kindly answer the questions of the case study accordingly. This is an Elective course " Channels management " Of Marketing major. thanks

01 Case Study: Carefully read the following case study & share alteast ten reasons to outsource distribution to third party used by EABL 8: also share that why EABL didn't opted to retain their distribution network themselves? East African Breweries conquers the Kenyan beer market East African Breweries Limited (EABL) is the largest beer brewer and marketer in East Africa. EABL's nine brands enjoy a virtual monopoly in the large Kenyan beer market, as its only rival, South African Breweries, withdrew from the market in 2002 after prolonged and intense competition between the two companies. South African Breweries (5A3), a multinational beer giant, entered the Kenyan market in 1995 by building a modern factory. Its efforts to win over a significant share were thwarted by an aggressive defense put up by EABL. This contest, referred to by industry observers as the Beer War, ended in July 2002 when SAB reached a market-sharing agreement with EABL. Under this agreement, EABL's Kenyan subsidiary now brews, markets, and distributes under license. SAB brands in Kenya. In turn, EABL effectively withdrew from the Tanzanian market, and SAB now markets EABL brands there, also under license. The situation EABL faced in Kenya was challenging. A long-running recession shrank the beer market in volume. Simultaneously, erce competition with SAB encouraged consumers to be more price sensitive. Thus, EABL could not rely on price increases but, rather, had to focus on cost containment and demand stimulation. This led the company to undertake a major restructuring in 1994, whose principal aim was to refocus the company on its core business, beer manufacturing, and make it both leaner and more competitive. A critical decision was to dismantle the company's distribution facilities. 0n the face of it, this is curious. Why give up control in order to win a market share battle? But EABL understood that beer distribution is not idiosyncratic and not subject to performance ambiguity. Hence, the company sold off noncore assets, including its transport fleet, and contracted distribution to thirdparty providers. Then, with a view to defending its market share, EABL focused on maximizing the effectiveness of its distribution network. In response to the market entry of SAB in 1995, EABL invested heavily in the improvement of its distribution capabilities. As a result, EABL achieved virtually 100 percent market coverage without ruinous levels of spending or investment. The EABL success story has many elements, including dramatic improvements in manufacturing return on investment and an effective promotional campaign that created a strong pull effect on Kenya's thousands of outlets selling beer; however, most observers agree that EABL prevailed over SAB because of the strength of its distribution network. Not only did the company enhance its own coverage of a highly fragmented market but it successfully prevented SAB from doing the same through aggressive distribution initiatives focused on reward power. The fundamental decision, however, was to give up control and free resources by retreating from forward vertical integration