Cookie and Privacy Settings

This website uses cookies to enable essential functions like the user login and sessions. We also use cookies and third-party tools to improve your surfing experience on preplounge.com. You can choose to activate only essential cookies or all cookies. You can always change your preference in the cookie and privacy settings. This link can also be found in the footer of the site. If you need more information, please visit our privacy policy.

Data processing in the USA: By clicking on "I accept", you also consent, in accordance with article 49 paragraph 1 sentence 1 lit. GDPR, to your data being processed in the USA (by Google LLC, Facebook Inc., LinkedIn Inc., Stripe, Paypal).

Manage settings individually I accept
expert
Expert with best answer

Axel

100% Recommendation Rate

48 Meetings

810 Q&A Upvotes

USD 179 / Coaching

5

What are the ways of structuring reasons behind market share decline while overall market is increasing

The case prompt is the number of membership in the fitness center has been declining last 5 years, what is the possible cause. I have been suffering from this specific question since I started case interview preparation. I usually break down market share decline into the old and new competitors, then I dig deeper to see whether it is a competition problem. Well, I feel insecure mainly because competition and customer-related reasons are interrelated. That creates lots of confusion. I know that structuring depends on the context, but I just wanna see different ways how one can structure this question

The case prompt is the number of membership in the fitness center has been declining last 5 years, what is the possible cause. I have been suffering from this specific question since I started case interview preparation. I usually break down market share decline into the old and new competitors, then I dig deeper to see whether it is a competition problem. Well, I feel insecure mainly because competition and customer-related reasons are interrelated. That creates lots of confusion. I know that structuring depends on the context, but I just wanna see different ways how one can structure this question

I would first want to see if our company have declined their sales or just not grown with the market, if there is a decline in sales as well they have a larger problems. Otherwise I would maybe look at what the competitors are doing that are growing, our clients ability to replicate this, and what excactly the customers in the growing market is looking for. — Carl on Jul 01, 2020

5 answers

  • Upvotes
  • Date ascending
  • Date descending
Best Answer
Book a coaching with Axel

100% Recommendation Rate

48 Meetings

810 Q&A Upvotes

USD 179 / Coaching

Hi Anonymous,

In a market share problem like this, it is best to just break down the market share formulas and look at each component.

Market share % = Client revenue / Market revenue

1. Understand how the drivers of the client's revenue

Number of centers * Number of members per center * Avg. membership price

Then you can qualitatively look into each to understand what is happening

2. Understand market development

You can use the same structure for the entire market as the formula above or just look at total memberships * price.

My hypothesis in this case would be that a new player has entered the market close to our client's center(s) with a better product.

-A

Hi Anonymous,

In a market share problem like this, it is best to just break down the market share formulas and look at each component.

Market share % = Client revenue / Market revenue

1. Understand how the drivers of the client's revenue

Number of centers * Number of members per center * Avg. membership price

Then you can qualitatively look into each to understand what is happening

2. Understand market development

You can use the same structure for the entire market as the formula above or just look at total memberships * price.

My hypothesis in this case would be that a new player has entered the market close to our client's center(s) with a better product.

-A

Book a coaching with Ian

100% Recommendation Rate

189 Meetings

15,944 Q&A Upvotes

USD 289 / Coaching

Hi there,

Old and new competitors is a horrible way to break it down! (sorry)

What does this split actually get you/help you organize?

Rather, your main objective here it to figure out what we as a company are doing wrong.

When you think about it, "wrong" can be an absolute/internal thing or it can be a relative/comparative thing.

As such, a reasonable bucketing is:

Company

  • Have we seen rising costs?
    • FC? VC?
    • Split by store
    • Split by product
    • Split by geography
    • ^i.e. some stores/products/geographies doing well and others not or universal?
  • Have we seen falling revenues?
    • Absolute revenues? Margins?
    • Have we lowered our price?
    • Are we selling fewer items?
    • Split by store
    • Split by product
    • Split by geography
    • ^i.e. some stores/products/geographies doing well and others not or universal?

Competition

  • Is all of our competition doing well or just a few?
  • If all, why?
  • If a few, what makes them different?
  • If doing well for x, y, z reasons, what are we not doing?
  • ^benchmark benchmark benchmark

This is a rough overview. It is not exhaustive nor is it tailored. The independent context, objective, industry, and my clarifying questions completely change what I write in these buckets and how I talk about it, but I hope you get the point :)

Hi there,

Old and new competitors is a horrible way to break it down! (sorry)

What does this split actually get you/help you organize?

Rather, your main objective here it to figure out what we as a company are doing wrong.

When you think about it, "wrong" can be an absolute/internal thing or it can be a relative/comparative thing.

As such, a reasonable bucketing is:

Company

  • Have we seen rising costs?
    • FC? VC?
    • Split by store
    • Split by product
    • Split by geography
    • ^i.e. some stores/products/geographies doing well and others not or universal?
  • Have we seen falling revenues?
    • Absolute revenues? Margins?
    • Have we lowered our price?
    • Are we selling fewer items?
    • Split by store
    • Split by product
    • Split by geography
    • ^i.e. some stores/products/geographies doing well and others not or universal?

Competition

  • Is all of our competition doing well or just a few?
  • If all, why?
  • If a few, what makes them different?
  • If doing well for x, y, z reasons, what are we not doing?
  • ^benchmark benchmark benchmark

This is a rough overview. It is not exhaustive nor is it tailored. The independent context, objective, industry, and my clarifying questions completely change what I write in these buckets and how I talk about it, but I hope you get the point :)

Book a coaching with Anton

100% Recommendation Rate

4 Meetings

1,087 Q&A Upvotes

USD 179 / Coaching

Hi,

I have seen numerous candidates develope BS frameworks on this. And here is why:

45% of candidates develop quantitative structures and fail. This is because these structures do not help to isolate a problem when it affects both number of clients and their spending simultaneously.

Another 45% of candidates will use Cheng structures like Clients, Company, Competitors. It does not help to isolate the problem again because the problem affects all drivers simultaneously. Your clients changed their preferences, your company has not reacted on this and your competitors have reacted.

Now what do the winning 10% of candidates do?

  1. Understand, that if you lose market share then clients think that your competitor is better at something
  2. Understand, that the only way to find out why clients think that competitors are better is to compare your company vs competitors
  3. Understand, that you need to be MECE to find the problem and the best way to be MECE in this case is to compare your company’s client journey vs competitor’s client journey

That’s it. Simple and clear.

Best,

Anton

Hi,

I have seen numerous candidates develope BS frameworks on this. And here is why:

45% of candidates develop quantitative structures and fail. This is because these structures do not help to isolate a problem when it affects both number of clients and their spending simultaneously.

Another 45% of candidates will use Cheng structures like Clients, Company, Competitors. It does not help to isolate the problem again because the problem affects all drivers simultaneously. Your clients changed their preferences, your company has not reacted on this and your competitors have reacted.

Now what do the winning 10% of candidates do?

  1. Understand, that if you lose market share then clients think that your competitor is better at something
  2. Understand, that the only way to find out why clients think that competitors are better is to compare your company vs competitors
  3. Understand, that you need to be MECE to find the problem and the best way to be MECE in this case is to compare your company’s client journey vs competitor’s client journey

That’s it. Simple and clear.

Best,

Anton

Book a coaching with Sidi

99% Recommendation Rate

423 Meetings

4,082 Q&A Upvotes

USD 449 / Coaching

Hi!

This is a nice example why you have to always first align on the definition of your focus metric. You can not just assume something!

"Market Share" is not universally defined. The most common definition is probably "Company Revenue divided by Market Revenue". But the definition differs by industry. Sometimes it is not about revenue, but about number of customers. Or about volume. Or something completely crazy, like balance sheet size (this is the case in Banking!). So before you start with anything, you have to define your focus metric.

And even if it is Revenue - decline in market share does NOT mean that revenue is decreasing! It means that the numerator (Revenue) becomes smaller RELATIVE to the denominator (Market Size). So you can also lose market share with growing revenue - if the market grows faster.

So Step 1 is a numerical analysis: codify the definition, then break down the definition into its numerical drivers, isolate where the problem comes from. This gives you the answer to WHAT the problem is, but not yet WHY the problem exists.

This is analyzed in a second step, which is a qualitative analysis, where you ask qualitative questions exclusively focused on the isolated problem driver to understand, what its underlying reasons are.

Hope this helps!

Cheers, Sidi

Hi!

This is a nice example why you have to always first align on the definition of your focus metric. You can not just assume something!

"Market Share" is not universally defined. The most common definition is probably "Company Revenue divided by Market Revenue". But the definition differs by industry. Sometimes it is not about revenue, but about number of customers. Or about volume. Or something completely crazy, like balance sheet size (this is the case in Banking!). So before you start with anything, you have to define your focus metric.

And even if it is Revenue - decline in market share does NOT mean that revenue is decreasing! It means that the numerator (Revenue) becomes smaller RELATIVE to the denominator (Market Size). So you can also lose market share with growing revenue - if the market grows faster.

So Step 1 is a numerical analysis: codify the definition, then break down the definition into its numerical drivers, isolate where the problem comes from. This gives you the answer to WHAT the problem is, but not yet WHY the problem exists.

This is analyzed in a second step, which is a qualitative analysis, where you ask qualitative questions exclusively focused on the isolated problem driver to understand, what its underlying reasons are.

Hope this helps!

Cheers, Sidi

Book a coaching with Clara

100% Recommendation Rate

50 Meetings

12,237 Q&A Upvotes

USD 229 / Coaching

Hello!

To add on top what has been shared already, I would break it down into:

  • Clients: and see the evolution on who they are, the value proposition they are looking for, etc.
  • Competitors: how they have evolved, new value proposition they are offering
  • Ourselves: did anything change inside, regarding our product? this can encompass also pricing, services, etc.

Hope it helps!

Cheers,

Clara

Hello!

To add on top what has been shared already, I would break it down into:

  • Clients: and see the evolution on who they are, the value proposition they are looking for, etc.
  • Competitors: how they have evolved, new value proposition they are offering
  • Ourselves: did anything change inside, regarding our product? this can encompass also pricing, services, etc.

Hope it helps!

Cheers,

Clara

Related case(s)

MBB Final Round Case - Smart Education

Solved 15.2k times
MBB Final Round Case - Smart Education Our client is SmartBridge, a nonprofit educational institution offering face-to-face tutoring services. The client operates in the US. The mission of SmartBridge is to help as many students as possible to complete studies and prevent that they drop from the school system, in particular in disadvantaged areas. The client is considering starting operations for its services in the Chicago area. They hired us to understand if that makes sense. Due to the nonprofit regulation, SmartBridge should operate on its own in the market, without any partnership. How would you help our client?
4.6 5 526
| Rating: (4.6 / 5.0)

Our client is SmartBridge, a nonprofit educational institution offering face-to-face tutoring services. The client operates in the US. The mission of SmartBridge is to help as many students as possible to complete studies and prevent that they drop from the school system, in particular in disadvant ... Open whole case

Bain 1st Round Case – BlissOttica

Solved 200+ times
Bain 1st Round Case – BlissOttica Our client is a BlissOttica, an Eyewear Manufacturer that is looking to reach a 10% increase in profits. How would you help our client?
4.2 5 13
| Rating: (4.2 / 5.0)

Our client is a BlissOttica, an Eyewear Manufacturer that is looking to reach a 10% increase in profits. How would you help our client? Open whole case