1. Identifying margin and decision-making opportunities
We compared Portside with food importers and distributors across North America, Europe and Asia. The work showed that Portside could improve gross margin without changing its core model. Private-label products looked attractive in categories where customers were less attached to brands and more willing to switch. Portside also used largely the same pricing across channels, even though margins and service costs varied, while sales incentives rewarded revenue more than gross profit. Procurement was another opportunity. The team relied heavily on experience to time purchases, without a repeatable framework for deciding whether to import or buy locally.
2. Redesigning the commercial model
We rebuilt Portside’s commercial model around the economics of each sale. We redesigned pricing by channel, account size and service level. We also changed the incentive structure so the sales team earned more when it increased gross profit, rather than only top-line revenue. Targets now account for product mix, returns and the cost to serve each customer.
We analyzed profitability by channel and allocated fixed costs more clearly across the business. Management now has a practical break-even view for each route to market and minimum margin thresholds by channel. This makes it easier to decide where the sales team should focus when working capital is tight.
3. Building procurement intelligence and demand planning
Portside needed better answers to two practical questions: when should it import rather than buy locally, and how much should it buy?
For timing, we built an SPS framework using government import permit data, expected timing of arrival of imports and domestic supply. It gives the team clear signals on when to import, when to buy locally and when to stay cautious.
For volume, we built a forecasting approach at the customer and product level. It uses real sales patterns to estimate future demand by segment, giving the team a clearer view of what customers are likely to need. Together, these tools give Portside a repeatable way to decide both the timing and size of each purchase. The team can rely less on intuition and reduce the risk of importing into a weak market. Many of Portside’s customers do not plan demand either, so the forecasting work also helps Portside advise its accounts and build stronger relationships with them.
At the same time, we mapped the requirements for a rule-based pricing and approval tool. The proposed system combines pricing logic, approval workflows and data capture. It would reduce pricing inconsistencies, apply margin rules more reliably and produce cleaner quote data for future analysis.
4. Focusing the expansion, and the sourcing structure behind it
The founders had several options for the next phase of growth. We tested each one against how Portside makes money and against what comparable companies had done. We then gave the founders a direct view on the few options worth backing, so they could focus their time and capital instead of spreading both across every possibility.
We also assessed two options for international sourcing and trading: an offshore trading entity and a more direct sourcing setup. The question was which structure could lower financing costs and retain more of the sourcing margin as volumes grow, giving any future expansion a stronger economic base.
5. Capital structure reset
Alongside the operating work, we mapped Portside’s balance sheet and full debt stack. A large share of its borrowing was in short-term, high-cost facilities, which created constant refinancing pressure. We prepared a financing package that connects the operating improvements to a credible financial plan. It includes a clean three-statement model and forecast, a consolidated view of historical and expected performance, and a structured data room with the main operating and commercial materials lenders will need.
We are now speaking with credit providers on Portside’s behalf to refinance expensive short-term debt into a more stable mix of term loans and working capital lines. The aim is to lower the blended cost of capital, extend repayment periods and give management room to plan growth without month-to-month refinancing pressure.
