Operating scope
Country head
Capability
All capabilities
Active handovers
0
Outcomes written back
0
Connected work · Agent system
MarginOS · screen 05 of 07
Markdown and promotion
Effectiveness net of funding, cannibalisation and the margin given away.
Issues in scope
3
3 instances across 3 places
Waiting on you
3
0 already decided in this session
Three largest
AED 13.4m–AED 39.0m
Modelled annual value, three largest only
Running without asking
0
0 armed and waiting on a threshold
Decision owner
Country head
Returns to Category and buy, Finance
Scope
Oman
27 stores · all capabilities
Listen
Promotional calendar and fundingTill lines, promoted and adjacentSpace heldMargin given away
Process
Net, not gross upliftCannibalisation inside the categoryAgainst the same space unpromoted
Act
Net view as the standing measureTreatment chosen by a personCalculation order confirmed with finance
Written backEvery outcome returns to the systems that produced the evidence.
KindOrder
Queue
3 issues · 3 waiting on youApprove
What happened
Every promotional review runs on uplift on the promoted line. Uplift ignores the displaced space, the cannibalisation and the margin conceded, and it makes nearly every promotion look like it worked.
Why it matters
Changing the measure changes what gets repeated, which is the only lever that affects next cycle. Leaving it means this analysis gets read, agreed with, and then overruled by the number in the actual review.
Already done
The net calculation is built and reconciles to finance. Only the decision to adopt it is outstanding.
Worth
AED 9.8m to AED 29.1m a yearModelledUplift makes nearly every promotion look successful, which is why the failing ones repeat. Value is the change in what gets repeated next cycle.Failing promotions repeated next cycle
Then what
Measure change into the promotional reviewFinanceReports back 16 Oct
If approved
Net effectiveness replaces uplift as the standing measure from next cycle
If declined
Uplift stays, and the failing promotions get repeated because uplift says they worked
Choose
8 of 33 promotions last cycle returned less than the same space unpromoted
OmanWhat happened
Measured net of supplier funding, net of cannibalisation inside the category, and against what the space would have earned carrying normal range. On uplift, every one of them looks successful.
Why it matters
These are not marginal. Each one occupied premium space, gave away margin, pulled volume from adjacent lines in the same category, and finished behind doing nothing. On the current measure they will all be repeated next cycle.
Already done
Each of the 8 is named individually with its funding, cannibalisation and space cost separated, so the treatment can differ by promotion.
Worth
AED 3.6m to AED 9.9m a yearModelledPromotions returning less margin than the same space unpromoted, net of funding and cannibalisation. Value is the margin recovered by stopping or changing them.Promotions below the unpromoted baseline
Then what
Treatment recorded per promotion, next cycle updatedCategory and buyReports back 30 Sept
Question
Netting funding before or after cannibalisation changes which promotions fail
BarkaWhat happened
The order of the two adjustments materially changes the result for promotions with heavy supplier funding and heavy in-category cannibalisation, which is most of them.
Why it matters
This is a finance convention, not an analytical choice, and it needs to be set once rather than argued per promotion. Whichever is chosen, the same order has to hold for every cycle or the comparison is worthless.
Already done
Both orders are computed and the promotions that change classification between them are identified.
Exposure
Not a revenue lineThe netting order changes which promotions fail. Without a fixed convention the comparison is worthless across cycles.Promotions changing classification by order
Then what
Netting convention set and applied to every cycleFinanceReports back 26 Sept

