Increase 3 times your chances of landing an offer Register ×

Case prompt

SecuLog is a US company specializing in internet security. They mostly provide desktop log-in applications for government organizations.  

Recently, SecuLog (SL) have been considering expanding into the mobile security market, so as to provide log-in options for their clients on both Android and IOS platforms. 

To do so, they are looking into acquiring a European company, Safe2Bank.

Safe2Bank (S2B) specializes in mobile and banking security and has ongoing contracts with several EU banks. Banking contracts are difficult to obtain and require working within certain conditions in a specially supervised environment (security cameras, restricted access etc.). 

S2B is valued at €250m. 

SL want to know if they should develop their mobile platform capabilities in-house and, if not, how much they should be prepared to bid for S2B. 


Paragraphs highlighted in orange indicate hints for you on how to guide the interviewee through the case.

Paragraphs highlighted in blue can be verbally communicated to the interviewee.

Paragraphs highlighted in green indicate diagrams or tables that can be shared in the “Case exhibits” section.

Detailed solution

Identify the Problem

The candidate should note that the question requires them to analyze the costs and benefits of acquiring S2B vs organic market entry by SL alone.

A good candidate would notice that the two companies operate in slightly different markets and so should ask questions to pinpoint SL’s exact objective, namely: 

Does SL just want to expand into the mobile security sector or is also interested in the mobile banking sector? 

The candidate should realize that there is also an element of market-entry here and thus be prepared to ask some market-entry related questions later on.  

If SL simply wants to develop mobile log-in capabilities for its existing clients, organic entry might be cheaper.  

Lead the analysis

Benefits of acquiring S2B 

The candidate should brainstorm and come up with a structure for the problem. A good structure would consider potential synergies from the merger as well as additional benefits from it. As much as possible, the candidate should opt for a MECE segmentation of the problem, where the additional benefits do not overlap the synergies. One possible structure would be:  


Now, the candidate should deal with the components of their structure systematically. 

Looking closer, the candidate should aim to investigate all of these avenues, starting with revenues.  

Revenues synergies  

The candidate can be given the following information:

Overview: SL will get access to the difficult-to-enter banking market. They will also acquire the expertise to create mobile security, which would give access to other markets and/or allow them to complement their existing value proposition.

Revenues from providing mobile products to its own customers: $150m 

Future revenues from contracts with banks for mobile apps: €500m 

Potential new revenues: there is a growing market of US healthcare providers and insurance companies requiring mobile security. The market is valued at $2bn but it is very concentrated, with three companies holding 30% market share each. 

Additionally, the market is hard to enter because of R&D barriers


The candidate should enquire about this potential new healthcare and insurance market in a structured way. Some potential questions would be: 

how much penetration can SL achieve 

Is this in line with expected ROI?  

Explain to the candidate that analysts estimate SL could get a 5% market share and would expect an ROI of between 8-10% in this market 

The candidate can then calculate the value of the market share: 

2bn x 5% = $100m 

Cost synergies 

The candidate should enquire about potential cost savings, especially in R&D and variable costs. 

They can be provided with the following information:

There would be no R&D cost savings - producing mobile security requires a completely different set of skills, so the departments couldn’t merge

No cost reductions on personnel

However, there would be a significant reduction of 40% in SG&A costs. Current SG&A costs are as follows: SL = $70m; S2B = €40m

There would be no savings on variable costs since we are essentially dealing with two different products

Additional benefits: 

SL may get a competitive edge when acquiring the ability to produce new technology. This, in turn, would increase its brand reputation.


Upon inquiry, the candidate can be provided with the following information regarding risks:

Time-zone differences would make it more difficult to communicate – however, since the projects are fairly independent, not that much communication would be needed

There would also be a currency risk from operating across two currencies with a fluctuating exchange rate.

At this point, the candidate should note that, in acquiring S2B, SL would be entering the banking security market and discuss the fit with the proposed market.

SL has no experience with the banking sector or negotiating contracts in the private sector, but has significant experience negotiating contracts with government entities.

The candidate should now consider the costs and benefits of entering the mobile securities market organically.  

Organic entry costs

The following information can be provided:

SL also has no technical experience with mobile security or the banking sector. It would therefore have to invest in R&D as well as hire software engineers and other personnel to coordinate production of mobile products. The total costs would be $400m. However, if SL chooses only to develop their own products for mobile platforms and sell them to their existing clients, the costs are estimated at $200m.

The US market for mobile security is difficult to enter and the company is behind in terms of R&D. SL estimate it would take 5 years to get up to speed, which would translate into an opportunity cost of $100m/year in the form of loss of revenue from healthcare and insurance providers, as well as $150m/year from loss of revenue from existing customers.

The banking sector is nearly impossible to enter organically, so this would mean a potential loss of €500m of revenue

Therefore, the candidate should realize the entry cost can be divided into:

Cost to enter the mobile market for potential customers:

$400m + €500m + ($150m + $100m) x 5 = $2.25bn    (where €500m = $600m)

Cost to enter the mobile market for existing customers:

$200m + ($150m + $100m) x 5 = $1.45bn  


The candidate can then proceed to calculate how much SL should bid for S2B 

To simplify, we will assume 1EUR = 1.2 USD 

Bid value = Estimated value + Revenue + potential new revenue + cost reduction 

Cost reduction = ($70m + €40m x 1.2) x 40% = 47.2m  $47m  

Therefore: €250m x 1.2 + €500m x 1.2 + $100m + $150m+ $47m = $300 + $600 + $100 +$150m + $47 ≈ $1.2b 

ROI for insurance and medical market: 100m/1.20bn = 8.3% - so, in line with expectations  

Delivering the recommendation 

Based on the analysis the candidate’s recommendations should be along the following lines:

SL should acquire S2B rather than develop capabilities in-house because: 

It allows the possibility to enter two different desired markets quickly and it is cheaper than organic entry both in terms of costs and time

The costs of inhouse R&D wouldn’t guarantee entry to the bank market as contracts are difficult to obtain.

The ROI from the insurance and medical sector would be in line with the client’s expectations  

Potential risks are SL’s lack of experience with the banking sector and potentially not being able to acquire further contracts with banks (although the experience of S2B’s negotiating team should help mitigate this) and the difficulties in merging the two technical teams in the long run.

This case doesn't have any exhibits.
Are you sure you will land your offer?
Let’s make sure you are
Getting into a top consulting firm is an investment that pays off every subsequent year of your career.
Work with us