A survival consultant with specialized tactical expertise must choose between four distinct customer segments while operating in a collapsed economy where traditional business infrastructure no longer exists and wrong strategic decisions carry life-threatening consequences. The decision requires balancing immediate revenue generation needs against long-term market positioning opportunities, all while managing the complicated legacy of a family name that simultaneously attracts and repels potential clients in a fragmented post-catastrophe marketplace.
Core Themes:
Browse our Insights Marketplace for frameworks and tools that drive results
Explore MarketplaceIn the aftermath of catastrophic technological warfare, a survival consultant with unique expertise faces a critical business challenge that transcends typical market segmentation decisions. Danny Dyson operates in an environment where traditional business infrastructure has collapsed, yet demand for specialized knowledge remains intense. His eighteen months of operational experience behind enemy lines represents genuine competitive advantage, but translating expertise into sustainable income requires strategic focus in a fractured marketplace where four distinct customer segments compete for limited attention and resources.
The central dilemma demands careful analysis: should Dyson pursue small scavenging crews with immediate needs but minimal resources, mid-size resistance cells with purchasing power but established loyalties, larger settlement councils capable of premium payments but hampered by slow decision-making, or emerging survivor groups driven by desperation but lacking payment reliability? The stakes extend beyond simple revenue optimization—the wrong choice could mean business failure in an economy where failure equals starvation, while the right selection could establish market leadership that saves lives and creates sustainable income simultaneously.
Danny Dyson carries both an advantage and a burden that few consultants could imagine. His uncle's role in the technological catastrophe that reshaped civilization creates a complex market position—some potential clients view his family connection as insider knowledge of machine behavior patterns, while others consider it a liability suggesting compromised loyalty. This duality has defined his business positioning since he began offering consulting services in the remnants of the western urban corridor. The Dyson name opens some doors while slamming others shut, creating an unpredictable dynamic that complicates straightforward market penetration strategies.
The...
Access full cases, analysis, recommendations, and community insights
Wonka Industries faces a critical strategic decision following the unprecedented success of its Golden Ticket campaign, which has sustained chocolate sales at 180% above pre-contest levels but overwhelmed the company's artisanal production infrastructure, forcing leadership to choose between automation, innovation investment, geographic expansion, or strategic partnerships. The decision is complicated by a leadership transition from inventive wizardry to operational pragmatism, requiring the new management to balance preserving the company's magical brand essence against building scalable competitive advantages in an increasingly aggressive global marketplace.
Explore the Case
Meridian Capital, an asset management firm known for its aggressive, opportunistic investment strategy, faces a dilemma as a highly profitable opportunity in defense technology conflicts with the ethical concerns of its institutional clients. The firm must choose between maximizing investor returns by embracing the defense sector or aligning with growing demands for ethical investing, a decision that will redefine its identity and future.
Explore the Case
After receiving a $2 million grant from FTX’s charitable foundation, Horizon Initiative faces legal and ethical challenges following the crypto company's collapse. The organization must now decide whether to return the funds, defend its right to keep them, or pursue a middle ground—all while balancing stakeholder trust, mission impact, and reputational risk.
Explore the Case