How to Increase Earned Revenue

1,028 views

Published on

Three month long market research project to determine how a small theatre could increase earned revenue. Also, complicated math.

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,028
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Lisa
  • Lisa
  • Lisa
  • Devon
  • Devon
  • DevonAttendees mostly associate the Cabaret with its intimate/casual atmosphere and its variety of showsNon-attendees differ most in terms of not thinking of the Cabaret as having an intimate atmosphere or short showsNeither group strongly thought of the Cabaret as a place to get dinner
  • Devon- Consolidate with “Sources of Information” slide but make sure to call it Sources of Information to match “Observations” slide. Highlight the 0% of very unlikely in the pie chart. Put in Net Promoter Effect under pie chart. What is the scale on the right?
  • PaulSatisfaction is high, with 85% saying they are “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the Cabaret overallSatisfaction with the shows closely mimics overall satisfaction, but food and drink satisfaction lags behind
  • Paul
  • Paul
  • Paul
  • LisaAttendees: Single ticket: 50.9% just right, 24.6% good deal (75.5%)10-ticket package: 32.4% just right, 61.4% good deal (93.8%)
  • AdamFood: Affiliates 6.67x more likely to spend more than $10 on food 18.33x more likely to spend anything Non-affiliates 10x more likely to spend more than $10 on food 43x more likely to spend anything Satisfaction with time of show, predicts high food spend Weekly attendees are 1/3 as likely to buy any food as <monthly guests, Drink: YSD 88x/ grad 6.45x/ affiliate 19x/ unaffiliated 14x/, unaffiliated still most likely to spend >$10 10-ticket package buyers are 2.2x more likely to buy drinks
  • Adam
  • LisaAttendees:Entrée: 32.2% ok, 7.5% good deal (39.7%)Small plate: 37.6% ok, 7.9% good deal (45.5%)
  • Athan- updated “Price” section to have this be the final slide with hard recommendations- ADD AND ADJUST “VOLUME” AND “FREQUENCY” AREAS TO PROVIDE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONSPriceIndividual Tickets: Price up according to WTP10-Tickets: Adjust price or decrease flexibility of redemptionEntres: Cut and offer only small dishes/dessertsConsider renaming “10-ticket package”
  • Athan- updated “Price” section to have this be the final slide with hard recommendations- ADD AND ADJUST “VOLUME” AND “FREQUENCY” AREAS TO PROVIDE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONSPriceIndividual Tickets: Price up according to WTP10-Tickets: Adjust price or decrease flexibility of redemptionEntres: Cut and offer only small dishes/desserts
  • Athan- updated “Price” section to have this be the final slide with hard recommendations- ADD AND ADJUST “VOLUME” AND “FREQUENCY” AREAS TO PROVIDE FINAL RECOMMENDATIONSPriceIndividual Tickets: Price up according to WTP10-Tickets: Adjust price or decrease flexibility of redemptionEntres: Cut and offer only small dishes/desserts
  • Adam
  • Devon
  • Devon
  • How to Increase Earned Revenue

    1. 1. Yale Cabaret<br />Survey Analysis by:<br />Paul Jessen, Lisa Law, AthanSlotkin, Devon Smith, Adam Stone<br />
    2. 2. Agenda<br />
    3. 3. Client Description<br /><ul><li>Mission: to provide a laboratory for Yale School of Drama students’ daring and illuminating experimentation.
    4. 4. New 1-hour show every week
    5. 5. 8PM and 11PM Thursday – Saturday
    6. 6. Food and drinks available for purchase</li></li></ul><li>Business and Research Problems<br />Marketing Research Problem<br />Management Decision Problem<br />How can the Yale Cabaret increase earned revenue?<br />What types of communications, product offerings, and product pricing will increase revenue?<br />Increased revenue could result from:<br />Price<br />Volume<br />Frequency<br />Cabaret Attendance/Tickets:<br />What are customers&apos; motivations for attending or not attending the Cabaret?<br />What are customers&apos; consumption patterns for the Cabaret? <br />What are customers&apos; perceptions, attitudes, and awareness of the Cabaret? <br />What types of marketing efforts by the Cabaret are most effective with customers? <br />How does the Cabaret fit into customers&apos; weekend entertainment decision-making process? <br />How do potential customers decide what to do in the evening?<br />Food/Drinks: <br />What are customers&apos; consumption patterns for food/drinks at the Cabaret? <br />What are customers&apos; perceptions, attitudes, and awareness of the food and drinks at the Cabaret? <br />What are customers&apos; motivations for ordering or not ordering food and drinks at the Cabaret?<br />
    7. 7. Methodology<br />
    8. 8. Answering the Market Research Problems<br />
    9. 9. Overall Brand Perception<br />
    10. 10. Sources of Information<br />Importance of Communication Channels for Cabaret Information<br />(by % Very Important or Important) <br /><ul><li>Net Promoters = 59% (Very Likely – Somewhat Unlikely – Unlikely – Very Unlikely </li></li></ul><li> Satisfaction<br />
    11. 11. Factors Driving Satisfaction<br />A linear regression model shows that 63.4% of variance in overall satisfaction can be explained by the following factors:<br />Show satisfaction (p-value=0.000)<br />Atmosphere satisfaction (p-value=0.000)<br />Food and drink satisfaction (p-value=0.000)<br />Size of tables satisfaction (p-value=0.003)<br />All factors have a positive correlation with satisfaction rating.<br />Overall satisfaction =<br />0.098 + 0.514(show satisfaction) + 0.243(atmosphere) + 0.152(food/drink satisfaction) + 0.111(size of tables)<br />
    12. 12. Barriers to Attendance<br />Reason Non-Attendees Did not Attend Cabaret<br />(by % of Respondents) <br /><ul><li>Nearly 50% of respondents claimed lack of knowledge prevented them from attending
    13. 13. Cost does not appear to be a barrier
    14. 14. Only 4% of respondents said they did not attend because they do not like the theater</li></li></ul><li> Factors Driving Frequency<br />A linear regression model shows that 64.7% of variance in the number of performances attended can be explained by the following factors:<br />Whether someone is a YSD student (p-value=0.000)<br />Whether someone bought a 10-ticket package (p-value=0.000)<br />Whether someone is a non-student Yale affiliate (p-value=0.021)<br />Overall satisfaction rating (p-value=0.000)<br />Size of tables satisfaction (p-value=0.012)<br />All factors have a positive correlation with frequency.<br />Ln(performances attended last season)=<br />-0.768 + 1.90(YSD student) + 1.03(bought 10-ticket) + 0.241(Yale affiliate) + 0.181(overall satisfaction) + 0.098(size of tables)<br />
    15. 15. Size of Table Satisfaction<br />44.6% of the variance in table size satisfaction can be explained by the following factors:<br />“Seating arrangements” satisfaction (p-value=0.000)<br />Importance of “how crowded” restaurants are (p-value=0.013)<br />Not eating at Cabaret due to poor service (p-value=0.058)<br />Not wanting to eat with strange people at Cabaret (p-value=0.032)<br />Seating has a positive correlation with table size satisfaction; all others have a negative correlation.<br />Size of table satisfaction = 2.98 + 0.562(seating satisfaction) - 0.118(how crowded) - 0.0949(poor service) - 0.080(don’t like eating with strange people) <br />
    16. 16. Willingness to Pay-Tickets<br /><ul><li>Single Tickets - $15, $10 for Students
    17. 17. Non-Attendees WTP suggests that 50% of respondents are willing to pay approximately $15 or higher.
    18. 18. 10 Ticket Package - $65, $45 for Students
    19. 19. Non-Attendees WTP indicates that 50% of respondents are willing to pay approximately $75 or higher.</li></li></ul><li> Drivers of Food/Drink Spend<br />Logistic Analysis predicts drivers of food and drink consumption:<br />Food:<br /><ul><li>Non-student Yale affiliation (18x undergrads)
    20. 20. Non-Yale affiliates (43x undergrads)
    21. 21. Satisfaction with show times
    22. 22. Less frequent performing arts attendance</li></ul>Drink:<br /><ul><li>YSD affiliation (88x), non-YSD graduate students (6x), non-student Yale affiliates (19x), non-Yale affiliates (14x)
    23. 23. 10-ticket buyers</li></li></ul><li> Barriers to Food/Drink Purchases<br />Reason Attendees Did Not Eat at the Cabaret<br />(by % Strongly Agree or Agree) <br /><ul><li>Cost is primary barrier
    24. 24. Customers don’t think of the Cabaret as a restaurant.
    25. 25. Customers are concerned about the food + show aspect of Cabaret. </li></li></ul><li>Willingness to Pay – Food<br /><ul><li>Entree – Approximately $17
    26. 26. Non-Attendees WTP suggests that 50% of respondents are willing to pay approximately $15 or higher.
    27. 27. Small Plates and Appetizers – Approximately $6 – $8
    28. 28. Non-Attendees WTP indicates that 50% of respondents are willing to pay approximately $9 or higher.</li></li></ul><li> Recommendations-Price<br />
    29. 29. Recommendations-Volume<br />
    30. 30. Recommendations-Frequency<br />
    31. 31. Questions?<br />
    32. 32. Appendix<br />
    33. 33. Feature Satisfaction<br />Satisfaction with Cabaret Attributes<br />(by % Strongly Agree or Agree) <br /><ul><li>Consumers tend to be most dissatisfied with anything relating to the kitchen and bar, perhaps due to a perception of the Cabaret not being a dining experience
    34. 34. Those who do go to the Cabaret tend to be highly satisfied with the show; hence the need to get customers in the door
    35. 35. Show satisfaction and ticket price inelasticity seems to present an opportunity to move away from 10-ticket packages and price up</li></li></ul><li> Segmenting the Market<br /><ul><li>Cluster analysis of consumer behavior/attitude data in any form failed to produce distinct, meaningful, stable customer segments
    36. 36. Distinct: On standardized or non-standardized scales, cluster centroids were too close together to suggest real differences in behavior and attitude
    37. 37. Meaningful: Cluster centroids often contained confusing or contradictory combinations of factors/variables, producing no actionable results
    38. 38. Stable: 20-25% of individuals were reclassified based on changes in linkage method, distance measure, and K-means reclustering</li></li></ul><li> Free Response Suggestions<br /><ul><li>Only do 1 show per night
    39. 39. Have breaks during the show to get food/drinks
    40. 40. Do something pre-show
    41. 41. Student discount on food
    42. 42. Keep table reservations
    43. 43. More types of beer
    44. 44. Waitlisted people get to order/eat
    45. 45. Post-doc or staff night early in season
    46. 46. More food options at late night
    47. 47. Run shows for 2 weeks
    48. 48. Budget night w/ fixed price (all included)
    49. 49. More vegetarian options
    50. 50. Online ticket purchases for YSD
    51. 51. Use YDC and GPSS to get word out </li></li></ul><li> Eating Out<br />Attribute Importance for Eating Out<br />(by % Very Important or Important) <br /><ul><li>Consumers need to perceive that they are getting value for their meal both in food quality, ambience, and reservation time</li></li></ul><li> The Combo Package<br /><ul><li>Consumers seem to be interested in purchasing a fixed price package of tickets, food, and drinks for a reasonable price. This could be an opportunity to increase margins, and better predict food purchases for the evening, thereby alleviating some operational issues. </li></li></ul><li>Willingness to Pay – Dessert and Beer<br /><ul><li>Dessert – Approximately $3 – $5
    52. 52. Non-Attendees WTP suggests that 50% of respondents are willing to pay approximately $7 or higher.
    53. 53. Beer – Approximately $4 – $6
    54. 54. Non-Attendees WTP indicates that 50% of respondents are willing to pay approximately $5 or higher.</li></li></ul><li>Willingness to Pay - Wine<br /><ul><li>Glass of Wine – $4
    55. 55. Non-Attendees WTP suggests that 50% of respondents are willing to pay approximately $6 or higher.
    56. 56. Bottle of Wine
    57. 57. Non-Attendees WTP indicates that 50% of respondents are willing to pay approximately $20 or higher.</li></li></ul><li> Population Validity <br />
    58. 58. Population Validity<br />

    ×