Sample result
Scenario Simulator for Restaurants
The owner asked this:«My rent goes up 1.2 million and I'm thinking of raising prices 8% to cover it. Is it enough? Or should I open Sundays instead?»
① Block A · The house model, validated
| Piece | Figure | Source | Assumption if any |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly sales | 38.0 M | POS, against their mean of the last 8 weeks | — |
| Average contribution margin | 62% | Costed menu, last 3 months | Covers the 12 references concentrating 80% of sales; the rest is left out and said so |
| Fixed costs | 16.4 M (rent 4.2) | Books | — |
| Break-even | 26.5 M/month | Calculated | — |
| Current cushion | 11.5 M above break-even | Calculated | — |
Validation: the model reproduces last month's real profit within 3% 🟢 — fit to simulate.
SUPUESTO: the margin per sales channel was split using the platform commission and the packaging cost the house handed over. If the real commission were 4 points higher, the Sunday scenario changes its verdict, because its sales arrive more through delivery than through the dining room. The figure can be moved inside the file.
What was NOT used: no industry benchmark elasticity. The volume lost to a price rise enters as a declared, movable assumption, not as a fact.
② Block B · The scenario matrix
| Scenario | Declared assumptions | Profit | Cushion above break-even | How far it holds | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A · Absorb the increase | Nothing else changes | Drops 1.2 M: 7.2 to 6.0 | Falls from 30% to 26% | Holds as long as sales do not fall | Survives, but with no room for error left |
| B · Raise prices 8% | Assumed volume loss: 3% | Up 0.9 M net | Rises to 33% | Breaks even if the real loss reaches 6% | Covers the rent, with its most arguable assumption already written down |
| C · Open Sundays | Sunday sales at 60% of Saturday; +1 payroll shift; delivery margin, not dining-room margin | +1.4 M/month if the sales arrive | Rises to 34% | Stops paying if Sunday sells under 1.9 M/day | Tested over 8 Sundays against that cut-off figure |
The verdict is a comparison, not an order: B covers the increase with less risk than C, and C can be tested AFTERWARDS with its deadline and its cut-off figure. The owner signs the decision.
The full example has 1 more part(s): you see them inside the library, with your account.