Icon

CS-106 Rise of the Microbrew - Part 06 Microbrews v05

[Case Studies] CS-106 Rise of the Microbrew - Part 06 Microbrews (Strange Differentiation)
Despite lower Quality, higher Costs, andhigher Prices, the Microbrews are able tocreate a profitable niche. Case Study (CS-106) - Rise of the Microbrew - Part 06:Enter the MicrobrewThis Market Simulation workflow follows the Case Study presentation and whitepaper called "Rise of the Microbrew".It is 1980. The few remaining mega-breweries in the USA are producingexceptionally high quality beer (albeit of unremarkable taste) and have developedimmensely strong brands. Industry experts believe that the barriers to entry are sohight that the emergence of even a single new brewery is impossible.But the experts are wrong, and thousands of new micro-breweries enter themarket within a few short years.While Microbrews generally are of inferior quality (when measured objectively) theirunique tastes and fresh brands are appealing to about 2% of Consumers. The Brand Value of the Major Beers are notcorrelated with the Brand Value of theMicrobrews. But Customers see Majors assimilar to other Majors, and Microbrews assimilar to other Microbrews. Microbrews have a Mean Willingness ToPay (WTP) by Customers much lower thanthe Major Beers. But they have a very wideStandard Deviation (SD) that allows them tocapture a small niche market. The Quality and Flavor of Microbrews canvary greatly - even among the set ofMicrobrews themselves. The difference in the Standard Deviation(SD) between the Major Brands (blue) andthe (mostly inferior) Microbrews (red) can beseen in a side-by-side WTP Histogram.BeerProductsAll ProductFeaturesBrandCustomer DistributionsProductFeaturesQualityFlavorFeature VariationsMajor Brandvs MicrobrewMajorvs MinorMajorBrandsMicrobrewBrandsMicrobrewProductsMicrobrewProductsMajor Brandsvs MicrobrewsBrandQuality + FlavorBrandQuality + FlavorMicrobrewQuality + FlavorAll FeaturesHorizontal DifferentiationMajorProductsMajorBrandsSimulateMarketMajor BrandWTP HistogramMicrobrewWTP HistogramProductWTP StatisticsMajor Brandversus MicrobrewProfitability ofMajors vs MicrosAll FeaturesVertical DifferentiationFeatureCorrelations Product Generator Table Creator MatrixDistributions Table Creator DifferentiationVertical Table Creator Row Splitter DifferentiationHorizontal DifferentiationHorizontal DifferentiationVertical Table Creator CorrelationConcatenation Row Splitter Row Splitter DifferentiationHorizontal CorrelationConcatenation Table Creator DifferentiationVertical Simulate Market Histogram Chart(JFreeChart) Histogram Chart(JFreeChart) Statistics Histogram Chart(JFreeChart) Pie chart (local) Concatenate Linear Correlation Despite lower Quality, higher Costs, andhigher Prices, the Microbrews are able tocreate a profitable niche. Case Study (CS-106) - Rise of the Microbrew - Part 06:Enter the MicrobrewThis Market Simulation workflow follows the Case Study presentation and whitepaper called "Rise of the Microbrew".It is 1980. The few remaining mega-breweries in the USA are producingexceptionally high quality beer (albeit of unremarkable taste) and have developedimmensely strong brands. Industry experts believe that the barriers to entry are sohight that the emergence of even a single new brewery is impossible.But the experts are wrong, and thousands of new micro-breweries enter themarket within a few short years.While Microbrews generally are of inferior quality (when measured objectively) theirunique tastes and fresh brands are appealing to about 2% of Consumers. The Brand Value of the Major Beers are notcorrelated with the Brand Value of theMicrobrews. But Customers see Majors assimilar to other Majors, and Microbrews assimilar to other Microbrews. Microbrews have a Mean Willingness ToPay (WTP) by Customers much lower thanthe Major Beers. But they have a very wideStandard Deviation (SD) that allows them tocapture a small niche market. The Quality and Flavor of Microbrews canvary greatly - even among the set ofMicrobrews themselves. The difference in the Standard Deviation(SD) between the Major Brands (blue) andthe (mostly inferior) Microbrews (red) can beseen in a side-by-side WTP Histogram.BeerProductsAll ProductFeaturesBrandCustomer DistributionsProductFeaturesQualityFlavorFeature VariationsMajor Brandvs MicrobrewMajorvs MinorMajorBrandsMicrobrewBrandsMicrobrewProductsMicrobrewProductsMajor Brandsvs MicrobrewsBrandQuality + FlavorBrandQuality + FlavorMicrobrewQuality + FlavorAll FeaturesHorizontal DifferentiationMajorProductsMajorBrandsSimulateMarketMajor BrandWTP HistogramMicrobrewWTP HistogramProductWTP StatisticsMajor Brandversus MicrobrewProfitability ofMajors vs MicrosAll FeaturesVertical DifferentiationFeatureCorrelationsProduct Generator Table Creator MatrixDistributions Table Creator DifferentiationVertical Table Creator Row Splitter DifferentiationHorizontal DifferentiationHorizontal DifferentiationVertical Table Creator CorrelationConcatenation Row Splitter Row Splitter DifferentiationHorizontal CorrelationConcatenation Table Creator DifferentiationVertical Simulate Market Histogram Chart(JFreeChart) Histogram Chart(JFreeChart) Statistics Histogram Chart(JFreeChart) Pie chart (local) Concatenate Linear Correlation

Nodes

Extensions

Links

Download

To use this workflow in KNIME, download it from the below URL and open it in KNIME:

Download Workflow
Created by: Berlin
Created at: 2018-05-28
On NodePit since: 2021-02-05
Last update: 2024-12-21
Created with KNIME version: v4.3.0

Deploy, schedule, execute, and monitor your KNIME workflows locally, in the cloud or on-premises – with our brand new NodePit Runner.

Try NodePit Runner!