Problem Definition
FreshDirect is an online grocery delivery platform operating in a major metropolitan area. Founded in 2015, the company built a loyal base of health-conscious urban professionals willing to pay a premium for curated groceries delivered to their door. The business model centers on a curated selection of fresh produce, proteins, and pantry staples -- fewer SKUs than a traditional supermarket, but with a quality-focused brand promise and convenient two-hour delivery windows. Prior to the pandemic, FreshDirect had grown steadily to $250 million in annual revenue with a clear path toward profitability.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, FreshDirect experienced explosive growth -- revenue surged 180% to $690 million as consumers avoided physical stores. The company rapidly scaled its workforce from 1,800 to 4,200 employees, added three satellite micro-fulfillment hubs, and expanded its delivery fleet. Management viewed the pandemic as a permanent behavioral shift and invested accordingly, signing long-term warehouse leases and building infrastructure for sustained high volume.
As pandemic restrictions eased, customer behavior reversed sharply. Revenue has declined 25% from its peak to $520 million as customers return to in-store shopping. More concerning, the customer base acquired during the pandemic is churning at significantly higher rates than pre-pandemic cohorts. Customer retention at six months is only 35%, compared to 48% for customers acquired before 2020. The company's cost structure, built for pandemic-level demand, has not adjusted accordingly. FreshDirect is now burning $8 million per month in cash with approximately $112 million remaining -- giving the company roughly 14 months of runway. Unit economics are negative: the average order generates a $78 ticket but costs $22 in fulfillment alone, versus the industry target of $14. The CEO has asked your team to evaluate four options: (1) cut costs aggressively and shrink to profitability, (2) raise prices and accept volume loss, (3) pivot to a hybrid delivery-plus-pickup model, or (4) seek a strategic acquirer. Which path should FreshDirect pursue, and what would the implementation roadmap look like?
Additional InformationAsk for more dataHide data
- One central fulfillment center (210,000 sq ft) and three satellite micro-fulfillment hubs
- Delivery fleet: 180 owned refrigerated vans plus overflow from third-party logistics (3PL) providers
- Employee count: 2,800 (down from peak of 4,200)
- Competitive landscape: Amazon Fresh, Instacart, Walmart+ all offer same-day grocery delivery in the market
- Customer NPS: 42 (down from 61 during pandemic)
- SKU count: 14,000 (versus 35,000+ at a typical supermarket)
- Annual lease and fixed overhead: $82 million
- Average delivery radius: 15 miles from fulfillment centers
- Subscription program ("FreshPass"): $9.99/month for free delivery; 18% of customers enrolled
Question 1Structuring
Prompt: "The CEO wants to understand why FreshDirect is losing money on every order and what levers exist to fix it. How would you structure your analysis?"
Hint · Structuring
Build 3–4 branches that are specific to this client and question, not a generic framework. Check they don't overlap and together cover the problem.
Additional InformationAsk for more dataHide data
Provide if the candidate asks:
- Fulfillment center currently operates at 58% capacity (down from 92% at pandemic peak)
- 3PL overflow costs $19/order versus $13.50/order for owned-fleet last-mile delivery
- Approximately 22% of orders currently go through 3PL due to delivery window constraints, not volume constraints
- Product spoilage and waste runs at 6.8% of COGS (industry benchmark: 3-4%)
- Customer acquisition cost (CAC): $38 per new customer
- Average delivery route covers 8 stops; industry best practice is 12-14 stops per route
- Marketing spend: $42 million annually (8% of revenue), split 60% acquisition / 40% retention
- Top 3 competitors in the market have delivery fees of $6-10; FreshDirect charges $0 for orders above $40
Try it first, then checkShow model answerHide model answer
A strong structure covers three pillars:
1. Unit Economics Repair (What is broken?)
- Revenue side: AOV trends, pricing power, basket composition
- Cost side: COGS optimization, fulfillment cost reduction (owned vs. 3PL mix, route density, spoilage)
- Target: Identify the path from -$3 contribution to +$2 contribution per order
2. Customer Portfolio Optimization (Who should we serve?)
- Segment customers by profitability, not just frequency
- Retention economics: CAC payback by cohort
- Prune value-destroying segments, double down on value-creating ones
3. Strategic Path Selection (Where do we go?)
- Each option evaluated on three criteria: time to positive cash flow, capital required, strategic risk
- Hybrid model analysis: delivery vs. pickup unit economics comparison
- Acquirer landscape: who would value FreshDirect's assets (fulfillment infrastructure, customer data, metro density)?
- Decision gate: by month 8-10, does the data support standalone viability or should management pursue a sale?
What the interviewer is looking forShow guidanceHide guidance
Good: Candidate identifies the core profitability levers (revenue per order, COGS, fulfillment costs, customer retention) and organizes them logically. Mentions the need to separate variable from fixed cost issues.
Strong: Candidate distinguishes between the demand problem (revenue decline) and the cost problem (negative unit economics) as two separate workstreams. Recognizes that solving one without the other is insufficient. Asks about customer segmentation to understand which customers are actually profitable.
Excellent: Candidate frames the analysis around the time constraint -- 14 months of runway means the turnaround must show results within 6-8 months to preserve optionality (need demonstrated progress to raise capital or attract acquirers). Structures the problem as: (1) diagnose root cause of negative unit economics by cost component, (2) identify which customer segments are value-creating versus value-destroying, (3) evaluate each strategic option against both short-term cash impact and long-term defensibility. Recognizes that the four options are not mutually exclusive -- the optimal path likely combines elements. Asks probing questions: "What percentage of the cost base is fixed versus variable?" and "Is there a customer segment that is actually profitable today?"
Question 2Numeracy
Prompt: "FreshDirect is considering the hybrid model -- adding pickup locations where customers order online and collect in-store. Walk me through the unit economics impact."
Hint · Numeracy
Write the formula before you plug in numbers, keep units and zeros explicit, and sanity-check the order of magnitude at the end.
(Give the candidate 30 seconds to outline their approach before sharing the data below.)
Additional InformationAsk for more dataHide data
Provide these data points:
- Each pickup location costs $240,000 per year to operate (lease, staff, refrigeration)
- A pickup location can handle up to 12,000 orders per month
- Pickup orders eliminate the $13.50 last-mile delivery cost but require $4.00 per order for in-store picking and staging
- Management expects 30% of current orders to shift to pickup within 12 months
- FreshDirect currently processes approximately 560,000 orders per month
Try it first, then checkShow model answerHide model answer
Calculation
Step 1: Determine pickup order volume and locations needed
| Item | Calculation | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Current monthly orders | $520M / 12 months / $78 AOV | ~560,000 |
| Orders shifting to pickup (30%) | 560,000 x 0.30 | 168,000 |
| Locations needed | 168,000 / 12,000 per location | 14 (round to 15) |
Step 2: Calculate per-order economics for pickup vs. delivery
| Component | Delivery Order | Pickup Order | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $78.00 | $78.00 | -- |
| COGS | ($53.00) | ($53.00) | -- |
| Gross profit | $25.00 | $25.00 | -- |
| Picking and packing | ($8.50) | ($8.50) | -- |
| Last-mile delivery | ($13.50) | $0.00 | +$13.50 |
| In-store staging | $0.00 | ($4.00) | ($4.00) |
| Support and promos | ($6.00) | ($6.00) | -- |
| Contribution margin | ($3.00) | +$6.50 | +$9.50 |
Step 3: Calculate blended monthly impact
| Item | Calculation | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Delivery orders contribution | 392,000 x (-$3.00) | -$1,176,000 |
| Pickup orders contribution | 168,000 x (+$6.50) | +$1,092,000 |
| Total order-level contribution | -$1,176K + $1,092K | -$84,000 |
| Location operating costs | 15 x $240K / 12 months | -$300,000 |
| Net monthly improvement vs. today | (-$384K) vs. (-$1,680K) | +$1,296,000 |
| New monthly cash burn | $8.0M - $1.3M | ~$6.7M |
Key Insight: The hybrid model improves monthly burn by approximately $1.3 million but does NOT solve the problem alone. FreshDirect still burns $6.7M per month, extending runway from 14 months to roughly 17 months ($112M / $6.7M). The hybrid model buys time but must be combined with other levers -- cost cuts, customer portfolio optimization, or pricing changes -- to reach sustainability.
Reality Check: 15 pickup locations at $240K per year each represents $3.6 million in annual committed costs. If pickup adoption falls short of 30%, the fixed location costs erode the savings. A strong candidate would note that a phased rollout (5 locations first, prove demand, then expand) reduces downside risk.
Question 3Judgement & Insights
Prompt: "Take a look at Exhibits 1 through 3. Based on this data, which customer segment should FreshDirect prioritize for its turnaround, and what actions would you recommend for each segment?"
Hint · Judgement & Insights
Read the exhibit title, axes and units first. Lead with the ‘so what’, then back it with one or two numbers.
(Hand the candidate all three exhibits simultaneously. Allow 2-3 minutes to review before expecting a response.)
Exhibit 1Customer Retention by Cohort (% of Customers Still Active)
| Months After First Order | Pre-Pandemic (2018-2019) | Pandemic (2020-2021) | Post-Pandemic (2022+) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 78% | 72% | 62% |
| 3 | 62% | 50% | 40% |
| 6 | 48% | 35% | 26% |
| 9 | 42% | 28% | 19% |
| 12 | 38% | 22% | 14% |
| 18 | 34% | 18% | -- |
| 24 | 31% | 15% | -- |
Source: FreshDirect case file
Exhibit 2Unit Economics Waterfall -- Average Order
| Component | Per Order | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $78.00 | $78.00 |
| Product cost (COGS) | ($53.00) | $25.00 |
| Gross profit | $25.00 | |
| Picking and packing | ($8.50) | $16.50 |
| Last-mile delivery | ($13.50) | $3.00 |
| Customer support | ($2.80) | $0.20 |
| Promotions and credits | ($3.20) | ($3.00) |
| Contribution margin | ($3.00) |
Industry benchmark fulfillment cost: $14/order. FreshDirect current: $22/order. The $8 gap is split roughly between last-mile inefficiency (low route density) and excess 3PL usage.
Source: FreshDirect case file
Exhibit 3Customer Segment Profitability (Monthly, Per Customer)
| Metric | Heavy (4+/mo) | Moderate (2-3/mo) | Light (~1/mo) | Occasional (<1/mo) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Share of active customers | 12% | 25% | 38% | 25% |
| Average orders per month | 5.2 | 2.4 | 1.1 | 0.4 |
| Average order value | $62 | $98 | $85 | $72 |
| Revenue per customer/month | $322 | $235 | $94 | $29 |
| Gross margin (after promos) | 16% | 30% | 26% | 22% |
| Fulfillment cost per order | $22 | $22 | $22 | $22 |
Note: Gross margin includes impact of promotional discounts redeemed at checkout. Fulfillment cost is uniform across segments. Heavy users' low AOV reflects frequent small "top-up" orders often triggered by flash promotions.
Source: FreshDirect case file
Try it first, then checkShow model answerHide model answer
The data reveals a counterintuitive finding that reframes the entire turnaround strategy: FreshDirect's most active customers are its biggest liability.
The Heavy User Trap (Exhibit 3): Heavy users contribute $322 per month in revenue -- the highest of any segment -- but their 16% gross margin and $22 per order fulfillment cost means each order loses roughly $12. The math: $62 AOV x 16% margin = $9.92 gross profit per order, minus $22 fulfillment = -$12.08 per order. Across 5.2 monthly orders, that is approximately -$63 per customer per month. This segment, at 12% of customers, is responsible for a disproportionate share of total losses. The low AOV ($62 versus the $78 company average) reveals that these customers are placing frequent small orders, often to cherry-pick promotional items rather than doing full grocery shops.
The Moderate User Opportunity (Exhibit 3): Moderate users generate approximately +$18 per month in contribution with $98 AOV and 30% margins. The math: $98 x 30% = $29.40 gross profit, minus $22 fulfillment = +$7.40 per order, times 2.4 orders = +$17.76 per month. These are planned, full-basket shoppers -- the profile FreshDirect should build its business around. Their higher AOV means the $22 fulfillment cost is absorbed by a proportionally larger gross profit.
The Retention Problem (Exhibit 1): Pandemic-era cohorts retain at only 35% at six months versus 48% for pre-pandemic cohorts. Post-pandemic cohorts are even worse at 26%. Many pandemic customers were trial users attracted by necessity and promotions -- exactly the heavy-user profile now destroying value. Pre-pandemic customers, who chose FreshDirect by preference, show retention patterns more aligned with moderate-user economics. The 18-month retention for pre-pandemic cohorts (34%) is nearly double that of pandemic cohorts (18%), suggesting the original customer base remains loyal while acquired-during-crisis customers continue to leave.
Recommended Actions by Segment:
- Heavy users -- restructure or release: Cap promo eligibility with an $80 minimum basket for promotional discounts. Introduce a $5 small-order surcharge on baskets below $50. Some heavy users will shift to larger, less frequent orders (becoming moderate users); others will churn. Both outcomes improve economics.
- Moderate users -- retain and grow: Launch a subscription tier ($12 per month) offering priority delivery windows and a 5% basket discount. This locks in profitable behavior and creates switching costs. Target: increase moderate-user 6-month retention from current ~35% to 55%.
- Light users -- convert selectively: Offer targeted "stock-up" promotions (10% off orders over $120) to shift light users toward moderate-frequency, high-AOV behavior. Avoid broad discounts that attract cherry-pickers.
- Occasional users -- deprioritize: No active investment. Let them self-select based on natural demand. Do not spend CAC to reactivate this segment.
What the interviewer is looking forShow guidanceHide guidance
Good: Candidate correctly identifies that moderate users (2-3 orders per month) are the most profitable segment based on Exhibit 3. Notes that heavy users generate the most revenue but recognizes they may not be the best target.
Strong: Candidate catches the exhibit trap -- heavy users appear most valuable by revenue ($322 per month) but are actually the most value-destructive when contribution margin is calculated. Quantifies this: heavy users generate roughly -$63 per month in contribution versus +$18 per month for moderate users. Connects this to Exhibit 1 to note that pandemic-acquired customers, who are disproportionately heavy promo users, are also churning fastest.
Excellent: Candidate synthesizes across all three exhibits to build a segment strategy:
- Heavy users (12%): Destroying value at scale. Low AOV ($62) combined with 16% gross margin reveals promo-dependency and cherry-picking behavior. Recommendation: restructure promo program (minimum basket size for discounts), introduce delivery fees for small orders, accept attrition of unprofitable heavy users.
- Moderate users (25%): The profitability engine. High AOV ($98) and strong 30% margins suggest planned, full-basket shoppers. Recommendation: invest in retention (loyalty program, subscription model, priority delivery windows).
- Light and occasional users (63%): Near-breakeven economics. Convert light users to moderate frequency through targeted incentives; let occasional users self-select out.
- Connects Exhibit 2: if FreshDirect prunes the worst heavy users and shifts light users toward moderate frequency, contribution per order moves from -$3 toward breakeven.
Question 4Synthesis
Prompt: "The CEO has 10 minutes before a board meeting. What is your recommendation?"
Hint · Synthesis
Answer first: the recommendation, two or three reasons with numbers, then risks and next steps.
Try it first, then checkShow model answerHide model answer
"FreshDirect should pursue a controlled shrink-to-profitability combined with the hybrid pickup model -- not a fire sale, but a deliberate portfolio restructuring. Here is the three-phase plan:
Phase 1 -- Stop the Bleeding (Months 1-3): Restructure the promo program immediately -- minimum $80 basket for discounts, $5 surcharge on orders under $50. Our analysis shows heavy users (12% of customers) destroy over $2 million per month in contribution margin through promo abuse and small baskets. Accept that 30-40% of heavy users will churn -- this is a feature, not a bug. Simultaneously, eliminate 3PL overflow by tightening delivery windows, saving approximately $1 million per month.
Phase 2 -- Pivot Economics (Months 4-9): Launch the hybrid pickup model starting with 5 pilot locations to prove demand, then scaling to 15. This shifts blended unit economics from -$3 toward breakeven on contribution per order and reduces monthly burn by $1.3 million at full scale. In parallel, launch a $12-per-month subscription for moderate users to lock in the most profitable segment and improve retention from 35% to a target of 50% at six months. Consolidate 3PL usage by tightening delivery windows and improving route density from 8 to 12 stops per route, saving an additional $0.5-1 million per month.
Phase 3 -- Strategic Decision (Months 10-12): By month 10, FreshDirect should have monthly burn under $4 million and a clear trajectory toward breakeven. At that point, the company can evaluate three paths: (a) raise growth capital from a position of improving fundamentals and a proven hybrid model, (b) approach strategic acquirers -- Amazon, Kroger, Ahold Delhaize -- with a differentiated hybrid platform and a clean customer base, or (c) continue the organic path to profitability if unit economics have turned positive. The decision should be data-driven: if contribution margin per order is above +$1 and trending upward, path (a) or (c) is viable. If not, path (b) should be pursued before runway drops below 6 months.
The critical insight is that FreshDirect does not have a revenue problem -- it has a customer quality problem. The path to survival is fewer, better customers, not more of the wrong ones.
Key risk to flag: If Phase 1 promo cuts trigger faster-than-expected churn beyond heavy users -- specifically if moderate users are also partially promo-sensitive -- the company could see revenue decline accelerate before cost savings materialize. Mitigation: launch the moderate-user subscription simultaneously with promo cuts, so the best customers have a reason to stay even as the promotional environment tightens."
Contributed by CaseDrill practice community
What the interviewer is looking forShow guidanceHide guidance
Good: Candidate recommends a clear strategic path with supporting rationale from the analysis. Acknowledges the runway constraint and picks a direction.
Strong: Candidate presents a phased approach that addresses the cash runway constraint: immediate actions (cost cuts, promo restructuring) in months 1-3, medium-term pivots (hybrid model, segment optimization) in months 4-9, and a strategic decision point (standalone vs. acquisition) by months 10-12. Quantifies the expected monthly burn reduction at each phase.
Excellent: Candidate delivers a crisp, prioritized recommendation that integrates all prior analyses. Quantifies the impact of each phase against the burn rate and runway. Identifies the key risk (promo cuts could accelerate churn beyond the target segment) and proposes a mitigation. Frames the recommendation as a sequence of "no-regret" moves that improve optionality regardless of which long-term path the company ultimately pursues.