CategoryCompetition.pdf

W15113
MANAGING THE COMPETITION: CATEGORY CAPTAINCY ON THE
FROZEN FOOD AISLE
Professors Madhu Viswanathan and Neil Bendle wrote this case solely to provide material for class discussion. The authors do not
intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. The authors may have disguised certain names
and other identifying information to protect confidentiality.
This publication may not be transmitted, photocopied, digitized or otherwise reproduced in any form or by any means without the
permission of the copyright holder. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights
organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Business School, Western
University, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 0N1; (t) 519.661.3208; (e) cases@ivey.ca; www.iveycases.com.
Copyright © 2015, Richard Ivey School of Business Foundation Version: 2015-04-10
Wilson Chen1
didn’t know what to make of the meeting that had just finished. He had expected it to be a
typical meeting with the buyer from BigCity Grocers (BigCity), a chain of food retailers, but it had been
far from routine. BigCity had deployed a variety of executives from marketing and operations who had
explained a new proposal to Chen. The upside seemed massive for Chen’s company but, sadly, so did the
downside. One thing he was sure of was that he would spend the month before the next meeting working
with colleagues to respond to BigCity Grocers’ request. When Chen entered the next meeting with the
retailer, he wanted to be prepared with a full proposal to explain everything that his firm would do for
BigCity. But first he needed to plan the proposal and determine its financial implications.
FROZEN READY-MEALS
Chen managed key relationships for a frozen food company, Freezer Foods. He was responsible for all of
Freezer Foods’ sales of frozen ready-made meals in the United States Industrial Midwest. His
responsibilities ensured he spent most of his time working with the big supermarket chains, of which
BigCity Grocers was one of the most important. He liked to think his job was helping food retailers be
successful by satisfying the demands of their customers.
Chen’s job was made more challenging by the presence of Freezer Foods’ big rival, TV Meals. The
product lines of the two firms were directly comparable. For instance, consumers could buy very similar
packages of lasagna, chili con carne, and mac and cheese from the two companies. Many customers
swore by the products of one company or the other. Indeed, some customers would simply not buy the
lasagna on offer from the rival if they were loyal to the other company’s recipe. Generally, such a
willingness to search — the percentage of customers willing to delay purchases, change stores or reduce
purchase quantities to avoid switching brands — was about 30 per cent. This significant proportion of the
consumer base meant that both companies, Freezer Foods and TV Meals, had loyal customers that they
could count on. That said, a greater number of customers, the remaining 70 per cent, thought one frozen
dinner was basically the same as another. Success, therefore, Chen found, was not only in persuading the
1
Although this case is based on true events and real data, the identities of the firms and people have been disguised.
This document is authorized for use only in Prof. Smitu Malhotra's REM, Term - IV, BMJ 2022-24 at Xavier Labour Relations Institute (XLRI) from Jun 2023 to Sep 2023.

9B15A014
end consumer to buy the products but also about developing a productive relationships with the grocers to
ensure that Freezer Foods products figured prominently on their store’s shelves. For example, being
positioned at eye level or at floor level could make a big difference to sales. Thus, the major determinant
of success in this industry was probably simply getting the product into the freezer section, so it would be
available for purchase by consumers.
Competition between the two firms had historically been meaningful but far from lethal. Every now and
then, a small price cut by one of the companies would stimulate demand a little, only to be matched by a
similar response from the rival firm. The price-cutting would usually stop at that point before the modest
margins on frozen food were too heavily eroded. Indeed, partly because the retail chains seemed keen to
maintain ties with both the big companies, neither Freezer Foods nor TV Meals had ever managed to
remove its rival from the freezer section of any major grocer.
New recipes were also a source of competition. Occasionally a new product launch would see one firm
gain a small spike in relative sales, but again, it was usually only a temporary phenomenon. Recipes were
relatively easy to replicate, and it was rare for any firm to come up with a product so appealing that it
fundamentally changed the competitive landscape. Some years, Freezer Foods or TV Meals performed
better than other years; the difference between a good and a bad year was significant to each firm’s
bottom line — and to Chen’s bonus — but nothing much had threatened either firm’s ability to continue
competing in the market.
As Chen emerged from the meeting with BigCity Grocers, he thought that maybe all that was about to
change. The BigCity proposal had certainly engendered fear; however, that emotion didn’t capture all the
thoughts flying around in Chen’s head. He had to admit there was also a large chunk of hope. The
proposal also had a huge potential upside.
BigCity wanted one of its suppliers, either Freezer Foods or TV Meals, to completely take over the
management of the entire frozen ready-meal category in all BigCity supermarkets. Chen, of course,
wanted his firm to win the right to manage the category. He needed a plan, but to formulate that plan he
knew he first needed to better understand what BigCity wanted, and why exactly it was making this
proposal.
THE BIGCITY PROPOSAL
The BigCity Grocers account mattered to Chen. This supermarket sold nearly 20 per cent of the ready-
made meals in the Industrial Midwest; and he worried about the rival firm, TV Meals, taking over the
management of the category. If TV Meals were in charge of the frozen food category at BigCity, he
feared what would happen. At the extreme, he wondered whether TV Meals would simply deny shelf
space to Freezer Foods. Chen couldn’t imagine his firm being forced off the BigCity shelves — and if
that did happen, he couldn’t imagine Freezer Foods would continue to employ him.
BigCity was proposing a category captaincy arrangement. The plan was that Freezer Foods or TV Meals
would become the “captain,” effectively taking over day-to-day management of the category from
BigCity Grocers. The proposal was something that many of his colleagues in other categories had
experienced. Indeed, this arrangement was becoming common practice for many retailers.2
Chen had
never experienced it, however, and wasn’t quite sure of the thinking behind it.
2
Sean Sands, “Strategic Issues in Retail: Category Captaincy,” The ACRS Thought Leadership Series, May 2010,
Melbourne, Australia, Monash University.

9B15A014
BigCity Grocers had formally requested proposals from its two major suppliers to become the category
captain for frozen foods. The documents Chen had been handed made it clear that BigCity Grocers
wanted either Freezer Foods or TV Meals to take on the new role; no other bidders were invited to
participate, as no other company was thought to have the necessary skills to do the job. Few outside of the
retail industry understood what it meant to be a category captain. The request for proposals that BigCity
gave to Chen outlined that the category captain would be responsible for assortment planning,
determining which stock-keeping units (SKUs)3
to stock and the selling price for each SKU.
The manufacturer who won the right to be category captain would control the placement of the various
SKUs within the freezer aisle. BigCity would, in effect, make the freezers available and would enable the
category captain to decide what products to sell and, in general, allow the category captain take on all
management functions related to the frozen ready-meals category.
In the proposal, BigCity suggested that the manufacturers use a direct-store-delivery system. This meant
that each individual manufacturer would be responsible for ensuring the freezer cabinets at each
supermarket were stocked with the products specified by category captain. The manufacturers would thus
need to increase their distribution network to ensure they were able to effectively supply product to the
shelves.
CATEGORY CAPTAINCY
Category management was nothing new in retail. The theory behind managing each category as one entity
was difficult to argue with. Managing the category as a whole, though complicated to do, should
theoretically be more profitable than managing the individuals SKUs. For example, managing an
individual SKU, or even an individual brand, to maximize its profitability might encourage price-cutting
in an attempt to steal sales from other SKUs, or brands. The lower prices might drive increased sales and
profits for the focal SKU but reduce the profits of other SKUs by more than the increase in profits gained
by the focal SKU. Thus, independently managing each SKU, or brand, could earn less from the category
as a whole than managing the entire category. For example, a retailer might manage the soft drinks aisle
to maximize profits from the category of soft drinks rather than attempt to maximize profits from two-litre
Coke alone or from an individual brand, such as Coke or Pepsi. Managing the category as a whole thus
ensured that any losses from the cannibalization of other SKUs in the category were considered when
decisions were made.
Despite its theoretical advantages, category management had some downsides, not the least being the
complexity of the management tasks. When making a decision, for example, the category manager
needed to not only project how price would impact sales of the SKU being considered but also how any
price change would impact sales of all other SKUs in the same category. To give an example, the
category manager at a large retailer needed to be able to predict how a cut in the price of the one-pint Ben
and Jerry’s Chunky Monkey ice cream would change sales of the large tub of private-label vanilla ice
cream.
Large supermarkets stocked multiple categories; thus, to gain the benefits from effective category
management, retailers would need to be experts in every category. The supermarket would need to have
expertise in frozen foods, candy, soft drinks, pet foods, household goods, etc. The informational problem
faced by the supermarket was exacerbated by the fact that, within supermarket chains, the optimal
3
SKUs refer to stock-keeping units, which are specific combinations of product and size. Thus, a 2-litre bottle of Diet Coke
would be one SKU, and the caffeine-free version of the 2-litre bottle would be a different SKU.

9B15A014
assortment differed by store location. For example, the relative volumes of straight cut and seasoned fries
typically differed between stores in the same chain, depending on the consumer preferences in each
store’s local community. The logistics task alone was massive. The aim was to ensure that popular
products were available to be sold without tying up capital and valuable shelf space with SKUs that
weren’t selling sufficiently quickly. Rather than rely on fallible human intuition, managing the shelves of
the local supermarket often involved more computing power and greater use of data than featured in the
first trip to the moon. As noted by the Category Management Association: “Category management is data
intensive and analytical in character. Category management is about understanding data.”4
Category captaincy comprised a subset of category management activities. In a category captaincy
situation, an arrangement existed between a retailer and a manufacturer in a given category in which a
manufacturer influenced category decisions for all the products in the category. Basically, the category
captain was an outside party that managed the category for the retailer. Thinking through the idea of
category management illustrated one of the most interesting features of category captaincy. The
manufacturer influenced the assortment and prices of all SKUs in the category sold by the retailer. In
other words, the category captain influenced the assortment and prices of its rivals’ SKUs. For example,
Coke might determine the assortment and prices of Pepsi within a big retailer, such as Walmart.
An effective category captain usually brought specialist knowledge about the category that the retailer did
not possess. The category captain might even be put in charge of the plan-o-gram, the map of the store’s
layout. The category captain was also sometimes put in charge of restocking, whereby the manufacturer
and not the retailer monitored the shelves and added product when necessary. When a consumer saw a
person stocking the shelves of a supermarket, it was quite possible that the person was not employed by
the retailer but by the manufacturer.
Category captaincy arrangements, despite being not well understood outside the retail sector, were
common in the sector of fast moving consumer goods. Captaincy arrangements were well known in the
grocery business and also featured in other types of retail, such as fashion. Small retailers might be
thought to be most in need of help in managing their product lines; however, evidence suggested that
larger retailers made considerable use of category captain arrangements. Although compared with smaller
retailers, larger retailers probably had more technical management skills, presumably they also
experienced more complex management challenges. Chen was given some data from a colleague in
another category, frozen pizza, which showed how category captaincy arrangements worked there.
Exhibit 1 shows the average revenues in a category depending upon the captaincy arrangement chosen.
Exhibit 2 shows the average selling space in the category of chains, given their category captaincy
arrangements.
WHAT MAKES A SUCCESSFUL CAPTAIN?
Progressive Grocer magazine ran an annual competition to recognize “overall excellence in innovative,
creative, profit-generating category management platforms”5
The questions asked by the judges gave an
idea of what successful category captaincy looked like:
4
Category Management Association, “Clarifying Definitions,” www.cpgcatnet.org/page/196881/, accessed March 4, 2014.
5
Jim Dudlicek, “Last Day to Enter Progressive Grocer’s Category Captains Award,” ProgressiveGrocer.com, August 6,
2014, www.progressivegrocer.com/awards-events/awards/pg-seeks-entries-category-captains-awards#sthash.ydMAG
VE3.dpuf, accessed November 16, 2014.

9B15A014
• What was the most important new shopper insight or innovation you brought to your retail customers
last year?
• How did your new insight or innovation build total category volume?
• What success models did you recommend to your customers in assortment, pricing and
merchandising?
• Did your category program gain new accounts and expand existing ones?
• Did your program invigorate a dormant or declining category?
• Did your program leverage social media or mobile technologies in a new and creative way?
• Did your program address unique needs or issues of your retail customers?
• What are your retail partners saying about your category management efforts? 6
Category captaincy arrangements changed over time, but, once awarded, a category captain was likely to
maintain possession of the category captaincy for at least two years.7
Changing category captaincy
arrangements was a significant task for both a retailer and a manufacturer, which tended to suggest that
the category captaincy arrangements would not change on a regular basis.
COMPETITIVE CONSIDERATIONS
Chen had been aware of the phenomenon of category captaincy for a few years but he felt he was far from
being an expert. He had heard that some legal issues were involved with category captaincy. For instance,
Chen remembered something about a controversial antitrust case, Conwood Co. v. United States Tobacco
Co. In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that United States Tobacco abused its category captaincy
status in the chewing tobacco category and awarded $1.06 billion in damages, one of the largest verdicts
in antitrust history. That said, Chen had noticed just how common category captaincy had become, which
he took to mean that violating competition law didn’t seem to be as big a problem for category captaincy
arrangements as an outsider might expect. Although he was far from a being lawyer, and so wasn’t
confident he was correct, Chen thought that what generally mattered to the courts was the outcome of the
category captaincy arrangement (i.e., “was the consumer hurt?”), not the form of the relationship or the
precise terms of the arrangement.
What wasn’t clear to Chen was how a non-category captain performed when a rival was awarded the
contract to be a category captain. What sort of impact might the new arrangement have on the profits of a
manufacturer who was not selected? Was there any positive benefit that the rivals could expect when a
competitor was selected as category captain?
A major consideration, and what those involved often commented on, was the informational
considerations involved in category captaincy.8
To effectively plan assortments and to price the goods
appropriately, the captain needed to receive information on all sales in the category, including the sales
made by rival firms. The category captain would know which SKUs were performing well, the prices
charged to BigCity by the rival manufacturers and which retail locations were most profitable. This
information might have significance beyond the category captaincy relationship with BigCity Grocers.
When he thought deeply about it, Chen wondered what his firm, Freezer Foods, would actually be
providing in a category captaincy arrangement. He had always thought that the quality of the product was
6
Ibid.
7
Madhu Viswanathan, “Economic Impact of Category Captaincy: An Examination of Assortments and Prices,” unpublished
PhD dissertation, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States, 2012.
8
Sands, op. cit.

9B15A014
a key determinant of success — that is, if Freezer Foods provided a better frozen lasagna, the end
consumer would flock to buy it. What BigCity was asking for seemed to be much more than to providing
quality frozen food. Perhaps the manufacturers were not so much competing to provide the best products
to the consumers but to provide the best services and consultancy to the retailers.
A further concern was that, in many situations, after the relationship had been secured, the category
captain became the gatekeeper to the retailer. For example, any new products would need to be approved
by the category captain before they appeared on the shelves. Chen wondered what effect this arrangement
might have on innovation and the creation of new products.
Finally, as he was thinking about competition, Chen wondered how the category captaincy might affect
the competition between retailers. Many category captaincy arrangements were already in effect, so
BigCity certainly wasn’t ahead of the competition. So why did BigCity believe that category captaincy
was the best strategy for it to adopt?
MEASURES OF SUCCESS IN THE GROCERY BUSINESS
As a for-profit business, the bottom line was the key metric that Freezer Foods considered. Any plan
adopted would need to be justified in terms of the profits that Freezer Foods could expect. Because Chen
would ultimately be judged on profits, he needed to have a clear understanding of the contribution margin
of all the SKUs in the category. BigCity Grocer had similar concerns; the retailer would explicitly
compare the expected profits from awarding the contract to either Freezer Foods or TV Meals. Chen
thought he had a good relationship with the managers at BigCity Grocers, but his counterpart at TV Meals
likely thought the same thing. Chen didn’t want to fool himself — he would be very surprised if
BigCity’s projected profits from the category weren’t the biggest factor in deciding which manufacturer
was awarded the contract.
Within the industry, revenue was often discussed as being an important metric. This focus tended to be
useful to show trends and was often thought of as a measure of power — the retailers that sold the largest
volumes in terms of sales revenue tended to be able to drive harder bargains with their suppliers.
Chen also used a variety of metrics when considering performance in the category. He knew that the
retailer would be worried about the level of out of stock,9
the percentage of outlets where a SKU was
listed (i.e., the SKU was listed as being available) but was not available when looked for. The easiest way
to minimize out of stock was to order large amounts of inventory; however, this solution was potentially
costly as a) capital was tied up in inventory, b) unsold food perished, and c) inventory took up valuable
shelf space that could otherwise display other, more productive goods. One measure of inventory control
used to monitor excess inventory holding was inventory turns, which was easily calculated as product
(SKU/brand, etc.) revenues divided by the average level of inventory for that product or SKU. Another
important measure for retailers might be service levels, such as the percentage of on-time deliveries.
The size of a given category might be assessed by the number of SKUs. Thus, a manufacturer would tend
to be interested in share of shelf — a given brand’s percentage of facings (frontal views of a single
product on a fully stocked shelf). Manufacturers also tended to be interested in numeric distribution —
the percentage of outlets that carried a given product.
9
All metrics in this section from Paul Farris, Neil Bendle, Phil Pfeifer and David Reibstein, Marketing Metrics: The Definitive
Guide to Measuring Marketing Performance, Wharton School Publishing, Philadelphia, 2010.

9B15A014
Finally, retailers usually monitored the Brand Development Index (BDI) and Category Development
Index (CDI), which represented how successful a given brand (or category for CDI) was within a given
group. These indexes were calculated by comparing how sales to that group compared with sales to the
wider population. For example, if households shopping at the store in Arlington, Virginia, bought, on
average, 0.3 boxes of Cheerios each week, whereas the average across all stores was 0.2 boxes of
Cheerios a week, the BDI for Cheerios at the Arlington store would be 0.3 ÷ 0.2 = 1.5. Given that the BDI
was greater than 1, the Arlington store could be said to be over-performing compared with the average
Cheerio sales.
WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF CATEGORY CAPTAINCY?
As Chen thought through how to assess the impact of category captaincy, four big questions came to
mind:
1. Does using a category captain arrangement reduce the overall assortment of products?
2. Do category captains selectively alter the assortment to favour their own products over those of their
rivals?
3. Do profits increase or decrease under category captaincy?
4. Do consumers benefit overall from category captaincy?
Because Chen was interested in the impact on the BDI and the assortment that consumers saw on the
shelves, he turned to real-world evidence. He had read a study of what actually happened in a market
when category captaincy arrangements changed, and decided to review the study’s data. Exhibit 3 shows
the average BDI when one of two manufacturers has the category captaincy and when the retailer resumes
management of the category inhouse. Exhibit 4 uses the same situations but shows each manufacturer’s
assortment share (percentage of category SKUs supplied).
Chen then considered some other data. Exhibit 5 shows the BDI, and Exhibit 6 shows the assortment
share, depending upon the captaincy arrangement. These data describe scenarios when the category
captaincy changed from one manufacturer to the other.
Further in the same report, Chen had seen some other relevant information. The author had taken data
from the real world and created counterfactual projections. In other words, an economic modeller used
real-world data to create a model that described the world, and then, armed with this model and
assumptions, the economic modeller created counterfactual scenarios, effectively testing how we would
expect the data to differ if the world was different. In this case, the modeller choose to estimate what
would happen if a retailer currently managing a category in-house appointed a manufacturer to take over
as category captain. Exhibit 7 shows the results of the model with respect to the number of SKUs of each
manufacturer on the shelves under the current situation (retailer managing in-house) and the
counterfactual situation after the change (manufacturer Y has taken over as category captain). Exhibit 8
shows the projected profits of each manufacturer and the retailer under the current situation (retailer
managing in-house) and the counterfactual situation (manufacturer Y has taken over as category captain).
This exhibit also shows the projected consumer surplus from a change, which is the value created for
consumers by the change from the category being managed in-house to being manufacturer-managed.
This value can be thought of as the equivalent amount of cash that would need to be distributed to
consumers (across the whole market, not to each individual consumer) to make them just as happy as
would the proposed change from a retailer-managed arrangement to a category captaincy arrangement.

9B15A014
Chen wasn’t sure what the answer was but he felt that he should be able to answer simple questions such
as: Is category captaincy a good thing? If so, for whom is it a good thing?
THE OFFER TO BIGCITY
Chen’s first task was to understand why BigCity was pursuing a category captaincy. BigCity Grocers was
a retailer of considerable size. It had large budgets available for things it needed to do and was not averse
to employing consultants and our hiring staff to provide the information needed to do the job. What could
Freezer Foods or TV Meals provide that couldn’t be bought on the open market — or at least at a
reasonable price?
What was BigCity Grocers expecting to achieve by bringing in a manufacturer to manage this central
element of its stores? It seemed like a radical change but category captaincy arrangements were common
enough across retail that there surely must be some benefits to the retailer.
When he had thought through what BigCity wanted, Chen felt he needed to put together an attractive
offer. What effect should he assume category captaincy would have? What should he offer BigCity?
Would BigCity pay the winning captain to manage the category, or would the captain pay BigCity for the
right to manage the category?
Chen wasn’t even sure what he could offer as part of the Freezer Foods proposal. Was this proposal
similar to a traditional contract, and so Chen would have to specify service-level agreements? Would
Chen need to specific a maximum level of stock-outs so as not to negatively affect customer satisfaction
by missing SKUs within the store? How would stock-outs be measured and monitored? What would be
the appropriate form of redress if things went wrong?
BigCity Grocers hadn’t even specified a length of term for the contract to be category captain. What
would be a suitable term length? Freezer Foods would almost certainly need to make considerable
investments (e.g., in information technology). What was the chance of the relationship being renewed
once it had been initiated? Chen knew that any assumptions he made would affect what he could offer the
retailer. He felt he needed to better understand what winning or losing the category captaincy meant for
Freezer Foods before he could construct an appropriate offer to make to BigCity Grocers.
What else could — and should — he offer BigCity? Was there anything about the bidding process itself
that was likely to make a difference to the way the deal was made?
Chen’s head was spinning. What terms should he propose?

9B15A014
EXHIBIT 1: EXAMPLES OF QUARTERLY REVENUE BY CATEGORY CAPTAINCY ARRANGEMENT
Source: Madhu Viswanathan, “Economic Impact of Category Captaincy: An Examination of Assortments and Prices,”
unpublished PhD dissertation, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States,
2012.
EXHIBIT 2: SELLING SPACE BY CATEGORY CAPTAINCY ARRANGEMENT
Note: Index = 1 when the selling space of the average store is equal to the market average.
2012.

9B15A014
EXHIBIT 3: BRAND DEVELOPMENT INDEX OF TWO MANUFACTURERS IN TWO SCENARIOS—
WHEN ONE IS CATEGORY CAPTAIN AND WHEN THE RETAILER RESUMES CATEGORY
MANAGEMENT
Note: BDI = brand development index
2012.
EXHIBIT 4: ASSORTMENT SHARE OF TWO MANUFACTURERS IN TWO SCENARIOS—WHEN ONE
IS CATEGORY CAPTAIN AND WHEN THE RETAILER RESUMES CATEGORY MANAGEMENT
2012.

9B15A014
EXHIBIT 5: BRAND DEVELOPMENT INDEX OF TWO MANUFACTURERS IN TWO SCENARIOS—
WHEN ONE IS CATEGORY CAPTAIN AND WHEN THE CAPTAINCY IS LOST TO THE RIVAL
2012.
EXHIBIT 6: ASSORTMENT SHARE OF TWO MANUFACTURERS IN TWO SCENARIOS—WHEN ONE
IS CATEGORY CAPTAIN AND WHEN THE CAPTAINCY IS LOST TO THE RIVAL
2012.

9B15A014
EXHIBIT 7: COUNTERFACTUAL PROJECTIONS—SELECTION OF PRODUCTS WHEN CATEGORY
IS RETAILER-MANAGED AND WHEN ONE MANUFACTURER ASSUMES CATEGORY CAPTAINCY
Total SKUs Stocked When
Retailer Manages Category
Total SKUs Stocked When
Manufacturer Y Is Category Captain
Total SKUs Stocked (out of top
15 in category)
10 14
SKUs from Manufacturer Y
Stocked
5 10
SKUs from Manufacturer Z
Stocked
5 4
Note: SKUs = stock-keeping units
2012.
EXHIBIT 8: COUNTERFACTUAL PROJECTIONS—PROFITS WHEN CATEGORY IS RETAILER-
MANAGED AND WHEN ONE MANUFACTURER ASSUMES CATEGORY CAPTAINCY
Profits When Retailer Manages
Category
Profit When Manufacturer Y Is
Category Captain
Retailer Profits $41,295 $98,096
Manufacturer Y Profits $29,608 $40,411
Manufacturer Z Profits $59,748 $49,679
Total Profits $130,651 $188,186
Impact on Consumers* Baseline $8,982
* Giving this amount of cash to consumers in total in this market would make them equally happy as the change
2012.

CategoryCompetition.pdf

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to CategoryCompetition.pdf

Similar to CategoryCompetition.pdf (12)

More from PriyanshiGupta21488

More from PriyanshiGupta21488 (7)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (9)

CategoryCompetition.pdf