1.) In some ways Gillette has become a victim to its own success. Simply because, when they were being innovative, they overshadowed their existing inventions. Meaning although the new inventions were increasing in sell, it sometimes took away from the sales of its previous inventions. The new products should bring something new to the table but not make what was already created seem unneeded. Then constantly buying out other companies that eventually proved to be unsuccessful also illustrated not well thought out business moves. Yes I do feel product innovation in the wet-shaving market has come to an end. It was evident when consumers stated the Fusion did nothing significantly different from the Mach3. It also showed when the sale of the initial razor was higher than refill cartridges. Meaning people were eager to try to the new product, but obviously wasn't pleased enough as to where they purchased refill cartridges and continued using them. The focus now needs to be on enhancing the current products and strengthening the brand as a whole, as they have been trying to do. The constant research and testing for new products is causing the price of their traditional products to increase which in the end can cause a consumer to go with a cheaper private-label razor.
2.) I don't really see at as a battle. Gillette had been out for awhile with no competition, and I feel Schick came along and challenged them. Although they took away from their profit shares with the introduction of the Quattro, that was pretty much it afterwards. A battle to me is something that goes back and forth, with comebacks and rebuttals. Schick did neither after the Quattro. Yes to some extent the battle of one-upmanship is needed to keep one on their toes and focused. However once it cause a business or corporation to lose focus on what is