Most consulting interviews include two components: fit interview and case interview. If you're not prepared for both, you can't get an offer.
This episode demonstrates both components.
Listen in as Tobe Ofili, a Management Consulted coach and former Bain Associate Consultant guides a consulting candidate through a Bain-style interview - complete with detailed feedback.
Tobe works with candidates 1:1 to prep for case interviews using a personalized approach. Join a Management Consulted program like Black Belt to work with him. There are 16 spots left for the upcoming cohort - once they're gone, they're gone.
Case Replay
Management Consulted Programs
- Join the Strategy Sprint virtual consulting project
- Purchase 1-hour coaching session
- Black Belt - 16 seats left for next cohort
- Book a 15min consultation with Eden to get your questions answered
Connect with Tobe
- See Tobe's calendar availability for one-to-one coaching
- Connect on LinkedIn
Exhibits
More Case Interview Resources:
- Interview Hub: Top free prep resources
- Black Belt Case Prep Program
- FREE Case Prep Plan
- Case Interview Guide
Transcript:
0:06
Strategy simplified.
Welcome back to the podcast.
Excited to have you today for this Bain interview demo.
Now, if you've been following us for any time, you know that we regularly do these case interview demos.
But today is not just that, it's also a fit interview demo.
So the session features Tobe, who is a management consultant, case coach, and former Bain associate consultant.
0:27
And he starts off by demoing what a Bain fit interview looks like with our candidate Rashawn.
So he has a couple of great fit or behavioral interview questions so you can see what this looks like.
Next, he moves into a fun Bain style case.
You're going to want to pay attention.
0:43
Follow along with a pencil and paper and see if you can crack the base alongside Tobay and Rashawn.
Tobay loves working with candidates one-on-one to help them prepare for case interviews at firms like McKenzie, Bain, BCG, Accenture, Deloitte, EY, and more.
0:59
So check out the links in the show notes too.
Learn what it takes to work with him via one-on-one Coaching.
Let's get into the episode.
Thanks Rishon for joining us today.
It's been great having you through the process.
I'm just going to go through a couple of questions and maybe first of all, we'll start by looking through your CV on your journey.
1:19
So I have your CV in front of me so you don't have to regurgitate the entire thing.
Maybe tell me something that's not on your CV and how that's drawn you here today.
I think the part would be, and you know, I think that's an interesting fact if I've had the opportunity, you know, to see the entire life cycle of a company.
1:36
So, you know, just coming in as an undergraduate, you know, who doesn't know anything about supply joining a company.
So, you know, being the founding member of a starter is actually laying down the foundations for the supply chain, scaling it, expanding it, and then eventually, you know, actually also, you know, participating in the liquidation at the startup up until the endpoint.
1:54
I think, you know, that's been an exciting journey.
You know, that's a might not truly capture, but I think, you know, that's truly been an awesome experience.
You know, in terms of learning, in terms of honestly just the experience itself.
So I think that's something that really goes along with, you know, to describe who I am.
OK.
2:13
Makes absolute sense.
And I guess what triggered that journey from start up to where you are right now in front of us?
Absolutely.
I think, you know, working in a start up, it's working with a lot of fires every day, you know, working on a lot of problems and you know, getting on your own.
2:30
And I think, you know, that's something that I've picked up in two aspects is, you know, I've seen that side.
You know, we're working on starting ourselves.
But you know, I really want to, you know, work with excellent people, you know, intellectual people, you know, like minded people where, you know, tackling that, you know, those problems on a daily, daily basis.
2:46
And then you're talking about those problems.
I think in consulting, you have the opportunity to, you know, work on exciting problems each day in terms of industry, in terms of even, you know, whatever segment you want to do.
So I think those two would be the reasons for working, you know, with people who have more experience than me and learning from them.
3:04
And then secondly, you know, working with a myriad number of problems, you know, to expand my learning.
OK, that sounds really interesting.
So I'm going to give you a couple of questions, or probably just one each in this case because of time.
So one to do with a past situation that you've been in in the past and how you dealt with certain problems, and then a future facing 1.
3:26
So hypothetical one, or for which you can also draw in past experiences if you want to use that as an anchor.
So Rashawn, describe a time to me when you've had to work with someone who had a different perspective or opinion.
How did you handle the situation and what did you learn from it?
Perfect.
I think, you know, working in a startup, you know, you get dealing counters, you know, you know, because you're working with this, you know, diverse set of people.
3:47
I think the encounter that I had, you know, would probably be with the CFO.
So the situation was, you know, that I was leading the national expansion for Chuknu.
That was a startup based back in Pakistan.
As you know, the person who was leading the expansion, we were actually deciding on, you know, which of the fulfillment centres or you know, which cities we wanted to expand into.
4:05
Eventually the problem arose, you know, that we were deliberating when we wanted to expand.
So the timelines of the expansion, you know, were up to question.
I actually had a long sighted approach with I actually wanted to make sure that we were able to, you know, do I do diligence on the plans, see all the risks, see all the hiring timelines and then actually incorporate the CFO, you know, based on a number of his perspectives, wanted that we expand, you know, in the short term because they wanted to drive the revenue from another city.
4:32
So I think that's something, you know, where the disagreement goes in one of the meetings where I was expanding and then expressing the strategy plans.
So I think the task at hand, you know, was actually seeing the perspective of the CFO and you know, actually also delivering, you know, what my perspective was.
So based on that, what eventually I did after the initial meeting by, you know, presenting an expansion strategy was actually locking A1 on one meeting with the CFO to understand, you know, what their perspective was and you know where they were coming from.
5:00
Based on that, I was able to understand what exactly their task was and, you know, which obviously went along with the broader strategy of, you know, what the company wanted to achieve in the short term.
And then, you know, in that meeting explained my perspective on, you know, being on ground, having, you know, seen things, you know, how meticulous planning would be able to, you know, add much better results in the long run.
5:23
Based on that.
I did that.
So the CFO asked me to draw up an exact Gantt chart or like a time and time on, you know, how the exact steps would go.
I did that, you know, worked on that extensively, built out several new medical models.
I showed, you know, how the short term and the long term would go, how the profitability in the revenues would look locked in another meeting, you know, where we actually went back and forth on, you know, several perspectives on the presentation.
5:50
Eventually what we decided to do was, you know that based on that, it came down to a middle ground, you know, where we actually are not in the long term, but in the short term, a medium size, you know, timeline we were looking to expand.
As a result, I think what we achieved was two things.
6:06
The CFO in itself had some more trust on the expansion strategy because of the meetings that I did with him.
We were able to launch the fulfillment center with a lot more meticulous planning.
The roll out and the launch was super smooth and eventually we did increase our revenues in terms of launching STD.
6:25
OK, that sounds really interesting and impactful.
So looking forward, hypothetically, imagine you were staffed on multiple projects across two partners, potentially across 2 geographies as well.
So London, Amsterdam.
This is actually possible, pretty rare, but possible.
How do you prioritize delivering clients to a very high standard while also making sure that you are checking in on your well-being?
6:48
Perfect.
I think, you know, if you're staffed in two projects and you know, I'll just draw back, you know, from your past experiences, you know, working in a startup, so on a daily basis you have to do a lot of different things.
So, you have to handle the management stuff, handle your operation stuff.
I think I would draw from that experience.
7:06
The first thing is to understand the nuance and the kind of project that I'm doing with each location and each geography and with each partner and the kind of relationship that I have and the kind of role that I'm playing.
Based on that, the kind of role that I'm playing in each project, I can sort of ascertain what kind of impact I have, what kind of value addition I can do and what's expected of me.
7:26
So I think considering those variable factors, essentially a project, you know, which has maybe a shorter timeline, which has more expectations of me and then I can add more value and more impact.
I think that's the one unit that gets the first priority.
Other than that, you know, then the second project just naturally follows along in those, you know, two things.
7:45
It's also important to, you know, maintain a work life balance.
So, you know, at least personally what's worked for me is having a very disciplined organized calendar.
So ensuring all of my meetings are locked in, all of my connections with the team are locked in.
And also, you know, my expectations, I'm going to connect with the partners are locked in.
8:01
So, you know, having biweekly connections on the projects to see, you know, where we're heading in terms of the direction we're expecting, you know, you know, how my performance is going on each of those projects.
I think, you know, those will be important.
So I think organized calendars, communication and you know, just having a bird's eye view of, you know, each project, I think that that's going to help me prioritize better.
8:22
Yeah, that sounds really credible.
I'm just wrapping it up right now.
What's your biggest driving force in life?
What drives you as a person?
I think the biggest driving force would be finding purpose and delivering impact.
I think that's what drew me to the startup as well.
8:41
We were working with retailers on the ground.
We were creating daily impact.
We were adding value.
And I think that's something that I seek and everything that I do.
So I think even for the case that I'm doing right now, I think I'm adding value for you and I'm adding value for myself.
So I think that's the main pillar that I strive for whatever I do on a daily basis that has some impact on myself or the company or the person that I'm working for.
9:08
OK, that concludes this part.
I was actually going to give feedback at the very end, but I think because we're dividing this into fit and case study, it probably makes a lot of sense to actually just give feedback now.
So on the fit section at least so on the CV walkthrough.
9:25
So I'll just talk through what went really well, and what could have been improved on.
And then what I think is an overall score as well for each question.
So I thought overall that was a bit of A7.
It was a very interesting sort of off CV story where the life cycle of the start up had really concrete reasons for why you were transitioning into consulting.
9:42
I think what was missing and why it wasn't a nine or a strong eight or 10, which is, yeah, pretty unattainable, is that I feel it wasn't a story fight.
So on the CV section, you don't want to sort of list out things in the bullet point form.
You want to make it seem like you're connecting the dots, even though we all know that many times we all just leave the randomness there.
10:01
There's some sense in trying to make the dots connect and make it sound like a bit more of a story.
But otherwise, the actual concrete points are really good.
It's just about trying to maybe Storify that a little bit more on the CV and keep it to under about a minute and a half.
I think it's very possible as well.
10:19
So on describing the time when you had to work with someone and had a different perspective or opinion, I thought that was a very strong answer.
So it was an 8.
So what I liked about it was that I think you are highly structured.
You clearly were using the style method.
So if anyone who doesn't know, but I'm sure everyone on this call, he's here probably knows it's situation.
10:37
So star situation, context, you want to spend about maybe the 1st 30 seconds laying that down.
It's sort of like in a Disney movie when you find out that potatoes can talk.
They usually use the first 30 minutes to make sure everyone understands that.
So you lay down the context and then the task or the challenge to be solved.
10:54
So what exactly triggered this thing?
And then actions and here you want to be quite stuck staccato.
So this is a very, very, very good time to sort of just go bullet points.
So the way Rashan handled the CV question.
So I did this, I did that, I did this.
11:11
If you can put numbers to it and quantify it, quantify it even better than the results.
So I thought that was a very strong part.
You want to sort of, you know, again, put numbers if you can.
I think it always makes it seem better.
So I thought you were really structured.
11:26
I can tell where you were on every part of the case when you transition from situation to tasks, action to results.
I think to make that an 8.5 or 9, it would have been nice to add a nice flourish at the end.
So the reflections.
I know Ben was pretty keen on this when I was interviewing and that's still a thing where you sort of reflect through how you could have handled that situation a bit better or what lessons you drew from that going forward.
11:50
Would have been really nice.
Though it was a bit long and it could have been a bit more concise.
So it felt like it was edging towards 3 minutes.
I think it could have been maybe 2:15 to 2:30.
And then finally, maybe working on switching off your cadence when you are going from one point in the start method to the other.
12:09
So when you're going from a situation , the last action results.
It was restructured so I could tell because you took some pauses, but maybe switching off your cadence just so that it doesn't get too monotonous as well.
Could have been really good to push it up to 9.
So I thought your strongest answer was, you know, the hypothetical imagining if you were staffed in mortal projects, how would you prioritize that?
12:29
So I thought it was a very strong 9 / 10.
I thought the story was really strong overall.
Like you story fighters.
I think what you did really well there that a lot of candidates don't do is that they don't always borrow from past experiences, even when they're because it's a hypothetical situation.
12:46
I think you always should borrow from past experiences and you were just a really structured, very high impact story, like very little to improve on there and on the driving force in life.
I mean, it's not really a squad question, but I think it's one that usually throws some people off as well.
So it's just one to have an answer for.
13:03
But I thought that was a really good answer, by the way.
But yeah, it's just worth 1, worth thinking about because it makes you seem a bit genuine.
Awesome.
So now we can transition to the case.
There might be any questions, some questions, please put them in the chat.
13:19
I'll try to answer them, answer them at the end of the entire case.
So yeah, let me know if there are any questions and just put them in the chat.
But now we can transition to the case.
Awesome.
13:35
So today we're working on the Indian Premier League.
It is a cricket league in India.
For any American viewers who are not familiar with the wonderful game that is cricket, it's a fantastic game.
So it's, yeah, one of the most popular sports in Asia and not Europe, probably just Britain, to be fair.
13:57
It's a very British sport, extremely rich, but just sort of likening it to American football.
Very different places but it's a really big league essentially and very big sports.
OK, so the Indian Premier League is the world's largest domestic cricket league and it is selling new team licenses, the IPL.
14:16
The Indian Premier League has seen tremendous growth in the past few years, attracting 300 million viewers each year.
Our clients are AUS based private equity firms that are wondering if they should invest in this opportunity or not and would love your advice.
Perfect.
14:32
Thank you so much.
I think, you know, someone as someone, you know, from Pakistan, you know, who has grown up, you know, watching cricket, you know, it does seem like an interesting business problem to solve.
And, you know, I've seen IPL, you know, I was just, you know, watching the recent Test series.
So, you know, definitely an interesting problem.
So, you know, just so I have all the facts correctly, I think the situation at hand is, you know, the IPL isn't settling out from the licenses.
14:54
We have a private equity firm, you know, who wants to invest and essentially we want to see, you know, whether that's the right move for them.
Is that correct?
Absolutely.
Perfect.
I think so just to get started, you know, I have a few basic questions on, you know, so essentially on the private equity firm, what do they mostly invest in?
15:14
You know, is that something that they're doing for the first time, investing in sports?
Or is that something they've done, you know, previously as well?
So it's a really good question.
So our client has some experience not in sports, it's the first time investing in sports, but some experiences with sort of not sports teams, but sport nutrition.
15:36
OK, perfect.
That's great.
Also want to understand, you know what the measure of success for this, you know acquisition, you know purchasing of this license is, do they want profit?
What exactly are they looking for?
So they're excited about the cross-selling opportunities that the acquisition can provide overall including some synergies within their portfolio companies and they would like to generate a 20% return minimum.
16:02
OK, perfect.
I'm going to, since you mentioned portfolio companies, do we have any other sports in a portfolio companies in their portfolio?
Can anything come again?
So do they have any other sports companies in the portfolio?
So no sports companies, but some opportunities to cross sell products to a potential team being made because of sports and nutrition.
16:23
Perfect.
That makes sense.
Can I have a minute to Orient and, you know, see how we'd like to post this problem?
Absolutely take your time.
17:51
I think, you know, I know how I want to put this.
So I think my hypothesis, you know, going in would be, you know, that it definitely seems like a lucrative enough opportunity, you know, for the private equity firm, you know, to, you know, purchase a license from IPL and you're invested in a team.
I think in order to do that, I would like to evaluate 4 areas and I'll talk about them broadly and then we can go deeply into all of them.
18:12
So I think firstly, I want to understand, you know, the cricket and the IPL market segment in India.
You know, it definitely is, you know, a huge segment, but you know what it encapsulates, you know what are the numbers?
That's something I'd be interested in moving forward.
The second thing, I definitely want to understand, you know, the private equities firm's capabilities.
18:31
So in terms of internal capabilities, external capabilities, since it is sort of like cross-border, you know, acquisition per SE or you know, purchase of a license, definitely you understand how that plays in.
Thirdly, I also want to understand, you know, synergies because you know, we mentioned, you know, they're looking to cross in products, you know, with some of, you know, the companies in the air portfolio, that's something you might be interested in.
18:53
Finally, I think the fourth thing, we definitely want to be looking at the financial due diligence and risks as well.
So in that, you know, we want to talk about, you know, what do the numbers look like for, you know, the purchasing of the license and other regulatory stuff.
Does that seem like a fair approach?
And you know, I'd be happy to run you through each of, you know, the segments.
19:11
Yeah, that seems pretty good in terms of buckets or maybe run me through a few drivers or a few.
Sure.
Absolutely within those work streams, essentially.
Absolutely.
I would love to.
I think so starting from, you know, the first bucket that is the cricket team, you know, IPL segment.
I want to understand, you know, what the oral market looks like in terms of, you know, advertising revenue, streaming revenues, You know what the revenues have looked like, you know, for the past teams.
19:35
You know, what kind of teams, you know, are there in the IPL segment and you know, what do the owners look like?
What has the growth been like, you know, for the past few years and what does the growth look like, you know, projected into the future?
That's something I'd be interested in.
What are the returns and the profits for other franchises?
19:52
That's something I'd be interested in as well.
In terms of market, what kind of customers, you know, to watch it, you know, is it also an opportunity to cross sell, you know, our products to those customers as well?
That's something I'd be interested in.
In terms of firm capabilities.
Definitely want to understand, you know, do we have the experience, you know, to manage an IPL team.
20:11
Would we want to partner with, you know, another entity to actually run the operations?
Who would be running the operations, you know, for running the decisions of, you know, what does a sales and marketing, you know, strategy look like?
So, you know, after purchasing this license, how do we want to go about it?
I think importantly you do have cricket expertise.
20:29
I think that's most important as well in terms of synergies.
I'm actually looking at sales.
So you know, how do we plan to, you know, actually synergize, fill with the team?
How do we plan to cross sell those products in terms of management even, you know, because you know, we're talking about having some sports nutrition products, you know, can we, you know, derive some exact synergy, some experiences from that?
20:51
And finally, for the financials, I want to understand what the numbers look like for the license, what the returns could be, and what the IPO due diligence looks like.
Definitely interested in some regulatory factors as well.
You know, since it's an AUS firm, you know, purchasing a license in India, you know, are there any risks associated with that as well?
21:09
So those are all of the important factors I'd be looking at.
I think the important perspective, at least from my experience would be starting with looking and you know, serving the market to see if it is the right fit for us.
And you know for that, looking at the market numbers, the growth would be a great starting point.
21:27
I think that's really sensible to start off with the market, but I want to take this in a slightly different direction.
So if we're looking at potentially the valuation as well, we're obviously going to have to look at the projections in terms of cash flows and specifically we'd want to project out revenue and want to project out a few cost items as well.
21:46
You just really run me through very quickly some revenue items that you would expect and then some cost items as well.
Sure.
So I think based on the revenue items I definitely want to segment it off into, you know, 2 product strategies.
22:02
The first kind of segment would be, you know, categorizing it as streaming or advertising, so something I think that's not from the team itself.
And the second revenue segment, you know, would be the crossing of the products.
So in the first one, I want to understand, you know, what the streaming revenue looks like, what the advertisement revenue looks like.
22:19
Those would be important to understand.
And secondly, I think the important part of the bucket, you know, would be the crossing of the products.
So in case we're able to invest, you know, how much of the revenue we can generate from additional sales in a new geography, I think that's important.
In terms of cost, definitely want to be, you know, breaking it down into, you know, some of the fixed and the operational cost.
22:41
So fixed cost, you know, we would be, you know, the idea would be having an idea around what the purchase of the license cost look like in order to, you know, maybe hire the team or set up a facility or set up an office back in India.
What would that cost look like?
And then be in terms of operation salaries, Definitely you want to understand, you want to be hiring the right team for this.
23:00
So a directed strategist, the players themselves.
So, you know, IP, LS, you know, they're known, you know, paying the players a lot.
So, you know, what do those costs look like for the players?
And essentially, you know, what does it cost us to run, you know, the franchise, you know, on a yearly basis.
I think those would be important numbers.
23:19
OK, that sounds very, very sensible.
So I'm going to share an exhibit and I'd love you to tell me what you see, walk me through some insights and tell me what the average profit per team looks like as well for that exhibit.
Just give me one second.
23:34
I'll share my screen with the entire group.
So if you can just have a look through that, rock me through.
Perfect.
Seeing and what the average profit is for is.
Sure.
23:50
So based on this essentially just, you know, orienting myself to the exhibit, we do see a bar chart, you know, where there is, you know, multiple teams.
So we have four teams on, you know, on a three-year basis.
We can see, you know, what the average profit per team has been.
24:08
So, you know, based on the bar chart, we can definitely see a trend in terms of the average finishing position as well.
That's what we have below.
So you know, 1.34.33.31.7.
So I think it's definitely interesting to see, you know, that the teams with the greater profit, you know, have the greater average finishing position.
24:26
I think that's one of the initial conclusions that I can definitely draw.
But I, I think I would love to grant you some numbers, you know, maybe on the average basis, if you want me to, you know, what does that look like?
But here or you know, maybe for like 1 franchise as well, I would love to do that.
24:43
Yeah, sounds fantastic.
So I think based on that, we can definitely take an early approach.
So just one second though, if you could have the exhibit up, I think that would be great in terms of the numbers or you know, I could.
Worries.
24:58
Just give me one SEC.
Fantastic.
Fantastic.
And I think, you know, the firm that I would like or the franchise I would like to focus on are maybe the Mumbai Indians and the Rajasthan Royals.
I think you know, they have a greater higher average profit.
25:17
So we definitely want to understand, you know, what the average profit has been for the three years.
So I'll do it for the Mumbai Indians first, maybe so we can see 2020 is 25,000,000, then we have 30 million for 2021 and 2022 is roughly around 27.5.
25:37
So I think based on that 55 and 27.5, that's going to be 80 roughly round.
Is it OK to round off to 85,000,000 for the Mumbai Indians?
Is that yeah rounded?
Off is fine.
So perfect 85,000,000 for the Mumbai Indians, that's going to be 85 / 3 as expected profit.
26:00
So that's roughly going to be two and that we have. 25, 24, so definitely round, I think 28 million, you know, that's the number that I'm seeing for the Mumbai Indians over the past, you know, two years.
26:22
And for the Rajasthan Royals, you know, you know, just changing from the Canadian and not crunching up the exact numbers.
It does look like somewhere, you know, in between 25 and 30.
So definitely round, you know, the same #2728 million.
So I think that's a fair and expected number that we're seeing, You know, for the average, you know, teams that are, you know, placing high.
26:42
For the teams that are placing low, I think the number would roughly ballpark around 17 to 18,000,000 as I can see from Kolkata Knight Riders of Punjab Warriors.
So I think based on that, you know, since we're A-Team that's coming in, you know, as a new franchise in terms of expertise and players as well, we can definitely ballpark, you know, what our profits would look like.
27:02
I think that's the approach that I would, you know, take and essentially that would help us answer the initial question that we had and you know, whether this makes a lucrative enough sense.
I think to ballpark it around 20 million, I think that's the number that I have in mind.
Is that a fair number to work with?
27:19
I think that's fair if you assume that they're going to sort of be somewhere in the average, which I think is a very fair assumption.
I think if you assume that they could invest and actually be a winning side as well, then you might want to benchmark that a bit higher.
27:35
But I think that's a very fair place to start.
So I'm going to show you another exhibit and I'd like you to tell me what you think our clients bid should be as a result based on the exhibit.
Just give me a couple of seconds and I'll flash that up.
28:08
OK, can everyone see my screen?
I can see your screen.
OK.
I think it's based on the exhibit's initial thoughts.
You know we're looking at two things, revenue synergies and synergy analysis.
28:27
We also do have a note that the profit multiple 25X should be used to carry the value of the team and you know, assume that you can set up a championship winning team.
So I think, you know, that goes hand in hand with information that we had in the past.
So what the number we decided for maybe championship winning team or you know, the teams are positioned higher.
28:47
That was roughly around 28 million.
So I think that's the number that we can work with since our client, you know, can take that up.
And in terms of revenue synergies, we do have some numbers.
What I essentially want to do is based on, you know, the profit multiple of 25 X would want to multiply that by the average profit that we had that was 28 million to see, you know, what the overall profit would look like.
29:10
And then, you know, segment that into revenue and cost.
So, you know, in terms of revenue synergies, that would roughly be around I think 15 and you know, cost synergies would be around 7 to 8.
And, you know, based on that, find out what the exact numbers would be.
Does that sound like a reasonable approach?
29:28
Yeah.
That sounds very sensible.
Perfect.
So you know, just taking the number that we had 28 million for a championship winning team, 28 / 2528 * 25 would be roughly 85045 to 10 and 40 and then 56.
29:48
So we roughly have around 700 million in terms of profit that we're expecting.
So that is a great number.
Definitely want to benchmark that against, you know what the expected returns for the private equity firm have been in the past.
But you know, based on my initial hypothesis, I think the number does look creative enough, you know, for the firm to invest in.
30:07
So for segmenting it into the revenue synergies and the cost synergies.
So the revenue would be roughly 15.
So I might like to assume, you know, that the revenue change in the constant needs to work in proportion.
So revenue synergies would be 15 / 25 off the total pool of profit that we expected to generate.
30:28
Not exactly.
So we have the profit which is one thing, but then these are synergies that the private equity fund thinks that they can extract based on the portfolio companies that it has as well.
So it sort of split them into the revenue synergies things can extract and then the cost synergies things can extract as well.
30:50
Perfect.
So then the idea would be, you know, taking the numbers for the revenue synergies that is 15 and multiplying that by 700 million and then taking the #8 roughly, you know, eight or seven, you know, for cost synergies and multiplying that by the profit, you know, to see, you know, how that would fade up.
31:05
Does that sound like a fade approach?
So not quite in the sense that I guess if you were, if you want to take the approach of thinking of yourself as a buyer and you are thinking of analyzing a business and you're trying to figure out what the value is to you.
31:21
You want to first of all see what the profits are for the business.
You want to project that out because you're going to eventually use that to get the cash flow.
But then you're thinking of the synergies as the sort of the extras, I guess that you could also get from the business.
31:37
So the additional revenue or the additional reduction in cost, which is also going to affect the profit as well.
So I guess you on the one hand have the stand alone profits without synergies and now you have the extras that you think you can extract because of synergies.
31:52
So where would you like to go from there based on that information?
Perfect.
So I definitely would want to understand the drivers, you know for these revenue synergies and for the cost synergies.
I think that would be important to understand.
Absolutely, absolutely.
And that's work that you would do maybe for Phase 2.
32:09
So for now, let's maybe just stick to calculating what based on all that information, what you think a reasonable bid would be and then we could maybe expand on that Phase 2.
That's perfect, perfect.
That sounds great.
So I think in terms of, you know what average or in a good bid should look like, you know, we do have a profit of 700 million.
32:32
My understanding of, you know, bids, you know, even for acquisitions or you know, for licenses.
So we definitely want to understand what the historic trend has been in terms of profit multiplied by maybe what the multiple is, you know, for the different franchises.
Do we have any, any information about that or you know, I can just assume you know what that multiple would look like?
32:52
So in the multiple case, let's look at the footnotes maybe.
So we have a profit multiple of 25 X, Yep.
And we have applied that to the operating profit that you think is sustainable.
Have we added the synergies as well to that?
33:11
So we can definitely do that.
I think.
So 700 million was the number that we had adding the many synergies would be, you know, 15,000,000 roughly and you know, just adding the cost synergies, that's 7 million roughly, you know looking for the numbers.
33:28
So that's 722 million in terms of the average value that I'm expecting, you know, after adding the synergies.
So I think, you know, that does sound like a reasonable profitable bid, you know that we could expect for the license.
OK.
Let me stop sharing.
All good.
33:44
So just to recap again where we are.
So in terms of the bid you are suggesting the client goes for, what number is that?
Five, 722. 722, got it.
OK, fantastic.
So moving forward, the client has just walked in their private equity clients.
34:02
So they are usually short on time.
They would like a recommendation based on the case prompt, and they have about a minute or so before they need to dash off.
Perfect.
Can I have a minute to synthesize my thoughts?
Absolutely.
35:01
So I think our recommendation to the client, the private equity firm would be to go ahead and you know purchase a license in the IPL for that.
You know, we've calculated average profits and you know 722 million, you know that sounds like a number, you know that we would be expected to pay for the company.
35:17
But based on the euro pieces, you know we will be able to get back those profits after finding out the expenses.
There are some risks associated with it, most importantly regulatory risks, you know, in terms of expanding into a new country, but that can definitely be mitigated, you know, by setting up a meeting with the IPL team to see, you know, how our teams and how near legal teams can or can work to mitigate those.
35:38
In terms of next steps, I definitely want to be sitting down with the IPL chief, you know, to be showing our interest, you know, projecting our, you know, financial proposals to them and you know, it takes them.
And I would definitely love to help you with that.
OK, so if that marks the end of the case and I'm going to be giving feedback in detail, just give me one SEC.
36:03
Fantastic.
Awesome.
So can everyone hear me?
Great.
So generally, like overall feedback, Rashan was a very strong candidate.
So starting with the fit, he was a strong candidate with the fit.
I think that was probably like a pass through on the case.
36:21
He was a strong candidate, but made some mistakes, especially around the mats and the insights that might stop him from advancing from around one to around 2.
So this is sort of very much around one type case in terms of level of difficulty.
But I think he was great overall and I think extremely bold and confident to do this and really good because there's parts where he really excelled in and parts where he dipped, which is great for the advantage of you guys because I can sort of go through what's good and what's not good and how you can improve on that as well.
36:52
So the way I like to give feedback, usually when I case, I type and I'm scoring based on metrics.
So what I'm judging or on what every interviewer generally will be judging based on.
So I give a score one to four, one being, you know, very poor, 4 being excellent.
37:08
It could obviously be the above 4 if it's very commendable.
And then comments as well.
And I usually send these via e-mail so that you're having a track of every single case, the case name, the date, and then the exact feedback in very granular form as well.
So starting with the first metric, case recap, very important.
37:25
I thought it was a four.
It was a great recap.
That was in the repeat of everything I said, which is very important to summarise the main business problem before heading on to the questions.
Very, very important because you want to make sure you're you and the interview is leaving from the same bus stop, especially when the cases get more and more complex so they can run into quite a few lines.
37:44
You want to make sure that you're capturing the most important points and also, you know, the exact business problem that you're trying to solve before you even do anything else.
Just a quick heads up.
So the metrics, the first few metrics are sort of case recap, clarifying questions and case structure.
The good news is that Rashawn scored pretty much a four in all of these.
38:03
The bad news is that no one ever gets through to the next round or gets an offer by scoring A4.
It's sort of like table sticks.
You have to do it.
You know, maybe you dip to a 3.5 somewhere, but you're not, you're never going to get an offer just based on getting a four in any of these.
It's where the mats insights are.
38:21
Exhibit readings, brainstorms, the final recommendation, that's where you really want to shine, but you kind of have to do this as a hygiene test.
OK, so the next point is clarifying questions.
Some people don't really care about these, but I think they're very important in the sense that there's usually things that you can unlock from them, like extra information.
38:38
So really good essential questions.
That's the scope of the case.
It was a four as well.
I think here the rule of thumb for me is that you don't want to ask more than four questions.
Well, the speed spot is sort of three.
I think if you're going to ask a fourth one, then there has to be a very good reason why you're asking the 4th 1.
38:53
And he has to, you know, be something that really does scope the case.
There's a list of questions that you almost always want to ask, and I think Rishon did well thereby sort of asking, you know, is there a financial target they're trying to reach?
For instance, anytime there's an investment case, you want to ask that the same way if it's a market entry case, for instance, or a corporate case.
39:13
Generally, most of the time you're going to ask about geography, what's the scope of the geographical scope of the company that you're interested in.
So there's a list of questions that are always going to be relevant, so it's worth having them to hand.
I think Rishon could have probably asked more, one more question like he was impressed with time.
39:31
So he could have asked one more question potentially around the business context.
And here it could have been the fact that there's three new, 3 new team licenses.
He could have asked if there were any other bidders.
So if this is a competitive round or if it's pretty much that his client is the only game in town essentially that could have helped maybe add a bit more context to his structure.
39:52
Brownie points are that after asking each question, it shows a majority in Polish.
I think just just give a very short rationale as to why you're asking the question.
So the way I sort of think about it is that if you had a new case.
And your manager or your principal sort of gives you this extremely vague case you're handling.
40:09
The clarifying question is a way to structure that to make sure that you scope the case so that you'd know what not to look for, which is as important as knowing what to look for as well.
But when you're asking the questions to your manager or your principal, you sort of want to give a short rationale as well, just like, you know, just shitting from the hip.
40:26
So I think that's a really good brownie point to add.
So, OK, so on the case structure, 3.5 slash force is the borderline good, definitely not going to knock it down South.
Commercially sensible buckets, which were very important.
40:42
You don't want to sort of boil the ocean.
You want your buckets to be as aligned in terms of importance to the case prompt and I think Richard did that very well.
I think the drivers under those buckets will be good and they were well explained as well.
I think in terms of the communication style, it was pretty good.
40:59
I could tell when he was transitioning from one bucket to the other, so not much to really push on there.
Why isn't it a slam dunk 4, I think he could have added a bit more on valuation straight off the bat and that the fact that he didn't do that also showed up in the calculations towards the end.
41:16
So we'll talk about that later.
But it's an investment case, whether it's a private equity investor or corporate investor, you always want to sort of bring our valuation as a bucket and then under that sort of explain what you know.
But to get the valuation, you're going to have to project cash flows.
41:32
But you're not going to do that in the real case most times.
So you want to just talk about revenue, revenue drivers, some cost drivers as well.
You don't have to list all of them out, but I think listing some of them out shows a lot of commercial sensibility.
So you definitely want to do that.
And that's probably why it wasn't straightforward, but the whole point of a case structure essentially, because when I was prepping for being, I always thought, why?
41:54
Why do we always do this?
Is it something you have to do in reality, when you're actually consulting, your case structure is essentially the case plan.
So it actually makes a lot of sense to sort of see how you would scope out a case.
And each of those buckets are essentially work streams that consultants will have autonomy over.
42:11
And then the drivers under that are things that are consultants and maybe AC.
So analysts would also have autonomy over as well.
So a consultant could hold one or two work streams or maybe principal holds, you know, another work stream and then overlooks the entire case.
42:29
And then the drivers are things that you would literally tell people, go look at this.
So go figure out, you know, what's happening with revenue, Go figure out what's happening with cost, Go figure out the impact of this risk.
So it's actually quite important for those who thought it was useless.
I was one of those who thought it was useless before I actually stayed working in consulting.
42:46
OK, so on to the fun part of Martin Insight, the first one. I thought he did an excellent job in the first one.
So it was a 4 by 4 great quick insight off the bat, which always sets off really good momentum.
And he was generally very confident in communicating problem approaches.
43:01
He got the mats really quickly.
He noted that there was a segmentation between the really good teams and what their profit was.
And then the, you know, less than stellar teams and what they profited as well.
So he noticed the segmentation, which is very important.
You always want to look out for segmentation.
43:17
He did the maths really well.
He communicated the approach before doing the maths, which is so important because one, it's just a better way to structure things like it's the right precedence and consultants are obsessed with, you know, order of things.
But then two, had he screwed up the mats, which was hopefully unlikely because it was pretty straightforward mats.
43:35
But if it was more complex mats like around 2 and a very deep operational case, I would have probably given him the benefit of the doubt because he structured the problem very well.
And I could tell, I would be able to tell where things went wrong if you don't structure the problems well.
And Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, I would definitely come back to you once I finish this.
43:54
I promise.
If you don't structure the problem well and you don't communicate the structure and you screw up the mats, then you're totally toast.
Like you're pretty much not finished, but you're going to get points to doctors.
So you definitely want to structure the problem before then going on to do the mats.
So a lot of candidates talk about how, you know, sometimes they're really good at insights, sometimes they're not.
44:14
And the truth is that there is a way to be repeatably good at insights.
So the structure, the formula I usually go through is 123.
So one talk through what you're seeing.
So take a bit of a deep breath and tell the interviewer that you want to talk through what you're seeing for the 1st 30 seconds.
It's a way of getting the panic out from your head and you usually will probably see something that's interesting.
44:34
And so that would be like a great insight that you can, you're putting points on the board essentially, right, so that you don't feel like you are rushed.
So you sort of take that first 30 seconds, explain to them that you're talking to what you're seeing and you put some points on the board as well.
Great.
44:50
So the second thing is drawing important insights.
So here you want to micro focus your brain and say, OK, what's interesting?
So what Rishon did really well was like he noticed, oh, there's two segments.
There's really good teams, there's really bad teams, and inevitably there was a correlation between that, so where the team finished and also the profit they were getting annually as well.
45:10
So you want to really look in and say, are there footnotes?
Are there things, are there correlations?
Are there interesting things that sort of really stick out?
And here you also want to link.
So you want to link what you're seeing to your case prompt.
Like is there anything from the case prompt that would make this exhibit more interesting?
45:29
And you want to link to prior exhibits as well.
So if you've already had an exhibit or a few exhibits and you've got some really interesting insights there and answers, you want to link it to what you're seeing as well.
So here's where you take your time to really like to put everything together.
And my best practice is that you want to see the most interesting points, but really go for it.
45:49
Like don't just talk about everything and see what sticks.
So, you know, don't make it like spaghetti during spaghetti on the wall, but like go over and beyond and what does over and beyond mean?
It's like every insight you can squeeze out, just squeeze out like say it's it's don't keep it in your head.
46:06
And then the Third Point is, So what?
OK, so you've talked through the insights really quickly.
You're then sort of hyper focused to really draw some interesting insights by Lincoln.
So what is OK, given all these things I know, how can I link that to moving forward with the business problem, like one or one or two things I could do to do that?
46:25
And again, here, Rashan did that really well because he noticed that there was a correlation between how good the team was and their profits.
So then I think he spoke, I hope I'm not putting words in this marketing.
I've spoken about, you know, trying to make sure the team is good, like, you know, investing in the quality of the team.
46:43
That's so watchful, right?
Like that's the next inevitable step.
So again, here I think the trick to getting brownie points as well is many times the SO watch is actually a bit of a brainstorm because it's like, OK, do this.
Then the next thing a great candidate will say is here are the three things I could do to do this right?
47:01
So if investing in the team is the imperative, then give us three things you would do.
Maybe go find a legend, go find a great coaching staff, like whatever you need to do, right?
So you make it a bit of a mini brainstorm.
So he did really well there all together going forward.
47:18
So where he struggled and what would have probably stopped him from getting into Round 2 was the second exhibit.
So here he struggled a bit.
Now I, I don't want to force him too much, but I guess like, because I could tell that what he was really struggling with was getting the concept of synergies and how that would apply into the profits.
47:38
So that's just a gap of knowledge, which is a bit annoying because if he knew that he probably would have aced it.
But because it's something that a lot of interviewers would expect you to have seen repeatedly, it's not an excuse.
So you probably wouldn't get this around.
So here what he had to do essentially was add the synergies, revenue and cost synergy.
47:56
Maybe first of all, spend a bit of time talking about what the revenue and cost synergies actually might be, which would have been really good.
So I just listed up one or two cross selling with, you know, nutritional or the nutritional company in the team maybe doing advertising, using players to advertise to boost growth, something along those like maybe on marketing as well, potentially like 1, you know, one bigger marketing budget.
48:22
So stuff around that.
So just quickly talking through that and then basically adding the revenue and cost synergies to the stand alone profit of the championship winning team.
Because the footnote said you should assume that you're going to get a championship winning team.
48:37
That's the assumption you're working on.
So you wouldn't take the average profit, you would just take the 28 million or the better teams and then add the revenue synergies, add the cost synergies that would have given you 50 million and then you would have applied the multiple, which is 25 X to give you 1.25 billion as the valuation.
48:55
But that wasn't the question, the main question.
And that's why it's always important to keep sort of as you keep going through the case, highlighting what the main problem you're solving is, which is what the bid was.
So we know that they want to, they don't want to, they want a 20% discount essentially between the valuation and the bid.
49:12
So you don't have to take that 1.25 billion and apply 80% to it to get the actual bid.
So if it's valued at 1.25 billion, they're going to be bidding somewhere around 1 billion and then that's it.
It pretty much cracked the case.
So moving on to the final recommendation, even though his recommendation was wrong in terms of the number, I still gave it a four because the structure was perfect.
49:35
And this is one of those places where you don't want to be a hero.
You can add flourish, but you need structure.
And the structure is basically, you know, you can spend the 1st 510 seconds recapping the case and what you have to solve, or you can just go straight into the recommendation.
That's fine as well, but a very firm recommendation like high conviction, this is exactly what we want to do.
49:54
Consultants are paid for conviction even if it's a borrowed conviction.
So you don't want to sound like you're a citizen sitting on the fence essentially.
So recommendation supporting data 123.
So here I advise going for two to three points, and one of those points almost always has to be a number, right?
50:13
Sometimes it can be two numbers because you might have calculated more than one thing, but it has to be a number that justifies the rationale.
So in this case, it would be the bid, but for some of the supporting data as well, you want to get something qualitative.
So you want to go to your case structure or any other case creative brainstorming session you might have had done as well and basically drag that into the supporting data.
50:35
So here's why they should do this.
Here's the number, but here's a bunch of other things as well that supports that. 2 risks, 2 next steps.
And there is literally a Bank of risks for almost every case type.
You want to specify it so that it's, you know, it doesn't sound like you're being generic, but it's good.
50:54
It's great to know the generic so that you can then apply to the actual case type as well.
And finally, case leadership, which is just executive presence essentially.
Like did he handle himself really well?
Was he friendly?
Was he affable?
Was he collaborative with the interviewer?
That sounds like a given, but there are some interviews where the interview is literally almost turned, the interviewees turned the interview shut up, and then it's an obvious automatic fail.
51:17
So he was highly collaborative, very enthusiastic.
He drove the case forward, except for the one part where he just, there was a bit of a gap of knowledge, but he really drove the case forward.
He was always providing, OK, here's what we should do next.
Here's where I think we should go next.
Here's the important thing to do next.
51:33
Here's how I'd prioritize this, which is really strong.
So stop in there because we're one minute over and I need time for questions.
A very strong candidate probably would have been borderline if it was a good candidate.
Pool probably wouldn't have gotten the second round because he fell short on the second exhibit because of a gap of knowledge.
51:51
But it's an expected thing to know.
So that probably wouldn't, you know, sadly wouldn't count, would still count against him.
But yeah, let me know what you guys think and any questions.
Before we let you go today, we'd love for you to take 10 seconds, 15 seconds to leave a quick rating and review for the podcast if you're enjoying it because it helps the show reach more people.
52:14
So wherever you're listening to do this hold on Spotify or on Apple or somewhere else, we'd love for you to take a few seconds to quickly pause this and go leave this review.
Thank you so much for listening to Strategy Simplified, for supporting us, for being a part of our community.
Can't wait for the next episode.