Ann: Half Year Report to Shareholders, page-118

"I don't know how much of a scale advantage Capilano has on its competitors, or whether or not it is the lowest cost producer. If it is the lowest cost producer, don't you think (this is especially directed at you @madamswer) don't you think a reducing GM makes sense if it co-exits with increasing market share? That is, if you really are the lowest cost producer, then gaining market share by lowering prices, rather than being a race to the bottom, can actually be a sensible way to get to the top."

Respectfully, I couldn't disagree more, @MarsC

Aggressive pricing strategy is the lazy way to gain market share.

If you have the best brands, best levels of service, most effective marketing and promotional strategy, industry leading operations, the most efficient supply chain then the way to gain market share is by supplying the best product in the best way with premium service levels.

Think of the pre-eminent, world-class companies you know.

Do they make use of discounting the price of their products and services as a strategy to sell more stuff?

Nope.

Their attitude is, "We know that the stuff we sell is the best there is, it's the best quality around, our world-beating inventory management systems mean we always have it when you need it, our best-of-breed supply chain infrastructure means can supply it quicker and more accurately than anyone else, our ingrained culture of premium customer service means that any inquiries/problems that our customers have are dealt with comprehensively and timely."
[*]

In my experience, that's the way to gain market share in a way that is both sustainable and value-accretive.

But standing up and saying, "Hey, Mr Customer, if we lower our asking price, will you buy some more?" is a sure way to profit erosion, because it is a slippery slope.

([*] Of course, not many companies can legitimately frame their business in those terms)