This paper analyzes NatureView Farms' strategic growth decisions as the company faces pressure to replace outgoing venture capital by increasing revenues. Using a SWOT framework and Porter's Five Forces, the paper evaluates the organic yogurt industry landscape and assesses three strategic alternatives: expanding six 8 oz SKUs into Northeast and West grocery stores, introducing 32 oz SKUs into supermarkets, and growing the multipack size within the natural foods channel. Financial projections, return on investment, and long-term growth potential are compared across all three options. The paper concludes that Option 1—entering the supermarket channel with 8 oz SKUs—best positions NatureView Farms to meet its $20 million revenue target while building brand equity and establishing first-mover advantage.
The paper demonstrates the use of structured strategic frameworks—Porter's Five Forces and SWOT analysis—as scaffolding for a business recommendation. Rather than presenting these frameworks as ends in themselves, the author uses them to surface risks and opportunities that directly inform the financial analysis and final strategic choice. This integration of framework-driven analysis with numerical evidence is a hallmark technique in applied business case writing.
The paper opens by establishing the business problem (capital replacement and revenue growth), then applies industry and SWOT analysis to set context. The central section evaluates three strategic options in turn, comparing financials and strategic fit. The paper closes with a specific action plan—including staffing, supplier, branding, and pricing guidance—that translates the chosen option into executable steps. This introduction–analysis–recommendation structure is standard in MBA-level case analyses.
NatureView Farms is at a critical junction in its business development. The company has grown rapidly since its inception but now requires an infusion of capital to replace its outgoing venture capital group. In order to attract new capital—and, just as importantly, to maximize the capital attracted—the company believes it needs to grow its revenues. The firm need not limit itself to new venture capital; it can also approach the capital markets for financing. However, regardless of the type of financing sought, a coherent plan for growth must be developed.
The company has placed priority on revenue maximization, although to improve overall value it should place greater emphasis on profit as well. With these considerations in mind, NatureView Farms must now chart the course of its long-term growth.
The industry in which NatureView Farms operates is generally favorable. Using Porter's Five Forces framework, supplier power is relatively low. NatureView's position in the organic yogurt market gives it strong bargaining power with producers of organic milk and other key food inputs. Buyer power, however, is moderate to high, with the moderate component (natural food stores) trending toward high as major natural food chains grow in size. Supermarkets in particular exercise high buyer power.
There are moderate barriers to entry. There is room for larger players—especially established dairy firms—to enter the market. The main barrier is the set of established relationships that firms like NatureView have with organic milk suppliers, the key input. The threat of substitution is moderate to high; in supermarkets, this threat is high because consumers tend to be more price sensitive. Price elasticity is lower among natural store consumers, making the threat of substitution lower in that channel. The degree of rivalry is low at present. There are low switching costs, but relatively few competitors in the organic segment, which is growing rapidly. The degree of rivalry in supermarkets is higher. Taken together, the industry is favorable, although the supermarket segment is less favorable than the natural food store segment.
NatureView's strengths include its relationships with major natural food wholesalers and stores, its brand equity among consumers, its proximity to the major Northeast market, and the extended shelf life of its product. The company has a few weaknesses, however. Its sales staff is not only inexperienced at working the supermarket channel but also appears to lack confidence in doing so. There are also significant philosophical differences among management personnel regarding corporate direction, which could compromise organizational buy-in.
Several opportunities are available for NatureView to choose between. The company can move into the supermarket distribution chain, expand its SKUs within the existing natural foods channel, or explore other channels such as volume discounters. International expansion is another potential opportunity. There are also substantial threats to address. The growing buying power of major natural food chains is one: these chains are expected to grow rapidly in coming years and, as a result, are expected to operate more like conventional supermarkets. Another major threat is new market entrants, particularly established mainstream yogurt producers. Other potential entrants could include niche competitors (Greek yogurt, for example) or substitutes such as non-dairy products that serve a similar function.
The broader economy represents a threat as well, since NatureView's premium positioning makes it something of a luxury product. Should the economy falter, growth in natural food sales could stall, taking organic yogurt growth with it. Finally, there is the threat posed by the outgoing venture capitalists. If the company cannot find an alternate source of financing, the business as currently constituted could be compromised.
Three strategic options have been identified for NatureView Farms. The first is to introduce six 8 oz SKUs into Northeast and West grocery stores. The second is to introduce 32 oz SKUs into supermarkets. The third is to expand multipack sizes within the existing natural foods channel. Each option carries a distinct risk-reward profile.
The strong growth in the supermarket channel makes Option 1 an extremely lucrative choice. Supermarkets, which are facing slow overall growth, are looking to expand their portfolio of organic foods in response to rapid growth in the organic grocery sector. More organic food buyers shop in supermarkets than in natural food stores, so pursuing this option would give NatureView greater access to a key but as yet untapped segment of its target market. Furthermore, entering now would allow the company to gain first-mover advantages.
There are several major risks to this strategy. NatureView faces new competition in organic yogurt from existing players, particularly Dannon. It also faces potential channel conflict with existing natural food retail partners, although this risk is likely overstated given that major natural food stores are expected to move toward a grocery store operating model anyway. Internal capability gaps can be addressed by strategically hiring experienced grocery professionals, who will be needed because this option would make the supermarket segment the company's most important one.
Strategically, Option 3 is the most conservative. The company, however, does not have the luxury of remaining a small, conservative Vermont yogurt operation. The venture capital situation overrides any inclination to stay true to the company's roots—NatureView must find additional sources of capital. While the conservative option targets the strongest growth segment by serving size, it remains a minor segment and the incremental revenue may not be sufficient for the firm to meet its $20 million target.
The two grocery store options must also be weighed against strategic positioning. The 8 oz cups offer greater visibility due to better shelf placement and reach consumers who are already receptive to organic products. Once NatureView becomes established in that format, it can fill out its SKUs—including the 32 oz size—and take its products to the Midwest and South. The 32 oz option, by contrast, places products at the bottom of the shelf, which contributes far less to brand building. Moreover, it directs sales energy toward a consumer segment less motivated by organic positioning. Strategically, Option 1 is the best fit given the financials, the revenue targets, and the platform it creates for subsequent expansion.
Porter, Michael. (1980). Porter's Five Forces, adapted from Competitive Strategy. Retrieved July 16, 2009, from http://www.quickmba.com/strategy/porter.shtml
No author. (2007). SWOT Analysis. QuickMBA.com. Retrieved July 16, 2009, from
You’re 55% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.