P&g study case
974 mots
4 pages
BackgroundCrest Whitestrips monopolized the domestic teeth whitening market before 2002, when Colgate Simply White entered the market and captured nearly 50% of the market share in 3 months. According to a concept test, the majority of customers failed to distinguish and identify the difference in effectiveness between Whitestrips and Simply White. The comparative advantages Whitestrips holds over Simply White must be conveyed to the customers effectively in order to have them truly understand the differences between the products.
Customers are reluctant to choose Whitestrips because they think the product is more difficult to use than SimplyWhite. Research has shown that people use products that require less time investments. Also Simply White attracts consumers because of Colgate’s name brand associated with a long-standing, effective teeth product producer. With a lower cost, Simply White is able to sell at a lower price and steal customers from Whitestrips. Blinded by brand effect, consumers perceived Simply White as cheaper, more convenience and with similar effective as Whitestrips.
Objectives
In order to differentiate Whitestrips from Simply White, we will convey the message that Whitestrips is more effective and simple to use. Also, we will develop synergy by associating Whitestrips with cosmetic products to build the image as a higher-end and more effective beauty product.
Strategy 1: Market Penetration Strategy
Imprinting the knowledge that Crest White Strips are easy and effective to use can help Crest to regain the lost market share.
Action 1: Hiring Research Firm to show the effectiveness scientifically
First, an independent laboratory is hired to conduct an investigation to prove the effectiveness of Crest Whitestrips. By hiring outside of our company, we can ensure that our customers will know the results are unbiased. This will show the true value of our product and how it can specifically help those who purchase and use it.