Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
strategy in India
In this article we have discussed Rin detergent marketing strategy in India from the
time it was launched in India.
1969 Rin Bar was launched in India with the iconic lightening mnemonic.
1994 Rin Detergent Powder was launched. This was the first product extension
from the iconic brand that stood for whiteness in laundry.
2007 The brand made an addiction in its portfolio with the introduction of Bleach
another whiteness solution for the Indian household. It even added the Rin Matic,
a specialist washing machine powder, based on the insight that ordinary powders do
not deliver performance in a machine wash thus leading to an unsatisfied consumer
need.
Rin promised to position itself as a surf with Whitening ability, but, it could not find a
tagline that was powerful enough to convey the brand promise. In the year 2008, the
brand adopted the punchline Duguni Safedi, Duguni CHamak. The ad was
catchy, but it could not establish a connection. So, Rin came up with the famous
tagline-Chamakte Rehna. It gives the brand new opportunities to communicate with
the consumers and has immense potential and possibilities for new campaigns. The
tagline itself is making Rin a strong brand and helped it make an aggressive
approach.
Recently, Rin released a new campaign- Rin Challenge which was endorsed by
Kajol. In the advertisement, Kajol challenges a group of women to join TEAM RIN,
highlighting the brands core competency Whiteness.
Hindustans Unilevers Rin and Proctor Gambles Tide are at loggerhead over a
latest advertisement by HUL where it puts an offer to the consumers to choose 1kg
of Rin pack with an Extra 100gm powder priced at Rs.67 over a 950gm pack of Tide
priced at Rs.80. HUL justifies it by saying that the advertisement is a factual
representation of the price of the two brands and helps consumers make an
informed choice. It was although not the first time that HUL had directly compared
Rin with Tide. In 2010, it used the tagline, Rin offers better whiteness than Tide as
a promotional tool to be used by the brand.
The Strategy
According to latest news report, the Calcutta High Court has restrained HUL from airing the
controversial campaign against Tide. HUL has been given 72 hours to comply with the order ( Source)
The current high profile aggressive stand of Rin has a background story. There was a proxy war going
on between Rin and Tide since December 2009. During December, P&G launched the low priced
variant of Tide branded Tide Naturals. Tide Naturals was priced significantly lower to the Rin. Tide
Naturals was launched at Rs 50 per Kg , Rs 10 for 200 gms and Rs 20 for400 gms. Rin was priced at
Rs 70 per Kg at that time.
The reduced price of the Tide variant was an immediate threat to Rin. Since Tide already has an
established brand equity, Rin was bound to face the heat. Although HUL had another low priced
brand Wheel priced at Rs 32/Kg, Tide was not in the same category of Wheel.
Rin had to cut the price to resist the market share erosion. As discussed elsewhere in the blog, HUL
was facing a steady erosion in the market share in most of the categories. In the detergent category
itself, the brand faced a market share fall of 2.5% in December 2009. With P&G starting a price war,
HUL had to react and it did by cutting the price of Rin by 30% to Rs 50 per Kg. ( Source ) .
HUL also reacted to the Tide Natural's price war in a ' Guerrilla Marketing ' way. It took P&G to the
court regarding the Tide Natural's advertisement. The contention was that Tide Naturals was giving
the impression to the consumers that it contained natural ingredients like Sandal. The court ordered
P&G to modify the campaign and P&G had to admit that Tide Naturals did not contain any Natural
ingredients. ( another example of a brand swaying over to unethical marketing practices).
While P&G opened a war in the price front, HUL retaliated by opening two war fronts. One was the
direct comparative ad and other through the court order asking P&G to modify Tide Naturals Ad and
to admit that Tide Naturals is not ' Natural'.
I think that it was Rin which won the Round 1 of this war. It generated enough Buzz about the brand
with all the media talking about the campaign. Rin was also able to neutralize the aggression of P&G
to certain extent.
Tide chose not to respond because further fuel to the fight can highlight the fact that Tide Naturals
does not contain any 'Natural Ingredients " which may negatively affect the brand's standing in the
consumer's mind. So it is better to play the role of a " poor" victim at this point of time.
P&G can celebrate because of the free advertisement it got for Tide Naturals because of the
comparative ad of Rin.
It is interesting to see the academic angle of this concept called Comparative advertising. From my
little digging of information, it was evident that the academic research is also clueless about the
effectiveness of comparative advertising. There are enough evidence to prove that comparative ads
work better than non-comparative ads and vice versa. So academicians are as clueless as the
practitioners in this regard.
According to academic literature, Comparative ads are those ads which involves directly or indirectly
naming competitors in an ad and comparing one or more attributes in an advertising medium ( Alan T.
Shao, Yeqing Bao, and Elizabeth Gray,Comparative Advertising Effectiveness:A Cross-Cultural Study
Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, Fall 2004)
There are two broad types of comparative ads. One is the Direct comparative ads which compares
the competitor in more than one attribute. The second type is the Indirect comparative ad which
projects the brand as the Leading Brand rather than comparing on certain attributes.
In the marketing world ( globally) comparative ads are commonly used across categories. Some of
the relevant observations regarding comparative ads are given below.
Comparative ads are perceived to be beneficial to the consumers since more information is
provided to him by the competitors. Comparative ads are encouraged in certain markets like USA by
the regulators because it increases transparency and provides more information to consumers.
The comparative ads generally result in counter arguments which often creates such a noise
that it discounts the original argument/information. Consumers tend to discount the claims by both the
competing brand because of the arguments.
Comparative advertising strategy is more effective for smaller brands rather than established
large brands. By challenging a larger brand through comparative ad , the small brands tend to derive
more acceptance and awareness than the larger brand.
Comparative ads are found to be more effective for categories where consumers tend to use
their analytical mind. Comparative ads tend to fail where consumers use imagery while evaluating the
brands. For example, products like automobiles use comparative ads extensively and with
effectiveness.
There are also studies which shows that male consumers are more attracted towards
comparative ads compared to female consumers.
Although Indian marketing world have seen lot of comparative ads, the current Rin Vs Tide is a rare
case of direct comparative ad where the brand has taken the competitor brand's name and
challenging it head on. That is the main reason behind the media noise about the campaign.
P&G India always was a laid back competitor in the FMCG market . Despite having the product
portfolio and market strength , it never realized its potential. The company was happy with their
minuscule market share in the various categories in the FMCG business . I am not sure whether P&G
will react aggressively to the current HUL onslaught and if at all they did ,will it sustain the fight for
long.
PROMOTION
Bold and brash is in and its the new chic(k?). Gone are the days of harmless understated
advertisements (Oh I am not complaining at all, maybe I will after a few decades, but not now). If
Deepika Chikhalia was the epitome of the Bharateeya Naari (thanks to Ramanand Sagars
Ramayan) for Nirma Super for what seems like ages ages ago, the new set of female
characters in advertisements for detergent powders appear to be scheming conniving saasbahu types straight out of a K serial (or soap). Whats more, their on-screen children too
seem to have inherited their impish traits.
It appears that Rin, that respectable Indian brand, has taken the initiative to alter the rules of the
game; if the new Rin advertisement is anything to go by, it certainly seems like Rin or Hindustan
Unilever Limited, probably has taken upon itself the responsibility of changing the hitherto
comparatively demure face of Indian ads. The new ad has got almost everyone I know with salt
n pepper hair talking about that mythical ancient time in everybodys lives (good ol days of
course). The ad runs something like this:
There are two women, the first one (lets call her Woman 1 like they do for extras in movie
credits) praises Tide, with a Tide packet featuring prominently. A bus, presumably school bus,
arrives with their children. Woman 1s son steps out of the bus first and his shirt is a dull shade of
white. A second boy alights and his shirt is an immaculate white. He moves towards Woman 2
who uses Rin, of course. Woman 2s son asks Woman 1 Aunty Kyun Chaunk Gai ? with the
obvious reference to Tides caption Chaunk Gaye !
Would this ad attract claims of disparagement? The issue of disparagement under Section 36 of
the MRTP Act has been discussed earlier on SpicyIP by Kruttika in the context of Britannia
successfully restraining Unibic from disparaging its Good Day brand of biscuits. In light of this
case, Tide seems to have a decent case for trademark infringement unless Rin is able to prove
that its depiction was honest and based on facts.
Whatever be the case, if these kind of ads are the way of the future, I would like to see how they
turn out for certain more interesting products
"I am getting T
ide at a very low price" which is what the
lady in the ad says, "Tide hain, Khushbhu bhi aur safedi bhi".. She has taken a Tide
Naturals pack and she still feels She has taken Tide.. which is not true and who has
mislead this customer?? P&G or HUL?? HUL is just trying to educate the customer
by saying indirectly in a respectable manner, "You can compare Tide with RIN my
dear.. But not Tide Naturals with RIN." It is not saying RIN is better than Tide w.r.t
the cost but, it is trying to say it is definitely better than Tide Naturals w.r.t the cost.
.
And HUL is also to be blamed one fourth for this confusion and the Ad agency that
did thi
s Ad for them for the rest three fourth. The
concept of direct attack is wonderful and awesome but, I think the customer isn't able
to get this right message from the Ad as expected by HUL and the Ad agency.. The
customer feels RIN says, "RIN is better than Tide".. I think it would have been better
if the Lady might have been shown in the ad picking up Tide Naturals instead of Tide
original version and RIN.. This might have emphasised the effect of Tide Naturals in
a better way..
.
But still, this campaign is definitely a tough one to crack for P&G and their agency.
Either HUL needs to bring more sense to this ad asap or else, if P&G comes with a
campaign in reply (though it will be very difficult to counter the argument) HUL will
definitely suffer huge volumes...
I had to view the ad nearly 10times with my eyes glued to TV at 1cm distance to get
the blurred disclaimer that appears in the bottom twice during the TVC that says... "
Schematic representation of superior whiteness is based on Whiteness Index
test of Rin Vs Tide Naturals as tested by Independent lab"