| Course | MT359 Integrated Marketing Communications |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 7 |
| Paper type | Sales promotion proposal |
| Length | About 980 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MT359 Unit 7
A Coupon That Expires at Easter: An MT359 Unit 7 Sales Promotion Proposal to Replace Buy One, Get One
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT359: Integrated Marketing Communications
Unit 7 Sales Promotion Proposal
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The tamale company, chain and figures are composite; participation rates are stated assumptions, and the promotion research cited is real.
Objectives
The promotion has three objectives, each stated as behavior. Pull purchases of the yellow Nogalitos bag into the six weeks of Lent, from Ash Wednesday, February 10, 2027, through Holy Saturday, March 27. Bring back lapsed buyers, defined as shopper-card households that bought at least twice in 2025 and not since June 2026. And do all of this without the chain's circular ever showing a price below $8.99, so the promotion stops resetting what shoppers think a bag is worth, the problem Unit 1 identified.
What Three Free-Bag Weeks Cost
The proposal must beat doing nothing, so the old deal is measured against a normal Lent week rather than against last year. In the chain's 118 stores, a normal Lent week sells about 8,600 bags. Each buy-one-get-one week sold 19,800 bags, half of them free: 9,900 paid, only 1,300 more paid bags than a normal week. The week after each deal sold 6,100, about 2,500 short, as shoppers worked through bags they had stocked up on. Van Heerde et al. (2000) documented exactly this pattern of dips after promotions in store scanner data.
Each paid bag earns the company $2.95 in contribution, its $5.40 net price less $2.45 in variable cost. Each free bag costs the company $2.45, because the chain bills the company for every free bag scanned. One deal cycle therefore added $3,835 from the extra paid bags, cost $24,255 in free bags and lost $7,375 in the dip week, a net loss of $27,795. Three cycles lost $83,385 compared with running no promotion at all.
The deal did not merely cost less than it earned; the company would have made $83,385 more by doing nothing.
Part One: A Coupon That Expires at Easter
A $1.00 digital coupon loads to shopper cards and works only from Ash Wednesday to Holy Saturday. It moves the timing of purchases into Lent without printing a lower price in the circular, since the shelf tag and the circular both stay at $8.99. The proposal assumes 42,000 loads, a 16 percent redemption rate and a cost of $1.25 per redemption, including the retailer's handling and the clearinghouse fee. That is 6,720 redemptions costing $8,400. It also assumes that 55 percent of redemptions are purchases that would not otherwise have happened, about 3,696 extra bags. Blattberg et al. (1995) found that much of what promotions sell comes from shoppers who would have bought anyway, so the incremental share is the assumption that matters most and the one to test first. Van Heerde et al. (2004) split promotion sales increases into purchases switched from other brands, purchases moved forward in time and genuinely new consumption, The coupon's narrow window openly aims at the second, moving purchases into Lent, while the reward and the sessions aim at the third.
Part Two: A New Filling as the Reward
Shoppers who upload receipts showing three Nogalitos dozens bought during Lent earn a coupon for a free six-count of the company's meatless rajas con queso tamales, a Lenten filling the company wants tried. The reward adds product rather than subtracting price. Assumptions: 1,600 qualifiers, 85 percent of whom redeem the reward, at $4.87 per redemption ($4.79 face value plus handling), and a receipt-platform fee of $1,200. Cost: $7,823. Of the 4,800 bags bought to qualify, the proposal assumes 60 percent are extra, 2,880 bags.
Part Three: Seats at the Spreading Table
The first 240 qualifiers may book one of eight Saturday sessions at the plant, thirty seats each, where they spread and fold a batch of tamales alongside the spreaders and take home what they make. Each session costs about $366 in staff overtime, masa, husks and filling, so the eight cost $2,928. The sessions are defended on brand grounds, not volume. They are the one part of the offer that states the position outright, putting shoppers' own hands on the masa so that spread by hand becomes something they have done, not something they were told.
The Cost Table
Coupon, $8,400. Receipt reward and platform, $7,823. Spreading sessions, $2,928. Official rules and legal review, $650. Total, $19,801. Extra bags, 6,576. Cost per extra bag, about $3.01, against $2.95 in contribution per bag. On volume alone, the new offer comes within about $402 of paying for itself, where the old deal lost $83,385. The proposal does not claim a profit it cannot show; it claims that the company can stop paying to teach shoppers a lower price.
Why No Drawing
A prize drawing that required a purchase to enter would combine a prize, chance and a payment, which state lottery laws generally prohibit unless a free way to enter is offered. The proposal avoids the problem: every reward is either guaranteed, like the six-count, or first-come, like the session seats. Official rules are still published, covering eligibility, dates, the limit of one reward and one seat per household, how seats are allocated and how shopper data are used.
Trade Terms With the Chain
The chain gives up seventeen free-bag weeks a year and gains a funded coupon, a display allowance for an end-cap of Lenten tamales and a feature in the circular at $8.99 that mentions the coupon. The company's sales team presents the dip-week figures to the chain's buyer, since the chain lost sales in those weeks too.
Assumptions to Test
Load counts, the 16 percent redemption rate, the 55 and 60 percent incremental shares and the 85 percent reward redemption are all assumptions. The shopper-card data in Unit 9 will replace each with a measured figure after Lent.
References
Blattberg, R. C., Briesch, R., & Fox, E. J. (1995). How promotions work. Marketing Science, 14(3_supplement), G122-G132. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.14.3.G122
Van Heerde, H. J., Leeflang, P. S. H., & Wittink, D. R. (2000). The estimation of pre- and postpromotion dips with store-level scanner data. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(3), 383-395. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.37.3.383.18782
Van Heerde, H. J., Leeflang, P. S. H., & Wittink, D. R. (2004). Decomposing the sales promotion bump with store data. Marketing Science, 23(3), 317-334. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1040.0061
Reading the MT 359 Unit 7 instructions
Unit 7 asks students to design a sales promotion for the campaign brand and defend it with costs. Objectives should be written as behavior, such as pulling purchases into a season or winning back lapsed buyers. Instructors expect any past promotion to be evaluated against a no-promotion baseline, including the dip that often follows a deal. Each element of the new offer needs mechanics, expected participation and cost, with assumptions labeled. Cost per incremental unit is the usual yardstick. The promotion should support the brand's position rather than undercut it. Official rules are expected where rewards have conditions, and drawings that require a purchase need special care. Trade terms with retailers often belong in the proposal.
Inside the MT359 Unit 7 example
Objectives open the sample, including a rule that the circular never shows a price below $8.99. The old deal is measured week by week against a normal Lent week, with contribution per paid bag and cost per free bag stated, under a highlighted line that doing nothing would have earned $83,385 more. The coupon is costed with load, redemption and incremental assumptions, citing Blattberg and colleagues and the 2004 decomposition by Van Heerde and colleagues. The six-count reward and the spreading sessions follow, the sessions defended on brand grounds. A cost table totals the offer per extra bag. A legal note explains first-come seats. Trade terms and a list of assumptions to test close it.
Reading the MT359 Unit 7 grading rubric
A promotion proposal usually gains or loses marks on its treatment of past results, the costing of each element, the fit with the brand position and attention to legal and trade issues. Measuring an old deal against doing nothing, rather than against last year, shows real analysis. Rubrics reward costs built from stated quantities and assumptions, with cost per incremental unit computed. An offer that carries the position earns more than a generic discount. Official rules and a correct note on purchase-required drawings show care. Trade terms with the retailer make the plan workable. Admitting that the offer only breaks even, if that is what the figures show, signals honesty. Research on promotion effects is cited in APA 7.
MT359 Unit 7 help: mistakes that cost points
Many proposals count total redemptions as success, though much of that volume would have sold anyway. Others compare the new offer with last year's results instead of with no promotion, which flatters both. A frequent gap is ignoring the dip after a deal week. Some offers contradict the brand's position by cutting price again in a new form. Drawings that require a purchase appear without any free entry route. Assumptions are often hidden inside totals. Before you cost anything, write down what a normal week sells and what each extra unit earns. Every element of the promotion then has to show how many extra units it adds and what each one costs.
Get an MT359 Unit 7 example written to your instructions
Which brand, which season and what budget ceiling has the Unit 7 prompt set? Add last year's promotion if there was one, then the rubric. Due within 24-48h, a free first custom proposal prices each element per incremental unit, keeps the offer tied to the brand's position and includes official rules wherever a reward is involved. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More MT359 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MT359 Unit 1: Ads Vs. Circular Contradiction Post
- MT359 Unit 2: Positioning Statement Test
- MT359 Unit 3: Get, Who, To, By Creative Brief
- MT359 Unit 4: Message Strategy Analysis
- MT359 Unit 5: Publicity Plan With PESO Model
- MT359 Unit 6: IMC Seminar Reflection
- MT359 Unit 8: Media and Budget Plan
- MT359 Unit 9: Evaluation Plan
- MT359 Unit 10: Integrated Campaign Plan
- MT358 Unit 7: Influencer and Disclosure Plan
- MT357 Unit 7: Paid Digital Media Plan
- MT355 Unit 7: Market Research Sampling Plan
- MT340 Unit 7: Team Development Analysis Paper
MT359 Unit 7 questions, answered
Why measure cost per incremental unit instead of total redemptions?
Because many redemptions come from people who would have bought anyway, and a promotion that mostly subsidizes loyal buyers looks busy while losing money. Cost per incremental unit asks what each extra sale cost, after removing baseline purchases and any dip afterward. State your incremental share as an assumption if no data exist, and show how the answer changes if it is wrong.
Is a buy-one-get-one ever the right choice?
Sometimes: for a new product needing trial, for clearing seasonal stock, or where the brand's position really is value. The problem arises when it runs often enough to reset what buyers think the product is worth, or when it contradicts a quality position. If your prompt suggests one, weigh its effect on price perception alongside its volume.
Do course proposals need official rules?
If the promotion involves a prize, a contest or a reward with conditions, many sections expect a short set of rules covering who is eligible, the dates, limits, how winners or recipients are chosen and how data are used. A purchase-required drawing needs a free entry route under state lottery laws. Keep the rules in an appendix unless the prompt says otherwise.
Where can I find a free MT359 Unit 7 sample paper?
This page carries the complete MT359 Unit 7 sales promotion proposal, replacing a tamale brand's buy-one-get-one weeks with a Lent-only offer.
Why are the spreading-session seats first-come in the MT359 Unit 7 sample?
A drawing that required a purchase would combine a prize, chance and payment, which lottery laws generally prohibit without a free entry route, so every reward is guaranteed or first-come.