Chester Square Public Ltd.

Presented By :
Aman Mahajan Anshul Prabhakar Antriksh Dadhich

Tushar Bhardwaj

Objectives & Strategy

To be the top seller in Specialty Segments High End, Performance & Size To maintain a steady overall market share with optimum focus on traditional
& low end segment

Strategy Broad Differentiation to Niche Differentiation (Round 4)

Change in Strategy - Midway

Tried to maintain market share in Traditional Segment (Volume vs. Price) Automation of the segment Increased Spending in TQM (despite loss)

Extended support to brands

Did it Work?
Partially 2nd Seller in High End Segment

Competitive in Size and Performance Segment

Contribution Margin Comparison

Increased Contribution Margins

High End Segment

Comparison- Round 4 Vs. Round 7

Performance Segment Size Segment

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

0.0% Round2 12.0% Round3 13.5% Round4 19.3%

Cookie launched

High End

5.0%

Round5
18.4%

Round6 15.2%

Dealer and Fluke launched

Round7 17.7%

12.0%

10.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

0.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

2.0% 6.5%
13.7% 14.4%

Performance

Round2

Round3

Bold-no accessibility Aft capacity sold

Round4

Round5

Aft Exit Bold specification

18.2%

Round6

2 new product by Ferris

13.0%

Round7

14.3%

Size

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

0.0%

5.0%

Round2
8.6%

Round3 6.5%

Ideal Age didn't hit

Round4

ChakDe Launched
22.1%

Round5

Multiple product launch

17.9% Round6

19.4%

Round7

17.7%

Why Competition fared better?

Higher Contribution Margins Stronghold in Low End & Traditional Segment , expansion into specialty Better positioning in certain products R&D Products coming early till parity achieved

Major Point of Difference

High Relative Market Share

Stars Cid, Cookie, Coat Cake

Cure,Chakde

Question Marks Cid, Cure, Coat, Cookie ChakDe.

Stars Products in Specialty Segment Question Marks

High Growth

Cash Cows Cake

Cash

Dogs

Traditional & Low Segment

Dogs

Dealer (Presumed)

Round 4 Income Statement

Round 7 Income Statement

Mistakes Areas of Improvement

Automation Playing conservative in first two rounds R&D -3.1 Cedar 3rd Round Launching two products Capacity issue?

Cure in 3rd round Ideal Age

Awareness & Accessibility in initial rounds Support to our brands Cookie, ChakDe & Coat

TQM spending
Unutilized Capacity , Less than 100% in Round 4 & 6

 Raising capital
Forms
Stock Issued Long Term Debt Issued Current Debt Issued

Finance overview
R2
0 0 0

R1
2,000 0 0

R3
5,000 10,000 0

R4
0 0 22,000

R5
5,000 0 24,000

R6
2,000 0 10,000

R7
-3870 8,000 22,465

Understanding in the beginning was to raise long term capital for both short term and long term cap-ex We had to play conservatively in round 2 due to Product updating schedule Emergency loan in Round 3 Thus, Profitability was expected to be low for some rounds

Capital Usage

Positives
Stayed back in anticipated sellers market
Launch of multiple products Maintained Leverage Spending in HR - Despite a crunch situation Revival after emergency loan Productivity Index

Spending in HR
PRODUCTIVITY INDEX
114
112 110

108
106 104

102
100 98 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Market Capitalization
Market Capitalization (Mn Dollars)
120 100

80

60

40

20

Major Blunder
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Revival
7 8

Parameter

Results Round 4 14.85%

Results Projected Round 8 15% 5% 4-5% 1.8 1-1.2 10-11%

Final Result 11.19% 8.1% 6.25% 1.6 1.25 12.9%

Market Share -1.8% ROA ROS -1.6% 2.4 Leverage Asset Turnover 1.13 -4.2% ROE

Learnings from Simulation

Is taking loan a bad thing? Supporting multiple products You can let go!!! Customer Satisfaction Importance of balance scorecard

Round 5 vs. Round 6

Thank You