One of the few videos where the case leads into something that deviates from the client main goal which is the ensure they diversify so their growth isn't as impacted.
I love it when consultants, who have never done sales, try to gauge potential market demand by basically trying to add up how many people eat almonds and then guestimate a percentage that they believe their product will do. You need to create personas for each type of almond buyer and then look at what persona will buy your product and the percentage of that that you think you could supply.
Yes, and they do it when working with a real case where they have enough time. The interview can't be longer that 1 hour so they just want to estimate your way of thinking. It would be weird to actually try to size a market without literally any statistics
I was just curious why we used the 300Million yet we said about a quarter of the market consumes almonds. Shouldn’t we have calculated using the 75M clients?
She assumed that 25% of the population consume almonds and so she went on and divided that 25% into (10% ,10%, and 5%) so when she is calculating these percentages she rightly uses the 300m figure because she is dividing the original percentage. If she would have used the 75m number she would have multiplied it by 10/25 or 40% and she would have still arrived at 30m
Wait on the brainstorming part it seems she was reading something off the paper was this like pre-arranged? because I don't see has noted anything down priorly?
I feel the segmentation estimate percentages are not at all intuitive. How can one be so sure that only 10% are light consumers of almonds? On what basis can we say only 1/4th consumes almonds. We need to see sales figures of companies or take a customer survey! Based on my interview experience, usually the interviewers are never satisfied with such vague reasoning and will definitely pick our brains. I am not at all convinced!
The challenge is the short duration of the case. Yes, the argument could have been tighter e.g. based on my experience of family & friends (albeit biased sample set), there are 2 of 20 ppl who are heavy almond eaters...and so on. Similarly where she did well was to say, I know xx who consumes yy packets a month so that is a proxy of a heavy user and so on.
If people switch from eating peanuts of their brand to their almond brand, then the net revenue loss is cannibalization. If there is net revenue gain, then its called revenue synergy
Great video! Would like to see real-time notes if possible, want to learn from how they actually write down notes:)
One of the few videos where the case leads into something that deviates from the client main goal which is the ensure they diversify so their growth isn't as impacted.
I love it when consultants, who have never done sales, try to gauge potential market demand by basically trying to add up how many people eat almonds and then guestimate a percentage that they believe their product will do. You need to create personas for each type of almond buyer and then look at what persona will buy your product and the percentage of that that you think you could supply.
Yes, and they do it when working with a real case where they have enough time. The interview can't be longer that 1 hour so they just want to estimate your way of thinking. It would be weird to actually try to size a market without literally any statistics
I was just curious why we used the 300Million yet we said about a quarter of the market consumes almonds. Shouldn’t we have calculated using the 75M clients?
Yep, it seems she just forgot that, while the interviewer did not spot it. Something that wouldn't have happened if it was an actual interview 😂
Exactly what i was wondering too
I thought the same as well
She assumed that 25% of the population consume almonds and so she went on and divided that 25% into (10% ,10%, and 5%) so when she is calculating these percentages she rightly uses the 300m figure because she is dividing the original percentage.
If she would have used the 75m number she would have multiplied it by 10/25 or 40% and she would have still arrived at 30m
Wait on the brainstorming part it seems she was reading something off the paper was this like pre-arranged? because I don't see has noted anything down priorly?
3 years payback / 10 billion in market size … that’s outrageous
I feel the segmentation estimate percentages are not at all intuitive. How can one be so sure that only 10% are light consumers of almonds? On what basis can we say only 1/4th consumes almonds. We need to see sales figures of companies or take a customer survey! Based on my interview experience, usually the interviewers are never satisfied with such vague reasoning and will definitely pick our brains. I am not at all convinced!
The challenge is the short duration of the case. Yes, the argument could have been tighter e.g. based on my experience of family & friends (albeit biased sample set), there are 2 of 20 ppl who are heavy almond eaters...and so on. Similarly where she did well was to say, I know xx who consumes yy packets a month so that is a proxy of a heavy user and so on.
Wrong calculation
That case is from the Wharton Case Book hahaha
How could cannibalization be a real issue? They’re literally separate products..
If people switch from eating peanuts of their brand to their almond brand, then the net revenue loss is cannibalization. If there is net revenue gain, then its called revenue synergy
They are both snacks, you can reasonably expect a person to not eat as much peanuts as they would when they are already consuming almonds
@@AnLe-xk8hb but the market already exists, they're not creating new products under the existing brand..