Northfield Sparkling TeaCampaign brief and budget
A complete example of the report in the US$49 campaign package, from management summary to evidence register, with scenarios, sensitivity, and a synthetic audience appendix.
- Campaign
- Northfield Sparkling Tea launch
- Company
- Northfield Drinks (fictional)
- Market
- Klang Valley, Malaysia
- Currency
- MYR
- Period
- 8 weeks
- Generated
- 28 October 2026
- Versions
- inputs v3 · report v1 · calc 1.0
- Scenario mode
- Assumption-only
01Management summary
Northfield Sparkling Tea launches in 40 Klang Valley stores over 8 weeks with a budget of MYR 120,000. The plan aims for 150,000 cans, of which 110,000 are incremental to the no-campaign baseline of 40,000 cans. On the confirmed assumptions, the central case returns an estimated MYR 29,600 of contribution after campaign costs.
The result depends most on net revenue per can, then on variable cost and incremental volume. Below 88,236 incremental cans, the campaign does not recover its cost. The low case loses MYR 11,200. We recommend approval on one condition: hold the final three weeks of media until week three sell-through confirms distribution.
02Business context
Northfield Drinks sells a ready-to-drink lemon tea through supermarkets and convenience stores in the Klang Valley. Sparkling Tea is its first carbonated variant. It shares the chiller shelf and the price point with the lemon tea.
The launch is listed in 40 stores. The first production run is 120,000 cans, and the customer confirmed a second run of 40,000 cans after the diagnostic flagged the stock gap.
03Baseline
Without a campaign, the listing alone is expected to sell 40,000 cans over 8 weeks. This estimate comes from the first two weeks of listing sales (E3). The scenarios measure the campaign against this baseline over the same stores, period, and definitions.
04Objectives
| Objective | Measure | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Commercial | Incremental cans over baseline | 110,000 |
| Commercial | Contribution after campaign costs | MYR 29,600 or more |
| Supporting | Buyers in eight weeks | 44,000 |
| Supporting | Repeat purchase rate | 28% |
05Audience
Urban professionals aged 25 to 34 in the Klang Valley who buy a chilled drink at a convenience store at least twice a week. Their current choices are sparkling soft drinks and iced coffee. The main barriers are an unfamiliar taste and a price above soft drinks on promotion.
06Proposition
Real brewed tea, lightly sparkling, less sweet than a soft drink.
Support points: brewed from tea leaves, light sparkle, a can sized for one break.
07Strategy
- Weeks 1 to 4: drive trial through sampling, creators, and visibility at the chiller.
- Weeks 5 to 8: turn trial into repeat by retargeting people who engaged, while displays hold the shelf.
- Protect contribution: avoid price promotion, which would discount the lemon tea buyers who switch.
08Messaging
| Message | Where it runs |
|---|---|
| Your break, lightly sparkling | Online video, in-store display |
| Brewed tea, less sweet | Creators, paid social |
| Try it chilled today | Sampling, retargeting |
09Channel roles
| Channel | Role | Measured by |
|---|---|---|
| Sampling | Put the product in hands at launch | Samples given, trial rate in sampled stores |
| Creators | Show the drink in real moments for the audience | Reach, saves, link clicks |
| Paid social | Build reach and retarget engaged viewers | Reach, frequency, engagement rate |
| Online video | Explain the taste and the occasion | Completed views |
| In-store display | Win the choice at the chiller | Display compliance, store sales |
10Activity plan
| When | Activity | MYR |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-launch | Concept check, film and stills, creator briefing | 26,000 |
| Weeks 1 to 2 | Launch: sampling, creators, paid social, online video, displays | 32,100 |
| Weeks 3 to 4 | Build trial: creators continue, retarget engaged viewers | 26,100 |
| Weeks 5 to 6 | Convert to repeat: video ends in week 6, displays stay | 18,600 |
| Weeks 7 to 8 | Sustain: paid social and displays only | 11,600 |
| As needed | Contingency | 5,600 |
11Timing
12Budget
| Activity | Unit | Quantity | Rate | Total | Timing | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concept check research | study | 1 | 8,000 | 8,000 | Pre-launch | Modelled assumption |
| Film and stills production | package | 1 | 18,000 | 18,000 | Pre-launch | Customer rate |
| Paid social | 1,000 impressions | 2,400 | 12 | 28,800 | Weeks 1 to 8 | Sourced rate |
| Online video | 1,000 impressions | 1,500 | 14 | 21,000 | Weeks 1 to 6 | Sourced rate |
| Creators | creator | 6 | 2,500 | 15,000 | Weeks 1 to 4 | Customer rate |
| In-store display | store | 40 | 300 | 12,000 | Weeks 1 to 8 | Customer rate |
| Sampling | sample | 10,000 | 0.60 | 6,000 | Weeks 1 to 2 | Modelled assumption |
| Agency service fee | fee | 1 | 5,600 | 5,600 | Weeks 1 to 8 | Customer rate |
| Contingency | allowance | 1 | 5,600 | 5,600 | As needed | Modelled assumption |
| Total, excluding tax | 120,000 |
13Measurement
| KPI | Target | Source | Owner | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reach | 1,300,000 people | Platform reports | Brand manager | Weekly |
| Engagement | 156,000 engaged viewers | Platform reports | Brand manager | Weekly |
| Trial | 44,000 buyers | Retail sell-out data | Sales lead | Weekly |
| Repeat | 28% of buyers | Loyalty app panel | Insights lead | Week 6 and week 8 |
| Incremental cans | 110,000 | Sell-out against baseline | Finance partner | Week 8 |
| Lemon tea sales | Within 10% of trend | Retail sell-out data | Sales lead | Weekly |
14Risks
| Risk | Likelihood | Response | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supply runs short in weeks 5 to 8 | Medium | Second run of 40,000 cans confirmed. Hold late media until week three sell-through. | E8 |
| Buyers switch from lemon tea rather than add a purchase | Medium | Track lemon tea sales weekly. Shift messaging to new occasions if the share passes 15%. | E6 |
| Trial does not turn into repeat purchase | High | Retarget triallists from week four. Review repeat rate at week six. | E7 |
| Media rates differ from the sourced references | Low | Contingency of MYR 5,600 covers a 10% rate rise on paid media. | E4 |
15Approval questions
- Do you approve MYR 120,000, with MYR 5,600 of contingency held back?
- Do you accept holding the final three weeks of media until week three sell-through is known?
- Who owns the weekly lemon tea sales check?
- Is a 28% repeat rate acceptable as the planning assumption, given that no repeat data exists yet?
16Evidence
| ID | Source | Basis | Used for |
|---|---|---|---|
| E1 | Campaign brief, uploaded by the customer | Customer-provided | Objectives, audience, period, stores |
| E2 | Price and cost sheet, confirmed in intake | Customer-provided | Net revenue and variable cost per can |
| E3 | First two weeks of listing sales, confirmed in intake | Customer-provided | No-campaign baseline |
| E4 | Public media rate references for Malaysia (fictional for this example) | Sourced | Paid social and online video rates |
| E5 | Agency and creator quotes | Customer-provided | Production, creators, service fee |
| E6 | Cannibalisation share of 10% | Modelled assumption, confirmed | Lost lemon tea contribution |
| E7 | Repeat rate of 28% and 2.5 cans per buyer | Modelled assumption, confirmed | Measurement targets |
| E8 | Supplier confirmation of a second production run | Customer-provided | Stock of 160,000 cans |
| E9 | Brand logo found by a web search on the brand name (fictional for this example) | Sourced, confirmed by the customer | Report cover |
AScenario comparison
Net revenue MYR 3.20 and variable cost MYR 1.70 per can give MYR 1.50 of contribution per incremental can. 10% of incremental cans come from the lemon tea, which earns MYR 1.40 per can, so each incremental can nets MYR 1.36.
| Measure | Low | Central | High |
|---|---|---|---|
| Incremental cans | 80,000 | 110,000 | 140,000 |
| Incremental net revenue | 256,000 | 352,000 | 448,000 |
| Incremental contribution | 120,000 | 165,000 | 210,000 |
| Contribution lost from lemon tea | −11,200 | −15,400 | −19,600 |
| Campaign costs | −120,000 | −120,000 | −120,000 |
| Total: contribution after campaign costs | −11,200 | 29,600 | 70,400 |
BSensitivity
CSynthetic audience exploration
Synthetic. These are hypotheses generated from the audience definition, not real interviews, measured demand, or conversion rates.
| Four Ps | Likely reaction | Likely objection |
|---|---|---|
| Product | Curious about a less sweet sparkling drink | Will the tea taste flat once chilled? |
| Price | Sees the price as fair next to the lemon tea | Compares the price with soft drinks on promotion |
| Place | Buys at convenience stores near work | May not find it outside the 40 launch stores |
| Promotion | Responds to creators they already follow | Ignores generic sampling without a reason to try |
Suggested research: a taste test of chilled samples in two launch stores before week one. No financial assumption was changed by this exploration.
DMethodology notes
Financial figures come from programmed calculations (calc 1.0) on confirmed inputs (inputs v3). The language model wrote the narrative and did not calculate. The scenario mode is assumption-only because the customer supplied no sales history beyond two weeks of listing. Unknown values were left unknown, never set to zero.
This sample report uses a fictional company. It shows the format of the package and how the numbers reconcile. It is not evidence of forecast performance.