Case study · Supplements & wellness

The short answer

A declining, unprofitable supplements brand became a $30M business at roughly a 10% net margin in three years. Not by growing its way out of the losses. The opposite. I joined in late 2022, when revenue had fallen to $5.1M after four straight years of losses. We fixed the unit economics first, at low volume: the first profitable year came at just $5.5M, before any growth. Then we scaled what already worked: $18.8M in 2024, $30M in 2025, profitable the whole way. The order is the lesson. Growth multiplies your economics, whichever direction they point.

Where it started

By the time I got the call, the brand had already lived a whole arc. Revenue ran up to $9.9M in 2020, slipped to $9.1M in 2021, and the losses grew with the scale: $4.2M gone in the biggest year. By 2022 revenue had nearly halved to $5.1M, still losing money. Four years in business, four years of losses.

The brand didn't have a growth problem. It had already proven it could grow. It had an economics problem, and growth was making it worse.

The read: growth was the anesthetic

Every fix before then had been a growth fix. More spend, more launches, more channels. It felt like progress because the topline moved, and the P&L quietly recorded what all that motion produced: a bigger loss.

Underneath, nobody owned the whole equation. Marketing owned ROAS. Ops owned shipping. Finance owned the autopsy. Contribution margin per order, the number that decides whether scale helps or hurts, belonged to no one.

Four years of data had already tested everyone's hypothesis: growth would fix it. It failed every year. My hypothesis was the opposite: the economics were broken at any size, and growth was multiplying the damage. There was only one way to test it: at low volume, on purpose.

Net sales & net profit, $ millions

The test: profitable at $5.5M, on purpose.

We froze the growth-first instinct and rebuilt contribution margin per order: pricing, offer structure, and the checkout economics. We cut the spend that was buying unprofitable revenue, knowing the topline would feel it.

2023 closed at $5.5M, barely bigger than the year before. The P&L swung from a $1.6M loss to a $300K profit. A small number that settled the argument. The hypothesis held: the machine worked at $5.5M, which meant it would work at any size.

The second hypothesis: retention sets the budget.

Once each order carried margin, repeat behavior became the engine. CAC ceilings came from our own LTV curves, not category benchmarks. Acquisition stopped being a bet and became arithmetic.

Making the diagnosis repeatable.

Turnarounds run on adrenaline. Staying turned around runs on cadence. We installed a scorecard with one owner per number, 90-day priorities, and a weekly meeting rhythm that surfaces issues while they're cheap. The cadence made the diagnosis repeatable: every number owned, every issue surfaced while it was still cheap.

Then, and only then, scale

2024: $18.8M, $2.8M of profit. 2025: $30M, $3M of profit. Same playbook as the $5.5M year, just with volume poured into economics that deserved it.

Growth multiplies your economics. Scale wasn't a bet by then. It was a validated hypothesis with volume poured in. Earn the right to grow before you pay for it.

Run the order on your own brand

• ✓Get contribution margin per order, fully loaded, before any scale plans.
• ✓Find the revenue you're paying to lose. Cut it even when topline shrinks.
• ✓Set CAC ceilings from your own LTV curves, not category benchmarks.
• ✓Install a cadence: a scorecard, 90-day priorities, one owner per number.
• ✓Scale only what's already profitable at small volume.

Asked and answered.

How do you turn around an unprofitable brand?

In this order: stabilize unit economics at your current size, then grow. Get contribution margin per order positive, fully loaded. Cut the revenue you're paying to lose, even if topline shrinks. Rebuild CAC ceilings from your own LTV curves. Install an operating cadence with one owner per number. Our first profitable year came at just $5.5M. The growth to $30M came after, and only because the economics already worked.

How long does a turnaround take?

Ours took roughly a year to the first profitable P&L, and three years to $30M. Margin moves show up fast: pricing, offer structure, and cutting unprofitable spend can swing contribution within two or three quarters. Durable growth takes longer. Be suspicious of turnarounds that promise growth first and profit later. That order is how the brand got sick.