Canonical

Decision Problems
Canonical
Decision Problem
1
Product Development Sequencing
 Overview
Eldorado Electronics is under contract to make 10000 medical scanners. Eldorado must decide
whether to make or buy the circuit board to which it will attach its proprietary microchip. There are two
stages in making a circuit board, development and fabrication. The chance that the Eldorado
engineers will succeed in development is 90%. The costs of development are $50000. The
fabrication stage has an 80% chance of success and will cost $30000. If both stages are
successful, the variable cost of producing a circuit board will be $9/board. The development and
fabrication processes use different sets of engineers and can proceed independently. If either stage is
unsuccessful, Eldorado must purchase circuit boards from an outside vendor for a cost of
$24/board.
The scanners are scheduled for delivery in 8 months. The development and fabrication stages each
take 3 months, and assembly of the finished product product take an additional 2 months. Purchasing
the circuit boards from an outside source requires a lead time of 3 months, although for a premium of
$10/board, Eldorado can purchase boards for immediate delivery.

4
 Analysis

Problem/Objective/Constraints Alternatives
● Eldorado needs 10000 medical ● Develop and produce the 10000
scanners to complete an order medical scanners
● Minimize Cost of Completing the Order ● Buy the medical scanners ahead of time
● Weigh the risks of successfully filling for $24/board
the order and minimizing cost ● Buy the medical scanners late for
● Consider the time constraints (order $34/board
complete in 8 months) ● Do not complete the order

BUSINESS NAME 5
 Product Development Sequencing:
Decision Tree
Fabrication
0.8 Success
Produce own
EV = 170000
scanner(9*10000)
(30000)

EV = 227000 0.9 Development Fabrication Buy from

Success Fabrication
outside
(50000) Fail (30000)
Develop and 0.2 (34*10000)
Produce own
scanner Buy from
Development
Develop and outside
Fail (50000)
Produce own (24*10000)
Scanner/Buy 0.1
from outside
Buy from Conclusion: Developing and producing
outside EV = 240000 own scanner is the best option to
(24*10000) minimize costs (EV = 227000)
6
Alternative
Analysis
Conclusion: Developing and producing own scanner is the best option to
minimize costs (EV = 227000)
Alternative 1: Buy from the outside provider. Very low risk and timely (3 months). EV = 24 * 10000 = 240000

Alternative 2: Develop and produce own medical scanners. Higher risk and requires more time (8 months for
total development and production). Has a lower cost.
EV = 0.9*(50000+(0.8*(30000+9*10000)+0.2*(30000+34*10000)))+0.1*(50000+(24*10000)) = 227000
Note: Some alternatives left out of decision tree due to obvious dominance (ex. Successful development
and fabrication and then buying from outside provider).
Also, development/fabrication cycle does not have enough time to restart since the 10000 medical
scanners are due in 8 months.

7
2
Options of Flexibility
 Overview
Susan Smart has decided to start her own business, Frill Less Internet Provider (FLIP). She offers
small businesses and residential customers Internet access, providing a fast and convenient dial-up
connection by modem. To start this business she must buy an Internet server, a special computer
designed to bundle incoming calls and establish the connection to the Internet backbone system. She
is currently evaluating two different offers from the computer manufacturer Xentec, one for a
X100 server for a price of $14000 and another for a X120 server priced at $22000. The most
important factor for her investment decision is the peak number of subscribers one server can handle.
A rule of thumb is that the peak capacity should be 10% of the total number of subscribers. The
number of subscribers Susan can take is constrained by the capacity of her server. The X100 has a
capacity of 80 connections at peak level; the X120 can handle up to 140 connections.
The problem is that Susan doesn’t know how many customers she will attract with her new service.
She believes she is equally likely to attract 400 or 800 customers during the first year. If the demand is
high in the first year she believes there is a 50% chance of getting 1200 customers during the second
year and a 50% chance the demand will stay at 800. If the demand is low during the first year, there…
9
 Overview
(Continued)
… is a 50% chance that it will remain at 400 and 50% chance it will go up to 800. Susan plans to
charge a $20 flat monthly fee to her subscribers, independent of the hour usage. The variable cost of
setting up the modem connection and monitoring the activities are expected to be $9 per month and
customer. The total overhead expenses are expected to be $6000 per month.
a) Should she buy one X100 or one X120 server? Assume a useful life of 2 years and no salvage value.
b) Susan expects that used Xentec servers will be available at 40% of the original price 1 year from now.
Does her investment decision change if she can buy a second used X100 server after one year?
c) Instead of buying another X100 server, she might want to sell her X100 after 1 year and buy a used X120
instead. Would Susan exercise this option? What is the EMV?
d) If demand is low after a year, Susan might want to abandon the business. She can sell her server for
40% of the original price, does this affect the initial business decision?
e) Susan many consider delaying the whole investment for one year and buying a used server if conditions
are favorable, is this a better alternative?

10
a) Should she buy one X100 or one X120 server? Assume
a useful life of 2 years and no salvage value.

EV:
● Yearly customer revenue = 12 * ($20 - 9) = $132 0.5 +400 0.25*158400 =
subscribers 39600
0.5 +400
subscribers EV:
Using X100 +800
0.25*158400 =
subscribers 39600
0.5
Demand
0.5
+800 EV:
subscribers 0.25*211200 =
EV = 184800 +800 52800
0.5 subscribers EV:
+1200 0.25*211200 =
*Not accounting for fixed subscribers 52800
expenses
0.5
11
a) Should she buy one X100 or one X120 server? Assume
a useful life of 2 years and no salvage value.

EV:
● Yearly customer revenue = 12 * ($20-9) = $132 0.5 +400 0.25*158400 =
subscribers 39600
0.5 +400
subscribers EV:
Using X120 +800
0.25*211200 =
subscribers 52800
0.5
Demand
0.5
+800 EV:
subscribers 0.25*290400 =
EV = 237600 +800 72600
0.5 subscribers EV:
+1200 0.25*290400 =
*Not accounting for fixed subscribers 72600
expenses
0.5
12
a) Should she buy one X100 or one X120 server? Assume
a useful life of 2 years and no salvage value.

● Accounting for fixed (overhead) expenses:

● X100 EV = 184800 - (6000 * 24 months) - 14000 = 26800
● X120 EV = 237600 - (6000 * 24 months) - 22000 = 71600
● Decision: Buy X120 since it has a higher EV

13
b) Susan expects that used Xentec servers will be available at 40% of
the original price 1 year from now. Does her investment decision
change if she can buy a second used X100 server after one year?

EV:
● Yearly customer revenue = 12 * ($20-9) = $132 0.5 +400 0.25*158400 =
subscribers 39600
0.5 +400
subscribers EV:
Using X100 + X100 y2 +800
0.25*211200 =
subscribers 52800
0.5
Demand
0.5
+800 EV:
subscribers 0.25*316800 =
EV = 250800 +800 79200
0.5 subscribers EV:
+1200 0.25*316800 =
*Not accounting for fixed subscribers 79200
expenses
0.5
14
b) Susan expects that used Xentec servers will be available at 40% of
the original price 1 year from now. Does her investment decision
change if she can buy a second used X100 server after one year?

EV:
● Yearly customer revenue = 12 * ($20-9) = $132 0.5 +400 0.25*158400 =
subscribers 39600
0.5 +400
subscribers EV:
Using X120 + X100 y2 +800
0.25*211200 =
subscribers 52800
0.5
Demand
0.5
+800 EV:
subscribers 0.25*316800 =
EV = 264000 +800 79200
0.5 subscribers EV:
+1200 0.25*369600 =
*Not accounting for fixed subscribers 92400
expenses
0.5
15
b) Susan expects that used Xentec servers will be available at 40% of the
original price 1 year from now. Does her investment decision change if she
can buy a second used X100 server after one year?

● Accounting for fixed (overhead) expenses:

● X100 + X100 y2 EV = 250800 - (6000 * 24 months) - 14000 - 5600 = 87200
● X120 + X100 y2 EV = 264000 - (6000 * 24 months) - 22000 - 5600 = 92400
● Decision: Buy X120 since it has a higher EV. No change in decision

16
c) Instead of buying another X100 server, she might want to sell her
X100 after 1 year and buy a used X120 instead. Would Susan
exercise this option? What is the EMV?
EV:
● Yearly customer revenue = 12 * ($20-9) = $132 0.5 +400 0.25*158400 =
subscribers 39600
0.5 +400
Using X100 then subscribers EV:
+800
buying X120 in y2 0.25*211200 =
subscribers 52800
0.5
Demand
0.5
+800 EV:
subscribers 0.25*290400 =
EV = 237600 +800 72600
0.5 subscribers EV:
+1200 0.25*290400 =
*Not accounting for fixed subscribers 72600
expenses
0.5
17
c) Instead of buying another X100 server, she might want to sell her
X100 after 1 year and buy a used X120 instead. Would Susan exercise
this option? What is the EMV?

● Accounting for fixed (overhead) expenses:

● X100 buying a X120 y2 EV = 237600 - (6000 * 24 months) - 14000 - X =
79600
● Highest EV in part a) = 71600, therefore as long as Susan can sell the X100
and buy a X120 for less than 79600 - 71600 = 8000, she should exercise this
option

18
d) If demand is low after a year, Susan might want to abandon
the business. She can sell her server for 40% of the original
price, does this affect the initial business decision?
● Yearly customer revenue = 12 * ($20-9) = $132

0.5 +400
EV = 52800
Using X100/X120 then subscribers
abandoning

Demand

EV = 158400 +800
EV = 105600
0.5 subscribers

*Not accounting for fixed

expenses

19
d) If demand is low after a year, Susan might want to abandon the
business. She can sell her server for 40% of the original price, does
this affect the initial business decision?

● Accounting for fixed (overhead) expenses:

● X100 EV = 158400 - (6000 * 12 months) - 14000 + 5600 = 78000
● X120 EV = 158400 - (6000 * 12 months) - 22000 + 8800 = 73200
● Decision: If she is considering abandoning the business, then she should go
with the X100

20
e) Susan many consider delaying the whole investment for
one year and buying a used server if conditions are favorable,
is this a better alternative?
● Yearly customer revenue = 12 * ($20-9) = $132

0.5 +800
EV = 105600
Using X100 subscribers

Demand

EV = 105600 +1200
EV = 105600
0.5 subscribers

*Not accounting for fixed

expenses

21
e) Susan many consider delaying the whole investment for
one year and buying a used server if conditions are favorable,
is this a better alternative?
● Yearly customer revenue = 12 * ($20-9) = $132

0.5 +800
EV = 105600
Using X120 subscribers

Demand

EV = 132000 +1200
EV = 158400
0.5 subscribers

*Not accounting for fixed

expenses

22
e) Susan many consider delaying the whole investment for one
year and buying a used server if conditions are favorable, is this a
better alternative?

● Accounting for fixed (overhead) expenses:

● X100 EV = 105600 - (6000 * 12 months) - 5600 = 28000
● X120 EV = 132000 - (6000 * 12 months) - 8800 = 51200
● Decision: Neither alternative is better than the original decision in part a), but
the better decision for delaying by a year is the X120

23
Market Research

3
Market Research
You are brand manager at Arrow Cosmetics and responsible for SilkskinTM
body lotion. Silkskin’s annual contribution is currently $2.1 million. R&D
produced a new aloe-based formula. You must decide whether you want to
change the formula for the SilkskinTM lotion or stay with the existing
formula
Arrow Cosmetics
produces the body Silkskin’s annual contribution is $2.1m
lotion “Silkskin”

R&D Developed a Variable costs increased to $7/bottle and sells

new formula for $12/bottle

Annual Sale 30% for 600,000 units

scenarios 40% for 300,000 units
30% for 200,000 units

Key
Information
26
Arrow Cosmetics New Silkskin Formula
The new Silkskin will be introduced if the expected sales scenario is 600,000. It is
the only scenario that is greater than the existing contribution of the original formula
of $2.1m. Looking at the entire decision tree, the expected value of introducing the
new formula is less than the existing contribution so the new formula is not
introduced. As a result, to introduce the new formula, the value of perfect
information is $570,000
EMV=600,000*5
600,000 (30%) =3,000,000

Introduce EMV=300,000*5
300,000 (40%)
New Formula =1,500,000

200,000 (30%) EMV=200,000*5

=1,000,000
Marble Research
You are considering hiring Marble Research, one of the nation’s leading
market research companies. For $150,000, they will perform a test market
study on your new formula. Marble cannot predict sales exactly, but they
will indicate whether they believe the product will be a “hit” or “flop” with
equal likelihood.
Cost to Hire Marble $150,000

600,000 0.60
If “Hit” 300,000 0.30
200,000 0.10

600,000 0
If “Flop” 300,000 0.50
200,000 0.50

Key
Information
29
 Marble Research indicates the
Formula will be a “Hit”
If Marble indicates “hit” go through with introducing the new formula. The expected value of $2.35m is greater than the $2.1m contribution of the
existing formula. If Marble indicates “Flop”, do not introduce the new formula. The expected value of “flop” is $1.25m, which is less than the $2.1m
contribution of Silkskin.I would not hire Marble. Marble charges $150,000 for the market research. Assuming the probability that Marble indicates a
“hit” or “flop” is even, the possible profit from introducing the new formula, we would only be willing to pay up to $125,000 for their services.

600,000 (60%) EMV=600,000*5

=3,000,000
EVSI=(3000000*0.6)+(1500000*0.3)+(100
Marble Indicates “Hit 300,000 (30%) EMV=300,000*
0000*0.1) = 2350000
5 =1,500,000

200,000 (10%) EMV=200,000*5

=1,000,000

600,000 (0%) EMV=600,000*5

=3,000,000
Marble Indicates EVSI=(1500000*0.5)+(1000000*0.5) =
300,000 (50%) EMV=300,000*
“Flop” 1250000
5 =1,500,000

200,000 (50%) EMV=200,000*5

=1,000,000
Bargain Research Consortium
The Bargain Research Consortium (BRC), one of Marble’s competitors, is
offering you a similar market study for just $15,000. They will predict a “Hit”
with probability .4, in which case the probabilities of selling 600,000,
300,000 and 200,000 units are .45, .40, and .15 respectively. If they predict
a “Flop,” the probabilities of selling 600,000, 300,000, and 200,000 units
will be 20%, 40% and 40%.
 Would you hire BRC?
I would not hire BRC. The expected value of their information for the new Silkskin formula is $1.8m. This is less than
the existing contribution so we would hire BRC. 600,000
EMV=600,000*5
(45%) =3,000,000

BRC Predicts 300,000 EMV=300,000*5

“Hit” (40%) (40%) =1,500,000 There is no price that we
would pay for their
200,000 EMV=200,000*5 services as it does not
(15%) =1,000,000
Hire BRC increase our value with
600,000
(20%) EMV=600,000*5 their information in either
=3,000,000 scenario.
BRC Predicts 300,000
“Flop” (60%) (40%) EMV=300,000*5
=1,500,000

200,000 EMV=200,000*5
(40%) =1,000,000
EV=(3000000*0.45)+(1500000*0.4
)+(1000000*0.15)=2100000
EV=(3000000*0.20)+(1500000*0.4) EV(hiring BRC)=(2100000*0.4)+(0.6*1600000)
The expected contribution is the +(1000000*0.4)= 1600000 =1800000
same as the existing contribution so
we are indifferent about introducing EV is less than original formula so we
the new formula. don’t introduce the new formula
Litigation Decision

4
Problem
Sarah Gable is the President of Gable’s Department Store. Last year Jeremiah Walls, a
35 year-old man, fell on the ice in the Gable department store parking lot. Walls, who
hurt his wrist and fractured his ankle in the accident, has brought a suit against Gable’s.

Of course, Sarah Gable would like to settle out of court and hence has initiated
discussion with Walls’ counsel. However, Gable is willing to go to trial if Walls’ attorney is
unreasonable. The first step of the process is a summary judgment in which the judge
will decide whether to hear the case. It will cost Gable $3,000 in attorney fees to prepare
for summary judgment, and she estimates that there is 90% chance that the judge will
decide to hear the case and a 10% chance that the case will be dismissed. If the case is
heard, Gable’s best guess is that there’s a 2-in-3 chance that Walls will win, with an
expected award of $50,000. A court trial will cost Gable another $10,000 in lawyer’s
fees.
90% chance the judge hears the case 10% chance the case is dismissed

$3,000 attorney fee Court trial will cost Gable $10,000 in

lawyer’s fees.

If judge hears the case, 2-in-3 chance Walls win, expected award of $50,000.

Key Information
35
Decision is made of expected value. What is the most
she would be willing to pay to avoid going to trial?
The most she would be willing to pay to avoid going to trial is $42,000

EV=(46333.33*0.9)+(3000*0 Walls win EV=(10000+3000+50,

(66.67%) 000) =63000
.1)=42000

Judge hears the case

Expected Cost =
(90%)
(62000*(⅔))+(13000*(⅓)) =
46333.33
Gable win
(33.33%)
EV=10000+30
Trial 00=$13000

Case dismissed EV=$3000

(10%)
Decision is made of expected value. What is the most
she would be willing to pay to avoid going to trial?
If Gable plans to appeal, the maximum settle amount is increased to $46,870. The expected cost is lower in the initial trial, so it is not recommended that
Gable appeals.

Walls win EV=(50000+5000+200

(90%) 0)*0.9=51300

Judge hears the

Expected Cost =
appeal (25%)
(51300*0.9)+(7000*0.1) = 46870
Gable win
(10%)
EV=7000
Appeal

Appeal Dismissed EV=$2000

(75%)
Bidding

5
Decisions
Probability of finding oil: 20% Cost of drilling: $10 million

The site is worth $150 million is oil is found The site is worth $0 is no oil is found

The competitor’s bidding behavior: 1. 25% for $5 million

2. 50% for $10 million
(coin flip when tie) 3. 25% for $15 million

Key Information
39
Question 1:
What is the EMV for bidding $16 million?
Revenue: $150M
Oil is found
Cost: $26M
0.2 Profit: $124M

Bid $16M
No oil found
Loss: $26M
0.8

EMV= 0.2*124M+0.8*(-26M)=4M
Profitable in the long run, but should seek better
strategies to maximize profits.

40
Question 2:
What is the best bid?

41
How to refine the competitor’s
bidding assessment
- Game theory
- Market trend (oil price, better projects elsewhere)
- Monte Carlo Simulations

42
Marketing

6
Given Information:
Inventory Analysis for the Festival
- The festival director wants to sell CDs but need to analyze the demand

44
Given Information:
Inventory Analysis for the Festival
- Demand probabilities:

45
 Question 1:
Probability that d=4,000?
Two possible cases for d=4,000 are
- Saturday 3,000+ Sunday 1,000
- P(Sat 3000)*P(Sun 1000| Sat 3000)
= 1/3*0.25=0.083

- Saturday 1,000+ Sunday 3,000

- P(Sat 1000)*P(Sun 3000| Sat 1000)
= 2/3*0.25=0.167

0.083+0.167=0.25
The probability that demand=4,000 is 0.25
46
Question 2:
Decision Tree
0.75 CDs sold: 2,000
Sunday Probability: 0.5
1,000 CDs Profit: 1,000
2/3 Saturday
1,000 CDs Sunday CDs sold: 4,000
Probability: 0.167
3,000 CDs Profit: 17,000
0.25 EV=$3,000
Press 4,000
CDs on Friday 0.25
CDs sold: 4,000
Sunday
Probability: 0.083
1,000 CDs Profit: 17,000
Saturday
1/3 3,000 CDs
CDs sold: 4,000
Sunday
Probability: 0.25
3,000 CDs Profit: 17,000
0.75

47
Question 3:
Expected Value Maximization
Press 1,000, EV= -7,000
Press 2,000, EV= 1,000
Press 3,000, EV= 2,000
Press 4,000, EV= 3,000
Press 5,000, EV= 500
Press 6,000, EV= -2,000
Press 7,000, EV= -8,000

48
 Question 4:
Expected Value of Perfect Information
Expected Value with Perfect Information
- Press 2,000, sell 2,000, profit= $1,000 (p=0.5)
- Press 4,000, sell 4,000, profit= $17,000 (p=0.25)
- Press 6,000, sell 6,000, profit= $33,000 (p=0.25)
- EVwPI= 1000*0.5+17,000*0.25+33,000*0.25= 13,000

Expected Value without Perfect Information= 3,000

Expected Value of Perfect Information= 13,000-3,000=10,000

49
 Question 5:
How salvage influences decisions?
From previous calculations:
- Optimal production with no salvage is 4,000 CDs
- The expected profit at 4,000 CDs is $6,000

Our goal is to determine the minimum salvage price per unsold CD that would
make producing a higher quantity generate a greater expected profit than the
current optimum of 4,000 CDs with no salvage value.

50
 Question 5:
How salvage influences decisions?
p= production, d= demand, s= salvage price
Pressing cost Fixed cost

profit(p,d) = 14*min(p,d) + s*(p-min(p,d)) - 3*p - 3*min(p,d) - 15,000

Sales revenue Salvage revenue Royalty cost

Simplified:
profit(p,d) = 11*min(p,d)+s*(p-min(p,d))-3p-15,000

51
 Question 5:
How salvage influences decisions?
Expected profit when producing 4,000 CDs, (p=4,000)

profit(p=4,000, d=2,000)= 11*2000+s*(4000-2000)-12000-15000

=2,000s-5000
profit(p=4,000, d=4,000)= 11*4000+s*(4000-4000)-12000-15000
=17,000
profit(p=4,000, d=6,000)= 11*4000+s*(4000-4000)-12000-15000
=17,000

E(profit(p=4,000))= 0.5(2,000s-5,000)+0.25(17,000)+0.25(17,000)
= 6,000+1,000s
52
 Question 5:
How salvage influences decisions?
E(profit(p=4,000))= 6,000+1,000s

E(profit(p=6,000))= 5,500+2,500s

6,000+1,000s=5,500+2,500s
500=1500s

s=⅓=0.33

The director would change the decision of production quantity when the salvage
price is greater than 0.33 for each CD.
53
7
Who’s Right? “Betting” on Theories
Problem Overview
Alison Silk, the new brand manager for Nopane, tested two advertising strategies—emotional vs. rational—in 24 sales territories.
Initial results showed that the rational approach outperformed the emotional by 2.13 sales units per 100 prospects. However, her
division VP, Stanley Skamarycz, argued that competitors had artificially increased their advertising spend in response to the test,
making the results unreliable.

Silk conducted a regression analysis and found that after controlling for competitive interference, the emotional approach actually
performed 3.00 sales units better than the rational one. This created a dilemma:

● If competitors react aggressively in a national rollout (as they did in the test), rational is the better choice.
● If competitors revert to their usual spending patterns, emotional is the superior option.

The core issue is whether the test results accurately reflect a national rollout scenario. To decide, further testing, competitive analysis,
and predictive modeling are needed before committing to a full-scale advertising shift.
Betting on Theories
a) If Silk is right, the observed effect that the “rational” advertising is 2.13 better than the “emotional” campaign. I would use the rational
advertising strategy.
b) If Skarmarycz is right, competitors will revert back to their own behavior and the “emotional” campaign would result in an average of 3 units
higher than the “rational” approach. I would use the “emotional” campaign for the product.
c) It would be difficult to make a decision given the information that we have. We have the results of sampling and the results from linear
regression. The results are contradicting making it difficult to make a decision. To solve this problem, I would get more sample data to put into
the linear regression model or run a simulation. The more information we can obtain, the more accurate the models will be.
 THANK
NO_REPLY@EXAMPLE.COM
123-456-7890

BUSINESS NAME
YOU
APPENDIX
BUSINESS NAME
58
 Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis expetenda
reprehendunt et. Et has nulla intellegat. Ea vix equidem
abhorreant deseruisse. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo
graecis expetenda reprehendunt et. Et has nulla intellegat.
Ea vix equidem abhorreant deseruisse.

PRODUCT 1
BUSINESS NAME 61
 OVERVIEW Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis expetenda reprehendunt et. Et
has nulla intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorreant deseruisse. Lorem
ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis expetenda reprehendunt et. Et has
nulla intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorreant deseruisse.

BUSINESS NAME 62
PRODUCT 1 PRODUCT 2 PRODUCT 3

➔ PRICE: $XX ➔ PRICE: $XX ➔ PRICE: $XX

➔ SALES: X00 ➔ SALES: X00 ➔ SALES: X00
➔ EMPLOYEES: X ➔ EMPLOYEES: X ➔ EMPLOYEES: X
➔ LAUNCH: MAY ➔ LAUNCH: JUN ➔ LAUNCH: JUL

PRODUCT Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis expetenda reprehendunt et. Et

INFO
has nulla intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorreant deseruisse. Lorem
ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis expetenda reprehendunt et. Et has
nulla intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorreant deseruisse.

BUSINESS NAME 63
01 02 03

PRODUCT 1 PRODUCT 2 PRODUCT 3

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis
expetenda reprehendunt et. Et has nulla expetenda reprehendunt et. Et has nulla expetenda reprehendunt et. Et has nulla
intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorreant intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorreant intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorreant
deseruisse, eos quod suas labore ex. deseruisse, eos quod suas labore ex. deseruisse, eos quod suas labore ex.

04

PRODUCT 4
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis expetenda reprehendunt et. Et
has nulla intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorreant deseruisse, eos quod
suas labore ex. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, quo graecis expetenda
reprehendunt et. Et has nulla intellegat. Ea vix equidem abhorrent.

BUSINESS NAME 64