Seven Seas Cod Liver Oil : Where is it ?

Brand : Seven Seas Cod Liver Oil
Company : E Merck


Brand Analysis Count : 260

Seven Seas is a brand that gives me a touch of nostalgia.The small golden colored capsule was a part of my day during my childhood. Seven Seas was marketed in India by Universal Medicare Ltd.

Seven Seas has a rich heritage, this global brand came into existence in 1935. The brand is owned by the UK based Seven Seas . Seven Seas was later acquired by the global pharmaceutical major Merck.

In India , Seven Seas was very popular as a nutritional supplement. Although the promotions were virtually nil for this brand, Seven Seas became popular through word of mouth. The golden capsule gave the visual incentive for kids to have it. So popular was the brand that even vegetarians ( my own experience) took the capsule. One of my colleague remarked that the brand became popular through Non Resident Indians ( NRI's ) who bought this product from abroad.
Cod Liver Oil is rich in Omega3 , DHA , Vitamin A and D. The nutritional value of Cod Liver oil is unmatched . Seven Seas globally is positioned as a nutritional supplement and its USP is that it has the finest Cod Liver Oil. Globally the brand uses the tagline " The Big Fish in Omega 3 " .

In India , the story of this brand is different . Since the brand changed hands from Universal Medicare to Merck , the brand began to vanish from stores. The original marketer Universal Medicare meanwhile launched a competitive brand SeaCod . Now in most of the shops only Seacod is available.
I am not sure what really caused this brand to vanish from the market. What ever be the reason, Seven Seas is missing the Health trend which is now visible in the Indian market. Now most of the customers ( former) of Seven Seas have become old. The new generation is slowly forgetting this brand . Its an opportunity lost for a heritage brand which had a good brand equity.

Market Statisitcs : Indian Retail Opportunity

Size of Indian Retail Market Across Segments




















Source : Business India July 2007 , Merrill Lynch Indian Retail Report 2007

Maruti Versa : Traveling Together Is Fun

Brand : Versa
Company : Maruti Suzuki Ltd
Agency : Lowe


Brand Analysis Count : 259

Maruti Versa is a sad story in Indian brand scene. This brand was launched with much hype in 2001 but now is waiting for death in the Intensive Care Unit. Versa was the first luxury Multi Purpose Vehicle from Maruti 's stable.

Versa was the logical upgrade brand for Maruti Omni. Omni was successful as a family van and Maruti thought that there is a market for a luxuri van that can carry more passengers than an ordinary car. Versa is the Indian version of the popular Japanese van EVERY/ Carry. Versa was called MPV which is the acronym for Multi Purpose Vehicle .


Versa had a dream launch. Maruti roped in the Big B and the small B ( Amitabh and Abhishek Bachchan) to endorse the brand. The commercial featuring the father son duo was a big hit at that point of time. According to reports, Versa was Abhishek's first brand endorsement.

Versa was launched as an Affluent Microvan. The brand was positioned as " Two luxury cars for the price of one" . The ads talked about twin A/C, comfort and space. Versa was launched with a 1300 cc engine which was the same used in Maruti Esteem.

Despite the dream launch, Versa failed to generate volume . The basic issue was the price. Versa was launched with a price of Rs 5.15 lakh for the base model and the top end model costs around Rs 6 lakh. Those enthusiastic customers who flocked the showroom after viewing the ads was shocked by the steep price of Versa. Versa was priced at par with Maruti Esteem and other entry level sedans.


Maruti was totally wrong in estimating the customer's perception of price in this case. It sounds little paradoxic because the company had blockbuster products like Maruti 800 and Alto which was in sync with Indian consumer's price value equation. In the case of Versa, Maruti was little too ambitious. Versa was a large car and the initial buyers were essentially those who had large family. For a small family , there was no logic in going for Versa when a sedan was available at the same price. Moreover the ' mini bus ' shape of the car also was a put off for many customers .
The lack of customer enthusiasm translated to inventory pile up and sluggish volumes for Versa. In 2004, Maruti relaunched Versa with a base price of Rs 4 lakh which was a drastic price cut. The positioning was also changed. The brand was relaunched with the new positioning based on the joys of traveling together. The tagline was changed to " Traveling in company in a car has its own kind of fun". New campaigns were launched which highlighted the theme of traveling together . The TG was identified as families which are large. The aim of the campaign was to inform the new price as well as drive the message that Versa is ideal for large families.

Watch the TVC here : Maruti Versa

But these campaigns did not had the desired results. Although sales peaked immediately after the announcement of price cut, Versa was not able to sustain the volume. More over the brand was eclipsed with the success of Maruti Wagon R which was priced higher than Versa but with less space and engine power.

Frankly I am perplexed with the failure of Versa especially after the price cut. Because this brand makes a perfect upgrade for those users who was fed up with Omni. I feel that again the prime reason is the price. Even after the price cut, the Versa still offers little value to the Indian consumer. Now that there are many large comfortable vehicles with in the price band of 4.5- 6 lakh rage, Versa is not even considered an option by the consumer. The brand recall is also very low. The success of Wagon R also have put this brand in a very odd position in terms of the Product line logic.
Versa has only two options left before it : one is to reduce the price drastically so that the price value equations are favorable Or await the slow death.

Source : agencyfaqs,autocarindia , wikipedia

Brand Update : Chlormint

Perfetti Vanmelle has comeout with a new campaign for Chlormint. The new campaign is surprising since it has changed the famous tagline " Dobara Mat Poochna " to " Khao Kabhi Bhi " ( translated to Eat Anytime )

Watch the new campaign here : Chlormint Kabbadi

It was surprising and shocking . Shocking to me because I have an inherent hate against brands changing their famous and successful taglines and positioning . The new campaign is funny for sure but I don't understand the logic behind the change in the tagline which made this brand famous.

A report in Exchange4media gives some explanation to the change. The brand has changed its positioning from the earlier " One does not need a reason for having Chlormint " to " Anytime Consumption". The brand owners want to expand the scope of the brand.

I would just site an example of the power of the earlier Dobara Mat poochna campaign. During the head butt controversy of Zidane , there was thousands of SMS featuring this brand. Matterazzi was head butted because he asked Zidane " Log Chlormint Kyun Khate hain " . That was a viral campaign initiated by consumers . The campaign had huge fan following and everyone was waiting for another series of Chlormint ads. Not many brands can have that luxury.

Is the new campaign going to expand the scope of Chlormint ? I guess no. This new tagline has nothing new in it. " Anytime Consumption" was the idea of Cadbury's Perk which made it famous through a series of campaigns featuring Preity Zinta. Lot of other brands have used this idea.

If the brand wanted to have the idea of " Anytime consumption" , It could have easily done so using the question " Log Chlormint KAB khate hain " translated to " When do people take Chlormint ? " followed by the famous " Dobara Mat Poochna ".

By forgoing a successful campaign , Chlormint may find it tough to recreate the magic of earlier campaigns.

What do you think?

Related Brand
Chlormint

Calcium Sandoz : Winners Have It In Their Bones

Brand : Calcium Sandoz
Company: Novartis
Agency : Euro RSCG

Brand Count : 258

Calcium Sandoz is a heritage brand and an offbeat brand too. The brand which is 45 years old has a rich heritage globally. It was created in 1929 and has revolutionized calcium therapy. The brand was earlier sold in the ethical route where the brand was promoted to Doctors and was sold through drug stores on prescription.

In 2000, Novartis decided to switch the brand to Over The Counter (OTC) route .At that time , the brand was worth 12 crore. OTC means that the brand is available in all shops and can be sold without prescription.

Calcium Sandoz is a calcium supplement. The product available in Tablet format has 250 mg of elemental calcium and was given to growing children. The target market for this product was kids aged 4-8.
When the product was launched as an OTC brand, the company had the freedom to market the brand through advertising and sales promotion. In the case of prescription drugs , company can advertise only in medical journals and has to depend more on its sales force to push the product.

Calcium Sandoz had a rich heritage and a strong brand equity despite the fact that it was promoted in the ethical route. I can even say that most of the urban population the SEC A B category knew of this brand or have used this brand. One of the major factor that aided this tremendous brand recall is one brand element i.e Packaging.
Calcium Sandoz is clearly identified by its unique Puppy pack which was there unchanged all through these years. That brand element has aided the company when they relaunched this brand in the OTC segment.
Calcium Sandoz is positioned as a supplement that will build healthy bones. The brand takes the tagline " Winner have it in their bones ".

As an OTC brand, Calcium Sandoz faced an issue : taste. The tablet have a chalky taste which often repelled kids from taking this product. When it was prescribed by a doctor, the brand was consumed as a medicine and hence taste didnot matter. But the moment it became OTC, these attributes like taste, softness etc become very important. Identifying this, Novartis launched a variant branded Calcium Sandoz Soft Chew which had the taste of a toffee and had the same calcium content. The company is promoting this variant heavily using visual media. Calcium Sandoz had earlier launched the tablet in orange flavor and icecream flavor. In the case of Soft Chew variant, the product form is also different.

Novartis had also extended this brand to another TG i.e Women. Actually there was a product branded Sandocal Chew which was an ethical product, Novartis decided to launch this product in the OTC as Sandoz Women.
Although Calcium Sandoz has brand recall and equity, it also faces some challenges in the market. The challenges are in the form of product usage and repurchase. The campaigns prompt the customers to buy this product but seldom this is consumed and repurchased . Infact , my wife bought Sandoz Women after seeing the advertisement but has not used it. In the case of the original Calcium Sandoz also, getting kids to eat it and asking for a daily dose is the most challenging task for Novartis.

The company expects that the new Soft Chew may prompt kids to take this brand in a different view and relieves mother of the task of getting the kids to eat it. The brand also faces the issue of " lack of proper clarity " interms of the regulations regarding OTC products. The government is yet of formulate a policy for OTC products ( drugs and supplements). The company had run into trouble when it gave free samples of Sandoz to kids in a school. Without guidelines, the brand cannot enhance its promotions for fear of getting into trouble. Although the market is having potential, this brand is really unsure whether it should go on an overdrive.

Marketing Funda : Power Brand Strategy

Power Brands strategy was the much hyped brand strategy of Unilever's which debuted in India in 2001. The father of this strategy was Niall Fitzgerald who was the Chairman of Unilever during that period.

Mr. MS Banga, one of the youngest Chairman of HLL at that time thought it was a good strategy that can be implemented ( or imported) in India. But four years later, the entire strategy was shelved. The much hyped power brands strategy was laid to rest quietly. Fitzgerald exited Unilever and Mr. Banga moved out of HLL to become the President of Unilever's Foods Division.

What is Power brand strategy?

Power branding refers to building multi-product, Multi-category brands which have global reach. (Marketing Week Dec. 2000) . The idea behind this strategy is to build global brands which endorse multiple products in various categories ( something like an umbrella brand).

To understand the relevance of this strategy, it is important that we understand the background under which this was mooted by Fitzgerald. In 2000, the $44 bn giant Unilever was reeling under the pressure to balance Size and Growth. Over these years, the company has grown to become a behemoth which was under severe marketing attack from small agile companies. This pressure forced Unilever to relook their brand portfolio. Unilever had a whopping 1600 brands ( mind you Brands and not SKU's) across various categories. The top management thought that this many number of brands is the main reason for the lack of growth momentum.
In an interview in Advertising Age, Unilever's Chairman remarked that there were hundreds of brand which existed in the company portfolio but nobody knew Why these brands existed?

Along with that there were other issues in the global market such as

Retailer Power: Large retailers like Walmart changed the power equations in the market. The power moved from manufacturers to distributors. Retailers began to aggressively market their Private Labels. Shelf Space became scarce and Retailers began to stock only large brands.

Brand Proliferation : The huge number of brands and their extensions along with the plethora of private labels forced customers to go for economical private labels because no longer brands provided meaningful differentiation.

This paved the way for the thought that it makes sense to have a limited number of large brands which could be extended to multiple categories / product lines which would reduce the clutter in the market. Another logic was the Pareto Principle of 80/20. Twenty percent of the brands contributed 80 % revenue, hence why not spent the marketing budget on those big brands that contributed to the revenue.
The result of all these thinking was the much hyped Power Brands Strategy which was the core strategy in Niall Fitzgerald's "Path To Growth" agenda for Unilever. Under this Unilever was going to prune its brand portfolio from 1600 brand to a core 400 Power Brands.

HLL's Power Brand strategy

Taking a cue from this, Mr Banga introduced the same strategy in HLL in the year 2000. HLL was also facing growth issues at that time . Like the parent, HLL had a huge brand portfolio consisting of 110 brands and hundreds of SKU's. Competition was hotting up and HLL was struggling to retain market share in various categories.
Mr. Banga decided to rationalize the brand portfolio by concentrating on 30 Power Brands and 10 regional jewels. The company expected that with a reduced number of brands, it will be able to concentrate on the large brands with more promotional budgets.
The plan was like this :
a. Reduce the number of brands from 110 to 40. This can help in increasing operational efficiency and reduce brand clutter.
b. Increase promotions for Power brands thus offsetting the loss from the brand rationalization.
c. Migrate users from small brands to Power brands.
d. Have ambitious growth plans for Power brands ( 8-10%).

The Power brands was chosen on the basis of Size, Brand Strength, Uniqueness and Growth Potential.
But the results were disastrous. After the Power brand strategy implementation, HLL' s topline took a major hit. Profits went down by 22%. In many smaller markets, HLL 's brands were knocked out by small regional brands.

Why Power Brands failed in India?

The primary reason for failure of Power Brand strategy was that HLL miscalculated the power utility of small brands especially in the Indian context. Although there were issues of competition, Indian market was different from global markets at that point of time. Retailers were not that powerful ( compared to Europe or America) and there was no Private label competition.

The withdrawal of smaller brands was the big mistake done by HLL. Smaller brands, although did not contribute significantly to the profitability had lot of uses. It acted as flanker brands for large brands thus preempting competition. Small brands was more accepted locally and when these brands were withdrawn, HLL lost its presence in the smaller markets. The brand rationalization also pulled down the distribution because many brands piggybacked other brands in various markets. The cutdown also helped the surfacing of many regional brands which established in small markets and later grown to fight large brands from its base.
Another strategy that failed was the migration effort of Power brands. The pruning of smaller brands was initiated with the assumption that users of these brands would be migrated to power brands. This assumption failed miserably. A classic case is the failed migration effort of Rexona to Lux. The users of the smaller brands of HLL moved away from the company to brands of other companies.

These issues snowballed into a situation where HLL 's topline got affected which inturn affected the investor sentiments. As a result, HLL went in for a face saving restructuring exercise which led to the exit of Mr Banga from HLL and a silent burial of Power Brand strategy.