Salta al contenuto principale

MarginLab Case Investigations
Illustrative case
Case 05 · Price-volume decision

Raising Prices 8% With a 6% Drop in Orders

The price rises from €50 to €54. Orders fall from 1,000 to 940. The commercial response looks mixed, but the contribution calculation shows whether the remaining orders fund the business more effectively.

The business question

Does the extra contribution per retained order outweigh the contribution lost with the 60 missing orders?

Initial evidence
CASE / 05
Price+8%€50 → €54
Orders−6%1,000 → 940
Product revenue+1.52%€50,000 → €50,760
Contribution after acquisition+€2,597.20€7,500 → €10,097.20
The investigationA lower order count can coexist with materially stronger contribution.
Investigation typePrice-volume decision
Evidence basisConstructed dataset
Tax basisExcluding VAT/sales tax
OutcomeScenario-dependent
Methodology note: This is an illustrative ecommerce investigation, not a named merchant, observed customer result or guaranteed outcome. One unit per order. No discounts or refunds in this isolated model. Product cost and fulfillment per unit remain constant, acquisition spend is fixed at €10,000, and shared overhead is excluded.
Evidence 01 · Unit economics

The extra price is partly offset by percentage fees.

Product cost remains €25 and fulfillment remains €6 per order. Payment fees are 3% of realized revenue, so they rise from €1.50 to €1.62 when the price changes.

Per-order contribution before acquisition
MeasureBeforeAfter
Selling price€50.00€54.00
Product cost(€25.00)(€25.00)
Fulfillment(€6.00)(€6.00)
Payment fee: 3%(€1.50)(€1.62)
Unit contribution€17.50€21.38
Contribution gained per retained order€4.00 price increase − €0.12 extra payment fee = €3.88

The unit contribution increase is approximately 22.2%, substantially larger than the 8% price increase.

Evidence 02 · Before versus after

Total contribution rises despite fewer orders.

Apply the new unit economics to the 940 orders that remain. Acquisition spend is held constant, so the comparison does not assume a marketing saving from lower volume.

Monthly economics; euros
MeasureBefore: 1,000 ordersAfter: 940 orders
Revenue50,000.0050,760.00
COGS(25,000.00)(23,500.00)
Fulfillment(6,000.00)(5,640.00)
Payment fees(1,500.00)(1,522.80)
Contribution before acquisition17,500.0020,097.20
Acquisition spend(10,000.00)(10,000.00)
Contribution after acquisition7,500.0010,097.20

Revenue grows just 1.52%, while contribution after acquisition grows approximately 34.6%. This is contribution before shared overhead, interest and tax, not a claim about final net profit.

Evidence 03 · Explain the improvement

The retained-order gain exceeds the lost-order contribution.

The 940 remaining orders each gain €3.88 contribution. The 60 lost orders would each have contributed €17.50 at the original price.

Contribution bridge940 × €3.88 − 60 × €17.50 = €2,597.20

€3,647.20 gained on retained orders less €1,050 lost on missing orders.

Finding 1

Surface metric

Sixty orders disappear. An order-count target would label that a deterioration.

Finding 2

Economic metric

The remaining orders retain enough additional contribution to more than compensate. The economics support the price change under the stated assumptions.

This decomposition avoids the claim that every euro of price increase becomes profit. It recognizes percentage fees and the contribution lost when customers stop buying.

Evidence 04 · Demand sensitivity

The result has room for a larger order decline.

To preserve the original €17,500 contribution before acquisition, the new price needs approximately 818.52 orders. Whole-order break-even therefore requires at least 819 orders.

Sensitivity at €21.38 unit contribution and €10,000 acquisition spend
Orders after price changeOrder declineContribution after acquisitionChange versus before
9406%€10,097.20+€2,597.20
85015%€8,173.00+€673.00
81918.1%€7,510.22+€10.22
80020%€7,104.00−€396.00
The observed 6% decline is comfortably inside this modeled boundary. The threshold does not predict future demand or guarantee that the same response persists.
Decision test · Check the omitted costs

The €2,597.20 improvement is a budget, not a certainty.

The change can absorb up to €2,597.20 of additional monthly burden before its advantage disappears. Higher service costs, extra incentives or weaker repeat demand could consume that amount.

Finding 1

Acquisition response

If maintaining 940 orders requires more than €2,597.20 of additional acquisition spend, the current-period advantage disappears.

Finding 2

Return response

A price-sensitive customer mix may change return behavior. Add any difference in mature refund contribution instead of assuming the no-refund model applies indefinitely.

Finding 3

Repeat demand

A lower repeat rate can matter beyond the month. Compare acquisition cohorts at the new price with a credible control over a defined horizon.

A uniform price change can also alter product mix. If customers substitute into cheaper or higher-cost products, recompute the portfolio result rather than multiplying one product’s margin across the store.

Validation · Retain the change if the economic gain persists

Test price, demand and contribution on the same basis.

The numerical result favors the increase. The operational decision is to retain or expand it only while the measured contribution advantage remains after mature returns and any new spend.

  1. Use a credible comparison

    Balance seasonality, traffic quality and promotional activity. A before/after change alone may include unrelated demand shifts.

  2. Measure realized price

    Confirm that coupons, bundles or manual concessions have not reduced the €54 actually collected.

  3. Watch the decision boundary

    At unchanged unit economics, fewer than 819 orders fails to preserve baseline contribution. Recalculate if costs or acquisition spend change.

  4. Extend the customer window

    Check repeat contribution and customer complaints before treating a one-month gain as a durable pricing improvement.

The pricing strategy guide provides the broader context for segmentation and positioning. This case supplies the numerical hurdle, not a universal prescription for an 8% increase.

Case conclusion · quantified decision

The price increase improves contribution by €2,597.20.

At €54 and 940 orders, the business retains €10,097.20 after acquisition, versus €7,500 before. The 6% order decline is more than compensated by stronger unit economics.

Calculated outcome

Revenue grows 1.52%; contribution grows 34.6%.

The improvement reflects higher contribution on retained orders after percentage payment fees.

Decision threshold

At least 819 orders preserve the baseline.

That threshold assumes €21.38 unit contribution and unchanged €10,000 acquisition spend.

Keep the price decision tied to total contribution and a defined customer horizon. Recalculate the threshold whenever costs or realized price change.
Continue the investigation

Model the price and volume boundary

Use your own variable cost and target contribution before choosing the price increase to test.

All calculations are illustrative. The decision depends on the stated cost, demand and timing assumptions.