*preL - prelaunch and postL - postlaunch

Assumptions:
preL and postL percentages given in the table are assumed to be for brands
after launch% have been given after a year's time
Thus, the market size is considered to be grown by 20% in a year's time
The analysis has been done for 100 units of bottled water units which increase to 120 units after a year
Positioning of Glacia either towards Ozarka or Evian would cause changes in share%(postL)

Present condition

Brand Cost per unit Price per unit Gross margin % Profit per unit Share%(preL)
Ozarka 1.46 1.86 21.5% 0.4 73%
Glacia 1.23 1.79 31.3% 0.56 0%
Evian 4.23 5.49 23.0% 1.26 12%
Aquafina 1.9 2.39 20.5% 0.49 15%

The overall profit grew from $51.67 to $60.576 (17.46% rise in profits)

Case 1: (Glacia closer to Evian)

Brand Cost per unit Price per unit Gross margin % Profit per unit Share%(preL)
Ozarka 1.46 1.86 21.5% 0.4 73%
Glacia Maple 3.63 4.99 27.3% 1.36 0%
Evian 4.23 5.49 23.0% 1.26 12%
Aquafina 1.9 2.39 20.5% 0.49 15%
100%

if Glacia is placed closer to Evian:

1 Customers will have to be made more aware about the product to command a premium and the product can be re
2 Around 20% of the customers prefer imported drinking water, so that will be the upper limit on the product share g
3 With Glacia closer to Evian in terms of price, there will be no brand dilution for HEB's own brand. (Price will be prop
4 It is assumed that Evian's and Ozarka's drop in share% after launch is attributed to Glacia Maple
5 There is also an opportunity for Hill Country Fare to release a product in the lower segment. Thius, increasing profit

There will be additional expenses in terms of promotions to strengthen Glacia Maple's name as imported spring wa

Case 3: (Glacia closer to Ozarka)

Brand Cost per unit Price per unit Gross margin % Profit per unit Share%(preL)
Ozarka 1.46 1.86 21.5% 0.4 73%
 Glacia 1.23 1.79 31.3% 0.56 0%
Evian 4.23 5.49 23.0% 1.26 12%
Aquafina 1.9 2.39 20.5% 0.49 15%
100%

if Glacia is placed closer to Ozarka:

1 Glacia was percieved to be a domestic spring water with only 19% of the people aware that the the product was bo
2 Though positioned to tackle Evian, Glacia was shelved with Ozarka and made available in Ozarka's key sizes
3 In blind tests, Glacia was rated in parity with Ozarka
4 Costs related to product development, repackaging and promotions will have to be incurred

The final decision will have to be made taking into consideration -

1 Procurement revenues
2 Footfall brought in by national brands
20 units after a year

1.2x
Share in 100units(preL) Profit(preL) Share%(postL) Share in 120units(postL) Profit(postL)
73 $ 29.20 52% 62.4 $ 24.96
0 $ - 22% 26.4 $ 14.78
12 $ 15.12 6% 7.2 $ 9.07
15 $ 7.35 20% 24 $ 11.76
Rise in profits over the year
total 51.67 total 60.576 17%

1.2x
Share in 100units(preL) Profit Share%(postL) Share in 120units(postL) Profit
73 $ 29.20 65% 78 $ 31.20
0 $ - 7% 8.4 $ 11.42
12 $ 15.12 8% 9.6 $ 12.10
15 $ 7.35 20% 24 $ 11.76
100% Rise in profits
total 51.67 total 66.48 29%

mium and the product can be renamed as Glacia Maple

per limit on the product share gain for Glacia Maple in subsequent years
s own brand. (Price will be proportional to quality)
Glacia Maple
egment. Thius, increasing profits more.

e's name as imported spring water

1.2x
Share in 100units(preL) Profit Share%(postL) Share in 120units(postL) Profit
73 $ 29.20 47% 56.4 $ 22.56
 0 $ - 24% 28.8 $ 16.13
12 $ 15.12 9% 10.8 $ 13.61
15 $ 7.35 20% 24 $ 11.76
100% Rise in profits
total 51.67 total 64.056 24%

are that the the product was bottled in Canada

ble in Ozarka's key sizes
Rise in profits over the year

Rise in profits
Rise in profits