Framework

Satellite vs Territorial Decision

TL;DR

A decision matrix for consciously choosing between territorial defense and satellite strategy.

A decision matrix for consciously choosing between territorial defense and satellite strategy. Sometimes the best territorial strategy is no territory - satellite strategy exploits defended territories without defensive costs.

When to Use Satellite vs Territorial Decision

Use in Phase 4 of territorial strategy (Month 4-6) for at-risk or economically indefensible territories. Also use when entering new markets as challenger or when current DI% exceeds 40%.

How to Apply

1

Evaluate Defensibility

Assess whether boundaries can be defended. High defensibility: Clear differentiation, high switching costs, strong brand/relationships, network effects, regulatory protection. Low defensibility: Competitors can easily enter, no switching costs, commoditized offering, no network effects.

Questions to Ask

  • Do customers have high switching costs?
  • Is your offering differentiated?
  • Do you have incumbent advantages?

Outputs

  • Defensibility rating: High or Low
2

Assess Strategic Importance

Determine if territory is core or adjacent to strategy. Core: Must control this space for business model to work, losing means losing business. Adjacent: Nice to have, can succeed without controlling, better to exploit than defend.

Questions to Ask

  • Must you control this territory for your business model?
  • Can you succeed without owning this space?

Outputs

  • Strategic importance: Core or Adjacent
3

Determine Your Position

Assess incumbent versus challenger status. Incumbent: Established presence, existing relationships, brand recognition in territory. Challenger: Late entrant, no existing base, must win customers from incumbents.

Outputs

  • Position: Incumbent or Challenger
4

Apply Decision Matrix

Combine factors to select strategy. High defensibility + Core + Incumbent = DEFEND INTENSIVELY. High defensibility + Core + Challenger = SATELLITE (grow until defensible). High defensibility + Adjacent + Incumbent = DEFEND MODERATELY. High defensibility + Adjacent + Challenger = SATELLITE. Low defensibility + Core = REDEFINE TERRITORY. Low defensibility + Adjacent = SATELLITE or EXIT.

Outputs

  • Strategic choice: Defend Intensively, Defend Moderately, Satellite, Redefine, or Exit
5

Monitor Satellite Saturation

If choosing satellite strategy, monitor for saturation. Market share ceiling: 15-30%. Competitive response trigger: 20-25% penetration. Complexity trap: resist SKU/service expansion. Inter-satellite competition: >30% combined satellite share compresses returns.

Questions to Ask

  • Have you exceeded 20% penetration triggering incumbent response?
  • Are you competing more with other satellites than with territory holders?

Outputs

  • Satellite sustainability assessment

Satellite vs Territorial Decision Appears in 1 Chapters

Framework introduced in this chapter

Related Mechanisms for Satellite vs Territorial Decision

Related Companies for Satellite vs Territorial Decision

Related Organisms for Satellite vs Territorial Decision