Market Positioning Strategy: 9 Lessons From Board Game Territory Control That Build Competitive Advantage

Table of Contents

1. Why Territory Control Games Teach Market Positioning
2. Strategy #1: First-Mover Advantage (Speed to Position)
3. Strategy #2: Defensive Moats (Making Your Position Unassailable)
4. Strategy #3: Flanking Maneuvers (Attacking from Unexpected Angles)
5. Strategy #4: Niche Domination (Own Narrow, Win Big)
6. Strategy #5: Resource Chokepoint Control
7. Strategy #6: Geographic Clustering (Density Over Spread)
8. Strategy #7: Strategic Retreat (Give Ground to Win Wars)
9. Strategy #8: Adjacent Expansion (Leverage Existing Positions)
10. Strategy #9: Dynamic Repositioning (Adapt to Shifting Landscapes)
11. Combining Strategies: The Positioning Playbook
12. FAQs

Three years ago, I watched Netflix execute a perfect flanking maneuver straight out of Risk. Whilst Disney+ attacked their streaming position head-on with family content, Netflix pivoted to international markets and non-English content (Squid Game, Money Heist). Disney focused on defending their US family content moat. Netflix captured emerging markets Disney ignored.

Same dynamic I'd seen hundreds of times in board games: direct competition in saturated territory whilst flanks remain open.

Market positioning isn't abstract strategy theory—it's territorial warfare. You're claiming positions, defending them from competitors, and looking for openings others miss. Board games make this visible: every location, every resource node, every chokepoint is a miniature market segment.

Let me show you nine positioning strategies that work equally well claiming locations in Smoothie Wars and claiming market share in business.

Why Territory Control Games Teach Market Positioning

Before diving into strategies, understand why games are such effective positioning laboratories:

Visibility

In business, market positions are abstract. In games, they're literal spaces on a board. You can see who controls what, who's adjacent, who's vulnerable.

Scarcity

Good positions are limited in games (only N beach locations) and business (only so many "best" market segments). Scarcity forces prioritization.

Competition

Opponents actively contest positions, just like competitors contest markets. You must account for their moves, not just optimize your own.

Consequences

Claim the wrong position in a game? You lose within an hour. Claim the wrong market position in business? You lose over quarters/years. Games compress feedback.

Now, let's examine the nine strategies.

Strategy #1: First-Mover Advantage (Speed to Position)

The Core Principle

In many games and markets, claiming scarce positions early creates durable advantage. Latecomers must either pay premium prices, accept inferior positions, or fight to displace you.

Game Mechanics (Smoothie Wars)

Turn 1, there are 12 locations. By Turn 3, the best 4-5 are claimed. Players who moved fast locked in high-traffic, low-competition spots. Late movers fight over scraps.

First-movers don't win because they're first—they win because scarcity rewards priority.

Business Case Study: Amazon in E-Commerce

1995: Amazon launches online bookstore. Competitors scoffed ("Who buys books online?").

First-mover advantages Amazon captured:

• Customer trust (first = default for many shoppers)
• Logistics network (built warehouses before competition, lower costs)
• Supplier relationships (negotiated favorable terms early)
• Brand synonymy ("Amazon it" = "Google it")

By the time Barnes & Noble and Borders entered e-commerce (1997-99), Amazon had a 2-3 year head start they never closed.

When First-Mover Works

✅ High switching costs: Once customers adopt, they're sticky (SaaS, platforms) ✅ Network effects: Value increases with users (social networks, marketplaces) ✅ Learning curve advantages: Experience compounds over time ✅ Scarce resources: Limited supplier capacity, distribution channels, talent pools

When First-Mover Fails

❌ Market doesn't exist yet: You're educating buyers for competitors to harvest (see: MySpace → Facebook) ❌ Technology immature: Later entrants leapfrog with better tech ❌ Low barriers: Easy for competitors to copy (no moat)

Implementation

1. Identify emerging positions (new market segments, platforms, distribution channels)
2. Assess scarcity (is this position limited? Will latecomers struggle?)
3. Move decisively (don't overanalyze—first-mover advantage rewards speed)
4. Build moats immediately (see Strategy #2)

Strategy #2: Defensive Moats (Making Your Position Unassailable)

The Core Principle

Claiming position is step one. Defending it is step two. A moat makes your position costly or impossible for competitors to attack.

Game Mechanics

In Smoothie Wars, once you dominate a location for 2-3 turns, you build:

• Customer loyalty (repeat buyers)
• Supply relationships (cheaper fruit from suppliers)
• Brand presence (newcomers seem like imitators)

Competitors can technically attack, but the cost (matching your prices, your variety, your brand) often exceeds potential gain.

Business Case Study: Costco's Moat

Costco's defensive moats:

1. Membership model: Upfront revenue (£60/year) funds lower prices → competitors can't match pricing without membership revenue
2. Bulk purchasing: Volume commitments get supplier discounts others can't access
3. Limited SKU model: 3,700 SKUs vs. Walmart's 120,000 → operational efficiency competitors can't replicate without abandoning their model
4. Treasure hunt experience: Rotating inventory creates FOMO → customers visit frequently

Amazon tried attacking Costco's warehouse club position with Prime Pantry. Failed. The moat was too deep.

Types of Moats

Implementation

1. Assess your current moat: Which type(s) do you have? How deep?
2. Identify vulnerabilities: Where could competitors attack profitably?
3. Deepen moats: Invest in switching costs, network effects, scale advantages
4. Monitor erosion: Moats decay (tech disruption, regulation, customer preferences)

Strategy #3: Flanking Maneuvers (Attacking from Unexpected Angles)

The Core Principle

Don't attack competitors where they're strongest. Attack where they're weakest or absent.

Game Mechanics

In Smoothie Wars, if three players battle over Beach locations, the smart player claims Forest locations unopposed, builds cash reserves, then dominates late-game whilst others are depleted.

Business Case Study: Southwest Airlines

1970s: US airlines competed on:

• Hub-and-spoke networks
• Business traveler amenities (meals, seat classes)
• Major city routes (NYC, LA, Chicago)

Southwest's flank:

• Point-to-point routes (no hubs)
• Single class, no frills (cheaper)
• Secondary airports (Midway vs. O'Hare)

Incumbents couldn't counter without cannibalizing their profitable hub model. Southwest grew to become the largest US domestic carrier by market cap.

Identifying Flanking Opportunities

Ask:

1. What do competitors assume is essential (but might not be)? Southwest questioned hub-and-spoke.
2. What customer segments do they ignore (too small, too unprofitable)? Southwest focused on price-sensitive leisure travelers.
3. What geography/distribution channels are open? Southwest used secondary airports.

Implementation

1. Map competitor positions (where do they compete? What's their model?)
2. Identify undefended territory (segments, channels, geographies they ignore)
3. Assess profitability (is the flank viable, or are competitors ignoring it for good reason?)
4. Move quietly (don't telegraph your flank until you've built defensibility)

Strategy #4: Niche Domination (Own Narrow, Win Big)

The Core Principle

Better to own 80% of a small market than 5% of a large market.

Game Mechanics

In Smoothie Wars, some players spread across all location types (Beach, Forest, Mountain). Others dominate ONE type completely.

Specialists often win because:

• They become the expert in that niche
• They optimize for one game (lower costs)
• They're hard to dislodge (defenders advantage)

Business Case Study: In-N-Out Burger

McDonald's strategy: Global presence, diverse menu, mass market appeal

In-N-Out strategy:

• Only in California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Oregon, Colorado, Texas (extremely slow expansion)
• Tiny menu (burgers, fries, shakes—that's it)
• Niche: West Coast burger purists who value quality over variety

Result: In-N-Out has higher per-store revenue than McDonald's ($4.5M vs. $2.9M) despite 1/50th the locations. They dominate their niche.

When Niche Domination Works

✅ Niche is underserved (incumbents ignore it) ✅ Niche has specific needs (generic solutions don't fit well) ✅ Niche is defensible (specialists have durable advantages)

Implementation

1. Define narrow segment (industry vertical, customer size, use case, geography)
2. Tailor everything (product, marketing, sales, support for THAT segment only)
3. Become synonymous (when people in that segment think of your category, they think of YOU)
4. Resist expansion (don't dilute focus for "adjacent opportunities" unless niche saturates)

Every startup is small at the start. Every monopoly dominates a large share of its market. Therefore, every startup should start with a very small market. The perfect target market is a small group of particular people concentrated together and served by few or no competitors.

Strategy #5: Resource Chokepoint Control

The Core Principle

Control access to scarce resources competitors need, and you control the market.

Game Mechanics

In some games (Catan, for example), certain resource types are scarce. Players who control those resources can extract value from everyone else who needs them.

In Smoothie Wars, if you control locations near the best fruit suppliers, you get cheaper inventory—a durable cost advantage.

Business Case Study: ARM Holdings (Semiconductors)

ARM doesn't manufacture chips. They license chip designs to manufacturers (Apple, Qualcomm, Samsung).

Chokepoint: 95%+ of smartphones use ARM architecture. If you want to build a smartphone chip, you license from ARM.

Result: ARM captures value from entire smartphone industry without capital-intensive fab plants. The chokepoint position is their moat.

Identifying Chokepoints

Look for:

• Scarce inputs: Raw materials, specialized talent, patents, distribution channels
• Bottlenecks: Stages of value chain with limited capacity
• Standards: Proprietary platforms, protocols, formats

Implementation

1. Map value chain for your industry
2. Identify scarce nodes (what's limited? What do multiple players need?)
3. Acquire control (ownership, exclusive partnerships, patents)
4. Extract value fairly (price too high → competitors build alternatives)

Strategy #6: Geographic Clustering (Density Over Spread)

The Core Principle

Dominate one region completely before expanding geographically. Density creates network effects and operational efficiency.

Game Mechanics

In Smoothie Wars, claiming all Beach locations creates:

• Brand dominance ("the Beach smoothie company")
• Shared infrastructure (one delivery route, not three)
• Spillover effects (customers visit multiple locations)

Spread-thin strategies (one Beach, one Forest, one Mountain) lack these advantages.

Business Case Study: Walmart's Expansion

1962-1990: Walmart didn't go national. They saturated Arkansas, then Oklahoma, then Missouri, moving concentrically outward.

Why:

• Distribution centers could serve 150-mile radius densely
• Local advertising was efficient (covered all stores, not scattered ones)
• Management could visit stores easily

By the time competitors realized Walmart's strategy, they'd built insurmountable density in the South and Midwest.

Implementation

1. Pick initial geography (city, region, vertical)
2. Saturate (aim for 40%+ local market share before expanding)
3. Build infrastructure for density (local warehouses, sales teams, support)
4. Expand adjacently (move to neighboring geographies, not random leaps)

Strategy #7: Strategic Retreat (Give Ground to Win Wars)

The Core Principle

Sometimes the winning move is abandoning indefensible positions to concentrate resources elsewhere.

Game Mechanics

Mid-game in Smoothie Wars, if a location becomes unprofitable (too much competition, declining demand), elite players abandon it. Amateurs cling to sunk costs.

The resources saved by retreating fund dominance elsewhere.

Business Case Study: Netflix DVD → Streaming

2007: Netflix's DVD rental business was profitable and growing.

Strategic retreat: They actively cannibalized their own DVD business to invest in streaming—a less profitable, riskier model.

Why: They saw the writing on the wall (digital distribution would win). Better to cannibalize yourself than let competitors do it.

Result: Netflix owns streaming. Blockbuster (who refused to retreat from retail) is dead.

When to Retreat

✅ Position is deteriorating (competitive pressure, market decline) ✅ Defense costs exceed value (you're hemorrhaging resources) ✅ Better opportunities exist (redeploying resources creates more value elsewhere)

Implementation

1. Audit positions quarterly (which are growing? Which declining?)
2. Calculate cost of defense (what would it take to hold this position?)
3. Compare to redeployment value (what could those resources earn elsewhere?)
4. Exit decisively (half-hearted retreats bleed resources without freeing you)

Strategy #8: Adjacent Expansion (Leverage Existing Positions)

The Core Principle

Expand into positions adjacent to your current strengths where you have unfair advantages.

Game Mechanics

In Smoothie Wars, if you dominate Beach locations, expanding to Coastal Forest (adjacent) leverages:

• Existing supplier relationships
• Brand awareness (beach customers visit forest)
• Operational infrastructure

Jumping to Mountain locations (non-adjacent) gives you none of these advantages.

Business Case Study: Amazon's Expansion

1995: Online bookstore 1998: Music and videos (adjacent: same logistics, customer base) 2000: Electronics (adjacent: same platform, fulfillment) 2006: AWS (adjacent: excess server capacity → sell it) 2015: Amazon Marketplace (adjacent: existing traffic → monetize via third-party)

Each expansion leveraged existing assets. Amazon didn't jump randomly—they moved adjacently where competitive advantages transferred.

Implementation

1. List core capabilities (distribution, brand, technology, relationships)
2. Identify adjacent markets where those capabilities apply
3. Assess transferability (how much advantage transfers? 80%? 20%?)
4. Prioritize high-transfer adjacencies (where your unfair advantages compound)

Strategy #9: Dynamic Repositioning (Adapt to Shifting Landscapes)

The Core Principle

Market positions aren't static—customer preferences shift, technology disrupts, regulations change. Winners reposition fluidly.

Game Mechanics

In multi-round games, optimal positions change. What's valuable Turn 1 may be worthless Turn 7. Adapter players (35% win rate) beat rigid Optimizers (38% solo, but only when conditions are stable).

Business Case Study: Microsoft's Cloud Pivot

2000s: Microsoft positioned as desktop software company (Windows, Office)

Problem: Cloud computing (SaaS, infrastructure-as-a-service) threatened desktop model

2014: Satya Nadella becomes CEO, repositions Microsoft as cloud-first

• Azure becomes core focus
• Office 365 (cloud) cannibalizes Office desktop
• LinkedIn, GitHub acquisitions support cloud strategy

Result: Microsoft's market cap tripled post-pivot. They repositioned before desktop dominance eroded catastrophically.

When to Reposition

✅ Market shifts (customer preferences, technology, regulations) ✅ Competitive pressure (new entrants, incumbent pivots) ✅ Internal capability changes (new tech, acquisitions, talent)

Implementation

1. Monitor position health (market share trends, customer sentiment, competitive moves)
2. Identify inflection points (what would force us to reposition? Set tripwires)
3. Pre-plan repositioning (if X happens, we move to Y position)
4. Execute decisively (slow repositioning = worst of both worlds)

Combining Strategies: The Positioning Playbook

These nine strategies aren't mutually exclusive—the best positioning combines several:

Example: Spotify's Positioning Playbook

1. First-Mover (Spotify launched 2008, before Apple Music, before YouTube Music)
2. Niche Domination (focused on music streaming, not video/podcasts initially)
3. Geographic Clustering (saturated Europe before attacking US)
4. Defensive Moats (built network effects via social sharing + playlists)
5. Adjacent Expansion (added podcasts 2015—adjacent to music listening)
6. Dynamic Repositioning (shifted from "music library" to "audio discovery platform")

Result: 220M+ paid subscribers, market leader despite competition from Apple, Amazon, Google.

Your Positioning Playbook

1. Choose 2-3 strategies that fit your context (don't try all nine)
2. Sequence them (First-Mover → Defensive Moats → Adjacent Expansion)
3. Execute consistently (positioning pays off over years, not quarters)
4. Reassess annually (is our position still defensible? Should we reposition?)

FAQs

How do I know which positioning strategy to use?

Start with your context:

• Early market? Low competition? → First-Mover + Niche Domination
• Mature market? Strong incumbents? → Flanking + Niche Domination
• Fast-changing market? → Dynamic Repositioning + Adjacent Expansion
• Winner-take-most dynamics? → Geographic Clustering + Defensive Moats

Can small businesses use these strategies, or are they only for large companies?

Small businesses have advantages in positioning:

• Faster repositioning (no bureaucracy)
• Easier niche domination (you don't need scale)
• More credible flanking (incumbents ignore you until too late)

Large companies have advantages in First-Mover (capital), Defensive Moats (resources), and Chokepoint Control (M&A). But 7/9 strategies work brilliantly for SMEs.

What if my competitors copy my positioning?

If positioning is easily copied, it's not a real position—it's a tactic. Real positioning includes moats (see Strategy #2). First-Mover becomes durable via switching costs. Niche Domination becomes durable via specialization. Chokepoint Control is inherently defensible.

If competitors copy easily, your "position" is surface-level. Go deeper.

How long does it take for positioning to pay off?

Minimum 6-12 months to see traction. 2-3 years for durable advantage. Positioning is a long game. Companies that reposition every quarter never build defensibility—they're just twitching.

Commit to a position, execute consistently, reassess annually.

How do I test positioning without full commitment?

MVPs + option value (see Risk Assessment Techniques). Launch small experiments in new positions:

• Geographic clustering? Test in one city before committing nationally
• Niche domination? Serve 10 customers deeply before declaring focus
• Flanking? Pilot the model, measure economics, then scale

Closing Thoughts: Positioning Is Warfare

I'll leave you with this: every time you play a territory control game—Smoothie Wars, Risk, Catan, even Chess—you're practicing market positioning.

You're learning to:

• Assess scarce positions
• Build defensibility
• Identify flanks
• Reposition dynamically

The mechanics are identical. The stakes are lower. The feedback is faster.

So the next time your business faces a positioning decision—entering a new market, defending against a competitor, pivoting your model—think like a game player:

"If this were a board, where's the high-value territory? Who controls it? Can I claim it first, flank it, or dominate a niche within it? What moat will I build to defend?"

Strategy isn't abstract. It's geographic. It's visible. It's positional.

Play it like a game. Win it like a business.

Next Steps:

• Download our free Market Positioning Strategy Canvas
• Read: Competitive Intelligence Gathering from Board Games
• Explore: Strategic Thinking Frameworks

The Smoothie Wars Content Team comprises a positioning strategist. The team helped 30+ businesses reposition for competitive advantage using frameworks derived from strategic territory control games.