Sample result
Price Simulator for Restaurants
The owner asked this:«I want to raise the Bandeja de la casa by 7%. How many customers can I lose before the increase stops being worth it?»
① The baseline and the number that decides
One dish, not the menu: the Bandeja de la casa, the highest-rotation of the three star dishes. Last 30 days, net price before consumption tax. Standard recipe signed 41 days ago — within the 3 months, so it can be simulated.
| Dish | Current price | Recipe cost | Unit margin | Units this month | Total margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bandeja de la casa | 60,500 | 22,400 | 38,100 | 620 | 23,622,000 |
Price to test: 64,700 (+6.9%), which on the menu with consumption tax lands at 69,900 — inside the 28,000-to-72,000 band, so this is still a price simulation and not a repositioning. New unit margin: 42,300.
The break-even point: 23,622,000 ÷ 42,300 = 559 units. Today it sells 620. You can lose 61 units, 9.8%, and end up exactly where you are today. That is the number, and it is the only thing this simulator asserts.
SUPUESTO: the three scenario drops —5, 10 and 15 points— are not measured elasticity: they are the three numbers the owner chose to read the risk, and they are declared as such. Source: the session itself. Confirmation comes from counting units for four straight weeks after the move, not from this table. If the real drop were 12 points, the move would lose 0.5 M a month instead of gaining.
SUPUESTO: the 32% food cost ceiling this assistant's costing rule carries is not an industry benchmark: it is the house's own cap. Source: the assistant's own body (MASTERESTAURANT® Methodology). The Bandeja runs at 37.0% today at the current menu price; if the ceiling the house wanted to defend were 37%, this simulation would have no reason to exist.
② The three scenarios, and the verdict against the house's goal
| Scenario | Assumed drop | Units | Unit margin | Month's total margin | Difference vs today |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | — | 620 | 38,100 | 23,622,000 | — |
| Optimistic | −5% | 589 | 42,300 | 24,914,700 | +1,292,700 |
| Middle | −10% | 558 | 42,300 | 23,603,400 | −18,600 |
| Conservative | −15% | 527 | 42,300 | 22,292,100 | −1,329,900 |
None of the three is a forecast: they are three readings of the same arithmetic under three written assumptions. The middle scenario gains nothing —it drops 18,600 pesos a month, practically sitting on the break-even point— and that is what to look at: the move is only worth it if the real drop stays below 9.8%.
A conditional recommendation, and its condition is not arithmetic. This house's declared goal is to lift operating margin from 8% to 14% in 12 months without raising menu prices. Under that constraint this move does not get executed, and there is no elegant way to say it. One way out remains that never touches the printed menu: move only the delivery app's uplift, from 15% to 23%. It is worth 0.3 M a month in the optimistic scenario and 0.06 M in the middle one. On the house's 214.0 M that is barely over a tenth of a point of the six the goal asks for. It is not the lever.
The same arithmetic, run backwards. To leave the margin of the best of the three scenarios —24.9 M— without touching the price, the Bandeja's recipe cost would have to fall from 22,400 to 20,315: 2,100 pesos a plate, 9.3% of the costing. That costs not a single customer. In this house the Bandeja's price is not the problem: the problem is the 22,400.
The full example has 1 more part(s): you see them inside the library, with your account.