Marketing and Cleopatra Soap

Colgate-Palmolive Cleopatra (1)Evaluate the results of the grocery survey carried out in move on of the release of Cleopatra later on analysing the Canadian exclusive grocery. If you believe the grocery survey was non appropriate, explain specifically how you would strike modified it. The results of the mart survey carried out in advance of the release of Cleopatra were little significant in substantiative that there was a real strong aim for Cleopatra in the target Quebec merchandise.This is mainly because of the by-line reasons(1) Inappropriate Target Sampling The idea of introducing Cleopatra guck to Canada, especially Quebec state of matter with French background, came because of the grand success in France and the expectation that the cultural si cubic cen eraterarities amongst those two places would produce similar results. Though the basis of considering the Quebec Province was their French influence, the securities indus show survey was conducted in Toronto, a city in Quebecs neighbouring province Ontario that has British influence.So at the first place, the searchers got the target sampling whole wrong and the commercialize survey results for the British-influenced marketplace cannot be used to respect the demand in the French-influenced market. (2) Inappropriate Research Study Method. The first question argona was conducted with a super group of articulate professional women who were introduced to the overlap, its scathe and denote, fol ruggeded by open discussion on uniforms and dis ilks. This study showed positive and candid results for Cleopatra.As Cleopatra was int stop overed to be premium- caliber, premium- expenditured cleanse, this study definitely validated the premium quality exclusively there was still a question mark on the response of premium worth as the super group in this case are mainly concerned with the returns of the guck and are little(prenominal) sensitive to the toll. The second research st udy was conducted with more typical oecumenical consumers who were clear to the advertising for Cleopatra and then asked if they were willing to buy the product. Also they were aban dod a metre of muck for foot race and were phoned a week after for their reactions.This study showed that 50% were willing to buy the product after icon to the advertising and 64% would buy it when it is procurable at the stores. Though this study shows that the people are willing to buy the product, it does not validate the reception of the premium price or the willingness-to-pay of the consumers as the price was not exposed to this study group. Since the typical general consumers were more price-sensitive, their willingness-to-buy the product definitely does not mean their willingness-to-pay the premium price for the product. Because of the above reasons, I believe that the market survey was not appropriate.If I was in charge of the market survey, I would like to modify it as fol slumpsSTEP1 Cl arify the objectives of the market survey as below(a) appreciate the word sense (willingness-to-buy) of Cleopatra scoopful by consumers in Quebec(b) appreciate the cistrons influencing the buying decision of the possible consumers(c) Assess the willingness-to-pay the premium price of Cleopatra pocket(d) Assess the effectiveness of the proposed advertising mercantile for Cleopatra easy lay(e) Assess the response of consumers on Cleopatra scoop for planning in store(predicate) promotionsSTEP2 Collect the information for determining the above objectives by doing the by-line(1) Conduct the survey in the target market, Quebec instead of Toronto to appreciate the demand in the French-influenced market. Start survey with mass consumers and then found on the results, survey further on specific target consumers. (2) take aim question like below to value the key buying actors of the potential consumers.? Quebec. What are the things that you consider while buying a? fur grapp le sludge? possible choices would be(a) price, (b) Quality, (c) Fragrance, (d) Mildness, (e) Soft for disrobe, (f) Other ( ___ )(3) Ask questions like below to assess the willingness-to-pay of the potential consumers.? Would you like to pay the premium price of $1. 29 for Cleopatra soap?? How much would you like to pay for Cleopatra soap?Possible choices would be(a) below $0. 5, (b) $0. 5 to $0. 8, (c) $0. 8 to $1. 1, (d) $1. 1 to $1. 4, (e) above $1. 4(4) foil feedback (like/dislike/opinion) on the advertising commercial from typical general consumers to assess if the commercial is really effective. Typical questions could beQ.? What did you like about the advertising commercial? What did you dislike about the advertising commercial? Q. Is the advertising commercial better than former(a) advertising commercials for soaps? (5) Get feedback (like/dislike/opinion) on the Cleopatra soap from typical general consumers after ravel use for planning future promotions. Typical questio ns could beQ.What did you like about Cleopatra soap? Q. Why would you indispensableness to buy Cleopatra soap? Q. What did you dislike about Cleopatra soap? Q. Why would you not want to buy Cleopatra soap? Q. Is Cleopatra soap winner to new(prenominal) scratch headache soaps? (2) What was made clear by the supernumerary survey conducted in January 1987? The additional survey conducted in January 1987 made the following clear. (1) Low psychometric test% but noble adoption% and amply note loyalty of Cleopatra soap. (2) superiority of Cleopatra soap fault over other undress care soap stigmatises. (3) exalted price as a factor of low rill% of Cleopatra soap. (4) less(prenominal) availability as a factor of low trial run% of Cleopatra soap. 5) advertizement less effective in compel people to accent Cleopatra soap. (1) Low trial% but high acceptance% and high filth loyalty of Cleopatra soap. On calculating regene proportionalityn ordains found on info in exhibit 9, the trial% or the conversion pass judgment from cross out cognizance to of all time Tried of Cleopatra is only 19. 3%, which is precise low compared to 83. 9% and 87. 6% of Dove and Camay respectively. However, the acceptance% or the conversion rate from of all time Tried to Brand In-home of Cleopatra is48. 6%, which is high compared to 28. 6% and 17. 6% of Dove and Camay respectively. This means that 48. 6% of people who effort Cleopatra deal it as their brand in home.Calculations(a) rill% or variation rate from Brand consciousness to constantly Tried (%) =( always Tried (%) / Brand cognizance (%) ) * 100%(b) sufferance% or Conversion rate from Ever Tried to Brand In-Home (%) =( Brand In-home (%) / Ever Tried (%) ) * 100%(c) Conversion rate from Brand Awareness to Brand in-Home (%) =( Brand In-Home (%) / Brand Awareness (%) ) * 100% . Also on calculating the % of Brand Used with relational to Ever Tried, we find that Cleopatra has a higher % of using the brand sole ly of the Time, virtually of the Time and now and then compared to other brands in the skin care segment, while a lower % of Stopped Using than the other brands. This means that most of the people who humble Cleopatra are loyal to it, confirming the high brand loyalty of Cleopatra soap.Calculations% of All of the Time relative to Ever Tried = ( All of the Time (%) / Ever Tried (%) ) * 100%% of Most of the Time relative to Ever Tried = ( Most of the Time (%) / Ever Tried (%) ) * 100%% of Occasionally relative to Ever Tried = ( Occasionally (%) / Ever Tried (%) ) * 100%% of Stopped Using relative to Ever Tried = ( Stopped Using (%) / Ever Tried (%) ) * 100%The compute values are shown in the table below. (2) Superiority of Cleopatra soap brand over other skin care soap brands. From exhibit 10, Cleopatra soap has the maximum number of respondents out of 99Cleo Triers for all the attributes, showing that the Cleopatra soap brand is superior to the other skin care soap brands. This al so shows that most people who put up act Cleopatra soap prefer to have it to other brands. 3) High price as a factor of low trial% of Cleopatra soap From consumer research on likes/dislikes of Cleopatra soap (exhibit 11), 20% of 99Cleo Triers dislike Cleopatra soap because its price is too high. Also from consumer research on trial (exhibit 14), 19% of 204 respondents have given the reason for not acting Cleopatra soap as being too expensive. Thus, these results show that high price is a factor of low trial% of Cleopatra soap. (4) little availability as a factor of low trial% of Cleopatra soap From consumer research on trial (exhibit 14), 29% of 204 respondents have given the reason for not trying Cleopatra soap as being not for sale where they shop.Even though the people wanted to try Cleopatra soap, they could not buy it at their regular shopping stores. Thus, this result shows that less availability is a factor of low trial% of Cleopatra soap. (Note In 1987, Cleopatra soap w as available only in 70% of stores in Quebec. )(5) Advertising less effective in compelling people to try Cleopatra soap From consumer research on advertising (exhibit 13), only 37% of respondents have shown their intention to try Cleopatra soap after seeing the advertising, while 63% of respondents have no intention to try Cleopatra soap after seeing the advertising. Thus, this result shows that the advertising is less effective in compelling people to try Cleopatra soap.So the additional survey done in 1987 made clear that though the Cleopatra soap brand is superior to other soap brands, it has low trial% receivable to factors such as high price and less availability and the advertising not much effective in compelling people to try the soap. (3) From the perspective of Steve Boyd, evaluate both the qualitative and quantitative data to subside whether achieving the target market piece of ground of 4. 5% is feasible or not. chance upon down the strategic options available . In my opinion, achieving the target market appoint of 4. 5% is feasible. However, this would require modifications in the current merchandise dodging along with more time and support from the sales and promotion activities. (1) Qualitative Analysis(1. ) Canadian Bar Soap merchandise Analysis For market analysis, I would like to use the 5 Forces framework on the Canadian avoid soap market as below The Key Success Factors (KSFs) of the comp any are(1) bully descent with Retailers, (2) Competitive Price, (3) High Availability. Threat of new entrants is medium. (Barriers to entry are medium. )- Difficult to differentiate- Tough price competition with the active brands Suppliers bar gaining strength is weak. Raw materials suppliers- General raw materials required for soap- Many suppliers of similar products Buyers bar gaining power is strong. End consumers- Lot of brand choices(35 to 40) available- Few perceivable differences among brands- just now 3 or 4acceptable brands- Price sensitive controversy in the industry is very tough (strong internal rivalry). $105 mil market to manufacturers- Revenue increase by 4-5% but Volume growth by 1. 0-1. 5% per course Many new and existing brands- omit of differentiation among brands- Retailers all-powerful- Price competition for gaining market package Threat of substitutes is low. embossment liquid soaps- 8% market fate- Maximum grant not anticipate to grow beyond 10% in the future Colgate-Palmolive marting scheme for Cleopatra Colgate-Palmolive used the differentiation strategy and positioned Cleopatra as the premium quality, premium priced skin care soap to avoid the price war. They bypassed retailers to avoid paying bouffant sums of capital to get the product listed and offering large mint allowances and discounts.Instead they tried to use electronic media and consumer promotions (Free Bar Coupons, Cleopatra Gold Collection, Sweep stakes) to create demand from the consumers and thus force retailers to keep the brand. Though the advertising commercial and the consumer promotions created the brand awareness among consumers, demand was not created as expected and so the retailers were move the Cleopatra brand off the shelves. In addition, Cleopatra was sold in single packs condescension the developing trend towards larger bundle packs and twin packs becoming the average in the skin care segment. Current tradeing Mix (4P)Product- agio quality skin care soap, Cleopatra- individual(a) pack Price- reward price ($1. 29 / bar)Place- Retail stores- Maximum ledge presence andProper shelf set Promotion- Advertising commercial (15% plowshare Of Voice)- Consumer promotions(Free Bar Coupons, Cleopatra Gold Collection, Sweepstakes)- Bypassing retailers (no plenty allowances and discounts for retailers)(1. 3) Cleopatra shelf Position in 1987From exhibit 8, it can be seen that the shelf lieu of Cleopatra is deteriorated. It received less shelf space than other brands and was placed i n the bottom shelf between Woodbury and Generic brands, not in the pith level of the consumers. Quantitative Analysis(2. 1) Cleopatra Soap Distribution Ratio and Market dole out in 1987At the end of 1986, Cleopatra soap statistical dispersal ratio was 69%, wholesome short of its target distribution ratio of 100% and its market share was 0. 9%, again well short of its target market share of 4. 5%. (2. ) Correlation between market share and distribution ratio On drawing the scatter plot for market share and distribution ratio data in exhibit 6 and drawing the elongate trend line, we have R2of 0. 69581, which is a good fit. So we see that the market share seems to be correlated to the distribution ration. (2. 3) 1987 Survey Findings From effect 2, we have the following findings from the 1987 Survey. (Please refer to exercise 2 for details. )(1) Low trial% but high acceptance% and high brand loyalty of Cleopatra soap(2) Superiority of Cleopatra soap brand over other skin care soap brands(3) High price as a factor of low trial% of Cleopatra soap(4) Less availability as a factor of low trial% of Cleopatra soap(5) Advertising less effective in compelling people to try Cleopatra soapBased on the qualitative analysis and the quantitative analysis, the following pros and cons/issues of the current marketing admixture (4P) can be listed out Current Marketing Mix (4P)Pros Cons/Issues Product- Premium quality skin care soap- Cleopatra triers consider Cleopatra soap brand superior over other skin care soap brands- High acceptance% (48. 6%) and High brand loyalty compared to other skin care brands- Low trial% (only 19. 3%)- No large bundle packs available Price- High margin due to premium price and no trade discounts- High price, compared to Dove($1. 19 / bar) (one of the factors of low trial%)- Not competitive price (failure to meet the KSF of Competitive Price)Place- Good correlation between market share and distribution ratio (increasing distribution ratio would co ntribute into ncreasing the market share)- Less availability distribution ratio of only 69% in 1986 (failure to meet the KSF of High Availability)- Deteriorating shelf positioning and space Promotion- stiff in creating high brand awareness- Adopted Demand Pull strategy and bypassing the all powerful retailers resulting into(a) Failure to get proper shelf space(b) meshing of interest for retailers(c) Non availability due to retailer indifference(failure to meet the KSF of Good Relationship with Retailers)- Less effective in compelling people to try Cleopatra soap(Low share to increasing trial%)So we see that though Cleopatra has high acceptance% and high brand loyalty and is considered superior to other brands, it has a low trial% mainly due to high price, less availability or distribution ratio with no proper shelf space and ineffectiveness of promotional activities to make people try the soap. Despite the high Brand Awareness% and Acceptance%, we have low Brand In-Home% due to low Trial%. As a result, our sales are low and we have a low market share of 0. 9% only. (Note Brand In-Home% = Brand Awareness% x Trial% x Acceptance%)Hence, if we could modify the current marketing strategy to come through high Trial%, it should be feasible to achieve the target market share of 4. 5%. We need to address the following issues to increase the Trial% of Cleopatra soap(1) High price ? not competitive,(2) Less Availability or Low distribution ratio,(3) Deteriorating shelf positioning and space, and(4) ineffectualness of promotional activities to create the required twist to warrant the trial . I would like to propose the marketing mix below to address these issues to view increase in Trial%, thus resulting into increase of our market share%. Proposed Marketing Mix (4P)Product- Premium quality skin care soap, Cleopatra- Single pack + introduce Twin pack to follow the norm Price- Price same or slightly below Dove ($1. 9 / bar or slightly below),become more competitiv e in price, make it compelling to try Place- Increase contract with main retailers (for high availability or distribution ratio)- Negotiate with retailers for proper shelf positioning and space Promotion- switch advertising concept to fit the Quebec market (try to create the pull to ensure the trial)- Consumer promotions compelling people to try Cleopatra soap such as distributing quit soap bars instead of resign bar coupons- Provide trade allowances and discounts for retailers (try to build good relationship with all powerful retailers)Although lowering the price, distributing free soap bars and providing trade allowances and discounts for retailers will result into a low contribution margin but with increase in sales, we should still end up with a healthy contribution margin. Modeling to estimate the Revenues for Cleopatra soap Revenues ($) =(Quebec Soap Market Volume ( of cases) x Cleopatra Market apportion (%)) x Case Price ($)In order to increase the revenues, Cleopatra Mar ket Share inescapably to be increased.Modeling to estimate the Market Share for Cleopatra soap Market Share (%) = (Brand Awareness % * Trial % * Acceptance %) * of households in Quebec *Avg. of Cases consumed per household / Quebec Soap Market Volume ( of cases)Since we have a high Brand Awareness % and Acceptance %, increasing the Trial% would lead to increase in the market share of Cleopatra soap. Calculation of Trial % required for achieving Target Market Share of 4. 5%Item Value Source Brand Awareness % 73. 5% abut 9Acceptance % 48. 6% Calculated value using data in screening 9((Brand In-Home% / Ever Tried %) * 100%) of households in Quebec 2. 3 one thousand million summon 6Avg. of Cases consumed per household0. 25 Assumption (0. 5 case per year)= 0. 25 * 48 soaps per year = 12 soaps per year = 1 soap per month Quebec Soap Market Volume( of cases)2. 0 million Calculated value using Forecast data in Exhibit 6 which is based on target market share of 4. 5%Total Forecast f rom 1986 Feb to Dec / 0. 045= 90,500 / 0. 045 = 2,011,111= Approx. 2. 0 million cases From modelling to estimate the market share for Cleopatra soap, we have Market Share (%) = (Brand Awareness % * Trial % * Acceptance %) * of households in Quebec *Avg. of Cases consumed per household / Quebec Soap Market Volume ( of cases)That is,0. 045 = (0. 735 * Trial % * 0. 486) * 2. 3 million * 0. 25 / 2. million On solving for Trial %, we get Trial % = 43. 8%At present, we have a Trial % of 19. 3% with the Brand Awareness % of 73. 5%. So if we could increase the Trial % to 43. 8% (assuming that Acceptance% remains at 48. 6%), we should be able to achieve the target market share of 4. 5%. Available Strategic Options Steve Boyd, Group Product Manager, had the following three options available(1) Admit defeat and discontinue the brand,(2) Continue the strategy with baby bird modifications, if necessary, and try to get a 4. 5%market share by give it more time and support(3) Alter the strat egy or even the product itself Recommended Strategic Option .I would like to recommend Option (2) to the management of Colgate-Palmolive based on the qualitative and quantitative analysis done in exercise 3. As we have seen that Cleopatra soap has been accepted as a high quality soap and is considered superior brand to other brands in the skin care segment, but due to various factors, the trial% is very low resulting into less market share. So if minor modifications can be done in the marketing strategy (such as the proposed marketing mix in exercise 3) to try to address the existing issues resulting into low trial%, it should be possible to increase the trial% and finally achieve the target market share of 4. 5% in some time.Option (1) has the benefit of not losing any more money if Cleopatra continues to be afailure, but it also has the risk of losing the probability of making more money if Cleopatra could succeed by making minor modifications in the marketing strategy. Also it w ould be too early and dirty to discontinue a brand that is highly evaluated and accepted by the consumers after a short period of about a year. Option (3) has the benefit of altering the strategy or even the product and start up all again to try and make consumers buy the product, but this is not required as the 1987 survey results show that Cleopatra has a high acceptance% of 48. 6% and a high brand loyalty.It would be wise to study the current marketing strategy and make minor modifications to address the existing issues resulting into low trial%. Option (2), however, has the risk of losing even more money if Cleopatra continues to be a failure but considering the fact that the product was so successful in a similar market in France and the 1987 market survey results that validated the acceptance of Cleopatra brand by the consumers, it should be a good risk to try and give the product more time and support. Making the price competitive, building good relationships with the retai lers to get proper shelf positioning and space and making effective promotions to create a pull to ensure the trial are the key factors to the future of the Cleopatra brand.