Fictional meal kit market
Competitor positioning slide with six brands on two axes
A competitor positioning slide is an argument about two axes, so the axes have to be chosen before the brands are placed or the map simply puts the presenter in the best corner. This one covers a fictional meal kit market on price a serve against range on the menu, and names the quadrant nobody occupies.
What is on the slide
- Axes
- Price a serve up the left, from under $9 to over $14. Range on the menu across the bottom, from narrow to wide.
- Premium quadrants
- Premium and narrow: Saltram Table, Two Hands Kitchen. Premium and wide: Verdant Box, Kitchen Nine.
- Value quadrants
- Value and narrow: Pantry Run, Sixpack Meals. Value and wide: no brand here yet, under $9 across 40 meals, the plan aims at this corner.
- Note
- All six brands are fictional, and each quadrant carries its own label rather than the generic leader and laggard names.
When this is the right slide
A two axis quadrant map suits a competitor positioning slide when both axes can be measured from public information and the empty corner is the argument being made.
What to swap it for
Grouping: Effort vs Impact. Swap to the effort and impact grid when the two axes are internal, such as prioritising a backlog, where the items being placed are pieces of work rather than competitors.
What this slide shows
A small eyebrow reads MEAL KITS above the title Where The Six Brands Sit. Under it sits a two by two matrix with axis labels on both edges: price a serve runs up the left from under $9 to over $14, and range on the menu runs across the bottom from narrow to wide. The top left cell, premium and narrow, holds Saltram Table and Two Hands Kitchen. The top right, premium and wide, holds Verdant Box and Kitchen Nine. The bottom left, value and narrow, holds Pantry Run and Sixpack Meals. The bottom right cell is labelled Value, wide: the gap, and instead of brand names it carries three lines: no brand here yet, under $9 across 40 meals, and the plan aims at this corner. All six brands are fictional. Each quadrant carries its own label rather than the layout defaults, so the four corners read in the language of this market instead of as generic leader and laggard boxes.
When this is the right slide
Use it in a pitch or a strategy paper where the argument is about where a market is crowded and where it is not. It suits a fundraising deck, a category review or a product plan, and it is at its strongest when the empty quadrant is the thing being proposed. It is the wrong slide when the comparison is really about features, since a matrix cannot show that one product has rostering and another does not: a tick and cross matrix does that in seven rows. It is also wrong when only one or two competitors exist, because four quadrants with three names in them looks like a map drawn to reach a conclusion. And it is wrong when the two axes are not independent, for example price and quality, where every brand lands on a diagonal and the grid adds nothing.
How to adapt it
First, choose axes that a stranger could use to place a brand without asking the presenter. Price, range, speed, coverage and contract length all work; innovation, focus and quality do not. Second, put at least two brands in every occupied quadrant, or explain why a corner has one. A single lonely brand is usually a sign that the axis thresholds were drawn to create the gap. Third, state the specification the gap implies. Under $9 a serve across 40 meals is a testable target, and it turns the empty corner into a plan rather than an observation. If the axes are internal rather than market facing, for example effort against impact for a backlog, use the effort and impact layout, which is built for prioritising work rather than placing rivals.
What makes this slide work
Both axes are measurable, not adjectives
Price a serve runs from under $9 to over $14, and range on the menu runs from narrow to wide. Anyone can check where a brand sits by opening its menu and its checkout. Axes labelled innovation and customer focus cannot be checked by anyone, which is why maps built on them place the presenter in the top right every time.
The empty quadrant is labelled as the gap
Value, wide: the gap, with the lines no brand here yet, under $9 across 40 meals, and the plan aims at this corner. Naming the empty corner turns the slide from a description into a proposal, and it states the specification the gap implies, which is the number the audience will test.
Six brands, evenly spread, none of them padding
Saltram Table and Two Hands Kitchen sit premium and narrow. Verdant Box and Kitchen Nine sit premium and wide. Pantry Run and Sixpack Meals sit value and narrow. Two per occupied quadrant means no corner is represented by a single outlier, which is the usual way a positioning map manufactures an empty space that is not really empty.
Questions people ask
How do you choose the two axes for a positioning map?
Pick two things a customer trades off when buying, and that anyone could measure from public information. Price against range works because both are on a website. Innovation against customer focus does not, because nobody outside the room can place a brand on either, which makes the whole map unfalsifiable.
How many competitors should be plotted?
Six to eight, with at least two in every occupied quadrant. One brand alone in a corner usually means the axis thresholds were chosen to produce that result. If a market genuinely has three players, a positioning map is the wrong slide and a landscape table with a row each will tell the audience more.
Should the presenting company be on the map?
Only if it is already trading in the market. A company that is proposing to enter belongs in the gap as a target rather than as a plotted brand, which is how this slide handles it: the empty quadrant carries the specification instead of a name. Plotting an unlaunched product beside real competitors overstates the position.
What makes an empty quadrant credible?
A specification rather than a label. Under $9 a serve across 40 meals is checkable, so an investor can ask whether the unit economics support it. An empty corner marked opportunity is just a claim, and the first question will be whether anyone has tried and failed there, which the slide should be ready to answer.
What is the difference between this and a SWOT?
A SWOT describes one organisation across four fixed categories, two internal and two external, and position within a quadrant means nothing. A positioning map places several organisations against two continuous axes, where position is the whole point. The two are often confused because both are drawn as a two by two grid.
When should a positioning map be split into two slides?
Split when a market has two distinct segments with different economics, for example household subscriptions and corporate catering, because a single map forces brands that never compete into the same grid. Split also when the evidence behind each placement needs to be shown, which usually becomes a table on the following slide.
Build your own in about a minute
The button below opens the generator with this use case already described. Change the wording to match your own, generate, then edit anything you like.
Make one like thisOther slide examples
Competitive landscape slide with four rivals in a table
A competitive landscape slide is judged on whether the rivals get the same treatment as the company presenting it, because an investor reads the row about the presenter first and the rest with suspicion. This one belongs to Lumen Ledger, a fictional bookkeeping tool, and gives all five providers the same four columns.
Problem solution slide with three paired problems
A problem solution slide fails when it lists problems on the left and features on the right, because nothing on the right answers anything in particular on the left. This one belongs to Kerbside, a fictional kerbside charging business, and every fix sits directly opposite the problem it solves.
Build vs buy slide with one costed verdict a side
A build versus buy slide decided on the build price alone always picks buy, because the build number arrives as a single project figure and the licence arrives as a small annual one. This one belongs to Westport Health District, a fictional health service, and compares the two over five years rather than over the first eighteen months.
Want the steps in the builder? Read Add charts, maps and diagrams to slides, then Make a pitch presentation with AI. For everything this generator can do, see the slide maker.
Written and checked by the OneCraft team. Last checked .