2017 Case Interview Workshop II presented by the Consulting Club at the Texas Medical Center

1. CASE INTERVIEW WORKSHOP:
PART II

2. COMPONENTS OF A CASE
 Opening
 Analysis
 Closing

3. OPENING THE CASE
1. Take notes
2. Summarize the prompt
3. Ask clarifying questions
4. Pause to prepare a structure
5. Present hypothesis and structure

4. ANALYSIS
1. Select one component of the structure
2. Analyze using process of elimination
3. Comment on significance of numbers
4. Update structure with insights
5. Synthesize what you have learned
6. Move to next branch
7. Exhaust all branches

5. CLOSING
1. State recommendation or conclusion clearly
2. Two or three supporting reasons
3. Risks
4. Next steps

6. ADVANCED PROFITABILITY CASE

7. PROFITABILITY
 Making profits is the core of most (for-profit)
businesses
 Profit (or loss) = Revenue – Costs
 Breakeven point is when:
 Profits = 0
 Revenue = Costs

8. EXAMPLES OF PROFITABILITY
CASES
 A telecom giant has seen a decline in profits over
the last two years and needs your help
 A pharma company wants to commercialize a new
drug and wants to know by which year of sales can
they expect to break even
 A large airline company wants to cut costs to
improve profitability
 An online gaming app is considering launching
consoles and needs your help to determine if they
can make $2 million in profits annually

9. PROMPT
Your client is a defense manufacturer that makes
the Mohawk Light Fighter Jet, a $20 million
fighter jet, for the U.S. Air Force. They have a
10-year contract with the Air Force which is up for
renewal next year. However, the client anticipates
that the Air Force will no longer purchase as
many fighter jets as before since they have seen
recent budget cuts. Your client needs help to
maintain profitability.
Adapted from Emory Goizueta 2006 case
guide

10. SUMMARIZE THE PROMPT
Candidate: That’s an interesting question. Given
Congress’ recent decision to cut defense
spending, it makes sense that the U.S. Air Force
will now want fewer fighter jets. This is likely to
affect our client, who is contracted by the Air
Force to supply a $20 million fighter jet. I am
happy to help to assess how we can maintain
profitability for our client.

11. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
 Customer
 Product
 Business Model

12. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Customer
 Candidate: I’d like to start by understanding our
client’s revenue sources in order to assess if
revenues from other customers or products can be
increased to offset the decline in revenues from the
U.S. Air Force? Does our client have any other
customers?
 Interviewer: Unfortunately, due to the sensitive and
confidential nature of defense contracts, our client
is allowed to only supply the U.S. Air Force and is
excluded from accepting any other contracts.

13. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Product
 Candidate: Got it. Is this the only product that
our client supplies to the U.S. Air Force?
 Interviewer: Yes, for simplicity, please assume
this is the only product they supply to the U.S.
Air Force

14. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Business Model
 Candidate: You mentioned that our client had a 10-year
contract which is up for renewal. How does the contract
between our client and the U.S. Air Force work? What
happens during this 10-year time frame?
 Interviewer: When the U.S. Air Force purchases jets from
our client, our client not only manufactures them but also
provides wear and tear maintenance for 10 years. So the air
force pays upfront for the jets and then pays a yearly
maintenance fee per jet.
 Candidate: I see. Okay, I think I have everything I need at
the moment. Is it okay for me to take a couple moments to
structure my analysis
 Interviewer: Absolutely.

15. PREPARE THE STRUCTURE
Client: Fighter Jet
Manufacturer
• Customer: U.S. Air Force
• 10-year contract
• Possible decline in
revenues starting next year
Clarifying questions
• Only 1 customer
• Only 1 product = $20M/jet
• Manufactures and
maintains jet. Paid upfront
for jet and yearly for
maintenance.

16. PREPARE THE STRUCTURE
Objective: To maintain profits
Hypothesis: Since revenues are bound to decline,
profits can be maintained by cutting costs
Profits
Revenue
Jet sales
Quantity Price
Jet
maintenance
Quantity Rate per
jet
Costs
Jet sales
Jet
maintenance
Client: Fighter Jet Manufacturer
• Customer: U.S. Air Force
• 10-year contract
• Possible decline in revenues
starting next year
Clarifying questions
• Only 1 customer
• Only 1 product = $20 M/jet
• Manufactures and maintains
jet. Paid upfront for jet and
yearly for maintenance.

17. ANALYZING REVENUE BRANCH
FIRST
Revenue
Jet sales
Quantity Price
Jet
maintenance
Quantity Rate per jet
$20M

18. EXHIBIT 1 AND ANALYSIS
Exhibit 1: Mohawk Fighter Jet Revenues
Year Jets Purchased Price
(in million USD)
Maintenance fee per jet for
10 years (in million USD)
2008 10 20 2
2018 8 20 2

19. EXHIBIT 1 AND ANALYSIS
Exhibit 1: Mohawk Fighter Jet Revenues
Year Jets Purchased Price
(in million USD)
Maintenance fee per jet for
10 years (in million USD)
2008 10 20 2
2018 8 20 2
Year Revenue from
jet sales
Revenue from jet
maintenance
Total Revenue
2008 10 x $20M =
$200M
10 x $2M = $20M $200M + $20M = $220M
2018 8 x $20M =
$160M
8 x $2M = $16M $160M + $16M = $176M
Differenc
e
$40M $4M $44M

20. PREPARE THE STRUCTURE
Objective: To maintain profits
Hypothesis: Since revenues are bound to decline,
profits can be maintained by cutting costs
Profits
Revenu
e
Jet
sales
Quantit
y
Price
Jet
maintenance
Quantit
y
Rate
per jet
Costs
Jet
manufacturin
g
Jet
maintenanc
e
Client: Fighter Jet Manufacturer
• Customer: U.S. Air Force
• 10-year contract
• Possible decline in revenues
starting next year
Clarifying questions
• Only 1 client
• Only 1 product = $20MM
• Manufactures and maintains
jet. Paid upfront for jet and
yearly for maintenance.
$20MM10  8 10  8 $2M
$200M 
$160M
$20M 
$16M
$220M  $176M
($44M decline)

21. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT 1 AND
SYNTHESIS OF REVENUE BRANCH
 Candidate: It looks like because of a reduction
in number of jets purchased, our client will see
a $44M decline in revenues. To maintain
profits, we will need to find a minimum of $44M
cost savings for the client.
 Interviewer: That sounds reasonable. How
would you go about doing that?

22. ANALYZING COST BRANCH
Costs
Jet
manufacturing
Fixed Variable
Jet
maintenance
Fixed Variable
Candidate: We will need to assess our client’s current
cost structure for jet manufacturing and jet maintenance.
Do we have any information on that?

23. EXHIBIT II

24. EXHIBIT II

25. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT II
 Candidate: It looks like our client makes a 10%
profit on both jet manufacturing and maintenance
and costs make up 90% of the client’s revenue.
With a reduction in number of jets sold, the
variable costs associated with jet manufacturing
and maintenance cost to client such as materials
and labor will reduce.
 Interviewer: That is correct. For simplicity, you can
assume that both fixed and variable costs will
reduce proportional to the number of jets sold.

26. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT II
Year Revenue from jet
sales
Revenue from jet
maintenance
2008 $200M $20M
2018 $160M $16M

27. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT II
Year Jet manufacturing
costs
Jet maintenance
costs
Total Costs
2008 90% x $200M =
$180M
90% x $20M =
$18M
$180M + $18M =
$198M
2018 90% x $160M =
$144M
90% x $16M=
$14.4M
$144M + $14.4M =
$158.4M
Difference $198M - $158.4M =
$29.6M
Year Revenue from jet
sales
Revenue from jet
maintenance
2008 $200M $20M
2018 $160M $16M

28. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT II
 Candidate: With a reduction in the number of jets
sold, the combined new costs to our client will be
$158.4M, which is approximately $30M reduction
in costs from 2008. Knowing that the total cost
savings needed is $44M, we still need to cut $14M
in costs. Since jet maintenance costs are relatively
low, it is unlikely that we will find $14M cost
savings entirely from jet maintenance. I’d like to
focus on finding costs savings in jet manufacturing
first and then circle back to jet maintenance, if
needed.
 Interviewer: Okay, how would you go about doing
that?

29. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT II
 Candidate: Within jet manufacturing, I see that materials
make up about 60% of the costs and are approximately
$86.4M (60% of $144M). To achieve our goal of $14M
reduction, these costs will need to be reduced by 16%. They
are divided into raw materials, components and purchased
subassemblies. I know what raw materials are but what is
the difference between components and purchased
subassemblies?
 Interviewer: Purchased subassemblies are assembled
components that function as a unit by themselves such as
the pilot night vision system. Our client buys these units
already assembled from suppliers. Components are smaller
parts that make up a system within the jet like an engine.
The client has to assemble these components themselves to
make the complete unit.

30. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT II
 Candidate: Got it. Since purchased
subassemblies are so expensive, it is likely we
could find some savings there. Would it be
possible for our client to purchase the
components for these cheaply and assemble
them in-house?
 Interviewer: That is an interesting suggestion.
How else can we reduce material costs?

31. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT II
 Candidate: An alternative would be to find new
suppliers or negotiate with our existing
suppliers to see if we can bring down costs of
raw materials, components and purchased
subassemblies. Do we have any information on
suppliers for these?
 Interviewer: The client buys purchased
subassemblies from 4 suppliers and has about
120 suppliers for raw materials and
components.

32. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT II
 Candidate: That’s very interesting. Since purchased
subassemblies are specialized parts, it may be difficult to find
alternate suppliers that meet our quality and standards. In
this case, it might be better to negotiate with existing
suppliers. If we lose the contract, these suppliers lose
business as well and this could be used as leverage in our
negotiations. On the other hand, raw materials and
components seem like commodities and perhaps can be
bought from multiple suppliers. There may be room to
negotiate with these suppliers or find others that can provide
these materials cheaper. Additionally, we could even
consider consolidating to fewer suppliers and work out a
better deal with a handful of suppliers
 Interviewer: That sounds like a reasonable suggestion. Why
don’t you go ahead and summarize your analysis for the
client?

33. PREPARE YOUR
RECOMMENDATION

34. RECOMMENDATION
Candidate: I recommend that client cut material costs
by 16%
1. Material costs make up 60% of the clients jet
manufacturing and maintenance costs
2. 16% reduction in material costs will maintain
profitability for client
3. Client has over 120 suppliers for materials. There
may be room for consolidation and negotiation
with suppliers

35. RISKS AND NEXT STEPS
 Risks
 Based on assumption that the Air Force will
purchase 8 fighter jets
 16% cost savings from materials may be a lofty
goal
 Next Steps
 Research suppliers and product offerings
 Devise strategy for negotiations with suppliers
 Find other areas of savings in labor or overhead
costs

36. Q1. MY CLARIFYING QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE LIFE
SPAN OF A JET? MAYBE CAN INCREASE
PROFIT/REVENUE ON JET MAINTENANCE BY
EXTENDING CONTRACT
 Interesting insight and something we can look at
as a next steps but not a key driver to maintain
profits
 Note that total revenue generated from
maintenance is 10% of jet sales ($200M vs $20M)
 Extending maintenance will be an added revenue
stream but it may also cost more to maintain older
jets (i.e. more likely to break down)
 Note: $20M is Maintenance Revenue, while
$2M is Maintenance Profit

37. MARKET ENTRY CASE

38. EXAMPLES OF MARKET ENTRY
 An American company wants to expand its
restaurant business into China
 A luxury car company wants to sell their first
economy car
 A car insurance company wants to provide
umbrella coverage
 Your friend wants to create an app for ______ and
wants to know if it’s a good idea
 A pharma company wants to commercialize a new
drug

39. PROMPT
Our client is Redox Solutions, medium-sized
pharmaceutical company that builds antioxidant-
based therapies for human diseases. Their R&D
team has developed a new treatment for Kobayashi’s
disease (KD) and has already funded its phase I
clinical testing through a private donor. The testing
has gone exceptionally well and Redox Solutions is
interested in getting their drug into the market. While
the KD market is already very saturated, the CEO
still thinks they should go for it and wants our help to
convince the Board of Directors.

40. SUMMARIZE THE PROMPT
Candidate: I know a few people with KD so I’m
always excited about new treatments. It looks like
Redox Solutions has developed an antioxidant
that’s already gone through Phase I trials
successfully, which is terrific! But now they are
concerned about the market being saturated and
whether they should continue forward. Did I get
that right?
Interviewer: That’s correct.

41. Q2. IF CEO THINKS THEY SHOULD GO FOR IT, IS IT
ACCURATE TO SUMMARIZE THE OBJECTIVE AS
“WHETHER THEY SHOULD CONTINUE FORWARD”?
 Note that total revenue generated from
maintenance is 10% of jet sales ($200M vs $20M)
 Extending maintenance will be an added revenue
stream but it may also cost more to maintain older
jets (i.e. more likely to break down)
 Note: $20M is Maintenance Revenue, while
$2M is Maintenance Profit

42. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
 Objective
 Industry trends
 Business model
 Geography
 Disease information
 Product insights

43. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Objective
 Candidate: Besides determining whether this is
a lucrative venture, is there any quantitative
goal?
 Interviewer: Being a seasoned pharma
company, our client is especially worried about
the saturated nature of the treatment market for
this disease and is wondering if entering this
market is worthwhile and if they do, could they
make at least $300 million in profits the first
year.

44. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Industry trends
 Candidate: You said the market is saturated but
are there any other antioxidants developed to
treat KD?
 Interviewer: There are other antioxidants but
we can get into the details later.

45. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Business model
 Candidate: These type of drugs are typically
paid for by insurance companies. Should we
keep them in the picture for today’s analysis or
keep it simple, meaning, our client sells the
drug to the patient?
 Interviewer: Due to time constraints, let’s keep
it simple as you suggested.

46. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Geography
 Candidate: Are we focusing only on the
domestic market?
 Interviewer: Yes, for today’s analysis, we’ll only
look at the American population.

47. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Disease information
 Candidate: Can you tell me a little more about this
disease?
 Interviewer: KD is a disease of the joints caused by
one’s own immune system attacking the joints,
which in turn leads to debilitating pain, joint
deformation, and dramatically increases the
chance of developing heart and lung disease. In
fact, these latter diseases are what actually leads
to patient mortality, not the joint damage. X-ray
imaging is the only way to diagnose KD but isn’t
fully accurate.

48. CLARIFYING QUESTIONS
Product insights
 Candidate: I’m curious why the CEO is pushing
this drug strongly given the market saturation. Is
there something about the drug I should be aware
about?
 Interviewer: The client discovered that the drug has
two remarkable properties:
 No side effects were found in humans during the Phase I
trial.
 During preclinical testing in animals, this drug reduced the
likelihood of developing heart and lung disease. These
factors are not present in any current KD therapy.

49. PREPARE THE STRUCTURE
Client: Redox Solutions
• Makes antioxidant
treatments
• A drug for KD passed
phase I trials funded by a
donor
• KD market is saturated
• CEO wants to push
forwards. Doable?
Clarifying questions
• Need $300M  in year 1
• Redox sells drugs to
patients
• US market only
• KD is an inflammatory
disease targeting joints
• Lung/heart disease kills
patients, not joint damage
• Drug advantages: no side
effects in humans; may
treat comorbidities unlike
other drugs
Objective: Should Redox Solution enter the KD
market and make $300M  in Year 1?
Hypothesis: Yes, considering their unique
advantages

50. PREPARE THE STRUCTURE
Client: Redox Solutions
• Makes antioxidant
treatments
• A drug for KD passed
phase I trials funded by a
donor
• KD market is saturated
• CEO wants to push
forwards. Doable?
Clarifying questions
• Need $300M  in year 1
• Redox sells drugs to
patients
• US market only
• KD is an inflammatory
disease targeting joints
• Lung/heart disease kills
patients, not joint damage
• Drug advantages: no side
effects in humans; may
treat comorbidities unlike
other drugs
Objective: Should Redox Solution enter the KD
market and make $300M  in Year 1?
Hypothesis: Yes, considering their unique
advantages
1
2
3
4

51. TARGET MARKET AND
CUSTOMERS
KD market
Market size
Stakeholder
needs
Patients Providers Payers

52. COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE
Competition
Current KD
treatments
Market
penetration

53. INTERNAL FACTORS
Redox
Solutions
Expertise and
capacity
Capital
available
Economics
Projected
revenue
Cannibalization Upfront costs Operating costs

54. PRODUCT DETAILS
Product’s
value
proposition
Efficacy Safety Convenience
Intellectual
property
X factors
40% Patente
d
granted
this year
No side
effects
Weekly
injection
May treat
comorbidities

55. MARKET ANALYSIS

56. ESTIMATE THE MARKET SIZE
What are some ways to estimate the
size of the KD market?

57. ESTIMATE THE MARKET SIZE
Population
Prevalence
Diagnosis
rate
Treatment
rate

58. ESTIMATE THE MARKET SIZE
Population
Prevalence
Diagnosis
rate
Treatment
rate
320 million Americans
X-ray imaging allows for 90%
successful diagnosis
0.4% are estimated to have
KD
80% opt for treatment

59. ESTIMATE THE MARKET SIZE
Population
Prevalence
Diagnosis
rate
Treatment
rate
Market size = 320M  0.4%  90%  80% = 921,600  900K
320 million Americans
X-ray imaging allows for 90%
successful diagnosis
0.4% are estimated to have
KD
80% opt for treatment

60. STAKEHOLDER NEEDS
 Patients
 Does it work?
 Is it safe?
 Is it painful or tedious?
 Is it expensive?
 Providers (physicians)
 Do we know how it works?
 Is it easy to explain to my patients?
 Is it safe?
 Is it easy to administer?
 Payers (insurance companies)
 Does the drug treat a medically recognized condition or just a quality of life one?
 Is the disease a common or uncommon occurance?
 How does the drug compare to current cost of care?
 Is the drug IP protected?

61. COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE
ANALYSIS

62. CURRENT KD DRUGS
 Antioxidants
 Numerous startups
 15% efficacy in treating joint damage
 Side effects include fever and headache
 Anti-inflammatory drugs
 3 major players (all large pharma)
 80% efficacy in treating joint damage
 Minor side effects and low chance of life-threatening
side effects such as cancer

63. HOW ARE OTHER
ANTIOXIDANTS DOING?
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Anti-inflammatory drugs Antioxidants
Exhibit 1: KD patients by treatment (thousands)

64. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT 1
 Candidate: KD market is stagnant at around
900K (aligns with our estimate)—no major
changes expected soon
 Candidate: Antioxidants stole market share
after launch but plateaued to 200K patients

65. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT 1
 Interviewer: Why do you think antioxidant usage
grew rapidly but eventually plateaued?
 Candidate: Antioxidants may have been exciting
due to their relatively minor side effects but failed
to gain traction since they were not very effective
treatments.
 Bonus: Since our client’s drug has no known side
effects but is much more efficacious than current
antioxidants (40% vs. 15%), we are poised to
dominate the antioxidant market while stealing
market share from the anti-inflammatory market.

66. MARKET PENETRATION
Anti-inflammatory
drug
Percentage of
patients using
treatment
Adoption for client’s
drug from surveys
Drug 1 51.1% 18.8%
Drug 2 29% 9.9%
Drug 3 19.9% 15.0%
90% of KD patients using current antioxidants would be interested in
switching to the client’s drug
Exhibit 2: Estimated adoption rates for client’s drug

67. INSIGHTS FROM EXHIBIT 2
 Candidate: It looks like a fraction of patients
using anti-inflammatory drugs would consider
switching—perhaps they’re hesitant having
seen what antioxidants are capable of in the
past. Meanwhile, almost all patients currently
using antioxidants would consider switching.
 Candidate: Using this information, I can
determine how many patients using either type
of treatment would likely switch to our client’s
drug.

68.  Patients switching from current antioxidants
= Patients using antioxidants  adoption rate
= 200K  90% = 180K
 Patients switching from anti-inflammatory drugs
= [(Drug 1 share  adoption rate) + (Drug 2 share  adoption rate) +
(Drug 3 share  adoption rate)]  Patients using anti-inflammatory
drugs
= [(50%  20%) + (30%  10%) + (20%  15%)] x 700K
= (10% + 3% + 3%)  700K
= 16%  700K = 112K
Total projected patients switching to client’s drug
= Patients switching from antioxidants + patients switching from anti-
inflammatory drugs
= 180K + 112K = 292K
Candidate: We can capture nearly 30% of the KD treatment market but this
figure is overestimating since not all patients will switch in Year 1
= [(Drug 1 share  Patients using anti-inflammatory drugs  adoption rate)]
+ [(Drug 2 share  Patients using anti-inflammatory drugs  adoption
rate)]
+ [(Drug 3 share  Patients using anti-inflammatory drugs  adoption
rate)]
= (50%  700K  20%) + (30%  700K  10%) + (20%  700K  15%)
= (350K  20%) + (210K  10%) + (140K  15%)
= 70K + 21K + 21K = 112K
CALCULATE MARKET
PENETRATION

69.  Patients switching from current antioxidants
= Patients using antioxidants  adoption rate
= 200K  90% = 180K
 Patients switching from anti-inflammatory drugs
= [(Drug 1 share  adoption rate) + (Drug 2 share  adoption rate) +
(Drug 3 share  adoption rate)]  Patients using anti-inflammatory
drugs
= [(50%  20%) + (30%  10%) + (20%  15%)] x 700K
= (10% + 3% + 3%)  700K
= 16%  700K = 112K
 Total projected patients switching to client’s drug
= Patients switching from antioxidants + patients switching from anti-
inflammatory drugs
= 180K + 112K = 292K
 Candidate: We can capture nearly 30% of the KD treatment market but
this figure is overestimating since not all patients will switch in Year 1
CALCULATE MARKET
PENETRATION

70. COMPANY ANALYSIS

71. COMPANY CAPABILITIES
 Candidate: Does Redox Solutions have the
expertise and capacity to carry out the remaining
trials and launch?
 Interviewer: Yes, they have already successfully
introduced several other antioxidants into the
market. However, they will need to expand their
facilities to manufacture this new drug.
 Candidate: Is there capital available to fund the
remaining clinical trials and launch?
 Interviewer: Yes, they plan to use their surpluses
from other successful drug launches to fuel these
costs.

72. ECONOMICS
Profit
Projected
revenue
Number of
patients
Price Cannibalization
Projected costs
Upfront costs
Operating
costs

73. REVENUE BRANCH
 Number of patients:
292K
 Pricing strategy
 Cost-based pricing
 Value-based pricing
 Competitive
benchmarking
Projected
revenue
Number of
patients
Price

74. PRICING STRATEGY
 Interviewer: Let’s use competitive benchmarking to
estimate a price.
 Candidate: Sure, for that I’d need to know how much
anti-inflammatory drugs and current antioxidants cost
on average.
 Interviewer: Anti-inflammatory drugs cost
$6000/patient/year & antioxidants cost
$2000/patient/year.
 Candidate: Since the client’s drug is 50% the efficacy of
anti-inflammatory drugs but has unique advantages,
the client has some wiggle room for pricing. I’d like to
ballpark it at $4000.

75. CALCULATE PROJECTED
REVENUE
Revenue = Price/unit  volume
= $4000/pp/year  292K patients
= $1,168,000,000  $1.2B annually

76. COST BRANCH
Projected
costs
Upfront
costs
Operating
costs
What are some
potential costs?

77. COST BRANCH
Cost
(millions)
Operating costs
Manufacturing 200
Distribution 100
Upfront costs
Phase II 15
Phase III 20
Drug launch 10
Capacity
155
Calculate costs in year
1
= 200M + 100M + 15M
+ 20M + 10M + 155M
= $500M
Exhibit 3

78. CALCULATE PROFITS
 Year 1 profit = annual revenue – year 1 costs
= $1.2B - $500M = $700M
 Candidate: It looks like the client will not only
reach their goal of $300M profit in year 1 but
exceed it.
 Bonus: Costs will drop to $300M in subsequent
years and profits will rise to $900M per year.

79. FINAL RECOMMENDATION

80. PRESENT YOUR
RECOMMENDATION
Candidate: I recommend that Redox Solutions
enter the KD treatment market
1. Their drug has numerous advantages over
other drugs such as having no side effects
and potentially able to prevent KD-related
deaths
2. They are poised to capture 30% of the market
3. They will generate around $700M in profits,
which is above the goal and will increase in
the future

81. RISKS
 True adoption rates
 Success in passing clinical trials and regulatory
approval
 Insurance coverage
 Competitive response (not relevant here)

82. NEXT STEPS
 Focus on successfully organizing and
completing clinical trials
 Perform more in-depth price sensitivity analysis
 Collaborate with patient advocacy groups