2. Are there any patterns evident between the brand performance measures in Tabl
ID: 338962 • Letter: 2
Question
2. Are there any patterns evident between the brand performance measures in Table 1? Describe the patterns and differences that you see between the competing brands, and specifically for Sunsilk. (400 words approx.)
3. Your Marketing Director recently attended a marketing conference where she heard a presenter talking about the importance of heavy buyers to a brand. This presenter said, “a brand’s customer base should mostly consist of heavy buyers, these buyers are vital to a brand’s success…” Your marketing Director now wants to implement a marketing strategy to encourage all existing buyers to become heavy buyers (i.e. to buy Sunsilk 5 or more times in a year). Explain if this is a good strategy to take. Why / why not? (300 words approx.)
Section 2: Brand Performance Table 1: Brand Performance Measures Market Share Average Purchase Frequency Category Buying Share of Category Penetration Sole Brand Requirements Loyalty 37 27 20 2.2 2.2 2.0 L'Oreal 75 5.2 43 Sunsilk 45 35 18 45 6.8 29 Pantene Herbal Ess 9.5 100 29Explanation / Answer
2. We can see that movements between 'Market share' and 'Market Penetration' are co-related. The company with the highest market share has the highest penetration, the one with the second highest market share has the second highest penetration and so on. Similar correlations can be seen with 'Share of category requirements' and 'Sole Loyalty.' However, the parameter, 'Average Purchase Frequency' doesn't show much deviation or fall like other parameters.
Sunsilk captures the 2nd space in the market with highest purchase frequency, however, faces the loyalty challenges with respect to L'Oriel despite having close to 1/3 market share. The category buying rate, however, is inversely proportional or shows a negative correlation with all other parameters.
It can also be seen that the ones with low market share capture no market loyalty.
3. This is not a good strategy.
As always, as per numerous researchers and said by many a marketing gurus, that a small section of the population estimates for the most transactions in any product category. This is the universal 20/80 Law—the 20 percent of the shampoo users consume 80 percent of the shampoo —applied to marketing.
Heavy users are often price alert, deal prone, and consequently unfaithful to the brands they buy. Winning them now with a great offer is no huge feat because you’ll lose them the next day inside a competitor’s deal.
Other heavy users are psychologically locked to a competing brand. They are perfectly happy with the labels they currently buy. They are somebody else’s best consumers. They are very difficult to influence. Heavy users may additionally have demographic and media-usage characterizations similar to every other in the division.
Sadly, these people usually are not especially diverse in terms of anything other than the variable that distinguished them in the first place. We cannot distinguish them by salary, schooling, age, the video they watch, the magazines they see, their attitudes toward food, use of the internet or anything other.
Yes, it is sure that heavy users approach toward cheaper, more massively promoted brands, but then now most brands are massively promoted. As a result, the brand purchasing behavior of heavy users is likewise similar to light users than several of us would like to think in sections as different as milk, light bulbs, long-distance services, etc.
However, targeting and transforming purchases of normal customers to heavy buyers will grow share but brand recall and trialability will add to what will enhance the sales.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.