Merchandising
AuraScore 83/100

Promotional Cannibalization and Basket Lift Brief

Model cross-elasticity, affinity baskets, and net margin lift to construct a promotional trade brief.

Use this template prior to launching major retail promotions to determine if promotional discounts yield true incremental margin. It prevents revenue leakage caused by subsidizing existing basket demand.

Template

Role: Principal Merchandising Econometrician specializing in cross-elasticity and omnichannel promotional analytics.

Context

  • Event Title: {{promotional_campaign_name}}
  • Hero Product Selection: {{lead_promoted_sku_cluster}}
  • Target Cross-Sell Domains: {{adjacent_category_list}}
  • Required Affinity Score: {{target_basket_affinity_score}}
  • Blended Margin Floor: {{minimum_net_blended_margin}}
  • Historical Halo Multiplier: {{historical_halo_ratio}}

Task

Generate a comprehensive promotional analytics brief quantifying cross-product cannibalization, halo basket expansion, and net incremental margin for {{promotional_campaign_name}} featuring {{lead_promoted_sku_cluster}} alongside {{adjacent_category_list}}.

Method

  1. Quantify the direct promotional lift and baseline sales subtraction for {{lead_promoted_sku_cluster}}.
  2. Compute cross-elasticity coefficients between the lead items and substitute SKUs in the portfolio.
  3. Estimate total cannibalized dollar volume diverted from full-margin substitute products.
  4. Apply {{historical_halo_ratio}} to project cross-category basket attachment across {{adjacent_category_list}}.
  5. Filter projected attached sales against {{target_basket_affinity_score}} to isolate true incremental buyers.
  6. Construct a blended margin waterfall validating compliance with {{minimum_net_blended_margin}}.
  7. Define targeted merchandise placement, cross-merchandising rules, and post-promotion exit triggers.

Constraints

  • MUST prove that net blended transaction margin meets or exceeds {{minimum_net_blended_margin}}.
  • MUST NOT treat gross promotional sales as purely incremental without subtracting cannibalization volume.
  • Clearly segregate subsidized baseline demand from true halo expansion.
  • Cross-merchandising suggestions must be limited to {{adjacent_category_list}}.

Output format

  • Executive Recommendation (promotional viability decision and key metrics)
  • Cannibalization vs. Halo Waterfall (numeric breakdown of gross lift, cannibalized margin, and attached profit)
  • Basket Attachment Strategy (co-merchandising pairings and placement rules)
  • Risk Controls & Promotional Guardrails (minimum purchase quantities, caps, and price fences)

Self-review

  • Did you explicitly deduct substitute product loss from total margin gains?
  • Is the resulting aggregate margin strictly above {{minimum_net_blended_margin}}?
  • Are attachment assumptions backed by {{historical_halo_ratio}}?
AuraScore breakdown
83/100Provisional
Instruction clarity15/15 · Strong

Explicit role, a named task, and discrete steps the model can follow.

Context architecture12/12 · Strong

Background, inputs and variables the model needs before it starts.

Constraint engineering10/12 · Adequate

Hard boundaries — what the model must and must not do.

Output specification6/14 · Thin

A named, field-level shape for the response.

Reasoning structure10/10 · Strong

Ordered work items that force analysis before an answer.

Model compatibility10/10 · Strong

Length and structure that travel across frontier models.

Token efficiency7/10 · Adequate

Signal density — instruction weight without padding.

Reusability7/7 · Strong

Documented variables so the scaffold adapts to new inputs.

Robustness5/5 · Strong

Quality bar, assumptions and behaviour when inputs are thin.

Observed performance1/5 · Thin

How much real usage the template has behind it.

ecommerce-retail
ecom-merchandising
complex-reasoning-analysis-math
promotions
cannibalization
basket-analysis