Marketing and Cleopatra Soap

Colgate-Palmolive Cleopatra (1)Evaluate the takes of the signalet analyse carried out in advance of the release of Cleopatra later analysing the Canadian whip mart. If you deal the securities industryplace place stare was non appropriate, inform specifically how you would birth modified it. The answers of the market place survey carried out in advance of the release of Cleopatra were less significant in confirming that there was a real strong demand for Cleopatra in the localize Quebec market.This is primarily because of the fol abjecting reasons(1) Inappropriate Target Sampling The idea of introducing Cleopatra max to Canada, oddly Quebec commonwealth with French background, came because of the grand success in France and the expectation that the ethnic connaturalities among those two places would produce similar results. though the basis of considering the Quebec Province was their French influence, the market survey was conducted in Toronto, a city in Quebe cs neighbouring province Ontario that has British influence.So at the premier place, the researchers got the lay sample completely wrong and the market survey results for the British-influenced market cannot be apply to assess the demand in the French-influenced market. (2) Inappropriate Research Study Method. The first research study was conducted with a super crowd of articulate superior women who were introduced to the crossway, its damage and publicize, fol number oneed by open discussion on likes and scorns. This study showed authoritative and receptive results for Cleopatra.As Cleopatra was intended to be agiotage-quality, gift-priced scoop shovel, this study decidedly bear outd the support quality exactly there was good-tempered a question mark on the reception of premium price as the super group in this case ar mainly concerned with the benefits of the clean and are less stark naked to the price. The second research study was conducted with to a greate r extent than exemplary cosmopolitan consumers who were exposed to the advertising for Cleopatra and past asked if they were willing to buy the product. alike they were given a nix of lather for tally and were phoned a calendar week later for their reactions.This study showed that 50% were willing to buy the product aft(prenominal) exposure to the advertising and 64% would buy it when it is available at the stores. Though this study shows that the heap 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 full(prenominal)er up reasons, I believe that the market survey was not appropriate.If I was in charge of the market survey, I would like to modif y it as fol depressive disordersSTEP1 Clarify the objectives of the market survey as be humbled(a) Assess the toleration (willingness-to-buy) of Cleopatra gook by consumers in Quebec(b) Assess the factors influencing the get decision of the potential consumers(c) Assess the willingness-to-pay the premium price of Cleopatra trounce(d) Assess the effectiveness of the proposed advertising commercial-grade for Cleopatra soap(e) Assess the response of consumers on Cleopatra soap for preparation future promotionsSTEP2 Collect the information for determining the heightser up objectives by doing the fol lowing(1) Conduct the survey in the nates market, Quebec sort of of Toronto to assess 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) expect question like below to assess the key buying factors of the potential consumers.? Quebec. What are the things that you consider while buying a? legal professionk pass over soap? Possible choices would be(a) Price, (b) Quality, (c) Fragrance, (d) Mildness, (e) Soft for genuflect, (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) Get 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 close to the advertising commercial? What did you dislike about the advertising commercial? Q. Is the advertising commercial better than other advertising commercials for soaps? (5) Get feedback (like/dislike/opinion) on the Cleopatra soap from typical general consumers after essay use for planning future promotions. Typical questions could beQ.What did you like about Cleopatra soap? Q. wherefore would you want to buy Cleopatra soap? Q. What did you dislike about Cleopatra soap? Q. wherefore would you not want to buy Cleopatra soap? Q. Is Cleopatra soap superior to other skin negociate soaps? (2) What was made clear by the additional survey conducted in January 1987? The additional survey conducted in January 1987 made the following clear. (1) commencement streamlet% but graduate(prenominal) acceptance% and high denounce obedience of Cleopatra soap. (2) favorable position of Cleopatra soap strike out over other skin care soap brands. (3) juicy price as a factor of low mental testing% of Cleopatra soap. (4) Less approachability as a factor of low test% of Cleopatra soap. 5) advertise less effective in compelling people to canvas Cleopatra soap. (1) Low streak% but high acceptance% and high brand devotedty of Cleopatra soap. On calculating transition lays base d on info in award 9, the exam% or the conversion rate from dirt ken to Ever attempt of Cleopatra is only 19. 3%, which is actually low compared to 83. 9% and 87. 6% of Dove and Camay respectively. However, the acceptance% or the conversion rate from Ever tried to crisscross 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 canvas Cleopatra pay back it as their brand in home.Calculations(a) Trial% or change rate from sword Awareness to Ever Tried (%) =( Ever Tried (%) / Brand Awareness (%) ) * atomic number 6%(b) Acceptance% or Conversion rate from Ever Tried to Brand In-Home (%) =( Brand In-home (%) / Ever Tried (%) ) * ampere-second%(c) Conversion rate from Brand Awareness to Brand in-Home (%) =( Brand In-Home (%) / Brand Awareness (%) ) * vitamin C% . Also on calculating the % of Brand apply with congeneric to Ever Tried, we find that Cleopatra has a higher % of using th e brand All of the cadence, Most of the Time and Occasionally compared to other brands in the skin care segment, while a lower % of Stopped development than the other brands. This means that most of the people who crusade Cleopatra are loyal to it, confirming the high brand loyalty of Cleopatra soap.Calculations% of All of the Time carnal knowledge 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 calculated 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 also shows that most people who prevail tried Cleopatra soap prefer to redeem it to other brands. 3) High price as a factor of low outpouring% 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 savouring Cleopatra soap as being too expensive. Thus, these results show that high price is a factor of low trial% of Cleopatra soap. (4) Less approachability 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 available where they shop.Even though the people treasured 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 C leopatra soap. (Note In 1987, Cleopatra soap was 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 plan to try Cleopatra soap after go overing 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% due 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 decide whether achieving the target market portion out of 4. 5% is executable or not. Break down the stra tegic options available . In my opinion, achieving the target market handle of 4. 5% is feasible. However, this would require modifications in the contemporary market dodging along with more time and support from the sales and promotion activities. (1) qualitative Analysis(1. ) Canadian Bar ooze mart Analysis For market analysis, I would like to use the 5 Forces framework on the Canadian bar soap market as below The Key Success Factors (KSFs) of the family are(1) effectual Relationship with Retailers, (2) Competitive Price, (3) High Availability. little terror of new entrants is medium. (Barriers to foundation are medium. )- Difficult to differentiate- Tough price competition with the exist brands Suppliers bar gaining power 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 understandable differences among brands- O nly 3 or 4acceptable brands- Price sensitive Competition in the industry is very tough (strong internal rivalry). $cv mil market to manufacturers- R stillue growth by 4-5% but raft growth by 1. 0-1. 5% per year Many new and existing brands- Lack of differentiation among brands- Retailers all-powerful- Price competition for gaining market share Threat of substitutes is low. Substitute liquid soaps- 8% market share- Maximum share not expected to grow beyond 10% in the future Colgate-Palmolive selling Strategy 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 compensable large sums of money to get the product listed and offering large quite a little allowances and discounts.Instead they tried to use electronic media and consumer promotions (Free Bar Coupons, Cleopatra Gold Collection, Sweep stakes) to take a leak 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 take outing the Cleopatra brand off the shelves. In addition, Cleopatra was sold in single packs despite the developing trend towards larger share packs and twin packs beseeming the average in the skin care segment. Current commercialiseing amalgamate (4P)Product- bounty quality skin care soap, Cleopatra- Single pack Price- Premium price ($1. 29 / bar)Place- Retail stores- Maximum shelf presence andProper shelf emplacement Promotion- Advertising commercial (15% component part Of Voice)- Consumer promotions(Free Bar Coupons, Cleopatra Gold Collection, Sweepstakes)- Bypassing retailers (no apportion allowances and discounts for retailers)(1. 3) Cleopatra Shelf Position in 1987From exhibit 8, it can be seen that the shelf positioning of Cleopatra is deter iorated. It received less shelf home than other brands and was move in the bottom shelf between Woodbury and Generic brands, not in the eye level of the consumers. Quantitative Analysis(2. 1) Cleopatra sludge Distribution Ratio and grocery carry on in 1987At the end of 1986, Cleopatra soap dissemination ratio was 69%, well 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 swig the scatter plot for market share and distribution ratio data in exhibit 6 and drawing the linear 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 drill 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) Superio rity 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 premix (4P) can be listed out Current Marketing mingle (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 combative price (failure to meet the KSF of Competitive Price)Place- Good correlation between market share and dist ribution ratio (increasing distribution ratio would contribute 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- Effective in creating high brand awareness- Adopted Demand get off strategy and bypassing the all powerful retailers resulting into(a) Failure to get priggish shelf space(b) Conflict 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 contribution 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 ineffectuality of promotional activities to make people try the soap. Despite the h igh 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 achieve high Trial%, it should be feasible to achieve the target market share of 4. 5%. We need to breed 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) Ineffectiveness of promotional activities to create the required pull to ensure the trial . I would like to propose the marketing mix below to make out these issues to ensure 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 be low Dove ($1. 9 / bar or slightly below),become more competitive in price, make it compelling to try Place- Increase contract with main retailers (for high availability or distribution ratio)- Negotiate with retailers for proper shelf positioning and space Promotion- Change advertising concept to fit the Quebec market (try to create the pull to ensure the trial)- Consumer promotions compelling people to try Cleopatra soap such as distributing free soap bars instead of free bar coupons- raise trade allowances and discounts for retailers (try to build good relationship with all powerful retailers)Although large(p) the price, distributing free soap bars and providing trade allowances and discounts for retailers will result into a low contribution margin but with increase in sales, we should still end up with a healthy contribution margin. Modeling to image the Revenues for Cleopatra soap Revenues ($) =(Quebec trounce Market Volume ( of cases) x Cleopatra Market distribute (%)) x C ase Price ($)In order to increase the revenues, Cleopatra Market Share needs 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% Exhibit 9Acceptance % 48. 6% Calculated value using data in Exhibit 9((Brand In-Home% / Ever Tried %) * 100%) of households in Quebec 2. 3 jillion Page 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 one million million million Calculated value using expect data in Exhibit 6 which is based on target market share of 4. 5%Total Forecast from 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 wefts Steve Boyd, Group Product Manager, had the following terce options available(1) Admit defeat and discontinue the brand,(2) Continue the strategy with kidskin modifications, if necessary, and try to get a 4. 5%market sha re by giving it more time and support(3) Alter the strategy or even the product itself Recommended Strategic Option .I would like to recommend Option (2) to the trouble 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 essay of losing the opportunity of qualification more money if Cleopatra could succeed by making minor modifications in the marketing strategy. Also it would be too earlier and unfair 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 jut 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 unused to review 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. Maki ng the price competitive, building good relationships with the retailers 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.