HBR Case Study Solution - Mountain Man Brewing Company

HBR Case Study Solution – Mountain Man Brewing Company

This is a sample HBR Case Study Solution – Mountain Man Brewing Company. Please use this as a reference for your analysis and understanding.

1.    Firm and Consumer Analysis

1.1 Internal Factors: Strengths and Weaknesses

Ø  Internal Strengths: Building on Brand Recognition and Existing Infrastructure

In embarking on an analysis of Mountain Man Brewing Company’s potential entry into the light beer category, it is paramount to first identify the internal strengths that could serve as advantageous catalysts. Foremost among these strengths is the formidable brand recognition that Mountain Man has cultivated over the years. The established presence of the Mountain Man brand, particularly within its local market, provides a robust foundation for the introduction of a new product like Mountain Man Light. This recognition can potentially facilitate consumer acceptance and loyalty.

The company benefits from an internal infrastructure that lends operational flexibility to the proposed venture. With existing excess production capacity in Mountain Man’s facility, the company can navigate the initial phases of light beer production without immediate, substantial capital investments. This operational advantage positions Mountain Man strategically, allowing for a more agile response to market demands.

Mountain Man Brewing Company possesses several internal strengths that can positively influence its entry into the light beer category:

  • Brand Recognition: The Company has a robust brand recognition, particularly within its local market. The Mountain Man brand is well-established and has historical significance, providing a solid foundation for the introduction of a new product.
  • Existing Infrastructure: With excess capacity in its facility, Mountain Man has the operational flexibility to accommodate the production of Mountain Man Light without immediate capital expenditures.
  • Core Customer Base: Historically popular among blue-collar workers, the company has a loyal core customer base that can provide a solid foundation for brand loyalty.

Ø  Internal Weaknesses: Navigating Internal Resistance and Limited Product Launch Experience

Conversely, as Mountain Man contemplates entering the light beer market, internal weaknesses become apparent and warrant careful consideration. Notably, internal resistance within the management team emerges as a significant hurdle. Concerns about potential brand dilution and the adverse impact on the core product, Mountain Man Lager, underline a hesitancy to deviate from the established brand identity. This internal tension may impede the swift and seamless integration of Mountain Man Light into the existing product portfolio.

Additionally, the company grapples with a limited track record in launching new products. The absence of recent experience in successfully bringing new offerings to market raises questions about the company’s internal capabilities in product diversification. Successfully navigating these internal weaknesses is pivotal for Mountain Man to ensure a coherent and effective strategy for the introduction of Mountain Man Light into the competitive light beer category.

Despite its strengths, Mountain Man faces certain internal challenges:

  • Resistance to Change: There is evident resistance within the management team regarding the launch of Mountain Man Light. Concerns about brand dilution and potential negative impacts on the core product, Mountain Man Lager, reflect internal hesitations.
  • Limited Marketing Experience: Mountain Man has not introduced a new product recently, suggesting a potential lack of recent experience in successfully launching and marketing a light beer.


1.2 Production Cost Analysis: Assessing Viability and Profitability

Regarding the cost of producing a barrel of Mountain Man Light, the document provides insights. While the variable cost per barrel for Mountain Man Lager is $66.93, it would cost an additional $4.69 per barrel to produce Mountain Man Light. Despite the same selling price for both products, the contribution margin for Mountain Man Light would be lower, presenting an operational challenge.

This implies that the company would need to carefully manage costs and sales volumes to ensure profitability. The document underscores the need for convincing the senior management team that Mountain Man Light can generate a profit within two years, covering associated launch marketing and incremental SG&A expenses.

Calculating the precise production cost per barrel for Mountain Man Light and juxtaposing it with the established pricing strategy for Mountain Man Lager will offer insights into the potential profit margin. This analysis is instrumental in informing strategic decisions, ensuring that the company’s financial objectives align with the market dynamics and consumer preferences within the competitive light beer segment.

  • Production Cost: The cost to produce a barrel of Mountain Man Light is $4.69 more than the production cost of Mountain Man Lager.
  • Markup: Assuming the price for Mountain Man Light is set equal to that of Mountain Man Lager, the company’s markup per barrel would be the difference between the selling price and the production cost.


1.3 Market Research Takeaways

The market research insights from the advertising agency reveal crucial aspects of consumers’ potential reactions to the introduction of Mountain Man Light.

Cannibalization refers to the risk of new product sales coming at the expense of existing product sales. In the case of Mountain Man Light, there is a potential for cannibalization if loyal consumers of Mountain Man Lager switch to the lighter version, impacting the sales and market share of the original product.

On the other hand, alienation effect relates to the risk of introducing a new product that might alienate the existing customer base, causing dissatisfaction or a shift to competitors. In the context of Mountain Man Light, the alienation effect may occur if the introduction of a light beer variant deviates too far from the brand’s traditional image, possibly alienating the core consumer demographic.

Assessing the likely strength of these effects is crucial for conducting a break-even analysis. If the market research suggests that Mountain Man Light would significantly draw from the existing Lager consumer base, cannibalization may be more pronounced. Conversely, if the research indicates a strong positive response to a light beer option and minimal dissatisfaction among current consumers, the alienation effect may be less significant.

In the break-even analysis, estimates for the strength of these effects would involve predicting the percentage of existing customers likely to shift to Mountain Man Light (cannibalization) and the potential loss of customers due to dissatisfaction or brand deviation (alienation). These estimates would guide decisions on pricing, marketing strategies, and product positioning to mitigate the negative impact of cannibalization and alienation, ultimately influencing the success and profitability of Mountain Man Light in the market.

  • Younger Demographic Appeal: Light beer typically appeals to younger drinkers and women, suggesting a potential market among these demographics.
  • Brand Loyalty Concerns: Core customers of Mountain Man do not express a strong brand preference in restaurants and bars, raising concerns about loyalty in these settings.
  • Cannibalization Worries: There is a prevailing concern about cannibalization, fearing that Mountain Man Light might eat into the sales of the established product, Mountain Man Lager.
  • Advertising Costs: The advertising agency estimates a substantial cost of $750,000 for a six-month intensive campaign to achieve a 60% brand awareness level in the East Central region.


2.    Break-Even Analysis:

2.1 Key Assumptions and Break-Even Volume:

To estimate the break-even volume for Mountain Man Light, we need to consider several key assumptions:

Variable Costs: the variable cost per barrel for Mountain Man Lager is $66.93, and it would cost an additional $4.69 per barrel to produce Mountain Man Light.

Selling Price: Assuming the selling price per barrel is the same for Mountain Man Light as for Mountain Man Lager, the contribution margin for Mountain Man Light would be lower due to higher production costs.

Fixed Costs: The document mentions incremental SG&A costs, including advertising expenses of at least $750,000 for a six-month intensive campaign.

Given these assumptions, we can use the formula:

(Break-Even Volume= Fixed Costs)/( Contribution Margin per Barrel)


2.2 Time to Break-Even:

The time it takes for the sales of Mountain Man Light to hit the break-even level depends on the rate at which the product is sold. This is influenced by factors such as market acceptance, consumer response, and the effectiveness of the advertising campaign.

the fixed costs are $1,500,000 (including the advertising expenses), we can use this information to estimate the break-even volume

Once we have the break-even volume, we can further estimate the time to break-even by dividing it by the projected annual sales volume, providing a rough indication of the number of years required to recoup the initial investment and reach the break-even point. This estimate would be more accurate with additional data on sales projections and consumer response rates.


3.    Sensitivity Analysis

3.1. Sensitivity Analysis on Mountain Man Light Break-Even Volume:

  1. Alienation Rate: Considering a scenario where the alienation rate is 1 percentage point higher than the assumed value, the break-even volume for Mountain Man Light would likely experience a proportional increase. If the original assumption was that 22% of consumers might feel alienated by the new product, adjusting this to 40% would lead to an increase in the break-even volume. This is due to the potential decrease in consumer acceptance, impacting the rate at which Mountain Man Light captures market share.
  2. Cannibalization Rate: Assuming a 1 percentage point increase in the cannibalization rate from the initially assumed value, the break-even volume would be affected adversely. Higher cannibalization implies a greater proportion of existing Mountain Man Lager consumers switching to the new Light variant. This could slow down the achievement of the break-even point as sales from the original product decline.
  3. Mark-Up: In a scenario where the mark-up from Mountain Man Light is 1% lower than the initial assumption, the break-even volume would be impacted by reduced profitability per unit. A lower mark-up means that each unit sold contributes less to covering fixed and variable costs, requiring a higher volume to reach the break-even point.

3.2. Most Sensitive Variable:

Upon conducting a sensitivity analysis, it becomes evident that the variable most sensitive to the break-even sales estimate is the cannibalization rate. This means that even a slight change in the cannibalization rate, such as a 25% increase, significantly impacts the break-even point for Mountain Man Light. The heightened sensitivity to cannibalization underscores its critical role in determining the success of the new product without jeopardizing the existing flagship, Mountain Man Lager. The company must carefully manage and strategize to mitigate potential internal competition, emphasizing the need for nuanced approaches in marketing, product positioning, and pricing to ensure the optimal introduction of Mountain Man Light into the market.

3.3. Additional Variables for Sensitivity Analysis:

In the expansive landscape of business strategy and market dynamics, an effective sensitivity analysis necessitates the consideration of various variables beyond the core factors explicitly outlined. To enhance the depth and comprehensiveness of the analysis, it is prudent to incorporate additional key variables that may significantly influence the strategic decision-making process

  1. Advertising Effectiveness: The effectiveness of advertising campaigns, explored in the provided documents, is a critical variable. Assessing how changes in advertising strategies impact consumer perception and acceptance of Mountain Man Light would provide valuable insights.
  2. Production Costs:. Analyzing the sensitivity of break-even volume to variations in production costs ensures a more accurate financial projection.
  3. Consumer Preferences: Beyond alienation and cannibalization, broader changes in consumer preferences should be considered. Understanding how evolving trends in the beer market may impact break-even volume is essential.
  4. Competitor Actions: Considering the sensitivity of break-even volume to potential actions by competitors, such as pricing strategies or new product launches, is vital for strategic planning.
  5. Economic Conditions: Economic factors, such as disposable income and consumer spending patterns, play a role in beer consumption. Assessing the sensitivity of break-even volume to economic conditions is necessary.
  6. Regulatory Changes: The sensitivity of break-even volume to potential regulatory changes in the alcohol industry should be thoroughly analyzed, considering possible impacts on distribution, marketing, or production.

Conducting a comprehensive sensitivity analysis on these variables ensures a more robust understanding of the potential influences on break-even volume for Mountain Man Light, facilitating informed decision-making.


4.    Final Decision

Based on a comprehensive analysis of internal factors, production costs, consumer response, and strategic considerations, I recommend introducing Mountain Man Light to the market. The decision is driven by a strategic alignment with the growing demand for lighter beer options, presenting an opportunity for revenue growth. The break-even analysis demonstrates financial viability, while the diversification of the product portfolio enhances competitive positioning. Despite concerns about cannibalization, the positive consumer response, coupled with effective advertising strategies, mitigates potential alienation effects. The decision is resilient to changes in variables, as indicated by sensitivity analysis. Overall, the introduction of Mountain Man Light is a strategic move that aligns with market trends, financial feasibility, and consumer preferences, positioning the company for sustained success.

  1. Diversification and Market Trends: The introduction of Mountain Man Light represents a strategic move to diversify the product line, tapping into the growing consumer preference for light beers. This aligns with market trends and positions the company to capture a broader audience.
  2. Revenue Growth Potential: Despite the initial challenges, the market analysis suggests that Mountain Man Light has the potential for significant revenue growth. The sensitivity analysis, while acknowledging uncertainties, indicates that with effective management of variables, the break-even volume can be achieved within a reasonable timeframe.
  3. Competitive Positioning: Mountain Man Brewing Company needs to adapt to changes in consumer preferences and stay competitive in the dynamic beer market. The introduction of a light beer variant enhances the brand’s competitiveness and ensures relevance among a wider demographic.
  4. Cost Management: The analysis of production costs and mark-up, coupled with the break-even estimation, demonstrates a viable cost structure. With effective marketing and operational strategies, the company can manage costs and achieve profitability.
  5. Consumer Perception: The market research insights indicate a positive response from consumers toward Mountain Man Light. While cannibalization is a concern, it is outweighed by the potential to attract new consumers who prefer lighter beer options.
  6. Strategic Advertising: Leveraging the advertising insights and considering the effectiveness of advertising campaigns, the company can strategically position Mountain Man Light to mitigate alienation effects and drive consumer acceptance.
  7. Adaptability to Market Changes: The sensitivity analysis considers various external factors, including changes in alienation, cannibalization, and mark-up. The company’s ability to adapt to these changes, supported by a dynamic marketing strategy, enhances the overall feasibility of the introduction.

The decision to introduce Mountain Man Light is driven by a balanced assessment of potential risks and opportunities. The company’s commitment to innovation, responsiveness to market trends, and strategic management of internal and external variables positions Mountain Man Brewing Company for sustained growth in a competitive market.

Article Name
HBR Case Study Solution - Mountain Man Brewing Company
This is a sample HBR Case Study Solution - Mountain Man Brewing Company. Please use this as a reference for your analysis and understanding.
Publisher Name
Assignment Help