Please refer to information provided for The Fashion Channel on pg. 6 of the case.

1.) Please show how the relative contribution in percentage of TFCs two revenue streams to total revenue will change from 2006 to 2007 for each of the scenarios. You may use Exhibit 5 on pg. 12 for your calculations.

2.) If ratings are 10% lower than forecasted, how will your choice of scenarios change?

Dana Wheeler, senior vice president of marketing for The Fashion Channel (TFC), sat in her Chicago office and scrolled through the email messages in her inbox. Thankfully, none required an urgent reply. She toggled over to her calendar: no meetings for the rest of the day. Finally, she could focus her thoughts on reviewing her recommendations for TFCs new segmentation and positioning strategy.

Wheeler believed that she had prepared a solid analysis; she felt confident about the strategy she was proposing. But next weeks senior management meeting would mark her first big presentation to the companys leaders since she had joined TFC, and, she admitted to herself, she was eager to gain the support of her colleagues.

There was a lot riding on the outcome of this meeting, both for Wheeler and for the channel. If founder and CEO Jared Thomas and his team liked what they heard, Wheeler would move forward to implement her recommendations. The company needed to strengthen its competitive position and would be spending more than $60 million in all national and affiliate advertising, promotion, and public relations in 2007, based on these recommendations. This would be an increase of $15 million over 2006 spending.

Background

TFC was a successful cable TV network and the only network dedicated solely to fashion, with up- to-date and entertaining features and information broadcast 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Founded in 1996 by two entrepreneurs, it had experienced constant revenue and profit growth above the industry average almost since the beginning. Revenues for 2006 were forecast at $310.6 million, marking another steady upswing.

Wendy Stahl prepared this case solely as a basis for class discussion and not as an endorsement, a source of primary data, or an illustration of effective or ineffective management. Wendy Stahl is vice president of corporate development at creditcards.com. She received her MBA from Harvard Business School.

This case, though based on real events, is fictionalized, and any resemblance to actual persons or entities is coincidental. There are occasional references to actual companies in the narration.

The channel was also one of the most widely available niche networks, reaching almost 80 million U.S. households that subscribed to cable and satellite television.1 Women between 35 and 54 years were its most avid viewers, according to its annual demographic survey. But beyond basic demographics, the channel didnt have much in the way of detailed information about its viewers. Nor did it attempt to market to any viewer segments in particular. From the beginning, in fact, Jared Thomas had believed that TFCs marketing messages should appeal to as broad a group as possible in order to achieve the highest possible viewership numbers. Early on, the network had chosen Fashion for Everyone as the theme for its marketing programs; one of its more popular series in 2005 had been Look Great on Saturday Night for Under $100.

TFC had clearly grown quickly without articulating any detailed segmentation, branding, or positioning strategy. However, at the beginning of 2006, the network realized that other networks were taking note of its success and beginning to add fashion-related programming to their line-ups. TFC was facing competition that could provide meaningful choices to both viewers and advertisers. By June 2006, these new competitive dynamics had prompted Thomas to rethink his approach to marketing. At the quarterly executive meeting that month, he told his senior team: Its time for us to build a modern brand strategy and secure The Fashion Channels position as the market leader. I want to use marketing to lay a foundation for future growth. At the same meeting, Thomas had announced plans to sharply increase TFCs investment in advertising and to hire an experienced marketer to develop marketing and brand-building programs to support TFCs continued growth.

Enter Dana Wheeler, in July 2006. Wheeler had a strong background in marketing for packaged consumer products as well as broad experience in the advertising industry. Thomas expected that Wheeler would draw on these strengths to help TFC build on the momentum it had created to date and stave off any competitors trying to make inroads. Still, he and some of the other members of the leadership team felt an urge to resist change. The network had been highly successful to date and no one wanted to break something that isnt broken.

Wheelers Plans

Wheeler turned back to her computer, opened up the slide-deck presentation she had created, and started reviewing it. As she began to page through the materials, she was thinking about the trends in the advertising marketplace that Norm Frazier had been talking about in the sales forecasting meeting this morning.

Frazier, senior vice president of Advertising Sales, had warned that TFC might need to drop the price for a unit of advertising next year by 10% or more if the network did not make some changes in its performance. He mentioned that both Lifetime and CNN had launched fashion-specific programming blocks that were achieving notable ratings (Exhibit 1). Frazier was a high-energy salesman who had personally built the strong ad sales performance of the channel. He was justifiably worried. Wheeler had left that meeting acutely aware that next weeks executive session wasnt coming a moment too soon.

Wheeler knew that in order to hold or increase price it would be crucial to attract a critical mass of viewers who were interested in the networks content and were also attractive to advertisers. The key would be targeting the right viewers and offering advertisers an attractive mix of viewers when compared with what competitors were offering. Wheeler believed she had good market data that would give her insights into the options for identifying the right segments for TFC. At the same time,

1 There were a total of 110 million households with televisions in the United States. Of those, approximately 70 million TV households subscribed to cable television service.

2 BRIEFCASES | HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL

she knew that the network needed to maintain its overall audience ratings with the cable consumers and the cable affiliate distribution network. If the network changed its offerings in a way that disappointed too many cable subscribers, it could risk losing its distribution support.

Wheeler clicked to the slide that outlined the marketing tools in her arsenal, and then clicked to a slide near the end of the presentation that revealed an aggressive implementation schedule. Her plan was to build a strategy for segmentation, and use it as a base to employ all of the marketing tools traditional and internet advertising, public relations and promotionsto reach the target consumers with integrated positioning messages. She also knew that it would take time to create and launch all the elements of a well-integrated marketing program and that there was no time to waste.

She moved back a dozen slides or so, opening the ones that summarized TFCs revenue stream from advertising sales and the slides that considered its revenue stream from cable-affiliate fees. Thomas and the rest of the senior management team knew this data as well as she did, she assumed. Everyone felt that advertising was TFCs primary growth opportunity. She wanted to think about her key messages one more time to ensure her recommendations would support building revenues as aggressively as possible.

TFCs Advertising Revenue Model

First, she reviewed TFCs advertising revenue model. TFC was on target to generate $230.6 million in 2006 from advertising. The advertising business model was built on attracting a mix of male and female viewers on a regular basis as measured by ratings (the percentage of television households watching on average during a measured viewing period.) Across the entire schedule, TFCs average rating was 1.0. With 110 million television households in the United States, this meant that on average 1,100,000 people were watching at any point in time.2

TFCs Ad Sales team sold access to these viewers via advertising spots (30 or 60 seconds in length) to a variety of well-known consumer marketers ranging from cosmetics companies to brand name clothing designers and automobile manufacturers. There were usually six minutes of national ad time in each half hour of programming, 24 hours per day for a total of 2,016 minutes per week. Wheeler knew from industry studies that, in 2006, U.S. consumer advertisers spent almost $20 billion buying spots on cable networks such as TFC. Because there were several hundred cable networks competing for viewers and the related ad dollars, competition for ad revenue was always fierce across all the networks.

While competition was intense for advertising overall, TFC remained the only network dedicated to fashion programming 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. This set up an interesting competitive dynamic. TFC needed to compete against a broad range of networks for advertising revenues. For these networks the ad buyers would be most interested in buying ratings and demographics, and less interested in specific programming subjects. At the same time TFC competed against other fashion- oriented programming that would appeal to advertisers who specifically wanted to participate in that programming context. The strong fashion programming blocks on Lifetime and CNN represented a double-edged competitive challenge. And if successful, more networks would likely copy the concept, skimming more viewers and ad dollars from TFC.

2 The ratings metric is used for all television networks and is calculated on the base of all TV households, not the smaller base of cable households. While some networks are not available in all households, the ratings calculation formula does not change but remains Viewers/Total TV HH = Ratings. This standardizes the rating metric used in measuring audiences for advertising purposes.

Dana reminded herself about the conversation shed had with Norm Frazier about advertising pricing. The network based ad unit prices on several factors, which advertisers also monitored, including the number of viewers (ratings), the audiences characteristics (age, demographics, and lifestyle), and general competitive trends. Prices were expressed as CPM (cost per thousand), which represented the price that an advertiser would pay for an impression, or moment of viewing.3 The ad market was dynamic because of the relatively fixed supply of advertising on traditional television networks. Market pricing moved up and down frequently, as advertisers developed new campaigns that required television support. And, in recent years, the advertising buying process had become very sophisticated, with many buying agencies and clients using combinations of surveys and optimizer programs to analyze the demographic and psychographic characteristics of audience groups and then establish pricing parameters that fit the audiences various networks delivered. The output of these programs would be a recommended advertising placement portfolio for a specific product campaign.

Networks were increasingly evaluated on their ability to deliver specific target groups. Generally, networks whose audiences were older or had low family incomes commanded lower rates for advertising. Advertisers would pay a premium CPM to reach certain other groups; in 2006, these were men of all ages and women aged 18-34. By increasing the ratings in highly valued demographic groups, the TFC Ad Sales team could achieve CPM pricing increases from 25% to 75%. By attracting a large number of highly valued viewers, the network had the opportunity to substantially grow its advertising revenues.

Cable Affiliate Fees

Wheeler next turned to the slides that dealt with the cable affiliate fee revenue stream. Cable affiliate fees, which were on track to bring in $80 million in 2006, were the second source of TFC revenue. Most U.S. households subscribed to cable television through local affiliates of a large cable multi-system operator (nationally, Comcast, Time Warner, Cablevision, and Cox were the largest). Consumers paid a monthly fee for a basic lineup of channels and incremental fees for premium channels and on-demand programming. TFC was positioned as a basic channel, so most consumers received it automatically when they signed up for basic cable service.

Large multi-system operators (MSO) would sign multi-year contracts with networks that specified the fee the network would receive for each household that received the channel. The local affiliates of that MSO marketed and distributed the service to consumers in all the local markets for which they held a franchise. For TFC, this negotiated subscriber fee averaged $1.00 per subscriber per year. The fee was paid entirely on the basis of carriage and did not go up or down as viewership changed. The TFC fee was at the low end of the industry range, reflecting the specialty niche content of the network. ESPN, and other networks that appealed to large numbers of households, charged the highest fees. Wheeler knew that the cable operators and affiliates carefully monitored customer satisfaction with network offerings and would threaten to drop unpopular channels. There were case studies of networks causing viewer outcry from unpopular changes. Consequently, it was important for TFC to maintain its general satisfaction level and keep the affiliates happy. Because TFC was widely distributed there was not much upside in affiliate revenue, though, and the general goal for both parties was to maintain a good equilibrium.

Wheeler closed the slide deck entirely. As far as cable affiliate revenue went, there wasnt much to be done, she thought. The network had already achieved virtually full penetration of available cable households and there was limited opportunity to raise fees. Wheeler knew that the two key levers to

3 The formula for advertising revenue for an individual spot = (Households x Ratings)/1,000 x CPM.

4 BRIEFCASES | HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL

The Fashion Channel | 2075

drive revenue growth would be (1) increased viewership (ratings), and (2) increased advertising pricing.

She pulled out a legal pad and wrote: Deliver quality audiences, as demanded by advertisers across the top in large print.

Competitive Threats

The phone rang, breaking her concentration. Dana, boomed Norm Frazier. Im running to a client meeting but just wanted to connect with you. I wanted to say, in the meeting next week, I hope well be able to talk about how to pitch TFC against the new fashion content on CNN and Lifetime. Lifetime is taking away a lot of ad buys from me because theyre attracting younger female demographics. CNN is starting to deliver some great numbers on men. Both of these segments can be sold for a premium CPM, so we need to do something to draw these viewer groups back. If you want to talk before the meeting, just let me know.

Wheeler shook her head, understanding his impatience, but frustrated just the same. Still, this might be an opportunity to build consensus. Im on it, Norm. And thank you for the offer. I might take you up on it. My goal is to be able to come out of next weeks meeting ready to take action immediately. They hung up, and Wheeler turned once again to her notepad, jotting down key points about the competitive landscape.

She picked up a folder and pulled out a summary of a recent Alpha research study on customer satisfaction with cable networks. The study showed that TFC was facing additional competitive challenges in its attractiveness to cable affiliates. On a scale of 1 to 5 (with 5 being the highest possible score), TFC had achieved a 3.8 rating on consumer interest in viewing, while the two competitors with new fashion programming had scored higher: CNN had scored 4.3 and Lifetime a 4.5 On awareness, TFC had scored 4.1 while CNN scored 4.6 and Lifetime a 4.5. On perceived value TFC was at 3.7, CNN 4.1andLifetime4.4.4 Cableoperatorsusedthesedatatodeterminehowmuchtopayforeachnetwork, and also where they would include the network in their consumer offerings. The cable operator needed to offer service packages (often called tiers) that would appeal to the home consumer and would justify the monthly cable fee. If a network underperformed the averages, it risked being offered in less appealing packages, which could mean it would be seen in fewer households.

While TFC had generally scored above the midpoint, these data suggested that it was lagging two key networks that were now offering competitive programming. To Wheeler this indicated a need for marketing initiatives to improve consumer interest, awareness, and perceived value. Change would upset some viewers who liked the networks current programs and probably some TFC employees as well, but change would have to come.

She thought back to her final interviews with Jared Thomas, before he had offered her the position at TFC. TFC can win in the market if the channel builds its marketing programs around the right consumer segmentation, she had told him. First, you have to identify the customer groups that are most worth the effort to pursue. You can use market research not only for demographic data but also to study consumer behavior and attitudeshow viewers use the network, what they value, and what needs they have.

4 The research had been conducted as a telephone survey of 800 U.S. cable households, who were all able to view all the networks. Households had been asked to rank the networks on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the highest possible score: Respondents were asked to rank on a scale of 1-5 (5= Most/Very/High; 4= Somewhat; 3 =Neutral/neither high nor low; 2= Not much; 1= Lowest/not at all).

Its likely that theres a core group willing to become very loyal to our network. These viewers have an emotional connection to TFC. We can find them and market to them so that we have the building blocks to create the brand loyalty that is hard for a competitor to take away.

Thomas had agreed, but confessed to being worried about viewers fickleness. Its easy to spend a fortune pursuing viewers who wont stay with you, he had cautioned. Theres an obvious risk in targeting only some of our customers. Some viewers could quit watching us and our ratings would decline.

She wondered what the management team would say when she presented her research and recommendations. Theyd been at the network for several years and been buoyed by the growth that had been achieved with the something-for-everyone strategy. She expected there would be concern about doing anything that put revenue at risk, even in the short term.

Attitudinal Research Findings

Wheeler flipped open another folder on her desk to review the most recent consumer research reports that shed commissioned. She removed two documents, which contained the highlights of a national consumer field study that had been completed in the previous month (Exhibit 2) by GFE Associates, a well-regarded market research firm. The researchers had asked a national panel of consumers more than 100 questions about their attitudes toward fashion and TFC as a way to understand the needs that the network served.

Attached to the data highlights was a second document (Exhibit 3) which GFE Associates had prepared compiling the results into attitudinal clusters. To create these clusters they had run the answers to all 100 questions through a sophisticated statistical correlation program to analyze patterns in the way consumers had answered. GFE Associates then constructed profiles for clusters of consumers who had common attitudes and needs. The report suggested four unique groups of viewers: Fashionistas, Planners & Shoppers, Situationalists, and Basics. While the segments varied in size, Wheeler quickly noticed that the smallestthe Fashionistashad a high degree of interest in fashion. Wheeler also perceived several possible multi-cluster schemes, each of which would need to be judged according to

How the scheme would impact the quantity of viewers (ratings);

What the CPM advertising revenue potential would be;

How TFC could be differentiated from current and future competition.

Most of the male interest occurred in the Basics clusterthe least likely to be engaged with TFC content. Wheeler had already concluded that it would be unwise to pursue additional male viewers only. Instead, she felt, TFC segmentation and positioning should be targeted at women, particularly the premium 18-to-34 year-old demographic.

She turned to a summary of the research on women. Since there were women aged 18 to 34 in all of the clusters, Wheeler first considered maintaining a broad appeal to a cross segment of Fashionistas, Planners & Shoppers, and Situationalists. By investing in a major marketing and advertising campaign as well as programming, it would be reasonable to expect that awareness and viewing of the channel would go up and could, over time, deliver a ratings boost of 20% (from the current 1.0 to 1.2). However, Ad Sales was forecasting a 10% drop in CPM to $1.80 if the current audience mix stayed the same and a broad multi-cluster strategy might not deliver an audience different enough to avoid that fate..

The Fashion Channel | 2075

And there was always the risk that the competition would continue to penetrate the premium segments and further erode TFCs pricing ability.

An alternative to a broad, multi-segment approach would be to focus more on the Fashionistas. This segment was strong in the highly valued 18-34 female demographic. It was smaller than the other segments, representing only 15% of households, and so targeting them might lead to a drop in viewersbut it would also strengthen the value of the audience to advertisers, with a likely increase in CPM. Wheeler estimated that this strategy could deliver a rating of 0.8. Ad Sales had given her a projection of a $3.50 CPM for an audience stronger in the younger, female-oriented Fashionista segment. In addition to targeting this segment in marketing programs, Wheeler expected that it would be necessary to invest in new programming to attract and retain the interest of this segment. She estimated that she would need to spend an additional $15 million per year on programming under this scenario.

Wheeler was also interested in a third alternative scenario that targeted two segmentsthe Fashionistas and the Shoppers/Planners. She estimated that a dual targeting would drive average ratings over time to 1.2 with a potential CPM of $2.50. For this scenario she would need to spend an additional $20 million on programming to ensure that there were selections aimed at both segments.

Wheeler knew that her recommendation would have to show how her plan would increase TFC revenue and also quantify risks if the plan disappointed. She had created a revenue calculator spreadsheet to calculate the impact of ratings and CPM increases on potential TFC ad revenues (Exhibit 4). Now she opened up a new worksheet and prepared to look at the financial impact of these choices (see Exhibit 5 for TFC 2006 and 2007 estimated financial statements). She would need to be prepared for many questions from Thomas and the other members of the leadership team. While everyone was aware of the changing competitive landscape, they really had not yet faced a decision about making real changes in order to stay ahead. Dana expected a vigorous discussion.

Exhibit 1 Viewer Demographics and Competitor Comparison (% Viewers; Adults over 18 years of age) All TV Viewers

24 x 7

49% 51% 30% 41% 21% 08% 16%

NA

110M All

The Fashion Channel

24 x 7

39% 61% 33% 45% 20% 02% 18%

1.0

1.1M

Fashion news, features, and information

Lifetime: Fashion Today

CNN: Fashion Tonight

M-F, 8-9 pm Sat.-Sun, 10-11 pm

45% 55% 27% 40% 26% 02% 17%

4.0

4.4M

Fashion news and features with celebrity focus available

Time Period

Male Female 18-34 35-54 54-74 >74 Income over $100,000

Average rating

Average Households Programming profile

M-F,

9-11 pm

37% 63% 43% 42% 14% 01% 19%

3.0

3.3M

(References: US Census, business documents, casewriter estimates) Rating - % TV households watching on average during measured viewing period. Total TV households = 110 million

Fashion news and information

The Fashion Channel | 2075

Exhibit 2 GFE Associates: National Consumer Survey (Excerpts) Sample results from panel survey of consumers (% responding). Consumers were all cable subscribers and were

selected to match the general demographic profile of this population.

	Strongly agree	Agree	Somewhat agree	Somewhat disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree
1. It is important to me to know the most up to date fashion trends	16%	20%	19%	20%	15%	10%
2. I rely on television reports on fashion to plan what I will wear to work	6	11	20	25	18	20
3. I rely on television reports on fashion to plan what I will wear on special occasions	10	20	25	25	15	5
4. I like to watch special tv programs on current fashion	15	20	30	15	15	5
5. TFC is my favorite channel on cable	15	10	20	16	16	23
6. Shopping for new clothes is one of my favorite leisure activities	15	20	25	10	15	15
7. I like to shop for clothes for parties and special activities	20	21	20	15	10	14
8. I dont really enjoy shopping for clothes and only do it when necessary	15	15	21	20	15	14
9. I dont need information on fashion, I just wear what feels comfortable	20	15	20	15	15	15
10. I use fashion information to be sure my family is well dressed for special occasions	10	15	23	22	20	10
11. I like to know what people are wearing in other parts of the country	15	10	20	15	20	20
12. Fashion is more interesting than many things on television	15	12	15	24	19	15
13. I am willing to spend money on special clothes for special occasions	15	20	20	20	15	10
14. I shop around to find the best value on clothes	14	25	20	20	15	6
15. I like to talk to my friends and family about fashion	20	10	14	25	11	20
17. I participate in hobbies and sports that require special apparel	20	15	20	19	15	11
18. I like to plan what to wear in advance of work days and special events	15	20	10	20	20	15
19. I am more interested in fashion than most people	20	24	15	11	15	15
20. Watching fashion programs on television is very entertaining	25	20	10	10	20	15
21. TFC is the best place on television for fashion information	9%	21%	28%	20%	12%	10%

Exhibit 3 GFE Associates: Analysis of Attitudinal Clusters in U.S. Television Households for The Fashion Channel

Cluster

Fashionistas

Planners & Shoppers

Situationalists

Basics

Involvement in Fashion

Highly engaged in fashion

Participate in fashion on a regular basis

Participate in fashion for specific needs

Disengaged

Size of Cluster (% HH)

15%

35%

30%

20%

Index: Interest in Fashion on TV (100=All viewer average)

140

110

105

50

Demographic Highlights

Female, 61% Income > $100k, 30% 18-34, 50%

Female, 53% 18-34, 25%

Female, 50% Children in HH, 45% 18-34, 30%

Female, 45% Male, 55%

Attitude Drivers

Anticipate trends Stay up to date Think a lot about fashion Enjoy shopping Develop fashion expertise to share Fashion is entertaining

Stay up to date Enjoy shopping Fashion is practical Interested in value

Enjoy shopping for specific needs Think about fashion for specific situations Fashion is both entertaining and practical Interested in value

Do not enjoy shopping Do not spend much time thinking about what to wear Interested in value

Index = Measure of segment interest in Fashion-oriented television vs. overall household interest in fashion television

Exhibit 4 Ad Revenue Calculator

The Fashion Channel | 2075

Ad Revenue Calculator

Current

2007 Base

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

TV HH

110,000,000

110,000,000

110,000,000

110,000,000

110,000,000

Average Rating

1.0%

Average Viewers (thousand)

1,100

Average CPMa

$2.00

Average Revenue/ Ad Minuteb

$2,200

$0

$0

$0

$0

Ad Minutes/Week

2,016

2,016

2,016

2,016

2,016

Weeks/Year

52

52

52

52

52

Ad Revenue/Year

$230,630,400

$0

$0

$0

$0

Incremental Programming Expense

a Revenue/Thousand Viewers b Calculated by multiplying Average Viewers by Average CPM

HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL | BRIEFCASES 11Exhibit 5 TFC Estimated Financials for 2006 and 2007.

2006 Actual

2007 Base

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

Assumptions

Revenue

Ad Sales

Cost of Programming

$230,630,400

Affiliate Fees

$80,000,000

$81,600,000

$81,600,000

$81,600,000

$81,600,000

Total Revenue

$310,630,400

$81,600,000

$81,600,000

$81,600,000

$81,600,000

Expenses

Cost of Operations

$70,000,000

$72,100,000

$72,100,000

$72,100,000

$72,100,000

$55,000,000

Ad Sales Commissions

$6,918,912

Marketing & Advertising

$45,000,000

SGA

$40,000,000

$41,200,000

$41,200,000

$41,200,000

$41,200,000

Total Expense

$216,918,912

$113,300,000

$113,300,000

$113,300,000

$113,300,000

Net Income

$93,711,488

Margin

30%

Insert scenario results from revenue calculator

Grows 2% per year with population

Grows 3% per year with inflation

Add incremental programming expense

3% of ad sales revenue

Reflects increased spending of $15M

Growing with inflation 3%

Spreadsheet calculates automatically

Spreadsheet calculates automatically

Spreadsheet calculates automatically