What is happening with thay market segmentation? 130M visitors are being split 50/50 between business and leisure, and then 65M is being split again into 20/80 business/leisure... Am I missing something?
Great approach Couple of things: 1) there was no need to segment between leisure and business since assummptions for both were the same 2) should have used proper income segmenting for the vacation market (looking at income brackets
this seems to be a badly made case. it does not make sense for one to go from a market estimation of the new york market straight to expansion opportunities (ways to possibly increase the market size you play in) without analyzing the profitability of the new York market first. logically, it would make sense to see if the current market actually works for the business before looking at ways to grow the investment. The 476M USD market mentioned means nothing compared to the 30M investment cost in the business if the profit margin is not taken into account. ROI was mentioned in the prompt but there was no direct discussion of this it also seems a bit fishy how the interviewee somehow just decided to make this transition. is there something I'm missing here?
another point seems fishy to me is her calculation was unusually fast for example 360*850k in 1 second? I'd need at least 5s-10s to do it on paper, it is as if she has a calculator on her table lolll, Even the interviewer commented on that speed
Isn’t it more intuitive that once I calculate the 60% that accounts for airport service, the total market size would be obvious? I don’t see the need for calculating the travel service in separate. correct me if wrong
I was gonna do the same but since the interviewer let her do that then it is because part of the case and she was being judge on her market sizing approach
What is happening with thay market segmentation? 130M visitors are being split 50/50 between business and leisure, and then 65M is being split again into 20/80 business/leisure... Am I missing something?
Great approach
Couple of things:
1) there was no need to segment between leisure and business since assummptions for both were the same
2) should have used proper income segmenting for the vacation market (looking at income brackets
this seems to be a badly made case. it does not make sense for one to go from a market estimation of the new york market straight to expansion opportunities (ways to possibly increase the market size you play in) without analyzing the profitability of the new York market first. logically, it would make sense to see if the current market actually works for the business before looking at ways to grow the investment. The 476M USD market mentioned means nothing compared to the 30M investment cost in the business if the profit margin is not taken into account. ROI was mentioned in the prompt but there was no direct discussion of this
it also seems a bit fishy how the interviewee somehow just decided to make this transition. is there something I'm missing here?
another point seems fishy to me is her calculation was unusually fast for example 360*850k in 1 second?
I'd need at least 5s-10s to do it on paper, it is as if she has a calculator on her table lolll, Even the interviewer commented on that speed
Isn’t it more intuitive that once I calculate the 60% that accounts for airport service, the total market size would be obvious? I don’t see the need for calculating the travel service in separate. correct me if wrong
I was gonna do the same but since the interviewer let her do that then it is because part of the case and she was being judge on her market sizing approach
The 60:40 split is the current revenue split for this company, not the market size split.