All about Market Research

[CaRaMBa]

I came from Sports Center, and I just posted in the Kobe Two thread. I'm just wondering. I'm sure these big companies spend a lot on research, before they come up with a new product, a new design, new packaging or taste for a certain product, etc.

But there are still "flops". Even after all the research done, the product isn't "accepted" by the market.

What went wrong? Wrong assumptions? Wrong participants in FGD's? Unreliable data during research?

Can you give more examples of these products?

(Did Coke research before they launched "New Coke"? Or did they just come up with the taste because Pepsi launched the Taste Test campaign? This is always used in marketing books as one of the worst campaigns of a brand.)

[aticus]

Originally posted by CaRaMBa
(Did Coke research before they launched "New Coke"? Or did they just come up with the taste because Pepsi launched the Taste Test campaign? This is always used in marketing books as one of the worst campaigns of a brand.)

:lol: As soon as I saw the thread title, I KNEW Coke's New Coke fiasco would come up... ;)

Yes, actually, they did do some research. :) What alarmed them further was that even their own Coke employees were selecting Pepsi more than Coke! :lol: That kinda spurred them to speed up the New Coke introduction.

What they failed to factor in, of course, was the "loyalty" that the original Coke formulation had engendered in its base of customers.

The rest, of course, is history... ;)

[NoisyCricket]

Well whoever invented that stupid device called the CueCat.. :rotflmao: Man.. that was a DUMB idea.. Scanning barcodes on a product to get to a website.. oh well..

And those KOBE II Adidas shoes look.. ugly.. hehehe :D

What I'm wondering also is that some Marketing gurus say that people will never want All-in-one devices, while others say that they do.. Like all in one cellphone-mp3 player-video cam-pda.. I dunno.. sometimes I think if you do that, you come up with a so-so phone, a limited PDA, an mp3 player that can hold only a few songs, and a camera that can take only very low-res, pixelated shots.. Better siguro if you got a real digital camera if you wanted to take digital photos, an mp3 player that could store 3 or 20GB of songs (Creative Nomad!).. etc.

Then again, I could be wrong! :teehee:

[Art Vandelay]

As Aticus has pointed out, New Coke actually had a lot of research backing it up. Just goes to show you how strong the Coke Brand is, imagine if there was another softdrink which taste just like coke, sells for half the price consumers would still chose Coke...

On a side note, about Pepsi's Taste Test campaign (the one where they blindfold you then make you drink two diff brands). Did you know that Jon Sculley (formerly Pepsi and Apple CEO) took one of those tests and what do you know he didn't pick Pepsi he was lucky that media were not around. Also I can't renmember if he was the one who admitted it but the "taste test" is loaded, meaning the formula for the Pepsi drink that is used in the test is different (usually sweeter) than the one used in the actual drink...

And what about that CEO who predicted "There's only a market for maybe one or two personal computers in the world" (or words to that effect)... Did he eat his words or what...

[CaRaMBa]

Originally posted by aticus

Yes, actually, they did do some research. :) What alarmed them further was that even their own Coke employees were selecting Pepsi more than Coke! :lol: That kinda spurred them to speed up the New Coke introduction.

What they failed to factor in, of course, was the "loyalty" that the original Coke formulation had engendered in its base of customers.



Yup, this is true. So it means that they focused on the wrong thing during research? It seems that they only asked about the taste, and not the 'feelings' of the drinkers.

You guys have examples for Philippine products? Can't think of any right now.

[Kaboom!]

Sergio Zyman, the Marketing Manager for Coke at the time they changed formulations defended his actions by citing all the research the company did regarding the preference of their customers. He actually claims that the fiasco was just what Coke needed to realize the importance of the attachment their customers have to the taste and brand.

One brand here in the PHilippines that probably had a lot of research and still failed was Crest by P&G. I know Bionade also did some research for san miguel as well and still failed.

Peace.

[NoisyCricket]

Just remembered. One of my ninangs is the General Manager for TRENDS MBL. They do A LOT of consumer research. If you want to reach her, you can call her at 925-3169 - 70 (According to my palm!). Pvt msg me if you want her email add. :)

[mac_bolan00]

the classic market research flop of the 20th century was the ford edsel. a supposedly high-end car to be mass-produced and made available to the middle- and upper middle-class???

[CaRaMBa]

mac_bolan, I've heard about that but I don't know the details. Could you tell us more about it?

[CaRaMBa]

Guys, I'm just wondering. Should we assume that "gaya-gaya" products didn't go through research at all? It could be that they just 'copied' the existing products.

[aticus]

Originally posted by CaRaMBa


Yup, this is true. So it means that they focused on the wrong thing during research? It seems that they only asked about the taste, and not the 'feelings' of the drinkers.

You guys have examples for Philippine products? Can't think of any right now.

Just to take off from Jude's point about Crest...

Even though I personally love Crest, and it was (at the time) America's no.1 brand, it didn't take off here because they found out (too late) that Pinoys didn't trust it to clean better than Colgate. The reason? It didn't bubble up as much. :lol:

Just goes to show that market research often can't account for certain intangibles... ;)

[hat_tr1ck]

If it's okay with mac_bolan00, I'd like to explain the debacle Ford went through with the Edsel.

Everyone blames the ugly "horse-collar" frontal treatment but that's only part of the story. Kinder critics say that its aim was true, but the target moved.

Conceived when sales of lower-medium priced cars were booming, the Edsel was made to be a mass-market winner. The trouble was that by the time it was launched, the American automobile industry was in a slump, with sales particularly affected in the Edsel's market segment.

The Edsel was also a victim of its own hype. Ford's marketing people had gone into hyperdrive throughout its conception. They forecast 200,000 sales in the first year and would have to build extra factories to cope with demand for a car they claimed cost $250,000,000 to develop. The truth is that in its first year the Edsel set an all-time record for deliveries of a brand-new mid-priced model. Yet it fell so short of its grandiose claims that it was almost instantly dubbed a failure.

And that, my friends, is the short story of the Ford Edsel.

[hat_tr1ck]

Now, for something a little closer to home, let's take the case of Bonifacio Land Corp. and its parent firm, Metro Pacific Corp.

When the government, through the Bases Conversion Development Authority, opened up the vast land area of Fort Bonifacio for bidding, the two corporations that fought tooth-and-nail to close the deal was Ayala Land Inc. and BoniLand. The consulting firm BoniLand hired to make the proposal, Landco Pacific Corp., which was later on acquired by MetroPac, submitted the winning bid of P33,000/sqm. as compared to ALI's offer of P24,000/sqm.

Initially, all went well for BoniLand since they had acquired a property that was foreseen to be the future Business Center of Metro Manila. BoniLand had a very good masterplan for Fort Bonifacio. Everything would be divided into zones to avoid congestion and instead encourage growth within the property. All the residential condominiums would be in one cluster while the office buildings were in another. The shopping district had a cluster all its own near the planned transportation hub of Fort Bonifacio to encourage people traffic and trade. IT developments had a place of its own thanks to a space Boniland alloted exclusively for IT companies. And to further seal its future as the future Business Center of Metro Manila, BoniLand convinced the Philippine Stock Exchange to transfer their offices and trading floor to Fort Bonifacio by offering a tract of land smack in the middle of the property's business zone AND to even construct the building for them - free of charge, no less.

To encourage people to come to Fort Bonifacio even while the are was still being developed and landscaped, BoniLand built The Fort. And it was a huge success - at first. Makati was forgotten, Malate was left behind because everybody went to The Fort. And this is where BoniLand failed.

First, the market crashed in 1997. Nobody saw this coming and by investing heavily in Fort Bonifacio, BoniLand and MetroPac's cash fund was seriously depleted. After being touted as a major player in Philippine business, MetroPac suddenly saw the walls collapsing around them. For them to continue as a viable company, Metropac sold its subsidiaries one by one by selling Sterling Paper, Metro Bottled Water and numerous other companies.

Robbed of cash, BoniLand couldn't develop any other property after The Fort. They had to scale down their plans for Bonifacio Ridge after initially planning it to compete directly with Pacific Plaza. And this slowdown in growth made people wary of going to Fort Bonifacio anymore. By not expanding The Fort, the property became stagnant and with less and less people coming to the site, the businesses leasing spaces within had to close one by one.

The way I see it, BoniLand put too much faith in The Fort. Seeing the success of The Fort, BoniLand firmly believed that by creating a destination, the traffic to their property would continue and entice real estate developers that despite the economic slump which particularly hit the real estate industry hard, they would continue to invest in Fort Bonifacio. And by not backing up the future plans of the very person who made The Fort a success, BoniLand suddenly found themselves stumbling.

With hardly any funding and minus the brains who made Fort Bonifacio a destination, plus the curent economic slump that only shows signs of easing up after two more years, BoniLand now finds itself on the seller's block. And what makes this quite ironic is that the very company they bidded against for the property is now close to buying their interest in it. After BoniLand spent so much to develop the place, landscape it and fit in all the basic facilites like drainage and telco facilites, Ayala Land might now acquire the property at amuch lesser price than they first intended too. They don't have to spend so much anymore since the basic facilities are already there, thanks to BoniLand's development of the property.

In the end, it's Ayala Land who found themselves laughing their way to the bank.

[ferrisb]

Even though I personally love Crest, and it was (at the time) America's no.1 brand, it didn't take off here because they found out (too late) that Pinoys didn't trust it to clean better than Colgate. The reason? It didn't bubble up as much.

Just goes to show that market research often can't account for certain intangibles...

if this were the case, the Crest brand managers and researchers were remiss in the research set-up. they should've known which toothpaste attributes mattered to end-users. an inquiry about 'bubbles' should have been included.

there could have been other factors though why crest failed to establish a beachhead in the Philippines. not sure about this....when P&G was going door-to-door handing out samples of crest, a colgate sampling team followed soon after handing out 2 samples of colgate in exchange for the crest samples handed out just minutes before... urban myth?

[CaRaMBa]

Wow, if Colgate really did that, all I can say is WOW.

Thanks for the Edsel story, Hat Trick!

Anyway, I agree with ferrisb - the bubbles should have been included in the research for Crest. They shouldn't have assumed that since it was a hit in the US, it will be okay here. The culture, the people, are different.

I think Vaseline did a lot of research to come up with their Shampoo which is a big hit right now. I think it's the only shampoo that really, truly makes the hair soft enough for a comb to go through it smoothly. And the smell - well, their target market says that's the smell they like.

[Art Vandelay]

Speaking of cars I remember another incident I think it was the Chevy Nova. This was in Mexico (or some Latin American country), sales of the car was bad but they couldn't figure it out until one day they found out that Nova in local lingo meant "No go".

[zimdude]

According to Gonzo Marketing: Winning Through Worst Practices by Christopher Locke:

Chapter One: Eight Miles High

The View from 40,000 Feet

Market research is dead. Let's hope so anyway, because all it does is predict we'll want the same things tomorrow that we wanted yesterday. As practiced in most of the 20th century, market research works against creativity and the kind of risk taking that's crucially prerequisite to innovative products and services. Today, there's a counter-phenomenon at work, beginning in the realm of ideas. If they're any good, ideas propagate well over networks. And ideas create new markets.

The outcome hinges on that little word if. If they're any good. Market research takes an idea and asks what proof there is of an audience. Will the idea fly? And if so, with whom? To start a new cable channel today, it's necessary to prove an audience of 30 million viewers. That's a lot of eyeballs. And terms like eyeballs are what you get when you begin to think this way. How much can you know about individual tastes and interests among that many people? Not much. But all you really want to know are the chances of whether they'll tune in. Because launching such a channel is going to take megabucks and whoever is putting up the cash is going to want pretty strong assurance of seeing those bucks back someday real soon, accompanied by a handsome return on the investment. The return will come through advertising. Or so goes the formula. Aggregate enough eyeballs, show them whatever you think they want to see -- which you hope market research will tell you -- and slip in as much spam as you can between the "content" segments. The spam then cooks up into a tasty profit sandwich.



The website and two free chapters here. (http://www.gonzomarkets.com/)

[hat_tr1ck]

Originally posted by Art Vandelay
Speaking of cars I remember another incident I think it was the Chevy Nova. This was in Mexico (or some Latin American country), sales of the car was bad but they couldn't figure it out until one day they found out that Nova in local lingo meant "No go".

Nope. That was Mexico alright.

[abcxyz]

just a caution : market research is NOT the holy grail of marketing. its not even an infallible, accurate crystal ball.

it is a tool among many that one must use to identify a direction. there are other many other tools, but two of my favorite tools are : gut-feel and common sense. unfortunately many brand managers forget to use those two other tools.

there are very few companies in the philippines that use market research very extensively, MOST philippine companies use research minimally and many of their brands have succeeded in the market place. why not use it much? budget constraints mostly.

sometimes i wonder where marketing tends to be in - is it an art or a science?

here's a good wurstion - how much art vs science should i use?

[mac_bolan00]

i disagree with an earlier post that plain commen sense and gut feel is better than market research. the former is applicable for a start-up or a small business but when you get to the multi-million dollar league, you have to be a little "scientific". a classic example is philip morris during the mid-90s.

the new ceo, the first non-smoking ceo of the company, wanted to maintain the growth in net income. he thought that lowering the selling price of marlboro and philip could snatch share from rjr-nabisco. what the poor non-smoker forgot to consider was demand elasticity. you don't increase demand for cigarettes by cutting prices. you increase it by advertising. also, you must consider cross-elasticities with other products like beer (you smoke more when you're drinking, right?)

well, the price cuts simply resulted in huge revenue shortfalls: hardly no change in market share or actual consumption.

it's not that market research is un-realistic. most of the time, it's just not done right.

[sdv_2012]

Do any of you guys still remember the brand of Shampoo that came before Pantene was launched? I remember my Marketing prof told us about this story and he said that after this shampoo has been launched it became a big hit in the market. Unfortunately, they weren't able to anticipate the demand and after a week or so of non-exposure, the people forgot about the product totally. And when they were able to produce huge quantities, it suddenly flopped! That's why they repackaged the brand and launched Pantene instead. Good thing Pantene was able to get market acceptance once again.

I wasn't sure if the product's name was Dimension or something.... :wondering:

[abcxyz]

i DID NOT say common sense and gut-feel are better than research. i also did not say they ought to be the only tools that should be used.

BUT what i did say was ASIDE from consumer research, there are OTHER tools that ought to be used, two of many other tools are common sense and gut feel.

fyi - cigarette advertising is banned in most of globe except japan, china and the philippines. and in countries where cig ads are banned, they have used pricing as an effective tool, among many other tools.

[abcxyz]

sdv - i dont know about what your prof said. i doubt it if that is true at all. who is this prof?

pantene is a small but successful brand that p&g brought from another small, highly cosmetic, niche company (vs p&g which is a huge mass consumer company). i cant remember the company now - vidal sassoon ata???? (dont quote me on that). p&g before pantene DID NOT have the technology to market a successful shampoo brand, so they bought a company that had a good shampoo technology for their own use.

[lupuS]

If I recall correctly, Dimension was a Unilever brand. Pantene whupped it all the way out of the market.

[CaRaMBa]

sdv_2012, I don't think what you posted is true, however I'm not too sure with what I'm going to post now also. Someone please set the record straight.

A week or two weeks before Pantene was launched, Dimensione was launched. Apparently they got hold of the plans for Pantene. Maybe the plans looked good? They copied and made sure that they launched before Pantene's launch. I think they were sued afterwards.

Someone, please post the real story, ehehehe!

[mac_bolan00]

Originally posted by abcxyz
fyi - cigarette advertising is banned in most of globe except japan, china and the philippines. and in countries where cig ads are banned, they have used pricing as an effective tool, among many other tools.
when you say pricing as a "tool", i take it you mean cutting down on prices to boost demand or increase market share. as i have said, you don't do that. please clarify this statement of yours.

you see, as far as i know, there has not been any price cuts on the retail price of cigarettes in the last FIFTY YEARS. understand this concept: PRICING POWER. that's what makes cigarettes so profitable.

[abcxyz]

sdv's prof story is incorrect, that i am certain. and yes i agree dimensione was a unilever brand. uni-lever is famous for very quickly launching competitive brands and then failing. i suspect uni-lever has ver good market intelligence of another kind. at least in the phil market. pantene is p&gs most successful global shampoo brand.

sunsilk, palmolive were the big brands then.

one of p&g's failure brands was prell.

[abcxyz]

in most markets, cig prices are rising because governments keep imposing higher taxes. governments do that to make cigs out of reach of young users and to discourage usage.

the way cig companies use pircing as a tool is by launching new brands that are lower in pricing and/or high in brand imagery, like niche positioning.

[aticus]

Originally posted by abcxyz
the way cig companies use pircing as a tool is by launching new brands that are lower in pricing and/or high in brand imagery, like niche positioning.

I don't think this is what mac was referring to. I actually thought that you meant that pricing was an effective tool for CURRENT brands, and that cutting prices on these existing brands was a good way to gain market share. At least, that's what I understood from your earlier posts. In which case, I'd tend to agree with mac and say that that's incorrect.

As regards introducing NEW brands to gain share from other market segments, or to niche, I don't believe this is the same thing, unless they're selling the same cigarettes and merely repackaging them to be cheaper.

[abcxyz]

hmmm...lets clear the confusion

yes, pricing can be used as a tool to gain market share and expand the market. many brands have done this.

as far cigs are concerned, they dont NORMALLY reduce price to get share bec they do want to protect profitability. what has been done in north america though (and asia) is that they launch new brands with lower pricing or launch niche brands with higher pricing.

in the phils, marlboro actually reduced prices when winston became a real threat to them. so - even cigs do reduce prices but in this case to defend share.

[mac_bolan00]

in most markets, cig prices are rising because governments keep imposing higher taxes. governments do that to make cigs out of reach of young users and to discourage usage.

of course not. cig companies regularly raise their prices, even in the US where raw materials are produced locally. that's the reason why philip morris and rjr-nabisco have bottom lines that increase monotonously by 10% year after year. pricing power, man. pricing power.

the way cig companies use pircing as a tool is by launching new brands that are lower in pricing and/or high in brand imagery, like niche positioning.

i see. well, the tool here is not really pricing but FULL SEGMENTATION. pricing is automatically differentiated.

[YuCkFoU]

Medyo nag-o-offtopic na po tayo. Any other stories? :teehee:

[aticus]

Originally posted by abcxyz
hmmm...lets clear the confusion

yes, pricing can be used as a tool to gain market share and expand the market. many brands have done this.

I accept that. :) I was merely referring to the cigarette industry, however, which mac has pointed out operates in a different realm entirely. I would say it goes beyond "pricing power" into the realm of "nicotine addiction..." :lol:

As for the issue of introducing new brands, I agree that the lower price is just a natural offshoot of this market segmentation, and not the actual strategy per se, unless their market research told them, " Cigarette smokers will buy more cigs if we price it at 20% off, regardless of brand, quality or flavor..." :) Then I'd accept that price was the defining factor.

But just to get back on topic, for all the marketing experts there, what role do you see market research playing on the actual PRICE of the new product? I mean, would questionnaires and/or tests be an accurate gauge of the level of pricing a new product would have to maintain to be accepted? I'm not so convinced myself, but I welcome the comments from our resident marketing research experts. :D Just to start off, my first question would be: Would you set about pricing the product according to what the public can afford, THEN deciding what features you can afford to include in it, or would you find out the features the public wants first, THEN decide how much you have to charge to get all of these in? :) I'd imagine the answer would vary according to the market, the type of product, and the actual need of the consumers. Please share any actual case examples you have.

[CaRaMBa]

But just to get back on topic, for all the marketing experts there, what role do you see market research playing on the actual PRICE of the new product? I mean, would questionnaires and/or tests be an accurate gauge of the level of pricing a new product would have to maintain to be accepted? I'm not so convinced myself, but I welcome the comments from our resident marketing research experts. Just to start off, my first question would be: Would you set about pricing the product according to what the public can afford, THEN deciding what features you can afford to include in it, or would you find out the features the public wants first, THEN decide how much you have to charge to get all of these in? I'd imagine the answer would vary according to the market, the type of product, and the actual need of the consumers. Please share any actual case examples you have.


I am definitely not an expert on this. That's why I posted this thread, to learn from the others! Anyway, here's my take on this. (Although I think this is off-topic.)

Market research is important in setting the price of the product. Remember that impressions are important. There are some cheap products out there (cheap during production) but people are willing to pay a lot for the product. Sometimes, when priced low, people aren't willing to buy because they have the impression that the quality isn't good. So one definitely has to research on this.

Aticus, the two choices that you posted are actually two different approaches. A hard-core marketing person will tell you that what the people comes first before anything else. They design the product according to what the people want, then everything follows from there. But that's only one approach, and I'm not sure if there's only one approach that's right.

[aticus]

Originally posted by CaRaMBa

Aticus, the two choices that you posted are actually two different approaches. A hard-core marketing person will tell you that what the people comes first before anything else. They design the product according to what the people want, then everything follows from there. But that's only one approach, and I'm not sure if there's only one approach that's right.

Well, to make everything truly "on topic" how about some kind PExers sharing their knowledge of when people got pricing WRONG? :) That would indicate a failure of market research, right? :) Please share how they got it wrong, if possible... :D

[mac_bolan00]

i've forgotten most of my pricing methods :*) anyway, broadly, you have 1) cost-plus and 2) competitive rates. let's see what i've observed as a one-time market researcher.

cost-plus is generally applied for nascient products and industries wherein risks are inherently high. in the real estate sector, socialized housing to low-cost housing developers first define pricing brackets to identify what type a concept belongs: < 180k - socialized, 180k-500k - low-cost, 500k-1m - medium-cost. after you have conceptualized your housing units, you put in a 25% gross profit margin (or a 33% mark-up over costs). this method was devised by camella-palmera in the early 90s and is still being practiced by low- to medium-cost developers. going to the high-end concepts, the gross margin could go up to 50% (or a 100% mark-up from cost).

competitive rates are often practiced in high-turnover industries. by turnover, i mean both sales volume and new product introduction. cellular phone units are a classic example. notice that the mainstay products: nokia 5110 and 3310 saw their retail prices go down by 24% and 36% respectively in less than 11 months. the explanation here is a loss allowance at the projected end of the product's life cyle. this is because the pressure exerted by competitors and potential obsolescence is very high. wholesalers now realize a gross profit margin of only 2.5% for the 3310 while retailers get 4%. they project a break-even selling price for this unit by the first quarter of 2002. don't feel sorry for them, though. remember that 3310s used to sell for 9,000. matagal na silang kumita! the 3310 will be superceded by a new model shortly.

another method is point-pricing (different prices for the same product). you notice that certain products carry different prices, depending on which mall/dept store they are sold. this is an income-dependent method. however, the classic example for point pricing is still the difference taxi drivers charge between local metro manila routes and those that emanate from NAIA!!!

[aticus]

Hey, thanks mac! :) I've learned something new today...

[CaRaMBa]

mac :bop: the topic isn't pricing! :teehee:

Aticus, I'm not sure about what I'm about to post since I don't have market share and sales figures.

Let's talk about Lifebuoy. It seems that they went against Safeguard in terms of price. They claim that they can clean, if not as well, even better, than Safeguard - at a lower price!

I tried the product, and it really looks like a bareta. And it's flaky. Also, I don't think that anything that costs so much less can actually be of the same quality. However people always say that I'm not the target market, so my comments don't matter.

Any comments?

(I think that Zest totally screwed Lifebuoy up 'cause at the same price, it does the same thing. And it's supposed to smell good, and the soap bar doesn't look 'chipipay'.)

Again I don't have figures - everything posted here's just my opinion.

[zimdude]

wow.

:handsdown:

for the Nokia example, Nokia introduces planned obsolesence in their products. how do they convey that the old models should be thrown out in favor of their new ones?

[abcxyz]

you really should start a new thread re brands that failed, brands that succeeded.

lifebuoy was a success, BUT just for a short while. it went up like a rocket, but its downhill fall was even faster. it gave p&g a scare, their bread and butter safeguard was threatened and for the first time in decades lost substantial market share. safeguard reduced price as a reaction and more importantly launched zest.

why did lifebuoy suddenly disappear - its basically what you experienced with the brand. consumers, though they like the low pricing, did not like the product. what you mentioned was a factor and some other product-related weakness. you may not be the target market but your observations were consistent with the sentiments of the whole market.

where is the market now? leadership continue to belong to p&g. zest was a good save. lifebuoy was a failure. theyre almost back to where they were before. lifebuoy did well on trial but was dismal at re-purchase due to product inferiority.

whats the lesson here? bad products dont sell for long. thats marketing 101.

[thebrain]

Marketing research does not fully guarantee product success. Risk will always be involved. Sometimes, cost of research limits the broadness of research activities. But those who usually pay the price for a really extensive research get to succeed. Product failures may be due to poor research or wrong timing and a lot of other factors. The thing is, in business you win some you lose some, but you always have to try and take the risk.

[CaRaMBa]

abcxyz, do you think Lifebuoy did research? It seems to me that they just came up with a product and priced it much less than the leader, and spent on advertising hoping that people would go for it 'cause of the price. It seems that they didn't check on what people will think about the shape of the product (really looks like a bareta), the use (it's hard to use 'cause it's rectangle) and the feel (flakiness).

[ferrisb]

conjecture....

if lifebouy is still around (is it?), unilever probably keeps it around to re-process bad soap production ('overruns' if you like), increase yield and fill up capacity. explains the poor quality...

unilever probably commisioned some sort of research before Lifebuoy was launched. baka not as sophisticated as it should have been pero meron pa rin i think.

[abcxyz]

caramba - yes, lifebuoy i am sure did a lot of research before they launched. uni-lever does a lot of research on their products.

ang research kasi is a guide, an indication of how consumers will behave and feel at a future time, when all the market forces are in actual play. so, puwedeng iba iyong actual response/behavior ng consumers when they actually use the products.

also and most importantly, research data is INTERPRETED by human beings. so sometimes, you see what you want to see.

i also suspect, and this is just conjecture, the research design could have been done poorly.

> they should revisit the design of whatever blind product testings they did. the brand encountered product problems, makes you wonder why that did not come out in their product tests

> the product was priced ridiculously low versus market leader safeguard, maybe the research design was not sensitive enough to capture "true" sentiments on the dynamics of price vs product performance. perhaps the respondents in their research were so overwhelmed by the low price that it clouded their feelings about product performance

> and lastly, the human factor. this is the point i raised earlier on the use of "common sense" and "gut feel". the "objective data" is there, people who read the research may have relied too much on the excellent data that they were unable to capture nuances and apply judgement. there is a need to finesse many of the things you see in marketing. research cannot make the decision for you, you have to make the decision.

art vs science balance or imbalance.

[Leigh]

I remember the story ( just got it from a reliable source :) ) about Head and Shoulders in the Philippines. When they launched it, it was supposed to be good to prevent dandruff. After a while when people were complaining that it was "hot" on the scalp, they did something like menthol version of the shampoo. Does this mean that since it was doing well in the U.S. it must be good for the Filipino Scalp?

Let's take Jollibee for example, they came out with the Primera...they did a lot of food tasting and they launched it in all of their branches. It passed their "food tasting committee" - which is composed of people from different walks of life but it seems that a lot of Filipinos still don't like it. I think with Primera, they just tried a different approach since we have always said that Filipinos like sweet things, it's possible that they are just testing the market now.

[Kaboom!]

I don't think any large company launches anything without some kind of research. Upper management alwasy looks for research to base decisions on to cover their backs.

I launched a juice brand for La Tondena a few years ago and we did extensive research on taste, packaging, and pricing. Upper management at that time would not have approved the launch if we didn't have research numbers to back it up.

Another product that probably had a lot of research but still failed was "Fit" from P&G. They spent quite a bit of money launching this thing but rational thinking would have predicted its downfall.

Peace.

[aticus]

Originally posted by Kaboom!
Another product that probably had a lot of research but still failed was "Fit" from P&G. They spent quite a bit of money launching this thing but rational thinking would have predicted its downfall.

Peace.

:lol:

I actually know the people behind "Fit." Believe me, they're rational people, but as abcxyz mentioned, sometimes you just see what you want to see. :) I remember one of them telling me it was going to be a hit, and I didn't have the heart to tell him that the only similarly between "hit" and "Fit" was that they rhymed... ;)

[sdv_2012]

Hi all! Sorry if my story wasn't very accurate. But to some degree the story goes like that....that Dimensionne failed to anticipate the demand that's why it's market shifted to other brands like Pantene.

[abcxyz]

it does not follow that what is good in other markets can work well here. head and shoulders launch was a resounding success in the phils. it killed gard shampoo, the then anti-dandruff shampoo leader.

[Kaboom!]

Although the jury is still out on this but a brand that I think will have a difficult time succeeding is Touch Mobile. I wonder what kind of research they did before launching this product. Voice messaging and other value added services might not be that attractive to new consumers. I'm still not sure who they are trying to target.

Peace.

[aticus]

Well, while we're on the subject, I honestly don't know what the people from Chikka did in terms of market research. I just don't see their service being very relevant, given that almost everyone they're targetting (people with computers and internet connections) would have cellphones too... :rolleyes:

[zimdude]

aticus:
maybe they're targetting overseas Pinoys who use their PC's, for families here who don't. I think the cellular companies were supposed to do some of the marketing of Chikka as well.

Kaboom!:
from the looks of their ads, they're selling to people who might want to have mobiles but not texting.

abcxyz:
True true. I do remember when Gard was the anti-dandruff ware for people like me. :glee:

What is "Fit" anyway? I'm not even sure what it is and what it's for.

Neither have I tasted the Jollibee Primera.

About soap, well, feeling clean is really Pinoy!

[sdv_2012]

Touch Mobile's voice services (airtime per minute) is cheaper than the two Telco leaders - Globe and Smart. The first day it was launched it had 170,000 subscribers. However, that source did not say if these are Globe subscribers who just shifted from Globe to Touch Mobile.

[abcxyz]

touch is cheaper than smart and globe????!!!!

thats a wierd move by globe. and yes, it may cause migration from smart and..... cannibalization from globe. wonder why globe did that???!!!!

but hey, wait a minute - maybe globe/touch will increase the prices of touch after 1 year! parang iyong ginawa nila sa "free sms text" - give lots for free at the start then take it away unceremoniously after your hooked on it. grrrrrr......

[ferrisb]

Let's take Jollibee for example, they came out with the Primera...they did a lot of food tasting and they launched it in all of their branches. It passed their "food tasting committee" - which is composed of people from different walks of life but it seems that a lot of Filipinos still don't like it. I think with Primera, they just tried a different approach since we have always said that Filipinos like sweet things, it's possible that they are just testing the market now.

'qualitative' research is insufficient. all it does is give you directional insight (i.e. 'product x has potential'). Jollibee should have tried (maybe they are as you said) to validate the 'passing rate' from the food tasting committee by running a more quantitative study like an in-market test or a limited branch test.

while the committee may have been comprised of a good sample of philippine society, focus groups like these don't quite give you a product's volume impact.

[hat_tr1ck]

Originally posted by abcxyz
touch is cheaper than smart and globe????!!!!

thats a wierd move by globe. and yes, it may cause migration from smart and..... cannibalization from globe. wonder why globe did that???!!!!

but hey, wait a minute - maybe globe/touch will increase the prices of touch after 1 year! parang iyong ginawa nila sa "free sms text" - give lots for free at the start then take it away unceremoniously after your hooked on it. grrrrrr......

I wouldn't call it a weird move by Globe. I'd call it marketing strategy.

TouchMobile is Globe's answer to Smart's subsidiary, Talk 'N Text. In the same way that Smart is marketing TNT to the lower income class, TouchMobile is being marketed to those whose income level is higher than TNT's target market but is likewise looking for more value for their money. I think the Ayala's would never stoop to TNT's level by targeting the same market - the so-called "jologs class, or if you prefer, C and D class. :D TouchMobile's target leans more to the value-conscious B class.

And as far as unceremoniously cutting down their free text messages, TouchMobile pre-empted this move by already doing so at the same time they launched their product to the same number of text messages that's alloted to Globe subscribers.

[abcxyz]

i know its a marketing strategy and its a bad one.

having two brands owned by the same company in two price segments is a risky move. there are very few local companies who have succeeded in adapting that strategy.

> you always run the risk of cannibalizing your own brands. and guess where the migration will go to? the tendency is that the lower priced brands will eat up on the higher priced brands. and thats not good from an over-all financial/profitability picture for that company.

> on the whole, it also downgrades the market's over-all value. that leaves you less flexibility to offer more value added services to the core.

> for some reason, touch and globe are in the same business center, sold by the same stalls which i think is also a strategu in doubt. globe in effect is putting into the same channel 2 "competing brands". so this segmentation by price and target market is not articulated well in terms of channel.

> while i agree that touch is probably targeting the lower income segment, its ad campaigns, brand images (logo, look, etc) and positioning does not seem to cater to that class. they do seem to have a more upscale image than intended. talk & text on the other hand appear to be doing a better job at targeting the lower income group. touch tends to be more on the lifestyle positioning while talk & text on the functional positioning. functional tends to have more appeal towards the lower income class.

[Kaboom!]

I am in agreement with abcxyz in the confusion as to who Touch is really trying to target. That is why I made the statement. Their ad campaign is very inconsistent with capturing the lower income bracket and seems to suggest cannibalization of current and potential globe users.

I don't know their current numbers but I have a feeling their subscriber acquisition has plateaud (spelling?) in the last month or so.

If it's supposed to cater to the "value added conscious B class", maybe they should've affirmed what value added services this class is willing to pay for. I'm not sure "voice text" is the answer (who knows, maybe they did extensive research on this).

And just because Touch Mobile is an Ayala company shouldn't necessarily mean they shouldn't cater to the "jologs" market. This is why you build brands to service particular markets.

Peace.

[CaRaMBa]

zimdude, "Fit" is a product that cleans veggies. So it comes across as 'soap'.

We used it at home before - the veggies really become bright, and you'll eat more.

Thing is, I think the main message they were trying to convey was "you get to clean your food!". For Filipinos, I don't know if that will work 'cause they can say "I can clean the veggies with water so why use that?"

---

I think brand managers should remember that cultures and societies are different. So a hit in one will not necessarily be a hit in another.

[mac_bolan00]

well, this thread is meant to be constructive so....

two of the biggest MR blunders in recent memory were: 1) black tiger prawn culture for export advocated by CRC and 2) high-rise residential development advocated by new developers and partly by CRC.

i won't expand on these until a CRC/UAP representative replies.

;)

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by abcxyz
i know its a marketing strategy and its a bad one.

having two brands owned by the same company in two price segments is a risky move. there are very few local companies who have succeeded in adapting that strategy.

> you always run the risk of cannibalizing your own brands. and guess where the migration will go to? the tendency is that the lower priced brands will eat up on the higher priced brands. and thats not good from an over-all financial/profitability picture for that company.

Not really, market segmentation is done all the time. Computer companies do it (especially with their server line of products), housing firms do it even the fashion industry does it (they usually have their high end products then another brand for their mass consumer line of clothes).

Do you run the risk of cannibalizing your high end brand ? To a certain extent yes that will happen, but the reality is someone will come along to do that anyway (as talk and text has for globe) so might as well get into the fray and benefit from it. There is also another benefit in this as well. Usually when you have several brands competing in several segments you try to use the same parts or process or channels for all the brands whenever feasible to take advantage of the economies of scale. In the case of parts the cost of production/manufacturing is spread out over several brands, thus bringing down the cost further and improving your margins.

And speaking specifically of the cell phone market, I really don't think the low end brand will hurt their core business since what fuels this industry is more image than services. Think about it what really differentiates a 5110 from the higher end 8210 (or 8310 or whatever). The people using these now wouldn't be caught dead using a lower end brand like talk n text...

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by hat_tr1ck
I think the Ayala's would never stoop to TNT's level by targeting the same market - the so-called "jologs class, or if you prefer, C and D class. :D TouchMobile's target leans more to the value-conscious B class.

I wouldn't call the C class "jologs", from what I remember the C class comprise the working professionals (lawyers, teachers, doctors, programmers, engineers). The D class are still comprised by the lower end workers (laborers, construction workers, janitors, etc) while the E class represent those who have contractual or no jobs at all and live on a hand to mouth existence. Globe is already covering A to C so its logical to assume that the target they would market to is the D class (and overlap of C). The B class however is by definition richer than 80% of everyone else in the Philipines so I wouldn't call that a "value concious class"...

[hat_tr1ck]

abcxyz: I agree with you, launching TouchMobile does sound like a bad move for Globe. But then, TNT, through Smart, has started to cut into their cellular market share. It's bad enough for them that Smart is already nipping at their heels, but to have another brand from the same company further eat into their market is too much for Globe, hence the launching of TM to target TNT's market base.

And that's where the confusion for potential TM subscribers come in. TM's being marketed as a mobile service for the lower income segment and yet their ad portrays their market differently. Like you said, TM is more lifestyle-oriented while TNT is more on the functional side and in the end, functionality wins it for the lower income class.

Yes, cannibalizing of their own brand is a possibility but Globe is hoping that what makes Smart and TNT co-exist can likewise make them and TM co-exist. They are supposedly targeting a different niche after all. While Globe and Smart have both pre-paid and post-paid subscribers, TNT and TM are only offering pre-paid accounts. Only time will tell if they can make as successful a co-existence as Smart has.

As for that two brands owned by the same company issue, Smart looks pretty good at running Smart and TNT at the same time precisely because they're targeting seperate markets. That's why Smart and TNT can maange to co-exist and share the same office, the same building and the same business center. And Globe can't do anything about their products being sold in stalls where TM's are sold. The whole retailer thing's out of their hands.

Kaboom!: As far as I can recall, TM was the product of market research that showed value-added service on voice traffic having been largely overlooked, that's why they're banking on voice traffic, specifically voice info and voice messaging .

According to their survey, voice messaging is ideal for Filipinos, "who naturally are shy and deeply reserved in their feelings", which, to them, explains why text messaging is a big success here. Unlike direct voice calls that can be very intrusive, TM believes that voice messaging still resembles the intimate nature of voice but in a more discrete manner. That, I believe is the answer you're looking for with regards to the VAS issue, according to TM.

The jury's still out on how factual their survey is but my guess is that by offering different kind of service, TM hopes to eat into the mobile market's share by offering a distinctively different service from that of their parent company, Globe. After all, there really isn't any difference between Smart and TNT, it's just their success in market projection that's making both brands viable.

[abcxyz]

globe/ayala have never been known to be good marketers. the top leadership of the globe marketing team that was responsible for globe being where it is now have left globe for other companies.

while smart have been recognized as good marketers. we are hoping the marketing savvy of smart rubs on to tnt.

[abcxyz]

product segemntation based on price and function is much more doable and easier for computer products because there are in truth tangible differences in product perfomances and hardware content. there is a big diff in using celeron vs intel, for example.

but not true for cellphones. product differention in terms of function are more invisible. in fact, i think they differentiate in terms of lifestyle, not function.

what does not help globe and touch is that their campaigns seem to cater to the same target market. compared to a little more obvious differentiatiion between smart vs tnt.

[CaRaMBa]

abcxyz, I think Art Vandelay disagreed with you 'cause you spoke in general terms. You didn't mention that you were just talking about telcos and celphones. You said


having two brands owned by the same company in two price segments is a risky move. there are very few local companies who have succeeded in adapting that strategy.

> you always run the risk of cannibalizing your own brands. and guess where the migration will go to? the tendency is that the lower priced brands will eat up on the higher priced brands. and thats not good from an over-all financial/profitability picture for that company.


Take a look at Safeguard and Zest. Same company, different prices segments, but I believe it was a good move on P&G's part to do that, since Zest can directly compete with Lifebuoy. So for those people who are really after the price, 'switching' in a sense, does not really happen. Instead of the sale going to the competitor, it still goes to the same company, even if it's another brand.

Yes it is risky, but it's not necessarily a bad move.

I do agree with you that Globe and Touch Mobile seem to be targetting the same people. If that's the case then that's really bad. If Touch Mobile was really launched to go against Talk and Text then they're marketing it the wrong way.

I also agree that Smart is more successfull in differentiating Talk and Text and Smart.

[Kaboom!]

abcxyz,

Didn't Globe win the agora award recently? I think they also won another award as the top marketing company of the year.

Peace.

[abcxyz]

did they win? well they deserve to win - they have grown their sub base from 100,000 to 3,000,000 (est only) in a short period of time.

while both owned by ayala, globe and touch are almost separate companies. and two separate marketing teams also. the final decision on how to position globe and touch, therefore rests on ayala. this glove vs touch positioning was what i thought was poor differentiation, and weak targeting for touch.

also, globe has lost the marketing team leadership that brought globe to where it is now to other companies just recently.

[hat_tr1ck]

Plus I'm pretty sure Smart has something up their sleeve right now that will further eat into Globe's market share. Now if only Smart could do something about their cell sites and their signals - or apparent lack of it.

[Gypsysoul]

I DONT KNOW ABT MARKETING BUT .. LETS SEE..RESEARCH.. MUST BE OK FOR COKE BUT THE THYE USED THE WRONG PEOPLE FRO RESEARCH.. TASTED WITH KIDS ALRIGHT BUT WITH OLDER PEOPLE DIDNT HVE A GOOD RESULT WHICH THEY HVE
MIS CALCULATED.

LIKE THE DR PEPPER.. ITS GOING STRONG HERE IN EUROPE..
THEY HVE A BETTER PRODUCT RESEARCH..MAYBE??

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by abcxyz
product segemntation based on price and function is much more doable and easier for computer products because there are in truth tangible differences in product perfomances and hardware content. there is a big diff in using celeron vs intel, for example.

but not true for cellphones. product differention in terms of function are more invisible. in fact, i think they differentiate in terms of lifestyle, not function.


You position your products on what features differentiate it from other similar products. In the case of servers it maybe price and performance/features. For other products it may be different like price, packaging/image/lifestyle, content, performance, services, etc.

For cellphones you've got image/lifestyle, isn't that why Nokia has several product lines of cellphones...

[abcxyz]

yes thats true for nokia phones.

i was referring to mobile services, like globe. smart, touch and tnt

[Art Vandelay]

Originally posted by abcxyz
yes thats true for nokia phones.

i was referring to mobile services, like globe. smart, touch and tnt

But they are different or at least Smart and Tnt are. There is a clear distinction in the way they are positioned. As hat trick mentioned TnT is only fo prepaid users (value concious, occasional users) while Smart has post paid (image concious, high end users).

[abcxyz]

yes, smart and tnt doing much better. globe and touch not too good at it.

[CaRaMBa]

Sharon was mentioned in the ads thread. I said there that she loses her credibility as an endorser 'cause she endorses everything! It's just like a business for her! For me, you should make it appear that the person really, truly believes in the product. Even if it's not true, at least that's the message that should be conveyed. With Sharon, it seems that it's just a business.

I wonder if there's research about this. It seems that the advertisers believe that what Sharon says, people believe in. Is she the 'Oprah' of the Philippines?

[hat_tr1ck]

I think that's what some people would like to believe. She's an endorser for Goodwill Bookstore, right? Well, guess what, Goodwill now has a carboard stand-up of Sharon that says...Sharon's Book of the Month.

[burningflamer]

I dont think Fit was a product of poor marketing research.
Sa pagkakaalala ko, nagkaroon ito ng issue sa BFAD. I think they failed to include its content sa packaging nila kaya nagkaroon ng speculations tungkol sa kung ano talaga yung "laman" nito. May nagsasabi kasi na clorox lang talaga yung product (although ginagamit naman talaga ang clorox sa paglinis ng vegetables). Anyway, hindi nila na-defend yon, and weeks later, bigla nalang itong nawala.
I personally think na kung walang nag-raise sa issue tungkol sa contents non, maghi-hit sana yung produkto.

As for ate shawie, effective pa rin naman syang endorser since napakarami ng fans nya. Saka credible naman kse bagay sa kanya yung mga endorsements nya, mostly food. (e di ba ang taba-taba niya that time? :) ) Pati yung sa Superferry bagay din kase nga ga-barko yung katawan nya. Lumilipad-lipad pa sya don, so feeling ng tao, pag sakay nila sa Superferry, para silang nakasakay sa lumilipad na barko.:D

[abcxyz]

technically speaking, there is no research that can go wrong. research can go wrong in cases of you ask the wrong questions, sampling error, incorrect respondent profile, etc...

its not the research that goes wrong, its the INTERPRETATION of t he research that can go wrong. and more importantly, the INSIGHTS/STRATEGIES that you draw from it and finally the MARKETING ACTIONS that you apply behind it.

[Elvira95]

Hi! I don't know if you guys'll agree with me or shoot this down but maybe Touch targets the "undefinables"...

who says market segmentation is definitive?

Their more comic advertising could have been used to target the lower market -- as in the wannabes (people who would want to look uppity but have to think of their finances first), or as you have mentioned, the functional people who crave value for money, then again they could also strive for the topmost market segment that feel like they "make do" with globe or smart.

What I'm trying to say is that touch may be targeting the "unsatisfied" group. Consumers falling into this category could be globe, smart, or tnt subscribers -- they may be from different market segments, with different tastes, but they may have dissatisfaction as a common factor. The new brand, touch, could entice them by being lofty and economical at the same time.

:wondering: am i making any sense? anyway my thoughts on cannibalism for globe... maybe their hoping their market is terribly brand loyal :D

[Krakista]

Originally posted by abcxyz
touch is cheaper than smart and globe????!!!!

thats a wierd move by globe. and yes, it may cause migration from smart and..... cannibalization from globe. wonder why globe did that???!!!!I think it was more of a technical move rather than a marketing one. It aims to balance out the load on the network. See this earlier thread in TechToday --> Touch Mobile?!? (http://www.pinoyexchange.com/forums/showthread.php3?threadid=59766) A newspaper article came out a few days ago about the NTC asking the cellcos to give out free 10-minute voice calls to replace the 100 free text messages. In that same article it stated that voice channels are underutilized by 40% and it validated what I had earlier thought. A more balanced load on the network gives better service and is like adding cellsites without incurring additional costs. It's a marketing decision as well.

[watland]

There is a lot of research and sales results behind Sharon Cuneta.
Sales of Big Mac shoots up when she first appeared in the McDo commercial.

Her Sara Lee appearance for its cosmetics line on TV worked wonders and the manufacturing people weren't able to keep up with the sudden demand for their products.

Research shows that Filipinas choose Sharon as their role model because she adheres to the Family-first-before-career principle. Yet she manages to be successful on both fronts.

She is the only celebrity accepted from class A to E.
So that makes her a viable endorser especially for clients who want to target all (which is of course not a good target).

Super Ferry suddenly became a household brand after she appeared in its ad beating William Lines and Sulpicio.

Alaska and Century Tuna are now in the No.1 position thanks to their Sharon ads.

Their a Sharon magic that is immeasurable, unexplainable, yet delivers tangible results.

With regards to choosing what she endorses, yes, she does choose the products she'd accept to endorse... and rejected a lot too, if she doesn't believe in the product.

Ask all the marketers who've availed of her services, and they will show you amazing results just because of their Sharon TV ads alone.

The point is, the advertiser and agency should know how to synergize their brand with the Sharon character to make sure their brand essence remains intact.

[Ferdi]

There was this brand of "kuto" solution - from P&G?- in the early 80s targeted to the people in the provinces. The research indicated the product will be a hit. But the sales result proved otherwise and the product was eventually pulled-out of the market.

Post-research showed that the key reason why the product flopped was...in the province, families tend to sit together and pick "kuto" out of each others head. The target market feared that if one used the product that it would destroy this family bonding moment.

[abcxyz]

krakista - i agree that could be one of the reasons. but if you ask me the way to truly encourage more voice calls is to LOWER pricing of voice calls AND to ensure there are no dead spots or dropped calls. on the latter how often do you get pissed at dropped calls and you just resort to sending text.

ferdi - from what i know of that p&g kuto shampoo product - they stopped it bec it was so successful that kuto was eliminated as a problem. also, they probably decided they didnt want to be known as a medicinal product company.

[CaRaMBa]

How about juices?

Would you know of any flavors that were tested but were not launched?

And Ice Cream? How do they come up with the Flavor of the Month? I've heard from a friend whose sister used to work for an Ice-Cream company that they'd do a lot of taste tests with kids and people (swerte nila!).

I just LOVE Pomelo and Ponkan! Whoever thought of that, ang galing mo! :teehee:

[Leigh]

CaRaMBa - even in the big stores, they usually have taste tests. i remember i had a couple of friends who were invited to have a beer taste test. they even got paid to go to the place and drink.

They usually have taste tests for certain groups and they give a certain amount to the people who go.

Regarding the shifting of the market - i remembered reading this shifting idea. That the same company creates a competitor for their own brand to "steal" the customers of the other company. They would like to have their own brand have a competitor from their own company rather than a competitor from the other side.

watland- i agree with you regarding sharon. But if sharon is the Female Favorite for commercials...isn't Aga the Guy Favorite? I personally don't think Aga is the "best" model for products but it seems that it works. He doesn't have a really nice reputation compared to Sharon Cuneta.

[hat_tr1ck]

I went to two supermarkets over the weekend; Rustan's Cubao and Hi-Top in Proj. 4. In Hi-Top alone, there were four products being offered for taste tests while Rustan's had two.

Taste tests are definitely a cheap way to market a product, particulary if the product being offered is located in an area where it's targeting its market.

[CaRaMBa]

Hmmmm another view. Sampling is actually an expensive way to promote your product because of the cost involved. However, it's supposed to be effective, especially if the product is really good. The assumption is that since the product is really good, and now that the customer has tried it, they'll purchase the product.

How do they choose people for FGD's? How does the researcher make sure that the 'sample' is reliable?

[abcxyz]

product sampling (taste tests if food product) in stores as practiced in the philippines and as a total budget is much less than a tv ad campaign. in here its usually done only in key metro manila stores, week-ends for maybe 3 months.

it depends on how many consumers you want to taste the product - number of people, location (outside manila is more expensive) and number of times sampled. the greater number, wider coverage the more expensive.

but i know of sampling efforts that went for 90% of target market nationwide and these brands are now market leaders.

research agencies are given psychographics and demographics profile (basically age, sex, socio-income group, etc) and look for these people. fgds are non-projectible and used only as a prelim radar or for prelim insight gathering.

[yanasmom]

Caramba, I have been attending a lot of FGD's lately. I believe the success depends on how well the participants are chosen and on the facilitatory.
In all the FGD's I've attended, was forced to lie about something. whether it's my age, my husband's work, etc. And, one is not supposed to have attended an FGD for the past 6 months for her to qualify. heck, for the past week i attended 3 already! it's quite interesting, though, but very tiring. especially since i'm one who really participates full blast.

The most successful I've attended had something to do with a new credit card line. All of us participants were actively giving out our comments and suggestions. The facilitator was spontaneous and knew how to encourage us to think and participate. Hopefully the credit card line will be successful!

The worst was about diapers. all of us were moms. FGD started 9pm, ended 12pm! by 10pm nobody seemed happy to be there. of course we were all mothers who wanted to go home to see our babies. the facilitator took a long time to start plus she wasn't spontaneous and didn't talk clearly. she also just read the questions straight from her notes. didn't even re=phrase them. GOSH! what a flop! i feel for the company who hired them. I know FGD's cost a lot!

Also, FGD's have become a sideline for me. The best I've gotten is P1,000!!!

[CaRaMBa]

Changed the topic so that we can be more general.

How can I be part of an FGD? I wanna! :D

Have a question about cars. How many cars do they crash for testing, before they release the model to the market?

[abcxyz]

you can contact the research agencies, theyll be happy to include you in their roster of respondents. theyre always looking for respondents.

or....if you see some woman in a mall or in ayala or wherever with a folder/clipboard talking to people , theyre probably recruiting respondents.

[hat_tr1ck]

Originally posted by CaRaMBa
Have a question about cars. How many cars do they crash for testing, before they release the model to the market?

Well, there's really no limit to the cars subjected to crash tests before they're put out on the market. What's important kasi is that the car can pass the safety standard required in the country the model will be sold in, and this is different in each country. Some models are crashed thousands of times before they can pass the safety requirement since they have to simulate different kinds of crashes for each vehicle.

Since our government doesn't have the funds to put up a government agency that can handle this kind of task, the cars that we have here technically have the safety standard that the Japanese have, since most of our cars are imported either CKD or SKD from Japan.

[tvholic]

Hello!

I'm tasked to look for the statistics of laptop users in the country.

Got any idea on how we can get it?

Thanks in advance!

[blueshark]

Hello!

I'm tasked to look for the statistics of laptop users in the country.

Got any idea on how we can get it?

Thanks in advance!


Try checking with AC Nielsen. I think they conduct surveys on computer (PC/Laptop) usage.

[agentmori]

My favorite local marketing flop is called....hmmm... forgot the name basta sya yung panghugas ng gulay.

[blueshark]

My favorite local marketing flop is called....hmmm... forgot the name basta sya yung panghugas ng gulay.


Yun yung FIT vegetable "cleaner" from P&G I think.

Flop sya sa mga household consumers pero ginagamit yan ng mga restaurants and airline caterers.

They were not successful in teaching consumers how to use the product. Akala ng mga consumers, pagkatapos mong i-rinse yung gulay sa FIT, babanlawan pa ulit.

The thing is, hirap ang consumers i-connect ang pagiging malinis ng gulay kung nilubog mo sa chemicals kaya they still rinse with tap water (which supposedly is dirty) according to FIT commercials then.

Also, relatively mahal yung product. Mahirap gamitin ng common household.

[tvholic]

Try checking with AC Nielsen. I think they conduct surveys on computer (PC/Laptop) usage.

Thanks alot!

I guess there's really no possibility to access information re: this market study for free..

Thanks again! *okay*

[tvholic]

Yun yung FIT vegetable "cleaner" from P&G I think.

Flop sya sa mga household consumers pero ginagamit yan ng mga restaurants and airline caterers.

They were not successful in teaching consumers how to use the product. Akala ng mga consumers, pagkatapos mong i-rinse yung gulay sa FIT, babanlawan pa ulit.

The thing is, hirap ang consumers i-connect ang pagiging malinis ng gulay kung nilubog mo sa chemicals kaya they still rinse with tap water (which supposedly is dirty) according to FIT commercials then.

Also, relatively mahal yung product. Mahirap gamitin ng common household.

I remember attending a seminar with the company that created the campaign for this particular product.

Even them admitted that it was a huge flop..as for the reasons;

1. lack of ample knowledge about the right product usage;

2. it's really hard to get rid of time-tested kitchen techniques like the usual paghuhugas ng gulay...no one can alter it and;

3. yeah, it's costly..

[blueshark]

Some of the best marketing campaigns include:

1. Surf - with the "Lumen" series of ads
2. Alaska - Sharon Cuneta
3. Penshoppe - Mandy Moore campaigne
4. Bayo - Lea Salonga
5. Ph Care - Sharon Cuneta -

[tristful]

May thread pala about marketing research - that's interesting!

Research studies right now are very demanding and far as I know methodologies get more varied nowadays - no longer your usual FGD's and interviews. Well, it does bring a lot of excitement to your research findings anyway and also provides insightful recommendations to "make new news" in the market.

Won't be sharing anything current now about research, ah, baka mapatalsik ako sa trabaho nang 'di oras kung mag-share ako. I know though the researcher who helped develop the "Lumen" campaign for Surf - galing niya! :)