the paper I thought it was a pretty nice
Reply 14
Original post by clauclauclau
really good questions loved that external changes 20 marker but my timing was awful on the case study ones
Fair enough I did 4.1 and 4.2 for section B
Reply 15
ssrrsx
OP
5
Original post by TomcSixthForm
How did you guys find the paper I thought it was a pretty nice
it was alright i just didn't really know how to answer the Ansoff question
Reply 16
Original post by ssrrsx
it was alright i just didn't really know how to answer the Ansoff question
Tbh I just heavily referenced the case study and outlined when they were demonstrating different areas of the ansoff matrix then did my evaluations per paragraph and conclusion
Reply 17
Original post by TomcSixthForm
How did you guys find the paper I thought it was a pretty nice
Same I made sure to heavily use the extract for those case study questions cause they want u to give good A02 in those and yh I started from the back did 2.1 and 2.2 and I finished on time so think it was good tbh
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- A-level Exam Discussions 2025
- Eduqas A-level Psychology predictions 2025
- Advice for Year 13 Physics
- Eduqas A level Psychology Essay Plans
- religious studies a level
- Eduqas Business A-Level
- A level Law Eduqas Notes
- help! a level art/ critical and contextual studies
- Resources for Eduqas A level Sociology
- GCSE Exam Discussions 2025
- Eduqas GCSE Computer Science Component 1 - Monday, May 12, 2025 [Exam Chat]
- Considering Geography GCSE or A Level? Read our FAQ here
- Eduqas A Level Psychology Component 1 (A290U 10-1) 19th May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Eduqas Drama GCSE
- Can I still get an A?
- GCSE WJEC and CCEA Exam Discussions 2025
- Whats A level film studies like?
- Should i pick Business or Econimics A-Level
- Eduqas GCSE Drama Component 3 - Thursday, May 8, 2025 [Exam Chat]
- WJEC A level Film Studies model answers
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 weeks ago
aqa a level business may 2025 paper 1Last reply 1 month ago
AQA A Level business- 16 markers, conclusion needed?Last reply 1 month ago
can someone mark this a level business edexcel 12 marker plssssLast reply 1 month ago
20-Marker A Level Business Edexcel. HELPLast reply 1 month ago
A-Level Business Studies Study Group 2024-25Last reply 1 month ago
anyone purchase the prim rose kitten predicted papers?Last reply 1 month ago
i need help with my ey assessment interviewLast reply 1 month ago
Is it possible to get a 7 in Edexcel Business without studying?
