Crafting Cases Review 2026: Who Its Video Drills Fit

Six Courses, Five Prices, One Access Term

Six courses sit in the catalog. The free one is called Case Interview Fundamentals, built around what the site names the "6 Building Blocks", and the course page says it is meant to be worked through "in 7 days" at "2-3 hours per day". The five paid ones are Bulletproof Mental Math at $70, Master Market Sizing at $197, Control the Case at $247, Analytics Academy at $297 and Structure from Scratch at $397. Every figure was read on its own course page 7 October 2026.

One sentence appears on all five paid pages, word for word: "You'll get 12-months of access to the whole material and will be able to start learning and practicing right now". That matters more than the prices do. A buyer reading "$397" reads a purchase. What the page sells is a license that ends.

Each paid page also carries a refund promise. The wording on the structuring course reads, "If after 30 days you don't LOVE this course, we want you to have 100% of your money back."

Coaching exists too, and its rate is published in an odd place. There is no coaching page on the site. The figure appears inside an argument on the Structure from Scratch page: "See, our coaching packages start at $500/session, with a minimum of 10 sessions...". Ten sessions at $500 each is $5,000, which is the floor rather than a quoted price. The site does not publish how long a session lasts, so we will not turn that into an hourly rate.

The universities page offers live workshops and bulk course licenses to career centers. Neither carries a price. Both buttons lead to a call.

How Its Video Drills Claim to Build the Skill

The mechanism is stated plainly on the catalog page: "Each of our courses has dozens of hours of video practice drills with in-depth answers so you can compare your answers to the answer of a real MBB consultant." Read 7 October 2026. That sentence is the whole method, and it has three steps. You attempt a prompt. You watch an experienced person attempt the same prompt. You compare.

The structuring course describes what it hands you as a system rather than a set of tips: "To structure any problem from scratch like a consultant would, you need a SYSTEM." It claims to teach named techniques, some standard and some its own, and sets the volume against coaching: "We've created this program so that it's the equivalent of getting 30-40 hours of coaching with us."

Comparison against a model answer is a real learning mechanism, and it is old. You see a worked example, you measure your own attempt against it, you adjust. It works best when the gap between the two is visible to you. It works least well when it is not.

What Crafting Cases Does Well, and Who Else Says So

Start with the fact that costs the brand nothing to claim and that it did not write itself. Bain's case interview page sends its own candidates to outside material. It tells them to "Sharpen your problem-solving skills with free, structured external resources", names Crafting Cases among a short list, and describes it as "A focused 7-day course designed to build confidence and help you take control of any case interview." The link behind that name goes to the free course. Read 7 October 2026.

Take that for what it is and no more. Bain publishes no criteria, pays nothing and certifies nothing. It still means a firm that runs the exercise looked at this material and was willing to put its own name next to it on a recruiting page. Nothing else in this brand's file carries that weight.

The second thing it does well is publish numbers that can be checked. Control the Case states "21.5 hours of video content" and twelve worked cases. Structure from Scratch states "50+ Video practice drills to master structuring". Master Market Sizing states twenty estimation drills. Prices are printed on the page instead of hidden behind a form. That is more disclosure than most of this market offers, and it is what made this page possible to write.

The third is the free course, and the site is direct about why it exists: "we've dedicated literally thousands of hours to have our free course be better than everyone else's paid materials". A beginner can work through a structured seven day pass at no cost, then decide. Any reader who has never spoken a case aloud should go and do that before spending anything, here or anywhere.

Where a Recorded Drill Runs Out of Room

That is the joint in this method, and it is worth being precise about. Watching a strong answer teaches you what strong looks like. Judging whether yours was strong is a separate skill, and a candidate under pressure is the worst available judge of their own structure. The drill cannot do that part. Nothing recorded can.

A video cannot read what you wrote. It cannot tell you that your second branch overlapped your first, or that you answered a question adjacent to the one asked. This follows from the form and holds for every recorded course ever made.

Here is the fuller picture across the forms a candidate mixes, ours included.

The last row is the one that lets you read the rest of this page honestly. We put a number on structure, arithmetic, sizing, brainstorming, exhibits and synthesis. We do not put one on whether you held the room, and a partner interview is partly about holding the room. Several of our simulators are still being built.

There is a boundary around every course of this kind, and the firms draw it. McKinsey's assessment integrity page expects candidates to "use only pen and paper for notetaking and calculations" and to refrain from "using any applications or websites, generative AI, a calculator, or prepared notes", read 7 October 2026 in the Internet Archive capture of 20 May 2026. Nothing you bought comes into the room with you. What comes in is what you can do unaided, which is an argument for drilling and against collecting material.

What Our Grader Reads in a Structure You Type

Our method is the same reading plus a verdict on the thing you produced. The weights are ours, so we publish them. No firm publishes a scoring sheet.

A typed structure is scored Coverage 45, Separation 25, Depth 20, Concision 10. Those numbers live in src/lib/grading/rubrics.ts and the full set sits on our method page.

Read the second weight against what this brand teaches. Separation carries 25 of 100, and it is the one a candidate cannot self assess. Everyone learns that branches should not overlap. Almost nobody can see their own overlap thirty seconds after writing it, because the two branches felt different when they were written. A model answer will not surface that. A score on your own tree names it.

Coverage at 45 is the heaviest weight we carry, and it asks one question: do the branches you named reach the whole problem? Depth at 20 asks whether you went a level below the headline. Concision at 10 asks whether a listener could follow you by ear. A good course teaches all four. It cannot tell you which of the four cost you this morning, and that is the single sentence a candidate needs in order to know what to work on tonight.

Crafting Cases Priced Against a Monthly Plan

A license and a subscription compare on the term, so here is the arithmetic. Our published prices, read in src/lib/pricing.ts: $49 a month, $120 for 90 days, $249 for a year. Divide 120 by three and the effective rate is $40 a month. Divide 249 by twelve and it is $20.75, which we round to about $21 and say that we rounded.

Now do the same to each course, since each one runs twelve months.

1. Bulletproof Mental Math at $70 is $5.83 a month, which we call about $6.
2. Master Market Sizing at $197 is $16.42 a month, about $16.
3. Control the Case at $247 is $20.58 a month, about $21.
4. Analytics Academy at $297 is $24.75 a month, about $25.
5. Structure from Scratch at $397 is $33.08 a month, about $33.
6. All five together cost $1,208, which is $100.67 a month, about $101.

Two readings, and only two. Control the Case at about $21 a month lands within a dollar of our annual plan at about $21 a month, which is a genuine coincidence worth knowing before anyone tells you one of us is expensive. And the last column is the real content of the table: these courses score nothing, because that is what a video is. Divide $397 by at least fifty drills and each drill costs at most $7.94, and every one of them hands you a model answer rather than a mark.

One cost free route goes unmentioned on every page about this brand. McKinsey publishes four named cases with suggested answers, Beautify, Diconsa, Electro-Light and Talbot Trucks, and tells candidates it recommends "reviewing the sample cases provided below". Read 7 October 2026. Work those before buying anything.

Who Should Buy Crafting Cases, and When to Stop

The verdict is a decision rule. Four readers, four answers.

Take the free course if you have never structured a case. It is free, it is ordered, Bain links it on its own recruiting page, and it costs you a week of evenings. Nobody in that position should buy anything before finishing it.

Buy Structure from Scratch if structuring is the thing you keep failing and you have twelve months. Fifty and more video drills against one problem type is a serious amount of focused repetition, and the twelve month term is long enough to use it twice. Note what you are buying: you are buying prompts and model answers, so the value depends on your ability to tell your tree apart from theirs.

Skip the full set at $1,208 unless somebody else is paying. Five courses bought together cost about $101 a month across the term, and a candidate preparing for one recruiting season rarely needs five. Buy the one that matches your weakest module and spend the rest on something that answers back.

It stops being enough the day your question changes. While the question is "what should I say here", a model answer serves you well. When it becomes "was what I said any good", video has nothing left, and no edition of it ever will. A reader who has watched a strong answer twenty times and still loses in a way they cannot name needs something that marks them.

Where to Take the Drills You Just Practiced

The gap this page measured is narrow and specific. The courses hand you a prompt and a model answer and leave you to judge the distance between them yourself. That judgment is the part we built.

Our structure drill scores a tree you type on Coverage 45, Separation 25, Depth 20 and Concision 10, and names the branch you missed instead of showing you a better tree. Our math drill scores Answer 40, Working 25, Units 15 and Interpretation 20, so the twenty points for saying what a number means stop being invisible. Our pricing is $49 a month, $120 for 90 days, or $249 for a year, which is about $21 a month on the annual plan. At $249 across two hundred graded attempts, that is about $1.25 an attempt.

What we do not do, stated plainly: we do not teach a method narrative, we do not judge how you come across to a partner, and several of our scoring simulators are still being built. These courses are better than us at the narrative. Work through one, then come and be wrong at us fifty times.

For wider context first, our guide to case interview tools covers what each category of software actually does, and our page on practicing cases alone covers how to get value out of a drill with nobody in the room.

How Each Figure on This Page Was Checked

Every number attributed to this brand was checked 7 October 2026 on its own page, with a browser user agent over a compressed request. Prices, access terms, drill counts and the coaching floor come from the six course pages and from the catalog page. Nothing about this brand comes from another preparation site.

The three facts that do not come from the brand come from firms. Bain's naming of it was read on the live page 7 October 2026, with the Internet Archive capture of 11 July 2026 used to confirm that the block is not new. McKinsey's four sample cases and its guidance on preparation were read in the archive capture of 27 September 2026, its domain answering neither a direct request nor a fetch. The integrity expectations came from the capture of 20 May 2026, the most recent one the archive index holds.

Three things we could not settle, and we would rather say so than round them off. The site publishes two counts of its own coaching hours, "1000+ hours" on one page and "10,000+ hours" on two others, with no date on any of the three, so we quote neither as the count. The stated offer rate above 50 percent carries no denominator, no period and no definition of a coaching client, so it stays a claim. And we found no first hand reader account we were willing to cite: the testimonials are chosen by the seller, the forum that would carry independent ones refuses our requests, and the video results under this brand name belong either to it or to its competitors.