BrandPro Simulation Learning Diary

Team 28 – No Rules
Ananya Verma | Arya Ghosh | Sravan Kumar | Vishnu Aduru
Distribution Charts
 Share Price Index

SPI
160

146
140 141
Percentage

120
124

100
100 99

80 82

60

40

20

0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Year
 Revenue

Revenue
90
82.23
80
72.99
70
60.01
60

50 44.93
37.12
40
33.69
30

20

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6

Year
 Market Share ($)

Market Share ($)

35
32
31
Percentage

30
25
2524
21
20 18

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Year
 Earnings Before Tax
EBT (M$)
30
27
26
25 23

20
17
1513
10
10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Year
 Volume
Volume
450

400 382.53

350
305.75
300
265.44
250

200 184.31

150
115.21 124.18

100

50

0
1 2 3 4 5 6

Year
 Market Share (U)

Market Share (U)

40
Percentage

35 34
32
30
26
25
22
2019
17
15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6

Year
Communication
Im p ortan ce on a scale of 100

Communication - Savvy
50 50 49 47 46
Communication - Pros
50 44 44 44 44 44 44 44
45 45
40
35 31 31 31 31 31 31 40

Importance on a scale of 100

30 23 25
25 20 22 35 31 30 31
19 19 29 28 28
20 30 27 26
25 25 25
15
10 25 21
5 20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 15
Year 10
5
Convenience Economy Performance
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Year

Convenience Economy Performance

 Marketing & Sales

Mojo Moon

5
Expense

2.8 2.6 2.6

2.5 2.8
4

3 2

2
3 3 3
2.5 2.5
1 1.7

0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Year
Market & Competitive Analysis
 Segment Attractiveness
Pros Savvy
Growth Rate 35

30
30

25

20 20
20

15 15
15

10 10 10 10
10

5
5

0
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Year
 Segment-wise Competitive Position

Pros Savvy

Percentage $
70
Percentage $

70 70 63
60 60 55
49
45 46
50
42
50 43
41 40 39
39
40 34 40 3332
31 29 29
27 28 27 25
30 23 24 30 23 23
20 20
17 17
20 20 14
9 9
7 6 6
10 10

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Company T Company M Company R Company T Company M Company R

 Competition analysis in the PRO segment
Comp. Brand Features Battery Processing Display Price
Toiz
Toga

Competition analysis in the Savvy segment

Comp. Brand Features Battery Processing Display Price
Toki
Rocx
 Purchase Intention
50%

45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%
0 1 2 3 4 5

Moon Linear (Moon) Mojo Linear (Mojo)

Conclusions drawn in Year 0

Allocated Brand
Non-Utilization of
spending to all
budget allocated
segments at once

Considered Savvy to Both Pros and

be the most growing Trendy are
segment important for Moon

Reduction in
attributes offered
The traps, pitfalls and navigation of learning
landscape
 Strategies Adopted
Round Segmentation Targeting Positioning Outcome
Moon- Trendy
Moon was positioned as an expensive phone
Failure - As both the segments of
1 All segments Moon- Pros predominantly targeted at users who want high
customers felt it was not for them
performance and an expensive price tag
Mojo-Savvy
Moon – Pros Brand spend was concentrated on only single Success – The emergent strategy
2 segment as opposed to previous segment became a success
Mojo-Savvy
The product changes on moon now cemented its
Moon – Pros position strongly in the pro segment but Moon became a huge success
3 surprisingly in the trendy segment also had a commanding >40% market share.
Mojo - savvy share of 10%. Changes were made to mojo to SPI increase of 46
Chose to serve Pros and make it a leader in its segment
savvy based on segment Failed. Share dipped to 25% as
attractiveness Went ahead with minimal changes to moon’s user needs have evolved and the
Moon – Pros product offering as we were the leader in the performance and economy have
4 segment and no bench-marking could be done become big decision criteria in
Mojo - savvy
against others. Changed Mojos features. this segment. Mojo performed
good
Moon – Pros Success – Both brands increased
With good understanding of the perception maps,
5 sales by >50% and ended with a
Mojo – High savvy communication was also taken care of. positive SPI
 Key Learnings

• Though excellent in terms of features

• The multi-segment positioning of
desired by the segment and brand
moon in in the initial rounds did not
awareness, purchase intention was
work well. Communication <25% till round 2.
• Focus of efforts and brand resources in-line with • Underestimated the importance of
should be as clearly defined as positioning communication w.r.t brand’s attributes
possible
to customers

Evolving
with
Clear cut
customer
positioning
Effects of Learning curve needs

• • With continued success in round 2 &

Pricing has to be perfected in order
Strategic 3, we believed the same strategy can
to capture a good market share
• pricing be applied to subsequent rounds.
Profitability should not be sacrificed
• Failed to take into consideration the
in the chase for market share
segment needs that were evolving
over time
Thank You!!!