A Biogal CEO cut the company's sales focus from 250 territories down to a handful by analyzing which markets generated 70% of revenue. The decision weighed sales volume, regulatory barriers, and distributor strength, letting them concentrate resources on what actually mattered.
Questions this video answers
The decision was based on analyzing territories by sales contribution, regulatory difficulty, and distributor strength. A small group of territories generated about 70 % of sales, and with limited resources, it made sense to prioritize those high‑impact markets rather than spread effort thinly across 250 regions.
Chapters
Biogal exists for 40 years. This is a company owned by Gal-Ed, by a kibbutz. This— the company is manufacturing and selling diagnostic kits for veterinary use all over the world. We have 2 lines of products. One is PCR-based and one is ELISA-based. One is to evaluate and to find the diseases, whether bacterial or viral, that the pets usually have, and the other one is for titer testing to evaluate the rate of immunization of these animals. Fantastic.
Thank you for this. So, a bit of context, you started, you joined the company relatively recently, and when you joined, you inherited a company that was selling into 250 territories. And one of the first moves that you made was to pull the budget from that and to focus on a handful of territories. Can you walk me through that decision? What gave you the confidence to cut sort of that marketing strategy or the marketing budget and to focus into a core number of strategies?
First of all, confidence is not the right word. It's maybe a decision based on some knowledge. But to be honest, I think that the answer is not cutting budget or relocating allocating budget, but to see, to prioritize. Most of the territories are territories that we sell, you know, on a coincidence basis or just a handful of products or a company or a veterinary that asks for the products. So we, at the beginning, we analyzed the territories that were prioritized based on level A, B, C, D, etc. And then we thought, listen, among all the territories, we have several, as you mentioned, handful that make a vast majority of our sales. Let's say something like 70% of the sales. So the idea was that we have limited resources, both personnel and investments. to allocate these personnel into the most selling or the most promising territories was, I think, a logical move. So we had a sort of a funnel. First, the territories that have the higher amount of sales, then the territories where we have less regulatory pushback, and then the territories that the distributor is a good one or that we have good relations with. That was, I think, the logic behind this
