Case Studies
Real Brands. Real Numbers.
Zero New Revenue Required.
Every dollar recovered in these case studies came from margin that already existed inside the business — not from new revenue, new products, or new customers. The Shelf-to-Savings™ framework exists to find what’s already there.
| Brand | Revenue | Margin Recovered | Engagement | Timeline |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Regional Craft Brewery | $4.2M | $180,000 | Elite | 90 Days |
 CPG Specialty Food Brand | $7M | $210,000 | Elite | Full Diagnostic |
 Specialty Hot Sauce Brand | $1.8M | $67,000 | FPT | Half-Day Session |
 RTD Beverage Brand | $3.4M | $104,000 (Yr 1) | Advisory | 12 Months |
 Better-For-You Snack Brand | $5.1M | $156,000 + Funded | Elite | Full Diagnostic |
🍺 Elite Engagement · Craft Brewery
$180,000 Recovered in 90 Days — Without a Single New Customer
A regional craft brewery had grown steadily to $4.2M in revenue over six years. Taproom traffic was consistent, their flagship IPA had strong regional distribution, and the owner was well-known in the local beer community. But every month ended with less cash than the month before. Revenue was up 11% year-over-year — and yet they couldn’t breathe.
Before investing in a sales push, they brought us in for a full Elite engagement across all five layers of the Shelf-to-Savings™ framework.
What We Found
| Layer | Finding | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| L1 — COGS | Grain supplier: 3-year relationship, volume tier pricing never applied retroactively | +$42K/yr |
| L1 — COGS | Co-packer contract had downtime charges built in — rescheduled to eliminate idle billing | +$18K/yr |
| L2 — Overhead | Equipment depreciation fully allocated to flagship seasonal SKU — suppressed margin by 15 points | Fixed |
| L3 — Working Capital | AP: 14-day terms. AR: 55-day collections. Cash conversion cycle restructured from 61 → 32 days | $47K freed |
| L4 — Pricing | Taproom pricing unchanged for 22 months while grain costs rose 11% | +$31K/yr |
| L5 — Growth Tax | $8,400/yr in unused software + cold storage contract at prior volume | +$22K/yr |
The Situation
Revenue Was Up. Cash Was Gone.
The owner's natural conclusion was that they needed more sales. What the Elite engagement revealed was that the brewery's most profitable product line appeared to have a 23% gross margin on paper — the actual contribution margin was 38%. They had been systematically under-investing in marketing their best SKU because the internal numbers were wrong.
The working capital analysis alone revealed that the brewery was paying its hop supplier in 14 days while waiting 55 days to collect from distributors. That mismatch — not a lack of sales — was the engine behind their perpetual cash crunch.
With their cash conversion cycle cut nearly in half, the owner eliminated a $60,000 line of credit draw they had been relying on monthly — freeing up $4,800/year in interest and restoring full credit availability.
"Scotty found $180,000 sitting in our own P&L that we'd been walking past every single month. I wish we'd done this three years ago."
— Brewery Owner, $4.2M Revenue
Revenue growth cannot fix a cost structure problem. When a brand's financial reporting misallocates overhead into product costs, every strategic decision — pricing, marketing spend, SKU prioritization — is made on false data. The numbers have to be right before the strategy can be right.
🥫 Elite Engagement · CPG Brand
$210,000 Identified — A Profitable Brand Building on a Broken Foundation
A specialty food CPG brand had crossed $7M with distribution in three national retail channels and a growing DTC component. The problem surfaced when the founder tried to model what the business would look like at $10M. The margin math didn’t work. Even assuming the same gross margin percentage, projected free cash flow at $10M was lower than today. Something was wrong with the foundation.
What We Found
| Layer | Finding | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| L1 — COGS | Packaging redesign 9 months prior added 9% to per-unit manufacturing cost — never reflected in pricing | +$63K/yr |
| L1 — COGS | 3 SKUs: incorrect BOM after formula adjustment — reported COGS 6% below actual | +$28K/yr |
| L2 — Overhead | 3PL contract renewed at prior volume tier — current volume qualified for lower rate | +$19K/yr |
| L3 — Working Capital | 90-day pre-build cycle renegotiated to 60 days — freed $55K in working capital | $55K freed |
| L4 — Pricing | Club channel: 3 SKUs at negative contribution once trade/freight allocated. Repriced 2, exited 1. | +$44K/yr |
| L4 — Pricing | DTC pricing unchanged since launch — hero SKU increase, no measurable conversion impact | +$31K/yr |
| L5 — Growth Tax | Broker commission structure not renegotiated after hitting volume milestone | +$25K/yr |
The Situation
Growing Fast. Building on a Broken Foundation.
Their accounting tracked revenue and COGS at a blended level. When we disaggregated it, we found three of their fourteen SKUs were generating negative contribution margin in the club channel once trade spend, slotting amortization, and per-unit freight were properly allocated.
The packaging redesign alone had been silently costing $63,000 per year for nine months before anyone noticed. And the growth model that previously didn't work at $10M was rebuilt on a foundation projecting $280,000+ in additional free cash flow at that revenue mark.
The exit from one underperforming club SKU freed up co-packer capacity immediately redeployed to their highest-margin retail item.
"I was planning a $150,000 marketing push to get to $10M. Scotty showed me I was building on a broken foundation. We fixed the foundation first — and now the growth actually means something.
— CPG Founder, $7M Revenue
Key Lesson
🌶️ FPT · Specialty Hot Sauce Brand
$67,000 Found in a Single Half-Day Session
A two-founder specialty hot sauce brand had scaled from farmers markets to regional grocery distribution over four years. At $1.8M in revenue, they weren’t in crisis. They were profitable. But one founder had a nagging feeling that something was off. They weren’t ready for an ongoing relationship — they just wanted someone to look under the hood.
FPT
Engagement Type
Half-Day
What We Found
| Layer | Finding | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| L1 — COGS | Pepper mash supplier: volume tier crossed 14 months ago — never renegotiated. Retroactive credit secured. | +$31K/yr |
| L1 — COGS | Glass bottle supplier: competitor quote used as leverage — new rate secured on 3-month review cycle | +$9.5K/yr |
| L4 — Pricing | Regional grocery SKU #2: net contribution negative after scan allowance + ad fees. Terms renegotiated. | +$18K/yr |
| L2 — Overhead | Shared kitchen lease: usage tracking showed brand was over-allocated vs. actual hours | +$8.4K/yr |
The Situation
Profitable — and Still Leaving $67,000 on the Table.
The biggest finding came in the first 20 minutes: their pepper mash supplier had a volume pricing schedule that kicked in at a threshold the brand had crossed 14 months earlier. No one had noticed. No one had asked. The supplier had simply continued billing at the prior rate.
The supplier also agreed to a retroactive credit for 14 months of overbilling — a one-time cash recovery of approximately $36,000 that the founders used to retire a short-term equipment loan early.
Both founders described the FPT as the most valuable four hours they had spent on the business in three years. They subsequently enrolled in a quarterly Advisory retainer.
"We thought we were doing okay. Turns out 'okay' was costing us $67,000 a year. The FPT paid for itself in the first conversation."
Key Lesson
You don't need to be in financial distress to benefit from a structured financial diagnostic. This brand was profitable and growing — and still had $67,000 in recoverable margin sitting in plain sight. The FPT is designed for exactly this founder.
🥤 Advisory-Only · RTD Beverage Brand
$104,000 in Year One — Ongoing Advisory That Paid for Itself 11×
A founder-led kombucha and RTD wellness brand had landed distribution with a major natural foods retailer. The deal required a 6× increase in production volume in 90 days, a $90,000 inventory pre-build, and retailer compliance specs she had never dealt with. Her bookkeeper could record transactions. Her CPA could file returns. Neither could tell her whether the deal would make money.
Advisory
Engagement Type
11×
What We Found
| Layer | Finding | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| L3 — Working Capital | Retailer deal structured as national launch. Rephased to regional rollout — reduced pre-build from $90K to $54K | $36K saved |
| L1 — COGS | Core ingredient (ginger extract) — price increase accepted 8 months prior without benchmarking | +$22K/yr |
| L3 — Working Capital | Distributor billing error: incorrect case quantity billed for 7 months. Full credit recovered. | $14.4K recovered |
| L2 — Overhead | Co-packer minimum run fee: restructured to match actual cadence vs. fixed weekly minimums | +$18K/yr |
| L4 — Pricing | DTC subscription: price increase test on new subscribers only — no churn impact, rolled out broadly | +$13.6K/yr |
The Situation
A Deal That Looked Amazing — And Would Have Destroyed Cash Flow.
The modeling revealed that the retailer deal, as originally structured, would generate a cash deficit in month four regardless of sell-through — because the inventory pre-build would exhaust the line of credit before the first retailer payment arrived. The deal wasn't bad. The timing was.
Rephasing the production ramp to align with the retailer's regional rollout reduced the initial pre-build from $90,000 to $54,000 — keeping her within capacity and preserving her operating buffer.
The brand finished year one at $3.4M with its first-ever positive cash position heading into Q1 production season.
"I used to make big decisions on gut feel and hope. Now every major decision gets modeled first. That's the thing Scotty actually changed — not just the numbers, but how I think about the numbers"
Key Lesson
The most expensive financial decisions a founder makes are often the ones that look like wins. A major retail deal, a new distribution partnership, a co-packer contract extension — each of these can quietly destroy cash flow if the structure is wrong.
🍿 Elite Engagement · Better-For-You Snack Brand
$156,000 Recovered — And an Institutional Round Closed at 40% Higher Valuation
A better-for-you snack brand at $5.1M had received soft interest from two strategic investors. Both had asked for clean financials and a credible unit economics story. The problem: the brand’s internal financials were structured in a way that obscured profitability. They needed a financial overhaul — not to hide anything, but to present the business in a way that reflected how it actually performed.
Elite
Engagement Type
Funded
What We Found
| Layer | Finding | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| L1 — COGS | SKU-level cost rebuild across 4 sites: 2 SKUs were 12 points less profitable than reported | +$41K/yr |
| L1 — COGS | Packaging supplier: 3-quote benchmark revealed 14% cost reduction available at current volume | +$33K/yr |
| L2 — Overhead | Facility overhead allocated equally across all sites regardless of volume — rebuilt to actual allocation | Fixed |
| L3 — Working Capital | AP terms restructured with 2 key suppliers: Net 15 → Net 45. Offset against Net 75 retail AR. | $48K freed |
| L4 — Pricing | Broker commission structure: startup-tier rate still in effect 3 years post-launch | +$28K/yr |
| L5 — Growth Tax | 3PL: volume milestone passed 6 months prior — lower per-pallet rate applied retroactively | +$14K/yr |
The Situation
Good Numbers — That No One Could Explain Clearly.
The COGS rebuild was significant: the brand produced 9 SKUs across 4 manufacturing sites with costs tracked at the site level, not the SKU level. Once we rebuilt the cost allocation properly, two SKUs that had been reported as the brand's strongest performers turned out to have contribution margins nearly 12 points below what management believed.
The financial restatement produced a business that looked significantly more attractive on paper — not because performance had changed, but because the performance was now clearly visible. Both investors converted to term sheets within 60 days of receiving the rebuilt financials.
The brand closed its institutional round at a valuation 40% higher than the founder's original estimate.
"We raised money at a 40% higher valuation than I expected — and I think a big part of that was that our financials finally told the real story. Scotty didn't change the business. He made the business legible."
— Founder, $5.1M Snack Brand
Key Lesson
Institutional investors don't just buy revenue — they buy financial clarity. A brand with $5M in revenue and murky unit economics is worth less than a brand with $5M in revenue and a clean, defensible margin story. The financial cleanup that unlocks better capital terms will always cost less than the dilution it prevents.