Running Head DOMENICO WINERY’S COMPETITIVE SET 1 .docx

Running Head: DOMENICO WINERY’S COMPETITIVE SET
1
Domenico Winery’s Catering and Events Competitive Market
Analysis
HTM 515-01 Hospitality Management Internship
Fall 2018
Paris Mijatovich
Student ID: 916571856
Dr. Andrew Walls
2
Table of Contents
Executive
Summary………………………………………………………………

……………….3
Section I -
Introduction/Background……………………………………………
………………...5
Section II - Statement of the Research
Project……………………………………………………9
Section III -
Methodology…………………………………………………………
……………..11
Section IV -
Findings………………………………………………………………
…………….14
Section V -
Conclusions…………………………………………………………
……………….18
Section VI -
Recommendations……………………………………………………
…………….23
References……………………………………………………………
…………………………..25
Appendix………………………………………………………………
…………………………27

3
Executive Summary
Parameters of the Report
Domenico Winery is an urban, family-owned establishment
located on Industrial Road in
San Carlos, California. The business features both on-site wine
production facilities as well as a
a 6,200 square foot venue space for rent. Due to the rapid
growth in the Catering and Events
Department since it became a catering venue four years ago,
Domenico Winery must examine
where its current business lay among its competitors in the Bay
Area. The purpose of this study
is to create a competitive set analysis for Domenico Winery’s
Catering and Events Department
and establish a list of feasible recommendations for the future
of its business so that it may
remain profitable and sustain a competitive advantage.
Description of the Problem / Statement of the Research Project
This research project aims to detail Domenico Winery’s current
event production services
as they pertain to weddings, and compare its operations with
that of two other winery-events

businesses within 25 miles of Domenico Winery. This research
will be important to Domenico
Winery’s long-term events reputation as the population steadily
increases throughout the Bay
Area, and the demand for wedding and events venues increases.
The businesses operating within
Domenico Winery’s competitive set include Dogpatch Wine
Works in San Francisco and
Thomas Fogarty Winery in Woodside. The production services
of each business will be analyzed
by examining the current venue metrics for weddings at each
establishment, such as venue
amenities, restrictions, and guest capacity; each business’s
event planning services included with
the venue rental; the advantages and disadvantages each space
offers in terms of its location; and
some financial basics that a future wedding couple might
consider before deciding on a venue.
4
This study will benefit the owners of Domenico Winery as well
as the Director of Events
by taking a closer look and performing an in-depth analysis that

the company currently cannot
perform on their own time due to being increasingly busy. It is
important for the key
stakeholders in this business to understand what their
competition is offering so that they can
choose to stay ahead and differentiate their business from the
others in the market.
Methodology
Key sales points for Domenico Winery will be obtained from
the company’s private
Google Drive sales documents, to which only I and the Sales
Department have access.
Comparative data for Dogpatch Wine Works and Thomas
Fogarty will be drawn from their
respective company websites, as well as Wedding Spot, an
online wedding venue database.
Visual data for interior and exterior context will be drawn from
each company’s brochures and
websites.
Summary of Findings and Conclusions
Overall, Domenico Winery maintains a competitive advantage
over the other venues in
its competitive set. On a scale of affordability, Domenico

Winery falls in a moderate price range
for total wedding expenditure. In addition, Domenico Winery’s
venue size is a spacious
700-2,200 square feet larger space compared to its competitors,
and situated in the central Bay
Area which makes for an easy drive from any direction. The
quality of service is highly
competitive at Domenico Winery because they provide rental
order services and in-house
catering, which neither other venues offer, an immensely
convenient “one-stop shop” experience
as the sales associates guide the client through the booking
deadlines. Domenico Winery would
appear to be at a tie with Dogpatch Wine Works, offering an
indoor venue advantage over
5
Thomas Fogarty Winery which must operate on a seasonal basis
due to the unpredictability of
occasionally inclement fall, winter, and spring weather.
Therefore, the venue sustains an
advantage in year-round operations and continual business.
Also, Domenico Winery’s optional

full-bar, catering menus, and requirement of a Day-Of
Coordinator solidify an even further
advantage over the other two venues, making an easier
operational experience for all in-house
floor staff day-of, and a smoother, less stressful environment
for the happy couple. However, this
does not imply that there is no room for improvement at
Domenico Winery.
Recommendations
To further differentiate itself as a wedding venue over the next
five years, Domenico
Winery might consider adopting the following recommendations
based on the research from
their competitive set analysis. First, Domenico might want to
consider offering their venue for
ceremonies, since their two competitive venues currently
already offer this. If they choose not to
do this, an alternative recommendation would be to contract
with a shuttle company that would
transport guests from the ceremony location to Domenico as a
convenience to the guests, and an
upselling technique, offering another inclusive-service in
booking with Domenico. Finally,

offered as a stretch goal for long-term consideration, Domenico
could look into expanding their
property ownership into an outdoor ceremony reception space
within 15 miles, and include
shuttle transportation to and from their outdoor ceremony space
and indoor San Carlos reception
venue.
Section I - Introduction & Background
For this Hospitality and Tourism Management Internship-based
course, I chose to
complete my 200-hour internship in the catering and events
field. I have had moderate exposure
6
and previous work experience as a catering server for a staffing
company, where I worked
large-scale events everywhere from holiday parties for tech
companies throughout San
Francisco, including Google, Twitter, and Facebook; 400-person
weddings at City Hall and the
Julia Morgan Ballroom; and annual festivals like the Bay Area
Brew Fest of more than 500

people at Pier 35. I chose to alternatively gain exposure at a
smaller-scale events company called
Domenico Winery (also referred to as “Domenico”), an
immensely complex, yet fully functional,
thriving, and successful family-owned and operated urban
winery in San Carlos, California. The
owners, Gloria and Dominick Chirichillo, have a history of
family winemaking, and 16 years ago
bought their current property for onsite wine production and as
a special-occasion venue rental
space. It is here that I have gained extensive knowledge about a
more personalized event
production service and all of the details needed to pull together
large holiday parties, corporate
events, and weddings in combination with smaller-scale events
and more intimate functions.
The company specializes first and foremost in winemaking from
Cal-Italia varietals
(Italian grapes grown in California), producing award-winning
wine for over 20 years, and
winning over 350 medals as of 2016 (“Our Story”, 2018). With
a full-time winemaking crew of
just 5 employees, they harvest their grapes from the Sierra
Foothills in Amador County, CA,

along with additional grape purchases from other vineyards, and
then crush, press, ferment, age,
and bottle all of their grapes onsite, making over 20 varietals
in-house. Wine production for the
company has been rising - in 2017, Domenico crushed 80 tons
of grapes during their August to
November harvest season, and as of the 2018 harvest season
that just recently came to a close,
the winery team crushed double that amount at over 160 tons,
the most produced by the company
in a single harvest to date. To help distribute their growing
production of wine, their Bacchus
7
Winemaking Club has over 225 members who pick up a case, or
receive a monthly shipment, of
select wines that are exclusively distributed to Bacchus
members.
On the event production side, the Domenico Winery property
has an exceptionally-sized,
6,200 square foot “Cask Room” for large-scale events,
specializing in private, holiday, and
corporate events including weddings, business functions, trade

shows, fundraisers, and mitzvahs
(see Figure 1, “Cask Room Layout”, Appendix pg. 27). The
venue can hold up to 700 people for
a standing-room-only event, 300 people for a seated event with
room for a dance floor, 375
people for a theater-style setup, and 180 people for a classroom-
style setup (“Domenico Winery
Events”, 2018). Smaller events that may be held in the Cask
Room include Meritage Blending
sessions, business meetings, wine bottling activities, wine
tasting and pairings, and public events
with live music.
The venue offers an industrial-chic base decor with cement
floors, market string-lighting,
stacked barrels lining the walls, marble bar-top, iron cocktail
tables, a 16-foot solid Pine
Gathering table, and white-washed brick walls, allowing the
venue to shift seamlessly from
daytime to evening events with a casual, informal interior that
can also be dressed up for
extravagant parties (see Figure 2, “Domenico Winery - Interior
Details”, Appendix pg. 28).
The Catering and Events Department offers full-service
planning and event execution for

their clients, allowing semester-based interns like myself to see
daily how many steps there are to
the event production process. I assisted the Director of Events,
Marina Patton, for a portion of
my internship hours working in the Sales Department, and
learned how she follows new client
inquiries from the beginning, and distributes the workload to
the other Sales Department
Associates. Marina’s job as Director is to review and finalize all
contracts and proposals coming
8
from the Sales Associates, who are the main client contacts.
Marina has extensive knowledge in
accurately portraying each client’s vision for the event from the
beginning, and gives the final
word on all decisions as event details fluctuate constantly. I
watched each inquiry turn into fully
produced events as I progressed from working in the office as a
client contact to working on the
floor in varying positions as a server, winetender and event
captain in-training.

Key Sales Department Associates include Teresita Santiago,
Azeema Jhinnu, and Jenni
Pelas who divide and conquer the high volume of inquiries that
Domenico receives on a daily
basis from multiple connection sites like Peerspace and
WeddingWire. From these inquiries,
each Sales Associate sells the venue with several client
walkthrough appointments and secures a
deposit and a contract for the event date. Leading up to the
event day, the rest of the proposal is
decided upon and charged, finalized through Marina: final guest
count, menu, serving quantities,
dessert vendors, service style, beer and wine, full bar, special
beverages, staffing, linen-, table-,
and chair-rental orders, photographer, DJ, sound system setup,
decor, and any last minute
changes.
As Head of the Production Department, Vanessa Huynh
coordinates the bulk of the venue
organization and staffing. She maintains staffing ratios that
fluctuate based on guest count for
each event, hiring, staffing in-house cleaning and organization
to maintain a high standard for a
polished venue appearance, drafting event layouts on

SocialTables (a floorplan software)
according to client requests, organizing the worksheets for the
Event Captains and Event Hosts
for each event, and schedules timely bi-weekly Production
Meetings for the Sales, Catering, and
Events Departments to run through the details of the week’s
events for accurate coordination.
9
As of just four years ago, the Events Department added a fully
in-house Catering
Department with a full-time kitchen staff. The team is led by
Chef Gino Gramegna, an
Italian-born citizen specializing in his home country’s cooking
that compliments the essence of
the Italian-heritage of the business. However, he is talented in
offering a wide range of menus
from California, Asian, American, Italian, Mexican, and more.
The Catering Department’s
menus and services extend across appetizers, entrees, plated-
service dinners, buffet-style, or
family-style food service depending on the type of event.

By examining Domenico’s current offerings in the Catering and
Events Department, it is
easier to see where their business lies among other competitors
along the Peninsula. Here, “the
Peninsula” will refer to the area of land extending from San
Francisco to San Jose, an
approximately 50 mile distance. As their business continues to
grow each year, it is essential to
see where the company may consider improvements for the
future to sustain a competitive
advantage. Without examining their current operations relative
to nearby competitors, Domenico
has potential for stagnation and may lose key clientele to other
businesses in the area. With this
in mind, an in-depth analysis of Domenico Winery’s
competitive set will include nearby
competitors Thomas Fogarty Winery and Dogpatch Wine Works.
Section II - Statement of the Research Project
There are several main objectives for this research paper. The
first objective is to
examine Domenico Winery’s event production services for its
Catering and Events portion of the
company, specifically pertaining to wedding production

throughout the year. Research will
present the details of Domenico Winery’s venue, venue
amenities, and venue restrictions; what is
encompassed in their “all-inclusive services” provided to their
clientele; their location as an
10
urban, indoor winery; and the financial basics that a wedding
client can expect when booking the
venue for their wedding.
The second main objective of this research paper is to examine
the assets of the two other
notable venues on the Peninsula that make them a comparable
alternative in consideration for
wedding clients in relation to Domenico Winery. The venues,
services, locations, and financial
aspects at both Thomas Fogarty Winery in Woodside and
Dogpatch Wine Works in San
Francisco will be examined and compared. Because each
business in this competitive set analysis
is vastly complex in its services, operations, and clientele, the
research for each venue will

specifically pertain to wedding services and the main wedding
venue for bookings.
Taking these two main objectives along with their analyses, the
overall purpose of this
project will be to identify a list of feasible recommendations
that Domenico Winery could
implement over the next five years to maintain a sustainable
competitive advantage among its
rival wedding venues. As San Francisco has a rapidly growing
population, up almost 79,000
people since its 2010 census, clearly becoming one of the most
up and coming places to live,
(Brinklow, 2018), the competition for large-scale events venues
will be expanding as well.
Private events including large-budget weddings have
historically been one of Domenico’s largest
sources of revenue. WeddingWire, a preferred website for
obtaining client inquiries, awarded
Domenico Winery with their 5-star Couples’ Choice Award for
2018 (see Figure 3,
“WeddingWire Award”, Appendix pg. 29), so Domenico has
notoriety within the wedding
booking realm in the Bay Area already. With the population
increase, however, it is necessary to

examine the company’s current position in the market to
determine where it can uplevel for the
11
future and what they can leverage against their competition as
more clientele possibly enter the
market.
Section III - Methodology
In order to identify Domenico Winery’s assets, I was constantly
on the lookout for
operational data via hands-on work during events, and
throughout my time working in the
Catering and Events office. I obtained the knowledge of the
inner workings of the events
business working under Marina and the Sales Department team.
Inherently, over the course of
the entire semester, I gained an in-depth understanding of the
most important aspects of the
Catering and Events operations, and can list specifically what
happens at each stage of the event
production process both pre-event and day-of as I explained in
the Introduction.

Also included in the Introduction and Company Background, I
used my own knowledge
to describe the lead-team employees, as I worked with them
nearly every day in the office or on
the floor during events. I was kept in the loop throughout the
Winery’s harvest season as well,
because it extended the length of my internship, so I became
familiar with the wine production
process for the fall 2018 harvest season. I was able to learn
about the Bacchus wine club
membership during my hands-on experience working in the
Tasting Room in their newly-opened
Osteria, and in the Cask Room bar as a winetender during
events. I gathered more factual
information about the overall event space offerings, such as the
square footage and floor layout,
and guest count and capacity from their online Catering and
Events brochure. In addition, I
gained my wine knowledge pertaining to their grape varietals,
vineyard, and grape purchasing
from their online web pages as well as from Michael
Annunziata, their main Tasting Room

12
employee and varietal specialist who has worked with the
company from the beginning to help
sell their award-winning wine.
To determine a locational comparison between the three venues,
I used Apple Maps to
devise a visual that might better display the three venues in
relation to one another, from where
Domenico Winery is situated on the Peninsula (see Figure 6,
“Contextual Map of Domenico
Winery’s Competition”, Appendix pg. 31-32).
I drew data for Domenico Winery Events Department from their
private Google Drive;
this was one of the most useful databases during my research
and during my office hours. Their
Google Drive holds key documents that are required for legal
purposes, sales details (depending
on the type of event), and catering menus, to name a few. For
venue and sales research, I had
access to the company’s 9-page Private Events packet, which
covers weddings, and all of the
more-specific details that are not listed on their public
brochure. This is the packet that each

Sales Associate hands to their client, and it is here that I was
able to find the listed in-house
amenities, menus, timeline, fees, and Frequently Asked
Questions (see Figure 4, “Domenico
Winery Private Events Brochure - Snapshots”, Appendix pg.
29). I also had access to
TotalPartyPlanner, the company’s event planning software that
aids in constructing each event so
that they may bill their clients properly with all order quantities
broken down, including staffing
hours, rental equipment, food and beverage, event timeline, and
any other event notes for the
day-of production schedule (see Figure 5, “TotalPartyPlanner
Software”, Appendix pg. 30).
For comparative data and information about Thomas Fogarty
and Dogpatch Wine Works,
I used their company websites, Frequently Asked Questions
pages, and online brochures for the
bulk of my compilation for detailed information on each
company’s events services. For Figures
13
12-15 (see Appendix pgs. 37-38), I organized the most

important data that a potential wedding
client would look for in a venue to have a side-by-side
comparison. Figure 12, “Venue Details -
Comparison” (Appendix pg. 37) lists out the location, guest
capacity, type of venue, catering
options, bar options, square footage of event space, event end
times, venue usage hours,
possibility of a company rental agreement, and ceremony and/or
reception options per venue.
Figure 13, “Financial Details - Comparison” (Appendix pg. 37)
lists the Total Wedding Price
Range per venue that a couple can expect to pay according to
each company’s brochures. The
average cost per guest that a couple can expect to spend is also
listed here, and includes the
venue fee, food, and beverage costs divided at a head count
average of 100 people. The couple
may also multiply this average at a higher guest count rate
depending on attendance, but this
provides an average ratio for predicted expenditures that might
assist a couple in deciding on a
venue pertaining to their budget. In this case, the higher the
guest count over 100 people, the
lower the average cost per guest due to the set venue fee being

divided over a higher number of
people. Figure 14, “Amenity Details - Comparison” (Appendix
pg. 38) charts out the Day-Of
amenities included in the cost of renting out the venue. Some
amenities are offered consistently
across the venues, however, with this chart, it is easier to see
where one venue lacks a key
amenity, which could ultimately fluctuate a couple’s decision.
Figure 15, “Venue Restrictions -
Comparison” (Appendix pg. 38) notes a few of the most
important restrictions that each venue
enforces as hard-and-fast rules, such as the requirement of a
wedding coordinator, decoration
approval, amplified music, and if alcohol must be provided by
the venue. These details may or
may not sway a final venue decision, but are offered as details
for final consideration.
14
For visual data as depicted in Figure 2 and Figures 7-10,
Appendix pg. 28 and 33-35,
respectively, I offered several snapshots of each venue’s
interior, and some exterior, images to

show what a potential client sees in each of the venue’s
brochures, as well as on a venue
walkthrough. These images can provide contextual information
and visual appeal for clients,
where decor, ambiance, and atmosphere are some of the most
important features for a venue
decision, as they will set the tone for the entire day (“The
Wedding Venue Checklist”, 2017).
Finally, a source that assisted me in compiling quick-reference
charts for all three venues
is Wedding Spot, an online database of popular California
wedding venues designed for
at-a-glance information about local venues, and helps narrow
down the most pertinent
information for potential wedding clients (see Figure 11,
“Wedding Spot - At a Glance”,
Appendix pg. 36). This was a useful source that readily
identifies a ballpark numerical average
for wedding expenditures per venue and what amenities a
couple would look for in each. The
information I found in this database search is included in
Figures 12-15.
Section IV - Findings

After charting out the factual information as provided by each
venues’ brochures, public
information, comparative data found on Wedding Spot, and my
own knowledge of Domenico’s
venue offerings, it is clear that among the three venue options,
Domenico Winery already offers
a noticeable competitive advantage based off of certain
amenities. The following results from my
research have been organized into factual, informational
sections based on location, venue
basics, venue amenities and restrictions, services, and financial
basics.
Location
15
In a locational comparison between the venues, Figure 6 shows
that, using Domenico
Winery as an anchor point, its first competitor, Dogpatch Wine
Works, is 23 miles away on the
edge of San Francisco in the urban “Dogpatch” neighborhood.
Thomas Fogarty is approximately
16 miles away, tucked away in the Santa Cruz Mountains in
Woodside. According to Apple

Maps, (also included in Figure 6) on a day without traffic, it
takes 30 minutes driving time from
Domenico Winery to Dogpatch Wine Works on Highway 101.
On a day without traffic, it takes
37 minutes driving time from Domenico Winery to Thomas
Fogarty Winery through Woodside’s
winding roads, or rather Highway 84 connecting to Highway 35,
taking about 7-10 minutes
longer even though the distance is 5 miles shorter than
Dogpatch Wine Works driving to
Domenico Winery.
Venue Basics
For a reference, Figure 12 details the three venues side by side.
Domenico Winery is a
6,200 square foot, indoor, urban winery and reception-only
space. This venue can hold up to 300
people seated with a dance floor. Thomas Fogarty Winery is a
4,000 square foot, indoor and
outdoor rural winery situated on a mountainside, and offers the
options of both ceremony and
reception spaces. It can hold up to 216 guests seated with a
dance floor. Dogpatch Wine Works
is a 5,600 square foot, indoor, urban winery like Domenico, but

offers both ceremony and
reception space, like Thomas Fogarty Winery. Of the three
venues, Domenico Winery offers the
largest usable space for a wedding, and also the additional space
for a larger guest count.
Dogpatch Wine Works offers a slightly smaller venue than
Domenico, and can hold the least
amount of people, while still being an urban winery venue
option.
Venue Amenities and Restrictions
16
Each of the three venues have differing amenities that are
included with the venue rental
fees, and also offer other fee-based amenities. At an extra
charge, all the three wineries offer bar
options including beer, wine, and Prosecco provided explicitly
by the venue. Domenico Winery,
however, is the only venue to offer a full-bar, having just
obtained their Cask Room Full Bar
license this October 2018.
The event end times are the same between Domenico Winery

and Dogpatch Wine Works,
where music must end by 12:00 A.M.; Thomas Fogarty’s venue,
being more secluded and
surrounded by other mountainside homes requires that music
end by 10:00 P.M.
Figure 14’s “Amenity Details - Comparison” and Figure 15’s
“Venue Restrictions -
Comparison” (Appendix pg. 38) lists the relative similarities
and differences between the venue
offerings for the day of the wedding. Most notably, Dogpatch
Wine Works is the only venue that
does not offer a bride or groom’s dressing area pre-reception,
nor offers kitchen facilities.
Domenico Winery is the only venue with a coat check room.
Thomas Fogarty Winery is the only
venue that does not require a day-of wedding coordinator.
Another set of comparable amenities between the venues is the
decor and ambiance.
Figure 2 depicts Domenico Winery’s Cask Room interior. Their
main base decor accents the
venue with white-washed brick walls, antique iron cocktail
tables, interchangeable mosaic candle
centerpieces, dimmable market string lighting, cement floors,
and barrel-lined walls. Thomas

Fogarty Winery’s decor in their main wedding venue, the
Pavillion, as shown in Figures 7 and 8,
appears farmhouse style, with exposed wooden beams, vaulted
ceilings, soft outdoor lighting, all
suspended over one of their vineyards with a Bay Area view.
Dogpatch Wine Works’ interior, in
17
Figure 10, similar to Domenico Winery’s interior, also features
cement floors, barrel-lined walls,
and dimmable market string lighting.
Services
Of the three venues, Domenico Winery is the only business to
offer the inclusive service
of renting tables, chairs, linens, flatware, ceramic plateware,
and any other decor from their
exclusive partnership with Unica Party Rentals. In-house
catering is also only offered at
Domenico Winery; Thomas Fogarty Winery offers full kitchen
facilities for outside catering
businesses; and Dogpatch Wine Works offers no catering
services nor kitchen facilities

whatsoever.
Financial
Depending on a couples’ financial limitations for a wedding,
there are varying price
ranges between the three venues. The following numbers, as
shown in Figure 13, Appendix pg.
37, offer a financial range that sums up the average
expenditures for a wedding depending on the
venue. The low end of the range is based on off-peak season
Sunday rates, a 100-guest
attendance, and standard amenities. The high end of the range is
based on peak-Saturday rates, a
100-guest attendance, and premium food and beverage options.
Dogpatch Wine Works is the
least expensive venue of the three, at a range of $10,000 to
$15,000. Domenico Winery falls in a
moderate price range at $12,000 to $25,000. Thomas Fogarty
falls under the highest price range
average, with expenditures of $23,000 to $35,000.
With these numbers, the average cost per guest can be
calculated, which includes the
venue fee, food, and beverage costs divided at a head count
average of 100 people. A couple may

then use this ratio and apply it towards a higher attendance to
gain an accurate number on what
18
they predict to spend per guest for their wedding. One point to
keep in mind is that the higher the
number of guests in attendance, the lower the average cost
becomes because the large, set venue
fee will be divided over a larger group of people. The average
cost per guest at Dogpatch Wine
Works is $100-$125; Domenico Winery’s per person average is
$125-$150; and Thomas Fogarty
Winery’s per person average is on the highest end, presumably
around $230-$325.
Section V - Conclusions
The following conclusions are made based on the factual results
as discussed in “Section
IV - Findings”. These conclusions are meant to extrapolate a
bottom line for each of the
important points that may be important to a wedding couple’s
final venue decision. Ultimately,
this will help Domenico Winery see where they stand amongst

its competitors’.
Location
Domenico Winery is situated in the middle of the Peninsula,
almost equal in distance
from San Francisco and San Jose, a convenient, central location
to arrive from anywhere in the
Bay Area. Domenico’s competition are not outrageously far out
of the way, making location a
likely neutral decision factor for a potential client. More
specifically, a client looking for a
wedding venue might not consider Domenico’s location as one
of the main selling points in
choosing their venue; the other venues appear to be within a
reasonable distance, which makes
the three venues very competitive.
Venue Basics
As simply a venue, Thomas Fogarty Winery stands out as a
slight outlier among the three
venues in this analysis because it offers an outdoor venue in a
rural location with a much smaller
space, at 4,000 square feet. However, Thomas Fogarty Winery
might be ideal for a client that

19
prefers a completely outdoor wedding with a view of the entire
Bay Area (see Figure 7 for
Thomas Fogarty’s exterior, and Figure 8 for their Interior that
offers an outdoor, hillside view,
Appendix pg 33 and 34). Outdoor weddings in the Bay Area are
mostly limited to the warmer,
non-rainy months extending from May to September. Due to the
weather and its exposure as a
partially outdoor venue space, Thomas Fogarty Winery books
presumably less events per year
compared to Domenico Winery and Dogpatch Wine Works, both
of which are urban, indoor, and
climate-controlled, booked year-round, therefore having larger
total wedding sales for the year.
From an operational, sales-driven standpoint, Thomas Fogarty
Winery is capped at summer-only
business due to seasonality, only operating less than half the
year for outdoor bookings, but may
offer a competitive advantage in the summer months where the
weather may be too beautiful to
pass up for an indoor reception space such as Domenico Winery
or Dogpatch Wine Works.

Venue Amenities and Restrictions
Depending on the couple and the essence of the wedding
desired, a full bar may be one of
the most desirable features in choosing the right venue for their
wedding. If alcohol is of little
consideration, then a full bar license is not enough to leave
Domenico Winery with a sustainable
competitive advantage. The event end times are also of
questionable importance and really
depends on each client’s preferences and type of wedding being
considered. Perhaps a louder
wedding with more drinking and a younger crowd might prefer
one of the urban winery options
with music end times of 12:00 A.M. over Thomas Fogarty
Winery which has quiet hours
beginning at 10:00 P.M.
One of the most notable differences in amenities that a couple
might consider among
those listed is the availability of kitchen facilities. Both
Domenico Winery and Thomas Fogarty
20

Winery offer kitchen facilities, while Dogpatch Wine Works
does not. In considering the latter
option, the couple would have to contract out a catering
company that uses a catering truck or
another form of off-site food service, and even then they must
determine if the venue can fully
support particular caterers, such as a rear loading area for the
event space, back of house set up
space, and other troubleshooting. Perhaps a couple that might
consider this outside catering
option would be inclined to have more oversight in their own
wedding production, as opposed to
contracting a wedding coordinator to organize the food and
beverage details.
The lack of a bride and groom’s dressing area at Dogpatch Wine
Works might be a
potential make or break situation if the couple is particular and
insistent on having a
post-cocktail hour “Husband and Wife Announcement”, as most
wedding timelines prefer.
Typically, for the weddings I have both worked and attended,
the bride and groom have a
post-ceremony room to freshen up while the guests enjoy a
cocktail hour. Without this amenity,

it would appear that Dogpatch WineWorks might be for the
more casual wedding reception as it
is also a cheaper total wedding price range than the other two,
with an average cost per guest
around $100-$125 (see Figure 13, “Financial Details -
Comparison, Appendix pg. 37).
A questionable amenity for consideration is that Domenico is
the only space offering a
coat check room. I might presume that this is likely of lesser
importance to a couple when
deciding on a venue, a fairly neutral consideration, and is likely
offered by the venue due to the
amount of other corporate events, galas, and large-scale events
that take place throughout the
holiday season. It is a detail that offers a nice touch of elegance
and convenience for a party and
an optional additional amenity, however, it is not the most
important consideration.
21
Another questionable amenity is that Thomas Fogarty Winery
does not require a

Wedding Coordinator for the day of the event. This could be a
detriment to Thomas Fogarty
Winery and gives the venue hosts more to worry about on-site
and day-of, but also not required
by the venue as a convenience for the couple because a
coordinator need not be budgeted out.
For decor and ambiance consideration, both Domenico Winery
and Dogpatch Wine
Works have a similar “blank canvas” interior that can be
dressed up. Their interior base decor is
very competitive to one another, the only noticeable differences
would be their location on a map
and their venue size. Domenico Winery’s usable space is about
700 square feet larger than
Dogpatch Wine Works (compare Figure 1 and Figure 9,
Appendix pg. 27 and pg 34) and can
hold 100 people more for a wedding. Thomas Fogarty Winery’s
indoor-outdoor venue, “The
Pavilion” is very different from the other two, appearing
farmhouse style, which complements
the vineyards over which it is suspended, and competes on an
entirely different playing field
from the other two indoor venues.
Services

As Domenico Winery is the only venue to offer rental services
through Unica Party
Rentals, there may be a sustainable competitive advantage
within this service. Of course, the
client is charged for the rentals in the final bill; however, there
is an easefulness that comes with
Domenico Sales Associates ordering the rentals for the client.
This way, as I have experienced it
in the office, the only follow-up that the client has to do is
update the Sales Associate in an email
or a phone call with the respective changed guest count, and the
Sales Associate hospitably
performs the task of changing the order quantity as desired with
Unica Party Rentals. In the end,
it may be more work for the Sales Associate, but it proves
preferable for the client by reducing
22
the client’s stress of having to additionally contact an outside
vendor. Domenico Winery also
posts an 18% service charge to the client’s final bill due to
these added booking services, so there

is a sustainable reason for Domenico to offer this service
without being taken advantage of. An
added bonus is that the venue (Domenico Winery) looks
organized and professional on the day
of the event because the Sales Associates have confidence that
they were the ones to accurately
place orders, and will take full responsibility for mistakes or
successes.
This situation may favorably apply to Domenico’s in-house
catering services as well. The
other two venues do not offer a catering agreement with another
company or full-service
oversight for working with any outside vendors, which may put
added stress on the client for
details to go “according to plan” on the wedding day. This
could be a larger make-or-break
consideration for a wedding client, and a service point for
which Domenico exceeds
expectations.
Financial
Domenico Winery offers a competitive price in its average cost
per guest over the other
venues. Falling in a moderate price range for total wedding
cost, it offers an immense amount of

amenities and conveniences, as discussed above, compared to its
competitors. Domenico Winery
offers in-house catering, Sales Associates that will do all of the
necessary rental orders, optional
full bar, a convenient central bay Area location, the largest
venue space, a late night end time,
year-round booking possibilities, all for a moderate price range.
At Thomas Fogarty Winery, it
would appear that the couple would pay more to have the
outdoor, rural venue, and also handle
the extra coordination of outside catering, outside rental orders,
an earlier end time, and strict
seasonal booking availability. Dogpatch Wine Works, with the
lowest price range, seems to
23
simply be venue space and that is all that is included. Overall,
for the price paid, Domenico
Winery offers services and amenities at a considerable
competitive advantage.
Section VI - Recommendations
Now that Domenico Winery has been thoroughly reviewed

against its competitors, a few
recommendations may be considered to leverage a competitive
advantage. One recommendation
that might be easily implemented, and offered at an extra
charge, is for Domenico to offer their
space for wedding ceremonies, in addition to receptions. This is
one of the amenities that they
currently do not provide in relation to the other venues in their
competitive set. This might come
as an added convenience for the wedding couple since they
would not have to transfer venues -
currently, a couple must have their ceremony elsewhere
(Domenico provides some
recommendations of local ceremony spaces), and then drive to
Domenico for the reception.
There have been a few weddings that I have worked this
semester where Marina allowed a
ceremony to take place at Domenico, and the floor staff swiftly
“flipped” the venue from
ceremony to cocktail hour to dining. It takes some extra
coordination and set up efforts, however,
the event went smoothly, and might be considered profitable for
the venue after said and done.
One catch is that this would likely only work for weddings of

100 people or less due to the
limited Cask Room space.
Another idea and feasible recommendation that might expand
Domenico’s event services
is to capitalize on ceremony-to-reception transportation. If
Domenico does not decide to offer
their space for ceremonies, they could establish a rental
agreement with a shuttle or bus
transportation company (which could be charged in the client’s
final bill) and would offer an
additional convenience for the guests. Just as how Domenico
currently offers an exclusive rental
24
agreement with Unica Party Rentals, they could look into the
financial feasibility of contracting
with a shuttle transportation company to transport the couple’s
wedding guests from Domenico
to the ceremony location, and back to Domenico. This way,
guests could drive their own cars to
Domenico, and leave with their own cars at the end of the night,
instead of having to drive to and

from the ceremony location, and back to Domenico. The
ultimate purpose for this would allow
Domenico to offer the additional service of transportation that
the other venues do not, in the
case that they cannot offer their space as a ceremony site.
An even larger, more creative recommendation for long term
business, perhaps as a
stretch goal in eight to ten years, might be for Domenico to
consider the financial possibility of
buying or renting an outdoor venue space, or partner with a
location within 15 miles, for
ceremonies. This could be both the beginning of a property
where they could grow more of their
own grapes, such as in Half Moon Bay, and a venue rental space
for other event companies
looking for an outdoor venue. This could be sold to their clients
as a “preferred” ceremony space
that is good for outdoor wedding photos, the ceremony on the
wedding day, and ultimately
retains the company’s vision for all-inclusive wedding services.
Overall, there are multiple venue options for future wedding
couples to choose from, and
Domenico remains among the top for consideration. With
constant reevaluation of their own

amenities, Domenico will attract an increasing amount of
business because of their current
competitive offerings. They have room for growth into more
ideas for “inclusive” services, and I
look forward to seeing how this business continues to expand.
25
References
Brinklow, A. (2018, March). San Francisco Population Swells
To More Than 884,000. Curbed
San Francisco. Retrieved from
https://sf.curbed.com/2018/3/26/17165370/san-francisco-
population-2017-census-increase
“Dogpatch Wine Works”. (2018). Dogpatch Wine Works.
Retrieved from
https://dogpatchwineworks.com/
“Domenico Winery Events”. (2018). Domenico Winery.
Retrieved from
https://pubs.hawthorncreative.com/domenicowinery/

“Events Facility” (2018). Thomas Fogarty. Retrieved from
https://www.fogartywinery.com/events-facility/
“Floor Plan & FAQ”. (2018). Dogpatch Wine Works. Retrieved
from
https://dogpatchwineworks.com/pages/inventory
“Our Story”. (2018). Domenico Winery. Retrieved from
http://www.domenicowinery.com/About-Us/Our-Vineyards
“Thomas Fogarty Winery Weddings and Events”. (2018).
Thomas Fogarty. Retrieved from
http://pubs.hawthorncreative.com/thomasfogarty/
“Venue Details - Domenico Winery”. (2018). Wedding Spot.
Retrieved from
https://www.wedding-spot.com/venue/451/Domenico-Winery/
“Venue Details - Thomas Fogarty Winery”. (2018). Wedding
Spot. Retrieved from
https://www.wedding-spot.com/venue/137/Thomas-Fogarty-
Winery/
“Venue Details - Dogpatch Wine Works”. (2018). Wedding
Spot. Retrieved from
https://www.wedding-spot.com/venue/9635/Dogpatch-
Wineworks/
https://sf.curbed.com/2018/3/26/17165370/san-francisco-

population-2017-census-increase
https://dogpatchwineworks.com/
https://pubs.hawthorncreative.com/domenicowinery/
https://www.fogartywinery.com/events-facility/
https://dogpatchwineworks.com/pages/inventory
http://www.domenicowinery.com/About-Us/Our-Vineyards
http://pubs.hawthorncreative.com/thomasfogarty/
https://www.wedding-spot.com/venue/451/Domenico-Winery/
https://www.wedding-spot.com/venue/137/Thomas-Fogarty-
Winery/
https://www.wedding-spot.com/venue/9635/Dogpatch-
Wineworks/
26
“Weddings”. (2018). Domenico Winery. Retrieved from
http://www.domenicowinery.com/Events/Weddings
“The Wedding Venue Checklist & Guide Every Couple Needs”.
(2017, July). WeddingWire.
Retrieved from https://www.weddingwire.com/wedding-
ideas/wedding-venue-guide
http://www.domenicowinery.com/Events/Weddings
https://www.weddingwire.com/wedding-ideas/wedding-venue-
guide

27
Appendix
Figure 1 // The “Cask Room” Layout, Domenico Winery
Source: Domenico Winery Private Events Brochure
28
Figure 2 // Domenico Winery - Interior Details
Source: “Domenico Winery Events”, 2018
29
Figure 3 // Domenico Winery - WeddingWire Award
Source: “Weddings”, 2018
Figure 4 // Domenico Winery Private Events Brochure,
Snapshots
Source: Domenico Winery Private Events Brochure

30
Figure 5 // TotalPartyPlanner Software
Source: TotalPartyPlanner.com

31
Figure 6 // Contextual Map of Domenico Winery’s Competition
32
Source: Apple Maps
33
Figure 7 // Thomas Fogarty Winery Exterior
Source: “Events Facility”, 2018

34
Figure 8 // Thomas Fogarty Winery Brochure & Interior
Source: “Thomas Fogarty Winery Weddings and Events”, 2018
Figure 9 // Dogpatch Wine Works Layout
Source: “Floor Plan & FAQ”, 2018
35
Figure 10 // Dogpatch Wine Works Interior
Source: “Dogpatch Wine Works”, 2018
36
Figure 11 // Wedding Spot - At a Glance

Source: “Venue Details - Domenico Winery”, 2018
37
Figure 12 // Venue Details - Comparison
Sources: “Venue Details - Domenico Winery”, 2018; “Venue
Details - Thomas Fogarty
Winery”, 2018; “Venue Details - Dogpatch Wine Works”, 2018
Figure 13 // Financial Details - Comparison

38
Figure 14 // Amenity Details - Comparison
Figure 15 // Venue Restrictions - Comparison
Running Head: EFFECTIVENESS OF MINIMAL MARKETING
Effectiveness of Minimal Marketing
HTM 515 Hospitality Management Internship
Spring 2011
910079396
Dr. Andrew Walls
1
Andrew
Typewritten Text
SXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Andrew
Rectangle
Andrew
Rectangle
EFFECTIVENESS OF MINIMAL MARKETING 2
Table of Contents
Career Center Workshop Attendance Form
............................................................... .3
Monthly Time Sheets
......................................................................................... .4
Intern Performance Evaluation Form
......................................................................... 8
Executive Summary
.......................................................................................... 11
Section I - Introduction/Background
...................................................................... 13
Section II - Statement of the Research Project.
.......................................................... 16
.................................................................................. 18
....................................................................................... 20
Section V - Conclusions

.................................................................................... 25
........................................................................... 27
References .................................................... ,
................................................ 29
Appendix
...............................................................................................
....... 30
EFFECTIVENESS OF MINIMAL MARKETING
Executive Summaty
Parameters oJthe Report
Station 1 Restaurant is a new upscale establishment located in
Woodside, CA. The chef
focuses on serving local, sustainable, California cuisine in a
warm, unpretentious atmosphere.
Due to its young age, owners do not have an allotted budget to
lavishly advertise for this new
restaurant. The purpose of this study is to determine whether
minimal and essentially "free"
marketing eff011s have been effective in increasing business
and improving the restaurant's
reputation.

Description oj the Problem/Statement oj the Research Project
11
Tllis research project aims to analyze the effects of minimal
marketing related to any
increases or decreases in business. This can be quantified in
terms of cover count (guests served
per night), nightly net sales, and per person average (total net
sales divided by number of guests
served). These numbers will be focused around certain
milestone dates in media exposure-in the
restaurant's short history. This includes the two reviews in
major print and online newspapers.
This project also aims to create a comment card to distribute to
guests at the end of their meal, to
gain insight on the guest's experiences and expectations in and
about Station 1 restaurant.
This research study will benetit Station 1 Restauratlt because it
will allow managing
partners to understand what types of minimal marketing efforts,
like posting content on social
media outlets, have a positive effect on business. It will also
measure what types of content from
these methods capture the most positive feedback from guests

and potential guests. In addition,
ownership can utilize the figures obtained n'om the chm1s on
personal net sales and per person
average to set appropriate standards and goals for how much
servers should be selling nightly in
order to acquire a realistic yet beneficial profit.
Methodology
Cover count data will be obtained from the restaurant's Open
Table reservation software.
Figures regarding net sales and per person averages will be
retrieved from personal server
checkout sheets that are required to be completed at the end of
each shift. Facebook statistics on
post content, post impressions, and number of active users is
made available online to Station l's
Facebook page administrators, which includes myself.
SlImmwy of Findings and Conclusions
In general, minimal marketing efforts have proven to be
effective in increasing business.
Overall, business changes around the milestone dates were

evident; cover counts on weekdays
increased as well as server's personal nightly net sales.
However, the data collected from nightly
per person averages showed no correlation with any increases in
minimal marketing around the
milestone dates. Additionally, judging from the insight statistics
on Facebook, when actively
marketing via this social media outlet, the number of
interactions and active users increased.
Unfortunately, these figures were not consistent around the
aforementioned milestone dates.
Recommendations
Since the owners did not implement the comment cards during
the process of this
research project, it is highly recommended they stmi
distributing them to guests as soon as
possible to gain insight of their opinions on their dining
experiences. Utilizing social media
outlets such as Facebook and Twitter more frequently will allow
Station I to remain, more
frequently, in the public'S eye. Keeping a computerized
database of all the servers' net sales and
per person average each night to determine what benchmarks
should be established to achieve

their desired profits will result in a clearer method for setting
goals.
Section I -IntroductionlBackground
The company where I completed my internship is also my place
of employment: Station
1 Restaurant. This fairly-new establishment opened tIllS past
September and is located at 2991
Woodside Road in Woodside, California. The owners and
managers are Zu Tarazi and his wife,
Kristi Borrone. Key individuals in the kitchen are executive
chef Zack Freitas, sous chef Ryan
Harris, and executive pastly chef Paul Shields. The restaurant is
open for dilmer Tuesdays
through Saturdays, from 5 pm until 9:30 pm. In new
developments, the restaurant will begin
opening for Sunday supper June 12,2011, from 4 pm until
8:30pm.
Chef Freitas and the Station 1 kitchen serve modern California
cuisine. There is an
emphasis on the use oflocal, sustainable, and organic product.
Much of the produce served

comes from local farms, namely in the Sonoma area. The
kitchen staff often forages for
garnishes for the dishes served, as well as grows some garnishes
ill theil' home gardens. Also, in
terms of proterns, Chef Freitas seeks product from animals that
have been sustainably raised; for
example, the wagyu beef is sourced from Snake River Farms in
Idaho because they raise theil'
cows in a much more sustainable manner than farms locally.
The menu available at the restaurant is a tIu'ee-course prix fixe
menu, offered at fifty-four
dollars per person. These three courses do not include the
complementmy amuse bouche and
intermezzo given to each guest that purchases the prix fixe
menu. All of the same prix fixe menu
options are also available a la carte for those seeking a quicker
dilmer experience, or those who
are unable to eat three courses. In order to keep the menu as
seasonal as possible, Chef Freitas
changes a few menu options on a weekly basis. This is
especially beneficial for our regular
customers, who want to be able to try something different each
time they return.

The menu always consists of five appetizers, three entrees, and
t1u'ee desserts. The
appetizer category always offers a salad and an additional cold
appetizer, such as the current
razor clam dish served with a twist on a potato salad. There is
also always a soup and two hot
appetizers offered, such as nettle risotto and soft-poached farm
egg dishes. For entrees, there is
always fish and red meat options, such as Arctic char and
Wagyu bavette. The third entree ranges
from either being a type of poultry, such as Muscovy duck
breast, or a type of game, such as
lamb or rabbit. In regards to the dessert course, there is always
a cheese plate available for those
who prefer to end their meal with this as opposed to a sweet
option. For those who do have a
sweet tooth, there are two menu choices for them, one typically
containing chocolate, while the
other highlights a seasonal fruit.
Station l's beverage program is just as impressive as the
creativity that comes from the

food. While the wine list is modest, there is much variety
available for guests. Also just like the
food menu, the wine list changes quite frequently. Zu is a
certified sommelier, and hand-selects
the wines on the list. He primarily chooses wine producers with
smaller operations; also, he
favors organic and sustainably-cultivated varietals. Many of
these wines are especially versatile
and pair well with more than one of the dishes offered. In
addition, all wines on the list are
offered by the taste (three ounces), glass (six ounces), and
bottle, ensuring that guests can mix
and match their wines at their own discretion.
Not only does the restaurant have a fantastic wine program, but
the cocktail program
should not be overlooked. Again, the house cocktail list
constantly changes, since bartenders are
always seeking to keep their fresh ingredients seasonal. The
cocktail list's theme is pre-
Prohibition era cocktails, one that is simple but still leaves
room for ilillovation. One can even
refer to our drinks as "culinary cocktails," since they are made
of seasonal fruits and herbs,

house-made syrups, and fresh juices. In addition, rather than
holding big name brands such as
Tanqueray gin and Bacardi rum, all of the liquors and spirits
tend to be from smaller, more
artisanal companies, ensuring guests are being provided with
high-quality drinks.
15
The coffee and tea available to guests are also considered to be
integral to ownership's
desire to stay local and sustainable. Taylor Maid Farms
provides both coffee and tea, which are
served in French presses. This company is based out of Sonoma
County, California. It sources its
product from fair-trade cooperatives and makes sure to offer
only products at the peak of their
season. In addition, Taylor Maid Farms mainly packages its
coffee beans and teas in recyclable,
reusable, and/or compostable packaging, to maintain its
reputation as being environmentally-
conscious.
Besides what type of food and beverage a restaurant serves,
atmosphere also plays a

crucial part in a diner's overall experience. At Station 1, the
front-of-the-house strives to provide
warm and unpretentious service. While considered an upscale,
full-service restaurant, the owners
want all guests to feel at home while dining. In addition to
service, the ambiance of the restaurant
itself adds to the warm atmosphere. The restaurant also exhibits
support of the local community
through this. All tables are made from two hundred and fifty
year old, reclaimed French oak,
sourced from a barn in Petaluma. Also, all of the dishes are
served on hand-thrown plates made
by Lisa Neimeth, an artist based out of the Mission district in
San Francisco. This philosophy
about atmosphere is closely tied to the mission statement for the
restaurant, which is stated in the
Station I Restaurant handbook as follows:
Our mission is to provide a warm, inviting atmosphere for
people to gather
regularly to enjoy each other and the food we have prepared
with the finest and
freshest seasonal ingredients that are produced sustainably and
locally. (p.l)

Section II - Statement of the Research Project
There are two main goals of this research paper. One is to
develop an effective comment
card for the restaurant, a feedback tool that will be incredibly
beneticial to such a new business.
Because of how young this restaurant is, it is vital to determine
exactly what guests think of the
establishment in order to effectively compete with successful
competing businesses. Without
knowing what aspects of their experience they were satisfied
and dissatisfied with, the owners
will not know how to best accommodate them. Rather than
simply asking them to rate cel1ain
features of the restaurant on a numerical scale, the plan is to
create a comment card with
questions that will draw out descriptive details from the guests'
points of view. This will assist
Zu and other key players in the restaurant to make important
decisions based on the wants and
needs of guests. Also, with the implementation of the comment
card, a database can be created

regarding our guests' birthdays and anniversaries. With spaces
at the end of the comment card
where guests can write down these important dates, the service
staff can better personalize their
next experience with knowledge of such special occasions.
The second objective of this research paper is to analyze how
effective minimal and
essentially free marketing tactics are in relation to the amount
of business received. Here, the
term "business" will refer to the amount of covers the restaurant
does each night, as well as the
net sales and per person average each night. Specifically, there
will be an analysis of changes in
these aspects of business in the time immediately surrounding
tlu'ee milestone dates our
restaurant has:
» February 6, 20 II - two great reviews for Station 1 are
released in the San
Francisco Chronicle and San Jose Mercury (ratings of two and a
half stars and
tlu'ee stars, respectively)

~ March 10, 2011 - I begin actively increasing the use of our
social media
outlets, specifically Facebook and Twitter; in addition, Station
l's Twitter
feed becomes featured in the Twitter "Chefs' Feed" featured on
the SF Gate's
Inside Scoop SF website
~ April 3, 2011 - Station 1 is added to Michael Bauer and the
SF Clu'onicle's
esteemed "Top 100 Bay Area Restaurants" list
Aside fi'om utilizing nightly cover count, net sales, and per
person average, there will be an
analysis of statistical data provided from being an administrator
of the Station I Facebook page.
With tllis, changes in interactions from users who "like" the
restaurant's page, especially relative
to the milestone dates mentioned above, will be observed.
There are numerous ways in which this research project will
benefit the restaurant. First,
it will provide myself and key internal stakeholders with a
better understanding of what minimal
marketing methods will continue being effective wllile keeping
costs low, or even nonexistent.

Second, since it is a new business, the chalis to be developed
based on findings will provide the
owners with tangible resources to analyze progress thus far,
especially in terms of nightly cover
count, net sales, and per person average. They can also use
these same figures to set appropriate
standards and goals for how much servers should sell per night
in order to earn a profit for the
restaurant. Moreover, this research project will assist in
providing the company with a better
understanding of what types of post content garners the most
attention, alld therefore more free
marketing, tlu'ough social media outlets. In regards to the
comment cards, as mentioned earlier,
ownership will be able to gain a better understanding ofthe
changing needs and wants of guests.
Finally, with the findings of this paper, we can provide a
jumpstart to continue such analyses on
a monthly basis to comprehend and modify our marketing
strategies, predict and increase
expected sales, increase the number of covers per night, and

gain a return clientele.
18
There were a number of sources that assisted the data collection
process for this research
project. To introduce the background of this company, I first
turned to my own personal
knowledge of the restaurant. I frequently get asked questions by
guests about the names of the
owners, the cuisine served, what days the restaurant is open,
and so on. I am expected to know
all this information in case of such an event, so putting them on
paper was relatively simple. To
obtain the restaurant's mission and vision, I personally asked
the owner Zu to provide a hard
copy of it for me.
Most of the numerical data collected is readily available on a
nightly basis at the end of
each shift. To take note of the number of covers achieved each
night, I turned to the restaurant's
Open Table reservation system, which takes record of this. I
input these numbers in an Excel
spreadsheet so I could apply these figures in a chart. This would

supply a better visual
understanding ofthe changes experienced over the last few
months, especially around milestone
dates. Furthermore, I recorded the number of covers starting at
the date of January 4, 20 II. I
chose this date because it would present data for the month
before Station I 's first milestone
date: the day the reviews were made public. This way, the
changes in business from before the
date compared to afterwards should be apparent. I continued
recording this number until April
23, 20 II, almost a month after the latest milestone date: the
amlOuncement of the restaurant's
inclusion in the Top 100 Bay Area Restaurants.
In order to obtain the figures for net sales and per person
average per night, I recorded
data from the server checkout paperwork each server is required
to fill out at the end of each
shift. I was only able to record these numbers from my personal
checkout, since the owners did
not think it would be appropriate for me to look at other servers'

figures. On this sheet, each
server is required to record the net sales for each of the
following categories: food, beer, liquor,
wine, gift cards, and miscellaneous (sparkling water, soda,
coffee, etc.). The figures I actually
took record of are the totals for these categories. Then servers
must calculate the tax for each of
these categories, followed by gross sales (net sales plus tax).
Afterwards, net sales is divided by
method of payment (cash, Mastercard, Visa, AMEX, and
redeemed gift cards). The total of these
numbers should equal the net sales calculated earlier. Servers
also take note of tips in each of
these payment categories. Then, servers calculate per person
average for the night. I input these
numbers in an Excel spreadsheet. I also made charts for these
figures per month to visualize any
changes, especially around the milestone dates being observed.
To collect data on which types of post content gain most
attention and interaction from
our Facebook "fans," Zu made me an administrator for our
Facebook page. Along with this title,
I was able to view statistics available to administrators. The
specific statistics I used were as

follows:
~ Weekly active users
~ Monthly active users
~ Total post feedback for the month
~ Post subject posted that month
~ Number of impressions garnered per post subject for the
month
For the first three bulletpoints, I made charts for each month to
view any changes surrounding
the milestone dates. In addition, I created a pie graph to analyze
which types of post content
(food, behind-the-scenes look, press, etc.) received the most
impressions from our "fans."
20
Finally, to collect information regarding our guests' opinions
and comments, I intended
to utilize the comment card I created for Station I (template
found as Figure 1 in Appendix pg.
30). As seen in the template, and as mentioned before, guests

are encouraged to write out their
opinions rather than simply rating the restaurant on a scale of
one to five. UnfOliunately, this
method of data collection could not be implemented in time for
this research paper. While the
owner did edit and print out a template of this conmlent card, he
has been so busy with other
aspects of the restaurant that he did not have time to start
employing these cards. He fully intends
to begin distributing them to guests; he just chose to delay this
until he figures out other elements
of the restaurant, such as the installation of a POS system and
opening for Sunday supper.
After analyzing data acquired from the Open Table reservations
software, it was clear
that the free marketing attained from the Station 1 periodical
reviews increased business in terms
of cover count. In January, the month before the SF Chronicle
and SJ Mercury published their
reviews of Station 1, the number of covers on weekdays was
relatively low compared to the
number of covers on weekends. On weekends, the restaurant
managed to sustain a high number

of guests in relation to the number of guests that can be seated
at once (54 maximum). During
this l11onth, the restaurant averaged about 78 guests per Friday
and/or Saturday, turning nearly all
of tables each of those nights. However, on weekdays, the
average number of guests was 34,
even reaching as low as 19 on one of those evenings (please see
Table 1 in Appendix pg. 31).
In the month of February, when the restaurant's reviews were
released, the number of
weekday covers increased. Starting from the Tuesday after
Februmy 6, the first "milestone date"
considered in this research paper, the average weekday number
of covers increased to 56 people.
The restaurant managed to do 69 covers on one of those
February weekdays. In addition, the
overall average number of covers for that month, including
weekdays and weekends, was an
impressive 63, compared to the previous month's 51 people. The
number of covers on weekends
remained reasonably constant with the previous month, as it

would continue to do for the months
of March and April (the average number of weekend covers for
Februmy was 73, March was 78,
and April was 76) (please see Table 2 in Appendix pg. 32).
In the months of March and April, it was clear that the higher
number of covers
stemming from the Februaty review day was maintained. This is
most likely attributed to the
other milestone dates being considered: when Station 1 's
Facebook page became more active,
and the day Station 1 's inclusion in Michael Bauer's Top 100
Bay Area Restaurants was
announced. While they were upheld, they did not increase as
anticipated. In terms of the amount
of covers on weekdays, the number was 51 in Mat'ch and 55 in
April. Moreover, the overall
average covers done in the month of March was 60, while it was
64 in April (please see Tables
3-4 in Appendix pgs. 33-34).
The data obtained from personal server checkout sheets did not
yield as clear of a
correlation with minimal marketing efforts as the cover count
data did. In particular, per person

average from the months of January through April showed no
specific trend coinciding with the
milestone dates (please see Tables 5-8 in Appendix pgs. 35-38).
This is due to the fact that a
range of factors affect per person average besides specific
marketing efforts. For example, if a
guest has an appreciation for cocktails and likes ordering them
when he dines at restaurants, he
would be willing to pay for them, increasing his check by
eleven dollars for every cocktail
ordered. Also, if a guest orders a bottle or more of wine
whenever dining out, he is willing to pay
anywhere from thirty-two to eighty dollars per bottle of wine,
significantly raising the total on
his check. However, if the guest prefers to only have tastes of
wine to pair with each course, the
total would only raise the check total to anywhere between four
to ten dollars per wine pairing.
Also, since the prix fixe option at Station I is not mandatory,
the check total of a guest who only
wants to eat one or two courses will decrease compared to if he
chose to spend the fifty four

dollars for the prix fixe menu. These factors, along with others,
influence nightly per person
average much more than marketing eff01is would.
Nightly net sales from the server checkout sheets show a little
more of a correlation to the
"free" advertising gained from the aforementioned milestone
dates. In January, before much of
the minimal marketing eff01is were executed, average net sales
were about $1,095.70. In
February, after the restaurant's reviews were released, personal
average net sales increased to
$1,321.14. The increased use of social media outlets had no
apparent effect on personal net sales,
actually decreasing the average to about $1,262.11. However,
with the Top 100 announcement in
April, net sales increased to an average of $1 ,526.43 (please
see Tables 9-12 in Appendix pgs.
39-42). Unfortunately, Station I marketing's direct influence on
these figures is not for celiain
for the same reasons of why per person averages were not
affected by it.
In terms of marketing via social media outlets, Station I has
garnered more attention

from the business' supporters, particularly its Facebook "fans."
Since I was declared one of the
administrators for Station I 's Facebook page, I started actively
using our Facebook and Twitter
accounts. From this, the restaurant's social media pages have
been gaining an increasing amount
of interactions from its corresponding users. This was especially
apparent right after the Februmy
milestone date, just as it has been shown that this particular day
increased business in terms of
number of covers and personal net sales.
23
In January, since the previous Station I Facebook administrators
did not frequently post
anything for the "fans," the restaurant's Facebook page only had
an average of90 weekly active
users and 243 monthly active users. For reference, Facebook
detines an active user as, "[t]he
number of people who have interacted with or viewed your Page
or its posts. This includes
interactions from Fans and non-Fans. (Unique Users)"

(Facebook, 2011). In February, since I
took more control over the page, the number of weekly active
users increased to 131, and the
monthly average increased to 292. Moreover, otheur weekly
active users reached a maximum of
213 compared to Januaty's 147, and monthly active users
reached 314 versus Janumy's 250
(please see Tables 13-16 in Appendix pgs. 43-46).
After analyzing the Facebook active user statistics for March
and April, it seems as if the
review milestone date had much more influence on the number
of active users than the other
milestone dates under observation. In fact, during these months,
the number of active users
actually decreased slightly, but not drastically. In March,
weekly active users decreased to an
average of 133 and a maximum of 195. That same month,
monthly active users went down to an
average of276 and a peak of313. In April, the number of active
users reduced fmiher. Weekly,
the average amount of active users was 117, with a maximum of
185. Monthly, the average was
278 and the maximum was 286 (please see Tables 17-20 in
Appendix pgs. 47-50). This reduction

in the month of April could possibly be attributed to the fact
that, with the influx of term papers
and group project deadlines during that month, I spent less time
posting content on the Station 1
Facebook page. My diminished use of the restaurant's Facebook
in the month of April was
evident in the statistics regarding total post views mld post
feedback. In Janumy, the total number
of post views was 2,953. In February, after the review milestone
date, the number almost
doubled to 5,687 post views. In March, the month I started
posting actively on Station 1 's
Facebook, post views went up, reaching 6,268. However, in
April, when my Facebook use
slowed down, the number of post views by more than half at
3,005 views (please see Table 21 in
Appendix pg. 51).
The Facebook post feedback statistics show the same trend as
the post views data above.
In January, the page only received 9 pieces of post feedback. In
February, it shot up

tremendously to 77. In March, it stayed relatively consistent at
79 pieces of post feedback. In
April, when Facebook use, and therefore amount of free
marketing through it, went down, post
feedback went down as well, to 35 (please see Table 22 in
Appendix pg. 52).
In addition to analyzing the number of Facebook post views and
feedback, it is necessary
to determine which types of post content attracted the most
attention from Facebook "fans." The
results from this analysis can be seen in the pie graph in the
Appendix (please see Graph 1 pg.
53). The top three subjects that garnered the most attention were
(1) Food/Menu; (2) Press, such
as reviews or honors received from Open Table users; and (3)
Behind-the-Scenes pictures or
videos, such as the kitchen cleaning up after service, or the
front-of-the-house staff being silly
before service starts.
There were a few alternate routes I could have gone in order to
conduct research for this
paper. For starters, ownership could have implemented the
comment cards for guests earlier, in

order to collect data from them for this paper. Tllis would have
given first-hand insight on all the
areas covered in the comment card template.
Also, I could have utilized the time I spent talking to my tables
as a server more
efficiently by asking them questions that would have given the
insight that would have been
provided in the comment cards. So, instead of giving the
comment card with their check, I could
have asked them specifics about how they enjoyed the variety in
the dishes, how the pacing of
their meal was, etc. However, this method of data collection
would have been seen as
inappropriate by the owners, and honestly by me. Guests may
feel under direct scrutiny and may
not appreciate being forced to answer such questions to a
member of the staff. TillS could
potentially cause the restaurant to lose customers. Also, asking
these types of questions during
service would take up quite a bit of time, depending on how
long the guests' responses would be.

The fast-paced nature of our dinner service would not allow for
such time-wasters.
A third alternative to the method of data collection for this
research paper would have
been to record the net sales and per person average of all
servers for the time frame under
examination. Recording trends in these figures from all the
servers would have yielded more
reliable data regarding its trends with our milestone dates.
However, as stated before, the owners
did not feel comfortable divulging these numbers, and I
understood.
Section V - Conclusion
Overall, the nllnimalmarketing approach has proven to be
effective despite the little
funding allotted to put towards such a marketing plan. Although
weekends have been
consistently busy since data collection began in January, the
number of covers on weekdays has
increased since gaining more attention via reviews, increased
social media use, and the
announcement in the Top 100 Bay Area Restaurants list.
Personal net sales per night also
increased with these "free" advertisements for the restaurants,

which is greatly attributed to the
increase in business volume. Also, the number of active
Facebook users and their interactions
with tllls page went up since use of this form of social media
public relations increased.
It is important to note that not all methods of measuring our
minimal marketing's effect
on business supported this notion. The per person average for
each night had no apparent
correlation with marketing efforts, being influenced more
greatly by how much each guests
typically spends while dining out; that is, whether they are big
drinkers or not, and whether they
go for the three-course prix fixe menu or prefer to eat a la cmie.
Moreover, nightly net sales'
trend of increasing slightly around the milestone dates is not for
certain due to the same factors.
Although it was inadvertent, the slowdown of posting on the
Station I Facebook page
actually helped in determining minimal marketing's effect on
the restaurant's popularity, besides

through number of covers and sales. When the Facebook page
was providing less insight to
"fans" in April, the number of active users, post views, and post
feedback significantly went
down in number. Administrators were still posting some items
for them to views, such as a
behind-the-scenes video of the front-of-the-house dancing
before service, but people were not as
interested in this as they were other posts during previous, more
active months. That is, the
number of impressions on posts in April was significantly lower
than prior months.
In order to gain more interest from "fans," Facebook
administrators should post much
more about subjects they showed most interest in. Specifically,
focus should be placed on food,
which is the main motivator behind why people eat out at
restaurants. Administrators should also
focus more on posting press releases about the restaurants, such
as in news in food blogs, and
behind-the-scenes activities.

Stennning from the findings and subsequent conclusions of this
research paper, there are
a number of recommendations for the owners' of Station I
regarding how they should utilize this
paper to their benefit. First, it is highly recommended they
begin implementing the comment
cards as soon as possible to gain a first-hand account of how
guests heard about the restaurant
and felt about their overall experience. Also, they can stmi
keeping a database of guests'
birthdays and anniversaries, better personalizing their dining
experiences.
Administrators should utilize the restaurant's Facebook page
more. I can assist with this,
since I will remain a Facebook administrator for Station l's
page. We should capitalize on what
the most popular post contents have been in the past, and post
more things like these for the
"fans" to view. This would likely increase the lltlmber of active
users and impressions left by
them. Also, we should post more often on the page since people
show most interest in Station I
when administrators post more frequently. This is evident

through the number of post views and
feedback received during times we post most. Also, we should
post content more on Facebook
since the Twitter account is tied to the Facebook account.
Related to this, owners should utilize Station I's Twitter account
more often as well.
Right now, only posts on Facebook are being posted on Twitter.
There should be separate posts
available on Twitter. This would give the restaurant much more
exposure on SF Gate's Inside
Scoop SF website, perhaps increasing business from first-time
diners, where most business has
been coming from lately.
Although the data collected did not yield the clearest of
correlations between nightly net
sales and per person average to minimal marketing efforts,
owners should still use the data
retrieved from the personal server checkout sheet to set
benchmarks for the service staff. I, or if
the owners are more comfortable doing it themselves, can create
a database recording all of the

servers' figures for net sales and per person average, then
determine what overall benchmark
should be established. They can use tillS database to determine
what amount of net sales per day
01' week will achieve the their desired profits. This can help
ensure that, as business goes on, the
owners know exactly where they stand regarding breaking even
and/or being able to afford any
equipment, software, or other resources needed to operate.
References
Facebook. (2011). Facebook insights data export- Station 1
Restallrant- 2011-05-01 [Data
File]. Retrieved from
http://www.facebook.com/insights/?sk=po_131678303546336
Station 1 Restaurant. (2010). Station Restaurant 1 Handbook.
Woodside, CA: Tarazi.
29

Appendix
Figure 1 - Station 1 Comment Card Template
Wo'd (e •• t.o h.", wh,t. Y0U tllb)L
Is tllts Y0lll' fi,st. tIp). bob)~ w!t.1l us? ~tlS Jrc
wh.t. h,'olli,11t. yeu b,r _______________________________ _
Jiew did yeu [od ,beUL
o 'ill. (,st.o ,"d ~"I.t;y 0[ ollr dlslws?
And just. , hit. lnore b)[m",,,t.Ioll to 'bet. t.o kllmV you bot.t.oL
o 'lIlr!,hdgy __________ _
o fbmt'Jl]l'sgt'Y _________ _
o bj))'U Address ([er $(,t.Ioll 1 llpd,t.g)
L
Table 1 - Cover Count January 2011
100 -,-------------------------------------------
90 -
,
87
82
76
85
76

i I
! I
. ill
I
80
89
71
70
I I l' I I
61 61
60 I I I I
r- r I
-
I r r-Number of Covers 50
43
41
r-I i 36 ~n i i
39
I i j 35
40
33 32
I I ,-~I I I I I

. I
I I " I i
30
22
19 -l
r- r
I
I I I I I .
21
I I I II -'I -,- I I I I -I
20
10 I ,- ,- I ,- r- I I I- I I I I I r- II
a . I-,- . . . . .,- . . . . l . . I-,- . . L_
y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Date
tTl -n
'""11
en :::;
<:
en
Z
en
0)
G''')
a

II
:s:
z
3:
:p
r
3:
::D
-p
-r:.
Cii
::j
2:
(:
().J
Number of Covers
Table 2 - Cover Count February 2011
90
85 84
80
80 1--
I
!
-
I

74
76
71
74
I
I 69 -,---- I--
69
l- I-- I--70
65 65
63 62
I-- -sT e- ,..... I-- l- i---
55 56
I- - I--60
51
49 .,
I-- I-- '-- - l- i--- - - i--- I- 49 I-- I-- l-50
40 e-
36
I-- - l- I- e- I-- i--- c- - - - - l- I-- 0-
30 I-- - - - I- - i--- i--- - I-- I- - - - - i--- i--- 0-
20 ~ - i--- l- I- l- I- - - I- - - i--- l- I-- I- '-- - I--
10 I-- I-- I-- i--- i--- l- I- l- e- l- I- I- I-- l- I- I- 1-1-
o -, I- i--- I- L,l I- I- I- l- I-- '-,-l I- L,l I- I-

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Date
m -n -n
en
(")
-l
c:
rt1
z:
m
(j)
0)
o
-n
s::
z:
::s:
JJ
r
::s::
:p
N
7'-
~
Z o
Q.,)
'l

.... IV W
0 0 0 0
3/1/2011
1 t .,'
3/2/2011
.J
3/3/2011
3/4/2011
3/5/2011
.. J
J J .I"
L _.1
3/6/2011
3/7/2011
3/8/2011
3/9/2011
J l
3/10/2011
3/11/2011
J J

.I
3/12/2011
3/13/2011
3/14/2011
3/15/2011
~ 3/16/2011 ..
111
3/17/2011
3/18/2011
J {
{ J
-C J
3/19/2011
1
,
3/20/2011
3/21/2011
3/22/2011
3/23/2011
_1
3/24/2011

3/25/2011
3/26/2011
J
-L
I _L
3/27/2011
3/28/2011
3/29/2011
3/30/2011
.J J -
3/31/2011
.J ,J, ~
. , J .
Sf
z
" 3
g-
~
0
-h
Ii
<
111
VI

... <.n m " <» 0 0 0 0 0
.. -~+~-, , ........... J<,;~-- .....
w
.J -I"
.J <.n
IV
.J
- ~
<.n
0
.J J
J g)
-t;;
...
ID
J
J
~
l'
<.n
m
1 J
J

<.n
<.n
...
0 ,
m
m
())
m -
-(;j
r
I
00 ....
00 w
<»
w
ID o
~I
.... g
''--I
I
o;t
C"
CD

w
n
0
~ ..,
n
0 c
::J ....
s:
III ..,
n
:::r
IV
0
~
~
T:1N IJ_371t1:lW itlH INIW .:10 S~;:':lN3/lJ3::l::l3
I I I I I I I
N ,...
'" ,...
<t on
on on
0
'"
0
00

~ .... ....
0
on on
N
0 -.- '" ...
Q. CO
c:( on
+'" c:
:s
0 u ...
~
0
00
0 on
U 00
o::t :J:
CU -.Q '" '"
{J. '" on
N ,...
- -- - - -- - - "-"- -.-< ,...
--1- -I I I. -- I ··········_-1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N .-< m 00 ,... '" on <t CO
~
OJ
.9 -0
~

'" .0 E
" z
Table 5 - Per Person Average January 2011
80 -// - -- 78.11
71.15 r--------------------
70
60
PPAin $ 40
30
20
10
o~< --/
y ~" ~" :f> :f> :f> ,,0, ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~" ~" ~" ~" ~<:j ~<:j ~<:j ~
0"'<:, 0':: 0"0, 0~
~" ~" y
~ ~ f
0:f> 0""" lY
Date

<:jV Y
~'" ~
0'" 0f'
~" -" ~" <:j <:j' <:j
n'" '<:,'" 0. '"
0'" 0'" 0""
" :t-<:j" <:jv
~ o,'"
'" 0'"
rn
-;-1
-n
01
::?l
.c.
m
Z m
(j)
U)
()
"T]
.s.
z
3:
:!:i
"
3:

:0
-p
::::
m
-'
-;;"
L
,~-...,
v'"
~
ClJe ~)II U3;;'(Jl:Jtr! '1:1H ,NIW.::IO SS3N311~)3j::l3
....
0 0
Ie. " 3/1/2011
3/2/2011
3/3/2011
3/4/2011
3/5/2011
3/6/2011
3/7/2011
3/8/2011

3/9/2011
3/10/2011
3/11/2011
3/12/2011
3/13/2011
3/14/2011
3/15/2011
0
3/16/2011 OJ ..
'" 3/17/2011
3/18/2011
3/19/2011
3/20/2011
3/21/2011
3/22/2011
3/23/2011
3/24/2011
3/25/2011
3/26/2011

3/27/2011
3/28/2011
3/29/2011
3/30/2011
3/31/2011
LS
..,
:g
5'
<h
IV W ..
0 0 0
In m
0 0 '" o
" -"-~'-"~"-'-'~""-"~"-'-'''-'--'---'--'-'-'-'----'' --"-,-,-""-,---,---,--''''-
'" .... N
'"
'" 0 10 w
'" IV
gg
1

'" In '" m
'" m
&l
QjI
tT
ii)
"
" tD
'"'
" tD '"' III 0
:l
~
tD
iil
atl
tD
s:
Q)
'"' n
::r
N
0 .... ....
8NLL311<ll:l.AJ 11:J.AJ INIr-I.:lO BS3N::JJUJ3::J:El
8S' 'ONLD.>I<JUHil:JWIN1H ::10 ~S3N3IUJ3jj3

39
I'r.
0c':
>6-
~
I'r.
0c':
--;i>
~
I'r.
0c': -<. 0-
I'r.
0c':
>;9
~
I'r.
0c': --s:
0-
I'r.
'l""I
0,%
'l""I

~
0
I'r.
N U)
O~
~
0 ~
U)
.-i I'r.
III O~
::J 0- Qj
r:
...
I'r. '"
III 00-
c
....
I) 0-
Q) I'r. - O~ III
V) ~ .... I'r.
Q)
0c':
Z
~ 0-
I'r.

en O~
Q) I'r.
0-
..c 0c':
~
-<.
I'r.
0-
O'%,
0-
I'r.
0c': --s:
i I'r.
0-
~
~
0,%
... 0-
.-i I'r. 0c':
~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" ;"; '"
0 "" '" '" '" .-i .-i .-i

<J>
.5
V>
oS!
cI1l ...
Qj
z
z .. ..
l.1
10
V>
S'
-II>
I-' I-' I-' I-' I-'
IV '" '" ." 0
IV '" '" ." 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
IV g
2/1/2011
2/2/2011
2/3/2011
f ' ' ' ...... .. ~I I
"
I

.....
I ';;:
I
2/4/2011
I-'
2/5/2011
2/6/2011
'" W IV ;t
C'" -
2/7/2011 CD ....
2/8/2011 0
2/9/2011 Z
2/10/2011
2/11/2011
~
,~
· I I I T '~
'" '"
CD ....
V
IU -
2/12/2011
· I I T I

~,
W CD
VI
."
~
2/13/2011 CD
C'" .. .. 2/14/2011
2/15/2011
I-'
· I I T
'"
I I I I
I-'
I~ '"
."
""'I
C
IU
""'I
<
2/16/2011 IY 0
2/17/2011 , t I 1,
.... ....
2/18/2011
I-'

2/19/2011 00 IV
00
2/20/2011
2/21/2011
2/22/2011 ..... '" '"
2/23/2011
I-'
2/24/2011 '" IV
2/25/2011
T I '"
2/26/2011 I I I I f.
j I I I I I
~
Oh 'UNU3t1l:JW l:lH INIr.::IO '883N3IUJ:l::1.:E:I
IV '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3/1/2011
,
~ ~ ~
-,
3/2/2011

3/3/2011 U 1 1
3/4/2011 1 ,..L J. ..L
3/5/2011 U -1
3/6/2011 I
3/7/2011
3/8/2011
3/9/2011
3/10/2011 IJ 1 1 J
3/11/2011 1 L -L .1
3/12/2011 1 J .J
3/13/2011
3/14/2011
3/15/2011
<:>
OJ 3/16/2011
~
3/17/2011 U l J 1
3/18/2011 1 J. J. -1
3/19/2011 1 .l .J. .,I
3/20/2011
- I
3/21/2011
3/22/2011 1 1 -L
3/23/2011

3/24/2011
3/25/2011 1L J. J .,I
3/26/2011 1 .1 -L
3/27/2011 II I
3/28/2011
3/29/2011
3/30/2011
3/31/2011
j I I I
Ih
2
'" " !.I'
iii"
'" 5'
'" .... ....
00 0 IV
0 0 0
0 0 0
""""J
~~g
1
....

1 8
'"
.... -1 IV
00
00
!r.
glT'
'f-
1 <D IV
VI
-1
..L ,..L .... .. ~
....
0
'"
1 151
<D
-1 .J.
0
..L -1
-L .L J.
00 .... ....
,..L

-L -1 .1
....
~
<D
1 ~
In
<D
I
.... ....
'" '" 0 0 0 0
1
;: .... ....
....
.~
In
....
1IlI~
J.
OJ
.L
....
00
0
0

....
'" VI 00
,J,
~
OJ
IV
....
~
IV
§

~
t:r
CD .... ....
:z
CD
r+
V)
Q) -CD
III
s:
Q)
ri
::r
IY
o .... ....
81'1 IL:r7l<:J ~ W l 1 V'I N H ::10 ':)S3N 31 1;)3::1: ::l

Table 12 - Net Sales April 2011
2000 --1934
1800
1627
1600
1400
1200
Net Sales in $ 1000
800
600
400
200
o
y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~&~~~~~~~###~~#~~~##~#
Date
----------

rn
'1
II en
()
:-t
.c. en
Z
~
o
II
:::s: -z -:::s:
:I5
"
3:
J:)
70
7C
g
Z
o
-C
N
"" c
'" '" Ul
.... .... .... ....
N .. (j) '" a N .. (j) a a a a a a a a a

1/4/11 tv 'I N
I
I
1/5/11
1/6/11 t;;
~
1/7/11 ~ 0--It)
1/8/11 ~I 1-10
w
1/9/11
1/10/11 OJ 'n ~
1/11/11 :0;
It) .. ....
1/12/11 OJ <" 'n »
1/13/11 t
n
r+ -.
<
1/14/11 :0; It) w
"T1
1/15/11
.... QI ..
(j) n
It)
c 1/16/11 0-., 0 ...

'" 1/17/11 0 ....
1/18/11
.... c: ~
III
1/19/11 ~
It) ..,
III
1/20/11 ~ .... QI
::l
1/21/11 (j) C w
QI
1/22/11 ~l -<
1/23/11 N N <n 0
1-10
1/24/11 '::' 1-10
1/25/11
1/26/11
1/27/11
1/28/11
1/29/11
Sh 'ON U3tCJ W 1 :lW 11' I rUO ~mN3f1v3::.:::l

..
c
Kl
VI
IV IV IV IV IV IV IV
0 .... IV W .. In '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.1 '
1/4/11
1/5/11
1/6/11 rut
1/7/11 ~I
0'" -It)
1/8/11 Vi ......
'" ~
1/9/11
1/10/11 Ui
S
~ 0
::I
1/11/11 Vi f"f' ... :::r
1/12/11 Vi <" •• »
1/13/11 Vi I n ~ f"f' _.
1/14/11 H' < It)
1/15/11 ~
'T1

!»
n
1/16/11 It) 0 0'"
~
I'D 1/17/11
0
0
;:II;"
'" 1/18/11 ~ c:
III
1/19/11 >V t: It)
iil
1/20/11 ~ '-
!»
1/21/11 ~ ::I s:::
1/22/11 '"
!»
'>' -<
1/23/11 '" N !'! 0
1/24/11 '"
......
IV ...... ..
1/25/11
1/26/11

1/27/11
1/28/11
1/29/11
hh V It lL31n :;A! 'I tr IN IW .::10 SB3N.3I'1D3:L::I3
..
c:
II>
n>
~
II>
I-' I-' IV IV
<n 0 <n 0 <n
0 0 0 0 0 0 ,
2/1/11 " '
2/2/11
2/3/11 <n 0} ~
2/4/11 "
C"
00 -tD
2/5/11 I-'
U1
2/6/11 I-' ~

~ 2/7/11 a; .~
tD
2/8/11 '" -<
2/9/11 »
n
2/10/11
IV r+
I-' -. I-' <
2/11/11
IV tD
I-'
W 'T1
2/12/11 0
QJ
n h
tD
c 2/13/11 r
C" .. 0 .. 0 n> 2/14/11
'" 2/15/11 ~ c: ~ 1/1
tD
2/16/11 ~ ~
.,
1/1
2/17/11 Illl
'T1
tD
C"

2/18/11 en
.,
w t:
2/19/11 .....
QJ
q ., -<
2/20/11 ..... N ~ 0
2/21/11 ..... I-' IV I-' <0
2/22/11
2/23/11
2/24/11
2/25/11
2/26/11
9h 'J(I.U3?lItlW I UWINlv JO '0831'13[8)::1:13
..
c
'" '" ;;
'-' '-' tv tv W W
V> 0 V> 0 V> 0 V>
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2/1/11
2/2/11
~
2/3/11 tv 0} <,n
2/4/11 tv
C"
ID fD
2/5/11 tv .... " en en
2/6/11
S
2/7/11 tv 0 '-'
:::J
2/8/11 !!,ll r+ :r
2/9/11 ~I <" »
2/10/11 w n <;:> r+ -.
2/11/11 < II)
'T1
2/12/11 !l.I
n
2/13/11
II)
!ii' C" .. 0
'" 2/14/11 0
~

2/15/11 c:
VI
2/16/11 II)
iil
2/17/11 w 'T1 0
II)
2/18/11 w C" C> ""'I
C
2/19/11 w !l.I '-' w -< 2/20/11 w '-' N ..
2/21/11 w
0
Q .... ....
2/22/11
2/23/11
2/24/11
2/25/11
2/26/11
o)h 0-N 137Cl C I,r{ '1 :;W Nr;10 SS'3N'3.fh;3J.:I3
IV ". <1>
0 0 0 0

3/1/11 I~ ~ ~ ~
3/2/11
3/3/11
-t ~ l.l
~ ~ J, 11
3/4/11 U mL -t
3/5/11 U mL -t
3/6/11 U ~ .Ii <1>
"
3/7/11 l.l .I IV lD
3/8/11 IJ" -~
3/9/11 11 IV ".
3/10/11 U ,J
3/11/11 11 J, ~
3/12/11
3/13/11
3/14/11
11 J, ~
~ 11 -t
~ 11
3/15/11 u ~
c
3/16/11 OJ It

3/17/11 I~ "" 11 ""
3/18/11 U ""
3/19/11
3/20/11 ~
~ 11
J, U
3/21/11 u "" J,
3/22/11
3/23/11
11
~ ·~l 11
3/24/11 U mL
3/25/11 11 .l
3/26/11
3/27/11
~ 11
~ ,J, 1.1
3/28/11 lL J, ~
3/29/11 11 ..
3/30/11
3/31/11
mL
=
11
11 J,

-
Lh
..
c
V> ..
~
V>
I-' I-' I-' I-'
00 0 IV ". <1>
0 0 0 0 0
. ..... .~ ~
I mL -t mL ~
I .l I-' OJ ~ lD
I-'
~
.l OJ
lD
mL
~
~ mL
~g
!;;:
~ I-' .l .Ii !;;:
"

~ ,J mL ... !;;:
<1>
.l J, .l .Ii t
~ J, ~
...l ~ ! -t J, ~
! ~
~ ,J ~ -:;,;
lD
~ ~ .. -1
~
~
mL
1 1
lD
"" mL .:;,; IV
.l .l t;;
I-'
mL ~
"" mL .. J, .l ; mL
"" .I ~ ~ "" .l ..
I-'
00
0

I-'
" IV
I-'
" OJ
I-'
" lD
I-'
00
I.n
'"" :» ".
!~
,
IV
0
0
rJ
C--CD ....
"""
~
CD ...
<"
»
~ -.
~
c:;t
n
CD
C-

O o ...
C
III
CD
iii
s:
OJ
~
::r
N
o .... ....
81 U:::171ClI:l vrl :J HI NI W ::10 S0:3N3J1103.:1.:l3
o
3/1/11
.~
3/2/11
I
3/3/11
",r
3/4/11
II
3/5/11
"II
3/6/11
IT

3/7/11
II
3/8/11
"I I
3/9/11
II
3/10/11
II
3/11/11
I
3/12/11
. I
,I
3/13/11
II
3/14/11
"II
3/15/11
0
3/16/11 .. ... .. "II
"II
3/17/11
3/18/11
II

3/19/11
"II
3/20/11
II
3/21/11
I
3/22/11
" I
3/23/11
·11
3/24/11
II
3/25/11
IT
3/26/11
Ii
3/27/11
II
3/28/11
II
3/29/11
"I I
II
3/30/11

" I
3/31/11
"I
Sh
In o
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
....
o o

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~ o
;
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..
C
~
;;;
:: o
'
T
T
T
I
T
I
I

I
T
T
T
f
I
I
'" In o
..
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

'" '" '" I
'" ~
I
'" In <D
I '" 0)
00
I '" 0)
00
I
'" 0) 0)
I",
In
0)
I",
In
.1",0)
'" <D
0
'n
~
'" In
I~
In

I
<D
'" '" I .... '" '"
I '" '" '"
I '" '" '" '" I '" In
<D
I '" In
10)
'" '" w I
g
w
I ,
t;;
~
I
I
I
I
'" 00 In
'" 00 In
'" ~
,
w o

w ....
'" W .... ....
W .... ....
W .... ....
W
In o
0}
C--I'D
~
00
s:
0
:::J
r+ :r --<
."
111
n
I'D
C-
O
0
;
c:
III
I'D
VI
s:
111
'"' n :r
N
0

~
~
'UN lL::JldUW lUH( W .::::10 SS3N3fl1.J3.:!.::13
Table 19 - Weekly Active Facebook Users April 2011
200 _:F
180
160
140
120
# Users 100,
80
60 ,
40
20
a -~/-=~-==.~~~~.-==~~~-=~-==.~~~~~==~~~-=~-
==.~~~==~==~~~-'
,"-",,,, ~",,,, '!:.",'" ~",,,, '!:.",'" '!:.",'" ",,,, '!:.",'" ';;.",'" ~",,,,
~",,,, ~",,,, '!:.",'" ~",,,, '!:.",'" '!:.",,,, ",,,, ",-",,,, ~",,,, ~",,,,
'J."'''' ~",,,, '!:.",'"
~~&~~~~~~####~##~#~~~##

Date
m
"T1
"'i
[rj
9
L-
en
z:
q::1
23
o
"'11
3:
z
3:
":D ,
3:
:D
70
7C
en
:::!
z
(;)
-C ..a
Table 20 - Monthly Active Facebook Users April 2011
m J /-'-------------------------------------------------------------------

Running Head DOMENICO WINERY’S COMPETITIVE SET 1 .docx

Running Head DOMENICO WINERY’S COMPETITIVE SET 1 .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Running Head DOMENICO WINERY’S COMPETITIVE SET 1 .docx

Similar to Running Head DOMENICO WINERY’S COMPETITIVE SET 1 .docx (20)

More from jeanettehully

More from jeanettehully (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Running Head DOMENICO WINERY’S COMPETITIVE SET 1 .docx