Go or no go is a decision, not a forecast
A leading LPG producer was assessing whether Vietnam was a market worth entering.
Four things had to be understood before that call could be made. The local distribution networks, consumer brand loyalty, the government regulation covering grey market activity, and how brands deal with lost sales.
A feasibility study that answers three of those four is not a feasibility study. Market entry decisions fail on the question nobody asked.
Six weeks, three regions, and more than twenty conversations
The work was an on ground field programme running six weeks, with more than twenty structured interviews across North, Central and South Vietnam.
Distributors, depot operators and industry veterans. Distributor economics were covered in detail: margins, credit terms and the depot level stocking patterns that differ by region.
Consumer loyalty and switching behaviour were mapped across the HORECA, industrial, retail and household segments, because a distributor network serves all four differently.
The regulatory landscape governing grey market and underfilled cylinder activity was covered, alongside the enforcement gaps in it. The top five incumbent brands were positioned on their go to market models.
Findings were triangulated against import statistics and regulatory filings, so the sizing rests on more than what twenty people said.
A number, a map, and a list of who to buy
The report documented market size and market share, broken out by segment across HORECA, industrial, retail and household, and by competitor.
It identified acquisition ready local distributors, with an early view of their scale and readiness, and the acquisition multiples prevailing in the market.
And it set out in detail what success would require if the client chose to enter.
That is the shape a go or no go answer has to take. Not a recommendation on its own, but the evidence a board can weigh either way.
