UNITED FOAM INDUSTRIES (PVT) LTD

O
n July 5th 1996, Mian Javaid Amir, Managing Director
of United Foam Industries (Pvt) Ltd, (United), Lahore
received a depressing news. Following up on its
recent threat, Diamond, the second largest competitor in the
foam industry, had increased its discount to Diamond
dealers by an additional ten percent. Javaid could easily
imagine the reaction of his dealers to this news. Only three
days back, he had a stormy meeting with his dealers who
were up in arms because of lack of sales which in their
opinion was due to the high United foam prices. Javaid
wondered how would United survive the beginning of this
apparent price war between Diamond and the market
leader, Master.

COMPANY BACKGROUND

United was one of the four subsidiaries of Shaikh Group with

an annual turnover of Rs 140 million in 1995 (see Exhibit I
for financial performance). The other subsidiaries were
involved in various textile related businesses. United was a
family-owned business and was the second player to enter
the foam industry in the formal sector in Pakistan.

Mian Javaid Amir had built the business from scratch. Prior
to United, Javaid had worked for fourteen years in National
Tyre and Rubber Co (Pvt) Ltd, (National) in various
capacities. In 1970 he was sent to a three-months training
programme in Europe. It was there that he became aware of
the huge potential that foam manufacturing might offer in
Pakistan. He wondered whether he should set up his own
foam plant. Back in Pakistan, he started discussing his ideas
with various friends who could provide him funding. One of
his friends, Mr Khalid Rasheed Sheikh, got seriously
interested in this project. Mr. Sheikh was involved in the
textile business and was looking for diversification
opportunities. By 1975, Javaid and Mr Sheikh had finalised
their plans. In 1976, Javaid resigned from his job and he
together with Mr Sheikh established United.

FOAM TECHNOLOGY, QUALITY AND COST OF

PRODUCTION

In its very basic form, foam production was simply a

chemical reaction between two chemicals. Toluene
Disocyanate (TDI) reacted with Polyoxypropylene Glycol
(PPG) at 14°C aided by catalysts like amines and silicones.
While the ingredients were being mixed, air in very small
amounts was injected at fixed intervals into the mixing
chamber. As the liquid flowed, carbon dioxide contained in
the chemicals diffused into the air. This process transformed
the liquid into a soft creamy foam. The foamy mixture
expanded as polymerisation took place. The foam gradually
gelled and became strong enough to remain standing in a
rectangular form. It was then dried and cut in various shapes
and sizes.

There had been a few changes in the technology employed

for foam production. In the conventional plants, two jets of
chemicals mixed in the air and the mixture deposited on a
paper in a mould. The chemicals were forced through
nozzles using different flow rates. Over time new plants
were introduced with different capacities of these flow rates
ranging from 60 lbs/min to 350 lbs/min. This differential in
flow rates resulted in foam of varying heights. For example,
a 120 lbs/min capacity plant could produce a raw foam of 36
inches height while a 350 lbs/min unit could
produce a raw foam of 42 inches height. Extra height
resulted in significantly lower overall

This case was written by Mian Hassan Javaid under the

supervision of Assnciate Professnr Ehsan ul Haque to serve
as a basis fur class discussion rather than to illustrate either
effective or iiieifeciive handling of an administrative situation.
This material may not be quoted, photocopied or reproduced
in any, form without the prior written consent of the Lahore
University of Management Sciences.
production costs as the wastage (consisting of cut corners
and other trainings) in a 42 inch high foam was almost 20%
less than that in a 36 inch high foam.

In 1984, Maxfoam technology was introduced in Pakistan. In

Maxfoam plants, the chemical reaction took place inside a
mixing chamber. This resulted in a better quality of foam in
terms of its molecular structure. In addition, Maxfoam
technology resulted in lower production costs as it was
available with the flow rate of 375 lbs/min.

Foam quality was primarily determined in terms of its

density. This density could be controlled by varying the
proportions of PPG and TDI used in the process. A higher
proportion of PPG, as compared to that of TDI, resulted in a
higher density foam which was considered as a good quality
foam. In Pakistan, foam traditionally came in five grades
(density levels). Highest quality foam (grade A) had a
density of 35 kgs/cu.mt while the lowest quality foam
typically (grade E) had a density of 20 kgs/cu.mt.

In addition to the flow rate capacities of plants, the cost of

foam production was also influenced by the procurement
policies of companies. The price of PPG and TDI fluctuated
regularly (at times, drastically) in the international market.
Large producers, with the financial muscle to procure and
store these raw materials in large quantities, could benefit
from such price fluctuations.

The cost break down of a typical foam product was as

follows:

Raw Materials 45%

 Import Duties 30
on R.M.
Sales Tax 10
Other 5
Manufacturing
Cost
Sales, 10
General &
Admin.

The cost of foam manufacturing was impacted dramatically

in the late eighties by government policies. In 1988, the
Government of Pakistan, in order to industrialise remote
areas, announced huge incentives to producers who would
locate their factories in Gadoon, NWFP. The incentives
included exemptions from income tax and sales tax on local
manufactured goods, and exemptions from custom duty,
sales tax, and surcharge on imported plant and machinery.
Other advantages included a 50% concessional rate for
electricity, project financing at a heavily subsidised rate of
3%, and a 25% rebate on import duties of raw material.
These incentives led to installation of many foam plants in
Gadoon giving these manufacturers significant cost
advantages. However, by early 1995 these incentives were
withdrawn by the GOP.

COMPETITION

Foam industry in Pakistan was dominated by the informal

sector prior to the 1960s. In March 1964, National entered
the industry with an automated plant of 60 lbs/inin capacity.
Soon afterwards, in September 1964, Master Enterprises
(Pvt) Ltd, (Master) also joined the industry with a similar
plant. For the next ten years these two companies were the
only producers in the organized, formal sector in Pakistan.
There were many small producers, operating in the informal
sector, in the market. However, their aggregate sales
volumes were considered not very significant by the
industry. In 1975, National discontinued foam production
due to financial problems leaving Master with a virtual
monopoly in this area.

Low entry costs, a rapidly developing market, and a simple

technology led to few other companies enter the foam
industry. By 1995, there were several plants operating in the
country (see Exhibit 2). According to industry estimates,
industry sales had touched Rs 1.5 billion in revenues and
13,000 tones in quantity in 1995. Almost 20% of sales were
in Sindh, while the remaining 80% were in other regions of
the country, primarily in Punjab and NWFP.

In 1995, foam industry was dominated by five

manufacturers. Master was the market leader in sales (see
Exhibit 3) while Al-khair, a new entrant, was the smallest
manufacturer. Each of these companies seemed to be
following a different marketing strategy. A brief discussion of
each follows:

Master Foam

Master was one of the subsidiaries of the Master Group of

Companies. The other businesses of the group included
textiles and auto-engineering. Although Master had
diversified into other businesses, foam remained its core
business. In the early sixties, Master was involved in the
manufacturing of Latex rubber. The company entered into a
ten-year licensing agreement with Bayer who were the
leading manufacturers of foam in Germany. For the next ten
years, Master marketed Bayer's product called Moltipren, in
the Pakistani market. At the end of the agreement, Master
started selling the product under its own brand name, Molty.

Master was reputed in the industry for innovative and

aggressive marketing. It had been upgrading its technology
on a regular basis. It introduced many new products in the
market such as Molty-Orthopedic mattress and Contour
Pillow. Master had over the years built a very strong
reputation of quality. Through its aggressive advertising, and
partly because of its pioneering advantage, Molty Foam had
become almost a generic name in Pakistan.

Another reason for Master's success was considered to be

its plant location policies. Foam transportation costs were
high as the value relative to the volume-occupied was low.
Consequently, each plant had a limited area where its
products could profitably, compete. Master, by locating its
plants in the three provinces of Pakistan, had achieved the
best coverage of the whole country.

The three plants of Master, however, were operated by

sister companies by the names of Master Enterprises (Pvt)
Ltd, Durafoam (Pvt) Ltd, and Khyber Plastic and Polymers
Industries Ltd. Each company had a whole range of brands
given below:

Foam Master Durafoam Royal

Quality (Karachi) (Lahore) (Gadoon)
Highest Molty Flex Interfoam -
Molty Foam Luxury King
 Premium - -
Commander Top Queen
Lowest Jet Comfort Prince

Unit sales of Master, Dura, and Royal were estimated to be

60%, 30%, and 10% respectively, while the rupee sales
were 70%, 22%, and 8% respectively.

As the price sensitive segment of Pakistani market grew

Master did not want to dilute Molty Foam's image by
reducing its price. Consequently, Master introduced
Durafoam and Royal to compete in the low price segment of
the market. According to industry sources, Durafoam was
primarily targeted towards the furniture shop market.

Master followed a policy of intensive advertising during the

peak foam selling season, i.e., between September to April.
During this time both TV and print ads were used (see
Exhibit 4). The company often sponsored a programme on
TV aired during the prime time. The frequency of ads was
one advertisement daily on national television while typical
duration of each ad was 15 to 30 seconds. During the off
season, the average frequency of ads dropped to one ad
aired every two months. In 1995, Molty Foam had spent
roughly Rs 20 million on TV ads. There was very little
advertising done for Durafoam and Royal Foam brands.
Sometimes Master would also offer promotional items like
wall clocks and calendars, etc., to the dealers. However,
according to the dealers, these items did not stimulate sales
to the household customer.
Exclusive dealership was the most commonly used
distribution system in the foam industry. Master had 250
dealers spread all over the country. Its dealers were
financially strong and they enjoyed a high turnover because
of Masters strong following. Master extended a discount of
18% to its dealers and a bonus of 2% if they met their sales
targets. Dealers were allowed to pass on some of the
discount to customers. However, Master had placed an
upper limit on discounts that dealers could offer to
customers , i.e., 10% 'maximum to household customers
and 13% to furniture shops. These margins applied to
Master only. For Dura foam dealer discounts were 30%
Dura and Royal margins were also more flexible and could
be altered according to the type of the customer. Master's
dealers preferred to sell to household customers as,
according to them, this segment was less price ' sensitive.
The furniture shops, apart from being price sensitive, also
demanded credit facilities which was not possible for
Master dealers since they purchased on advance cash
payment from the manufacturer. Master dealers were
serviced by a sales force of 30 salesmen.

Diamond Foam

Diamond Foam was one of the subsidiaries of the Diamond

Group of Industries. The company started manufacturing
foam in the informal sector in 1978 and entered the formal
sector by installing a Max foam technology plant in 1984.

Initially, Diamond focused its marketing in the south but later

on it expanded into north as well. According to industry
sources, one of the major reasons of Diamond's initial
success was very aggressive advertising, unheard of in the
foam industry. In the early years there was a fierce rivalry
between Diamond and Master. For example, in 1986,
Diamond tried to combat Masters advantage by issuing
limited guarantees for its foam products for the first time.
Soon all the manufacturers followed this practice. Master
then responded by putting zips on the covers of its mattress.
Master made TV ads emphasizing the good quality Master
Foam beneath the cover by unzipping the cover and
showing the "real" mattress. This practice was also followed
by all the manufacturers. In retaliation Diamond started to
weigh mattresses of different manufacturers to show that
only Diamond had the proper weight and the real quality.
This rivalry continued over the years, albeit, with less
intensity.

In the beginning of 1995, Diamond went public through their

Gadoon Amazai plant. With this, Diamond also had three
foam manufacturing plants in Karachi, Lahore, and Gadoon.
Just like Master, Diamond also established sister concerns
to operate the new plants. The company's product line
consisted of fifteen brands of foam in various quality grades.
Its premium brand was Supreme However, the company
concentrated more on slightly lower quality brands than on
the top of the line high quality brands.

After the initial round the year intensive advertising, which

helped Diamond establish a name for itself in the market,
Diamond advertised on television only during the peak
season. Even these ads were only for Diamond Supreme.
The lower quality brands relied more on push rather than
pull.
Diamond's advertising expenditure had remained constant
over the years. In 1995, it was estimated to be about Rs lo
million.

Diamond had 150 dealers all over Pakistan. These dealers

purchased foam on advance cash payment from the
manufacturer. Diamond attempted to give sales targets to its
dealers. However, it was rumored that this idea had failed as
it only increased dealers inventory. Diamond dealers got a
discount of 20% on retail price -- 2% more than what
Master's dealer got. Diamond kept the largest sales force
(55 people) in the foam industry to service its customers.

Mehran Foam

The Mehran Group was a family-owned business based in

Lahore. They had been dealers of Master for the whole of
Punjab for fifteen years before they decided to start the
production and marketing of foam in 1984.

Mehran had three foam manufacturing plants in Lahore,

Gadoon and Kamoke (near Lahore). The company had five
brands in its product portfolio. Its unit sales were known to
have been growing at a rate greater than the industry's
growth rate of 15%. This increase in sales came mainly from
the increased consumption of its lower quality brands in the
market.

Mehran did not advertise its brands and followed a low cost,
low quality policy. It marketed its products primarily by
"pushing" them through the channel. The CEO felt that the
foam industry as a whole was moving towards low quality
and low price products. Thus, the company was positioned
to take advantage of the changes in the industry. Mehran
was concentrating primarily on Punjab, as they felt Punjab
offered the greatest potential in terms of sales growth.
Another reason for this was the high transportation costs
involved in transporting foam. It was not feasible for the
company to distribute its products to other areas in the
country.

Mehran had 100 dealers, mostly in Punjab. Some of the

dealers were also family members of the owners. Its dealers
sold foam primarily to the furniture shops on credit. Mehran
provided its dealers promotional material to be given to
furniture shops. Before the advent of Al-khair, Mehran
offered the highest margins in the foam industry, i.e., 27% to
its dealers. It also kept a sales force of 12 to service its
dealers.

Al-khair Foam

Al-khair was a newly established public limited company

which joined the industry in 1994 through its Max foam plant
at Gadoon. Using its contacts, Al-khair had obtained a duty
free import quota on its raw material equal to 25% of its
capacity. As the capacity utilization in foam industry was
around 20% this represented a tremendous advantage to
the company. It was rumored that the company saved many
millions of rupees in this fashion. Al-khair put the money
thus saved into advertising and dealer credit. Over the last
couple of years, Al-khair sales grew tremendously.
According to industry sources, there were three reasons for
its growth. First, it produced a reasonably good quality of
foam which was priced relatively low. Second, it executed a
nice and extensive advertising campaign for its top of the
line Five Star brand. Third, Al-khair extended lots of credit to
the dealers to stock its product. They also provided 30%
margin to their dealers.

Foam industry reacted sharply to Al-khair's inroads. When

Al-khair offered a life-time guarantee with its foam (an
innovation in the industry) Diamond and Master retaliated
with bringing out a cheap foam and branding it as Life-Time
Guarantee. Al-khair retaliated by increasing expenditures on
ads as well as dealer point of sale materials (see Exhibit 5).

FOAM MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION

In 1985, the three players operating in the formal sector of

the industry were Master, United, and Diamond. Hussain
Chemicals was a major supplier of imported chemicals used
in the production of foam. Negotiating raw material prices on
a monthly basis with three different manufacturers was
becoming problematic for Hussain Chemicals. The
company, therefore, requested foam manufacturers to form
a common platform to facilitate the decision making process
regarding the prices of imported chemicals. In response to
this request, Master, United, and Diamond formed the Foam
Manufacturer's Association (FMA) in 1985. Under FMA
umbrella chemical prices were fixed each month and
everybody was expected to pay the same price.

The FMA provided foam manufacturers with a forum where

they started discussing other problems facing the industry
as well. They could now jointly negotiate with the
government, the suppliers, and the dealers regarding issues
of common interest. Over a period of time FMA was also
entrusted to set the retail prices for foam. This decision was
taken to overcome the unhealthy price-cutting competition
that industry occasionally engaged in. These prices were
subject to review after mutually agreed upon time intervals.
FMA made it mandatory for all its members to abide by FMA
prices. The retail prices set by FMA in 1995 are listed in
Exhibit 6. Foam manufacturers also used FMA forum to
agree upon and maintain a differential dealer margin
structure for different manufacturers. These margins were
set so as to maintain the market shares of different
producers. However, these agreements were not always
followed by members.

Over the past few years, as new manufacturers entered the

industry, the membership of FMA increased. However, the
three founding members held a controlling position by virtue
of being the founders of the association and commanding
the highest market shares. inclusion of new entrants into the
FMA was at the discretion of the founders.

FOAM CUSTOMERS

Over the past few decades, the usage of foam in Pakistan

households and offices had increased steadily. Main
reasons behind this increase were high population growth
rate, rising levels of disposable incomes, and increased
urbanization. The image of foam also transformed gradually
from that of a luxury item used only by high income
households to that of a necessity product used by all. This
shift also brought about with it demand for reduced prices
which the lower income households could afford.

The customers of foam included household customers and

institutional buyers like furniture shops, contractors, and
hospitals. According to a survey conducted in 1995, the
market was evenly divided between household and
institutional buyers. However, the penetration of different
companies and brands in these two segments varied widely.
Exhibit 7 shows the segment-wise sales breakup for
different manufacturers.

A survey of 200 housewives in Lahore in early 1995 showed

that 25% of housewives could not recall the brand of foam
that they had purchased last, whereas 20% of them were
undecided about the brand of foam they would purchase in
future (see Exhibit 8). Molty Foam carried the highest
awareness level and brand loyalty. Household consumers
looked for comfort and durability as the two most important
product attributes defining quality for them. Foam was
purchased fairly infrequently, most often with a new piece of
furniture or for dowry purposes. It was generally purchased
through the retail outlets of different dealers. Dealers
seemed to play an important role as it was difficult for
consumers to judge quality.

Furniture shops comprised nearly 90% of the institutional

buyers. These shops purchased foam from the dealers.
High-end furniture shops, catering to the more affluent
customers, usually were quality conscious and purchased
Master or other high quality brands. Other shops were not
so quality conscious. In any case, most shops were fairly
price sensitive and obtained credit facilities from the dealers.
The average credit period was 2-3 weeks. The demand of
foam for furniture shops was a derived demand and
depended upon the demand of furniture. The demand for
furniture was highly seasonal and was linked to the manage
season. This resulted in two thirds of the sales occurring in
the months from October to March.

UNITED FOAM AND THE CURRENT PROBLEMS

United had only one production facility located in Lahore. In

the early years, United had the advantage of being the only
manufacturers in the north. It was thus able to create a
niche in this highly lucrative market and establish a firm
footing in Punjab and Frontier. Over the years, however, this
monopoly was broken as other manufacturers established
plants in either Lahore or Gadoon.

United did not upgrade its technology in the mid-eighties

due to financial constraints. This led to some erosion of its
competitive advantage. However, the company met with a
severe blow in the shape of Gadoon incentives. Being a
tradition, family-run company United lacked the managerial
and financial resources to set up a production unit at
Gadoon. They were thus unable to take advantage of the
incentives offered by the government. This situation resulted
in a major handicap for United while its competitors, who
capitalized heavily on the opportunity, were able to canalize
their cost savings into rapid growth and expansion.

United believed in manufacturing superior quality product.

It's top of the line mattress was Unifoam. As the foam
market moved towards inexpensive brands, United delayed
the production of cheaper quality brands. Only in 1993, it
entered the low price/low quality segment with Saba Foam
and Rose Foam. In 1996, it had nine brands of different
qualities in its portfolio.

United, traditionally spent little on advertising, relying more

on pushing the product through the channel. Lately,
however, it had started to advertise on TV and print (see
Exhibit 9) to prevent erosion of its market share. In 1995,
United had spent roughly 2 million on ads.

Approximately 40 dealers, concentrated mainly in Punjab

and the Frontier, carried United's products. As United had a
regular sales force of only two people these dealers, in
addition to being stockiest and retailers, worked as the sales
force of united in their respective areas. United Foam gave a
24% discount off the list price to its dealers. These dealers
also obtained a credit facility of approximately sixty days
from United which was considered as twice the industry
average. United also paid for the transportation costs of
foam from the factory to the showrooms.

By 1996, United was facing a number of serious problems.

Its market share was declining rapidly. The competitors had
come up with a broad range of products under different
brand names and operating through different companies.
This had given them more flexibility in pricing the product
without hurting the brand image of their premium brands.
This also enabled them to keep their dealers' profitability
intact while allowing them to offer deeper discounts on
different brands. Thus, the competitors could cater to a
broad range of customer with different price sensitivities.
United had lagged behind in this respect.
Another area of concern for United was its dealers. These
dealers were getting increasingly frustrated with their sales.
Dealers maintained that there was a customer pull for
United's products. This made selling the product extremely
difficult because customers were attracted by brand names
like Molty, on the one hand, and the reduced prices of Al-
khair and Diamond, on the other. Javaid wondered how he
could motivate his dealers to push the company's products
in the face of all this. Other problems that Javaid faced with
dealers were regarding preferential treatment and bad
debts. United extended preferential treatment, in terms of
discounts, to dealers with high turnovers. The largest dealer
of United accounted for a third of company's sales. He was
given additional discounts of 3 to 5%. The next three
dealers, who accounted for an additional 20% of the
company's sales were unhappy about this situation. They
demanded the same treatment.

United was also carrying a bad debt of 5% of total dealer

credit. This was higher than the industry average of 2%.
The company needed badly to recover this amount and to
avoid this situation in the future. At the same time, it did not
want to restrict its dealer network or interfere with the
working of those dealers who were successful in increasing
sales.
The most urgent problem that Javaid faced was the
imminent price war between Diamond and Master. The
background to this conflict went back to 1995. In 1995, a
major manufacturer of raw chemicals for the foam industry
in Hong Kong temporarily shut down because of some
problems. This led to chemical prices increase in stages
throughout 1995 (see Exhibit 10). During this time frequent
meetings of FMA were called to re-fix the retail prices of
foam so that all the raw material cost increases were passed
on to the customers. This resulted in a massive price
increase in all foam products within a year.

Pakistani consumers, however, changed their preferences in

the face of this price increase. Overall industry sales shifted
from high quality, high price brands to lower quality, lower
price brands. See Exhibit II for the impact of this consumers
shift on United's product mix. Furniture shops also shifted
their attention to non-branded, lower quality foam instead of
buying more expensive branded foam. Some of the
manufacturers responded by temporarily increasing
discounts to their dealers although this was against FMA
decisions.

The chemical manufacturing plant in Hong Kong restarted

its operation early 1996. As a result, during the first quarter
of 1996, chemical prices plummeted. In the next FMA
meeting, however, the manufacturers decided not to reduce
retail prices as they could not agree on decreasing the
prices of foam. This was the peak selling season. In
addition, Eid was approaching. Master introduced a free gift
scheme during Eid (the month of March). They announced a
free contour pillow, worth about Rs 500 with the purchase of
a mattress worth Rs 5000. It was rumored that Master did
this in response to the huge discounts offered by Al-khair.

During the next meeting of FMA, Diamond vociferously

complained about Master's scheme and the under-hand
discounts that other manufacturers were giving to their
dealers. Diamond said that they had incurred substantial
decrease in sales in different regions because of these
discounts and gift schemes. Subsequently, Diamond
increased its discount by an additional 17%, and threatened
to increase it by a further 10% if these under-hand practices
were not stopped. All of the manufacturers followed suit and
increased their discounts by the same degree. Master, in
addition to increasing discount, continued with its gift offer.

United had previously maintained a 4% higher discount than

Diamond. Its dealers demanded an even higher discounts
than those offered by other manufacturers. United's largest
dealer, who had been receiving the preferential additional
3% discount previously, demanded the same preferential
treatment even with the increased discounts. He threatened
to quit stocking United by the end of the week, saying he
had offers from competitors to sell their foam.

While Javaid was contemplating how to react to his dealers

anger and concerns he received the latest news. Diamond
had increased its discounts by an additional 10%.
 Exhibit 1

UNITED FOAM INDUSTRIES (PVT) LTD

Income Statements of United (Rs in ‘000)

Year Year 6 Months

Ended Ended June 30,
December December 1996
31, 1994 31, 1995
Gross 120,000 140,000 95,000
Sales
Discounts 25,000 34,000 35,000
Net Sales 95,000 106,000 60,000
COGS 65,000 72,500 41,000
Gross 30,000 33,500 19,000
Profit
Misc. Other 500 700 300
Income
Admin. 8,000 9,500 5,500
Expenses
Selling 17,000 17,000 8,000
Expenses
Financial 3,000 2,000 1,000
Expenses
Net Profit 2,500 5,700 4,800
 Exhibit 2

UNITED FOAM INDUSTRIES (PVT) LTD

Foam Manufacturing Plants in Pakistan

Mast 19 Conventional Karachi

er 64 60 Ibs/min Lahore
19 Maxfoam* Karachi
82 Maxfoam Gadoon
19 Maxfoam
85
19
90
Diam 19 Maxfoam Karachi
ond 84 Maxfoam Lahore
19 Maxfoam Gadoon
86
19
89
Unite 19 Conventional Lahore
d 77 120 Ibs/min Lahore
19 Maxfoam
91
Mehr 19 Conventional Lahore
an 84 350 Ibs/min Gadoon
19 Maxfoam Kamoke
90 Maxfoam (near
19 Lahore)
93
Al- 19 Maxfoam Gadoon
khair 94 Maxfoam Gadoon
 Mumt 19 Conventional Karachi
az 94 220 Ibs/min
Vohr 19
a 80

Exhibit 3

UNITED FOAM INDUSTRIES (PVT) LTD

Relative Market Share of Large Foam Manufacturers

1994 1995 1996

(%) (%) (%)
Mast 54 51 51
er
Diam 25 23 20
ond
Unite 11 10 8
d
Mehr 8 9 10
an
Al- 2 7 11
khair