HOW DO

BRANDS BECOME
NO. 1... IN "FMCG"
 CONTENTS
Topic
Acknowledgements
Executive summary
Introduction
 What is a Brand
 How do Brands Become No. 1 in
FMCG?
 Objective of the Project
Research Methodology
Industry Overview
 History of chocolates
Company Profile (for Chocolate Brands)
 Nestle.
 Cadbury
Product analysis
 Kit Kat Vs CDM
Analysis of Competition
Current Segmentation targeting and
Positioning
What is Strong Brand
Data Analysis and Findings
 Cadbury's & Nestle
(Consumer Perception)
 Cadbury & Nestle (Retailer’s
Perception)
 To Become a No. 1 Brand (in FMCG)
One has to be ...
Analysis of Success or Failures
Conclusion
Bibliography
References
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This project was undertaken to find out the attributes that make a brand
No. 1. An exploratory and descriptive research was undertaken.

Sample of two brands were analysed namely - CDM, Kit Kat. The brands
were selected on the basis of their usage and noticibility. Total sample size
of 100 respondents selected on the basis of convenience was surveyed,
which included consumers, retailers and dealers.

Data was collected from secondary as well as primary sources. Structured

questionnaire was used to collect primary data.

Various statistical tools such as modal value, correlation, simple averages

and percentage were used to analyse the collected data.

From the above analysis it was concluded that in a highly competitive

FMCG market the following parameters were considered important for any
product (Chocolate) to become a No. 1 brand :

 Top of the mind recall

 Change in the style and code of the brand

 Availability

 Advertising

 Keeping the brand alive

 A clear brand personality

 Satisfied retailers

These conclusions are based on a thoroughly conducted survey and gives

some insight of the characteristics that go in to make a brand the No. 1 in
its product category.
 INTRODUCTION

What is a Brand ?
The concept of a brand is probably the most powerful idea in the
commercial world. The formal history of brands is in many ways a prosaic
one, starting not all that many years ago when mass production and wider
distribution led manufacturers to identify (or brand) their merchandise in a
recognisable way, so as to offer a promise of consistent quality. But the
real history of brands is much longer and more interesting. Brands truly
understood are the things which patrol the boundary between people and
the world outside them. Well before the industrial revolution people were
acquiring swords, horses, estates even countries, not only for their
usefulness but because of what they projected about the person him or
herself. In a deeper sense, people have always used objects not just to
change outward impressions, but also to change things inwardly, i.e. to
change themselves. Children’s obsession with trivial objects like, say’
coloured pens, is instructive. Once they have acquired the desired, but
frequently useless object, their interest disappears because they find that
no amount of coloured pens makes you into a different person.

The same is sadly true in later life. The anticipation of owning a fast sports
car is never matched by the reality. In truth, one car turns out to be much
like another, and you’re still the same person. The science and art of
branding has become much more valuable since its practitioners have
learnt to expand the notion beyond the makers’ mark and pure
performance-based claims, to embrace the whole relationship between a
product or service and its customers.
In the yearly 1990’s, the marketing big wig were deliberating vociferously
about “The Immortal Brand” and it was said that :

‘Building age and become dilapidated.

Machines wear out.
People die.
But what live on are the brands.’

The metaphor is clear: the brand as deity, a sentient being whose

existence transcends our merely human lifespan. And indeed this how we
in marketing and advertising talk of brands. They life cycles; they have
personalities. In our research we personify brands, and find consumers can
play the game. Unconsciously we credit the brand with some kind of
absolute platonic existence. Our mission is to discover (rather than invent)
its ‘core values’ and abide by them. In fact, the brand is a rather primitive
kind of god. If we keep its laws and pay regularly the tributes due (mainly
advertising), fortune will smile on us - otherwise disaster.

Now most of this is way of saying valuable and important things about
branding. Brands can ‘live’ longer than people. The metaphor of personality
has been very helpful, here. A brand may have ‘personality’, but it is not a
person, still less a good on a cloud. you cannot talk to its and it cannot
answer you back. In fact, a brand has no absolute or objective existence -
nor are its ‘core values’ are engraved on any stone. A brand is simply a
collection of perceptions in the mind of the consumer.

The tentative answers in this chapter - and I regard it only as an essay

which I hope others may improve on - are rather complex. Branding can be
seen as satisfying various different needs, and working at different levels
and in different ways. What I will suggest in fact has happened is that
brands originally begin as a badge or promise of certainty in an uncertain
world, and that this offers simple and functional benefits to any consumer.
But because a brand offers this kind of certainty it also becomes a kind of
currency for consumers to carry out less obviously related kinds of
transactions with themselves and with each other. In a sense, consumers
have ‘hijacked’ brands for their own purposes. But all the ways in which
brands can be used derive from the basic promise of certainty, and I will
therefore argue that we are talking about one coherent, if complex
phenomenon. Brands as a badge, and brands as personality are aspects of
the same thing.

At its simplest, a brand is a recognizable and trustworthy badge of origin,

and also a promise of performance. But to be No. 1. is the name of the
game. To be the Best brand in a product category entails much-much more
than just being recognizable, trustworthy promise of performance. It is to a
very large extent perceptual in nature. In other world, it is directly
proportional the consumer. And, Consumer is the King. To be No. 1. is
something that every brand in its lifespan would try to achieve. Is it
possible? If yes, what does it take to be No. 1.? Let’s find out.

How do Brands Become Number One ?

Now a days, everyone is talking about Kit kat, McDonalds, Marlboro etc.
But what is common to these Brands, that makes them the talk of the town!
The common feature in these brands is that, either they are, or have been
the Number One Brands of the worlds.

Since Liberalization of the Indian economy, Indian companies are now

facing tough competition from these brands. Nestle is here to compete with
its traditional rival Cadbury and with other Indian brands of Chocolates. on
the other hand, had an even tougher task to gain market share in the
Indian market, as is had to compete with two players, Amul and Campco.

McDonalds has come into the Indian market only a few months back and is
already creating waves. It’s giving a tough competition to the already strong
local player Nirula’s which has been on the scene for a long time.
Now, the talk is of the cigarette giant Philip Morris Inc. of “Marlboro” fame
planning to enter India with it’s world famous brands. What should the
Indian big wig ITC do to make their brands of cigarettes compete against
the challenge posed by the one time Number One brands of the world ?
Are there any common attributes in the Number One brands which make
them Number One? To find out the answer to this question and also to find
out whether these attributes can be applied across different industries lets
take a journey into the “World of Brands”.

OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT:

 To find out the attributes which make the Brand Number in FMCG

Chocolate Industry (Cadbury's and Nestle)

 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Type of Research : Exploratory and Descriptive.
Sample Units : Two of the Number One brands in India namely Cadburys
and Nestle, respectively, were chosen on the basis of their market shares.
These two industries were chosen on the basis of the usage of the
products, as the usage of FMCG’s and is high and noticeable.
Sample Design : Non-probability sampling was resorted to and the
methods used is Convenience sampling and Judgement sampling.
Sample size : The total sample size is 120 which includes consumers of all
the two brands, retailers of Cadburys and Nestle .
Data Collection : Data was collected both from Secondary sources as well
as Primary data was also collected. A structured Questionnaire method
was used to collect the primary data. Secondary data was soured from
various published sources which includes magazines like A&M, Business
India and Business World. Newspapers like Brand Equity, Brand Wagon
and The Times of India were also used. Annual Report of Cadburys and
Nestle were also referred
Data Analysis Techniques used are :

 Modal Value

 Correlation

 Simple Average

 Percentage
Data was analyzed manually and with the help of computer software
EXCEL, to make graphs and pie charts.
Limitations of the Project :
1. For generalization of the results a study needs to be undertaken based
in a larger sample across different industries.
2. Since the study is confined to Delhi only, the findings cannot be applied
to other parts of the country.
 INTRODUCTION
HISTORY OF CHOCOLATE

The story of chocolate began in the New World with the Mayans, who
drank a dark brew called cacahuaquchtl. Later, the Aztecs consumed
chacahoua and used the cocoa bean for currency. In 1523, they offered
cocoa beans to Cortez, who introduced chocolate to the Old World, where
it swiftly became a favorite found among the rich and noble of Europe.

From the beginning turning raw, bitter cocoa beans into what one 17 th
century writer called “the only true food of the gods” has been a fine art, a
delicate mixture of alchemy and science. Centuries ago it was discovered
that by fermenting and roasting the beans, an almost otherworldly flavor
could be created. In 1875, after years of trying, a 31-year-old candy maker
in Vevay named Daniel Peter figured out how to combine milk and cocoa
powder. The result milk chocolate. Peter, a friend and neighbor of Henri
Nestle, started a company that would quickly become the world’s leading
maker of chocolate.

Currently it has a market capitalization of 100 billion Swiss franks. Another

household name in the field of chocolate market is Cadbury Schweppes
Plc’s having $ 4.2 billion company and has a presence in 200 countries.
company profile
(for Chocolate brands)

 Cadbury
 Nestle
 NESTLE – A PROFILE

For 130 years, the Nestle story has been a tale of growth and expansion. In
1875, when Henri Nestle sold his company to a group of Swiss
businessmen, they incorporated the firm with a capitalization of one million
Swiss francs. Eight years later, as an attempt was made to merge the
Nestle Company with arch-rival Anglo –Swiss Condensed Milk Company,
the capitalization of Nestle had risen by a factor of 10. On the eve of World
War 1, the value of Nestle, which by no included the Anglo-Swiss
Condensed Milk Company, stood at 60 million Swiss francs. By 1929, the
value had climbed to 145 million Swiss francs. Today, Nestle has a market
capitalization that has risen to around 100 billion Swiss francs.

SEGMENT OF NESTLE (World Wide)

By Geographic Area

Country 2001

Europe 36.7%

North and south America 31.8%

Africa, Asia and Oceania 19.3%

Other Activities 12.2%

By Main Product Group (Nestle)

Product 2001
Beverages 27.4%
Milk Products, Nutrition & Ice Cream 27.6%
Prepared Dishes and Cooking Aids 25.2%
Chocolate and Confectionery 15.2%
Pharmaceuticals 4.6%

Nestle break up at a glance

Expenses (in %)
Raw Materials 26.2
Packaging 8.8
Salaries and Welfare Expenses 16.6
Depreciation 4.1
Other Trading Expenses 34.5
Total Trading Expenses 90.2
Trading Profit 9.8
Total 100
Nestle’s Chocolate and Confectionery

Nestle: Crunch, Cailler, Frigor, Chokito, Sarotti, Galak/Milkybar, Yes, Kit

Kat, Quality Street, Smarties, Baci, After Eight, Baby Ruth, Butterfinger,
Lion, Nuts, Roto, Aero, Polo, Bar one Charge, Classic etc.
 CADBURY SCHWEPPES PLC’S

Chairman: Dominic Cadbury

Share Capitalization: $ 4.2 billion

Presence: 200 countries worldwide

India’s Scene (Turnover RS. 354 crores) (2001–2002)

Cadbury Schweppes business in India is split into two companies: -

• Cadbury Indian Ltd. for Confectionery

• Cadbury Schweppes Beverages India (CSBI) Pvt. Ltd. for soft drinks

Registered Office: Cadbury House, Poddar House, Mumbai

Managing Director: Rajeev Bakshi

Financial Position:

1997 : Sales ↑ 13%

Profit ↓ 17% (Due to 80 cr. Investment)

1998 - profit was 28 crore

Turnover of Chocolate is 2/3 of 354 crores

Advertisement spend % change Sales Ad spend % of sales

29.62 cr 15.75 354.4 cr. 8.36%

CADBURY’S CHOCOLATE (MAJOR PRODUCT)

1995 – “Perk”

“ Thodi si Pet Puja”

With minimum chocolate condition.

1997 – “ Truffle” Rs. 18/447

People resented both the price and flavour.

1998 – “Picnic”

1999 “Kuch Zyada Hi Solid”

Cad bury gold (Prior to truffle)

CADBURY DAIRY MILK

CDM’s AD :

“ Real Taste of Life”

 PRODUCT ANALYSIS

(KIT KAT VS CDM)

KIT KAT

• It is a hybrid between biscuit and chocolate

• It is not a traditional type of chocolate and it is not too sweet

• The chocolate is light and easy

• Most people enjoy the unique ceremony of gliding their finger down the
foil to unwrap the chocolate.

• Consumer say that the ‘tearing of the foil’ and ‘breaking of the finger’ is
really interesting and it adds to the eating ……….. like a game.

CADBURY’S DAIRY MILK

• CDM is a regular range of chocolate slabs

• It has a traditional chocolate taste

• It gives full chocolate experience too sweet and too rich

 PRODUCT TRUTH

A Tale of two experiences

Kit Kat CDM

(Chocolate Surprise) (Chocolate Temptation)

Altogether different Chocolate Full Chocolate experience…. Too
experience rich
Light and easy Un questioned ……… too rich and
too sweet
Not fulfilling
 ANALYSIS OF COMPETITION

Indian Chocolate market having a turnover of Rs. 350 crore (20,000

tonnes) has three major market players CIL dominating the market by
capturing 71% of the market share, followed by Nestle having 20% of
market share, Amul having a niche market of 6% and remaining 3% with
small players.

Nestle introduced Kit Kat in 1995, which brought in competition to the

monopolistic Chocolate Industry , dominated by Cadbury’s India Limited
(CIL).

Nestle introduced its Kit Kat brand with an all time unique feature of wafer
biscuit and chocolate, thereby giving light taste to its brand. Knowing this
entry as an uphill task they responded positively by exploring innovative
and early adopters market through Kit Kat which is a premium –priced
brand. Nestle approach of entering Chocolate market was supported by the
7777333reluctant attitude of Monopolistic, CIL who uptill then never tried to
diversify their product with such innovative product features.

This resulted in eating up of 20% of market share of CIL by Nestle within a

short period of 3 years. .Kit Kat had hold good and touched huge volumes
at a significantly high price. The up market image of Kit Kat had caused
some worry to CDM.

Though CIL introduced Perk to subside the daunting effort made by Nestle,
Kit Kat. But Perk could never withstand the competition due to the
combination of unique and better quality of product, good packing and
effective communication tools adopted by Kit Kat.
In the present scenario CIL is seeing Kit Kat as a threat to CDM the main
weapon in its arsenal. Kit Kat having developed an upmarket image
promises to make competition stiffer in times to come.

Thus, in a nutshell, CIL has been losing its ‘Prestige share’ to Nestle.

Share in percent of the 20,000 tonnes chocolate market in 2002

Amul Others
6% 3%

Nestle
20%

Cadbury
71%
 AN OVERALL REVIEW OF COMPETITION

CADBURY INDIA LTD. NESTLE INDIA LTD

Sales (total ) 354.14 crore 1489.33 crore

Advertisement (total) 29.62 crore 79.89 crore

Advertising Rank 27th 5th

CHOCOLATE MARKET : 337 CRORE

(20000 tonnes)

Chocolate share

CADBURY CHOCOLATE NESTLE CHOCOLATE

236 crore (2/3 of CIL sales) 67. 42 crore (4.5% of total sales of
Nestle)

70% of chocolate market 20% chocolate market

Advertising expenses

CADBURY CHOCOLATE NESTLE CHOCOLATE

26.66 crore 31.96 crore

(90% of CIL Ad exp.) (40% of Nestle Ad Exp.)
 CADBURY DAIRY MILK KIT KAT

Sales 129.8 crore 57.29 crore

55% of CIL chocolate 84.9% of Nestle chocolate

38.5% of chocolate market 17% of chocolate market

CADBURY DAIRY MILK KIT KAT

Advertising Expenses 13.33 crore 17.58 crore

50% of CIL chocolate ad 55% of Nestle

exp. Chocolate ad. Exp.

AD AGENCY

Cadbury Dairy Milk Ogilvy & Mather (O&M)

Kit Kat Hindustan Thompson Associate (HTA)

 CURRENT SEGEMENTATION, TARGETING &
POSITIONING

SEGMENT

CDM KitKat

Age Group (in years)

8-14 25% 7%

15-20 24% 23%

20-25 31% 28%

25 and above 20% 42%

Income Group (Monthly income in Rs.)

For both the brands

4000-8000 16.2%

8000-12000 28.3%

12000-16000 32.0%

16000 & above 23.5%

 TARGET

Kit Kat

Youngsters and Adults having a yearning for light sweet snack in the age
group of 20-25 and also from 25 and above are the target customers of
Nestle Kit Kat

CDM

Its target is almost equally vast as its segment i.e. ranging from kids and
youngsters to adult willing to go in for traditional rich and sweet chocolate.

POSITIONING

Kit Kat

Kit Kat wanted to position it self as a ‘ritualistic’ break -time snack and it
had been successful in bringing this image, by their slogan ‘Have a break,
Have a Kit Kat’, which is used worldwide. Kit Kat has strong association
(young, modern, fun) but an image that is nascent.

CDM

Wanted to position the product as ‘real taste of life’. Wanted to move

Chocolate from the realms of pure indulgence for children to indulgence
for everyone. It tries to position itself as a stimulant for those who wants to
find the ‘real taste of life ‘ through its advertisement by depicting
emotional associations in synchronization with the product experience.
 WHAT IS A STRONG BRAND ?
Before understanding What is a strong brand or How to build a strong
brand, we must understand Why is it hard to build a strong brand?

David A. Aaker in his book “Building Strong Brands” has said :

It is not easy to build a strong brand in today’s environment. The brand

builder can be inhibited by substantial pressures and barriers, both internal
and external. These pressures and barriers are :

1. Pressure to compete on price : This affects the motivation to build a

brand.

2. Proliferation of Competitors : This reduces the positioning options

available to the brand builder.

3. Fragmenting markets & media : Increases the complexity in building a

brand. As of today with the media getting fragmented it becomes very
difficult for the brand builder to decide the most effective option.

4. Complex brand strategies and relationship : This also increases the

complexity for the brand builder as he has to maintain all the
relationships of the brand with the outside world.

5. Bias towards changing strategies : The temptation to change a sound

strategy, by the top management is a major problem faced by today’s
brand managers. This might lead to a weak brand.

6. Pressure to invest elsewhere : If the brand is strong the management

does not feel the need to invest in that particular brand. This may be
caused by arrogance or more often by complacency.
7. Bias against innovations : Generally, if the brand is doing well in the
market place the management does not feel the need to innovate. This
again is caused by complacency on the part of the management.

8. Short term pressure : Short term results pervade the organizations. The
management does not think of the long term benefits, in the process
many brands do and strong brands become weak.

The irony is that many of the formidable problems facing brand builders
today are caused by internal forces and biases that are under the control of
organization.

Now the question arises how to build a strong brand. For this David A.
Aaker in his book “Building strong Brands” has suggested certain
measures which, if practiced, can make a brand strong.

According to David A. Aaker to become a strong brand the brand must

“Learn to change their style and products in order to remain in fashion and
up to date. According to the author of building Strong Brands, to manage
effects of changes in time one must :

1. Permanently Innovate

2. Cultural Evolution : As the values, customs and behavior patterns are

continuously evolving, so must the should evolve to keep pace with
these changes.

3. Clientele advance and grow older : The power of the brand lies in it’s
ability to cater to the needs of it’s clientele without adjusting it’s faith or
becoming a brand for elders. The brand must respond to the needs of a
continuous sequence of clientele.

4. Core value of the brand is kept permanent over long run. The core
values of a brand should remain the same and must be reflected in any
thing the brand indulges in.
5. Style and codes of the brand is a reflection of the brands core identity.
Style should be related to the brands deep identity.

6. Communication : Clear understanding of brand’s core and source point

is the essence of communication. Since now the market is not restricted
to a particular geographical area the communication and images are not
homogenous throughout the world.

Therefore, a strong brand is the one with high brand equity. Brand equity
generates value for the customer as well as for the firm. Brand equity of a
brand is not created overnight, it is over a period of time that brand equity
is created and a brand which has withstood the test of time becomes a
strong brand and a Number One Brand.

This project was chosen to find out whether these features of building
Strong Brands, if applied, can make a brand number one or not.
 DATA ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
Data was tabulated manually and was also analyzed manually. EXCEL
was used to make graphs and pie charts. Main techniques used were :

Model value was used to analyze the questions with ranking.

Percentage were used to analyze those questions which had two choices
as their answers.

Simple averages were used to get answer to question of Semantic

Differential scale.

Correlation was used to find out relationship between two variables.

 CADBURY & NESTLE
(Consumer Perception)

Sample Size : 50 consumers

1. This question was used to analyze Brand Recall of chocolates which

would help us establish whether the chocolate with top of the mind
recall is the most widely consumed or not.

Findings :

• On the ranking scale of the highest brand recall a total of 26

respondents said that when they think of Chocolates - it’s Cadbury.

• Second on the recall level is Nestle

• Nestle is followed by Amul

2. This question along with question # 1 will help us establish the fact that
positive relationship exists between top of the mind recall and
consumption of that brand.

According to the survey 46% of respondents say that they consume

Cadbury's followed by Nestle 34% hence the positive relationship
between brand recall and consumption is established. 20% of the
respondents consume other Chocolates

There is a perfect correlation of 1.0 between top of the mind recall and
consumption of that brand.

3. This question is used to find out whether Brand loyalty exists in

Chocolates or not.
Findings :

Brand Loyalty is very low, with 82% respondents willing to switch their
generally preferred brand if they do not get the brand of their choice.

This leads to another question which says why do consumers prefer

Cadbury's? On the semantic differential scale respondents have marked
their choice that of availability an important parameter.

Therefore availability of the brand should be widespread as loyalty is low.

4. This question is used to find out respondents preference of Cadbury

over Nestle or vice versa. This will establish another fact whether the
Chocolate is consumed or not.

Findings :

58% respondents prefer Cadbury and 42 % prefer Nestle. Respondents

which consume other chocolates that is 20%, prefer cadbury more than
Nestle as 63% respondents were in favour of Cadbury's.

Hence, it is established that Cadbury's is the most widely preferred and

consumed chocolate.

5. After getting the preference of the respondent the next question is to find
out as to why he/she prefers this particular chocolate. This will help find out
the attributes which influence the purchase behavior of a consumer in
deciding whether to consume the number on brand or any other brand.

Findings :

In the case of Cadbury Taste and availability are the two most important
attributes that make it the most widely consumed brand in India.

In case of Nestle, taste is followed by the attribute - brand being more alive,
that is the brand continuously evolve with culture.
 If we take both the brands together then it can be seen that Taste and
Keeping the brand alive are the most important attributes that makes a
brand number one.

These are followed by availability, matching the brand personality with

consumers and packaging.

If we take into account those respondents who consume other chocolates

and classify their choices then it is again evident that taste and keeping the
brand alive are the two most important attributes that make a brand strong.

There is a high degree of positive correlation 0.73, consumption of Cadbury

and availability of the chocolate

3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3

More Popular ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Less Popular

Attractive Packaging ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Unattractive Packaging

More Fizz ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Low Fizz

More Availability ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Less Availability

Excellent Taste ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Bad Taste

Fits with your Personality ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Does not fit with the personality

More Alive ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Less Alive

Key : ____ Cadbury , ------ Nestle

6. Kit Kat's packaging is famous all over the world.

Therefore to find whether, using a different shaped pack helps distinguish

one’s product form the other.
Findings :

60% of the chocolate consumes like the pack of Nestle.

Thus we can say that packaging of the chocolate eaters has little
significance in distinguishing one’s product from the other. This can also be
established from the findings of question # 5 in which respondents marked
the liking of the packaging towards the lower end of the scale.

7. As CDM is the number one brand in Chocolate category in India. This

question will answer why is it doing better than Nestle which, is the number
one brand of the world.

Findings :

By calculating the modal value it was evident that because of :

a. This is followed by availability,

b. Which is then followed by advertising, that is the adaptation of

communication to the Indian Culture.

c. After that comes promotional activities and

d. Finally comes Indianisation of the brand.

 2
Availability 18

5
Indianisation of
6 Ranking
Brand
Score
3
Advertising 11

4
Prom otional
Activities 10

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

8. This question was asked to find out the effectiveness of communication.

Aided recall was used in the form of Nestle's tag line.

Findings :

61% respondents remembered the tag line of Kitkat, reason for which could
not be Indianising the communication. Till recently, the company had been
using international ads to advertise.

9. For Cadbury unaided recall was used to find out whether localizing
communication has any impact on the recall level and hence the
purchase decision.

Findings :

78% respondents remembered the tag line of Cadbury, which is high,

considering that it is unaided recall. This makes Cadbury the Top of the
Mind brand hence is widely consumed and preferred.

10. To find out the authenticity of the responses, this question was asked.
Findings :

Most respondents remembered the tag line of Cadbury being “The Real
Taste Of Life”.

11. & 12. These questions was used to administer the brand personality of
the two chocolates. This is also an important parameter because a clear
brand personality ads to the strength of a brand.

Findings :

Cadbury : Belonging to the age group of 15-25 years, male, cool, not
stereo typed, outgoing, independent, full of life, open to new ideas. He also
sophisticated, savvy and sports loving.

Nestle: This person belongs to the age group of 30-40 years and is a
business man, belonging to the upper middle class. Mature, sincere,
hardworking, smart, sophisticated, rich, controlled, intelligent. He is short,
lazy and rounded.

Some respondents have said that this person is also energetic, lively,
mean, warm from within. This clearly shows that Nestle has a conflicting
brand personality unlike Cadbury, and a conflicting brand personality can
harm the image of the company.
 CADBURY & NESTLE
(Retailers Perception)

Sample Size : 50 Retailers

1. This question was asked to find out whether the Number One brand is
the most demanding.

Findings :

By finding out the model value of the responses, it was evident that
Cadbury is the most demanded brand.

Nestle is the second most demanded brand, followed by Amul and

Campco.

Therefore the Number One brand if the most widely demanded one
followed by the second of the recall level.

2. This question was asked to find out the attributes that a consumer
considers before buying a chocolate, as it is the consumer who makes
the brand Number One. Another objective was to find out whether the
attributes rated by the consumers are the same as perceived by the
retailers.

Findings :

According to the survey it was evident that Taste is the most important
attribute that the consumer considers before purchase.

Second to Taste lies Popularity which is followed by Availability and

Promotional activities come on number four.

Consumer does not eat the chocolate under the influence of their peer
group as it falls low on the ranking scale i.e. on # 7.
According to the consumer survey of the Cadbury eaters Taste, Availability,
The Brand is More Alive and Popularity are the most important attributes
that influence the consumer to consume the chocolate. Hence, it can be
inferred that Taste, Popularity and Keeping the Brand Alive are the most
important factors that make Cadbury the Number One Brand.

2
More Popular 13

1
Taste 15

7
Influence 5 Rank
Score
Fits w ith 6
personality 6

3
Availability
12

Prom otional 4
activities 10

5
Fizz
7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

3. As availability has a high degree of positive correlation with consumption

it is important for any company who have wide spread retail network.
This question was asked to find out what motivates a retailers to keep
a particular brand of chocolates

Findings :

The findings clearly indicate that retailers keep a brand because of the
consumer pull and the brand name. Therefore, the company was try to
convince their target consumers to consume their brand of chocolates.

Company support comes at No. 3 of the ranking scale and then is the
Promotional schemes . Therefore, to be a Number One Brand the
consumers play a very important role, more important than the retailers as
they influence the retailers to keep a particular brand.

4 & 5. Since the shelf space of a particular brand depends on the retailers,
keeping them satisfied is as important as keeping the consumer
satisfied. Therefore, to judge whether the retailers of Cadbury and
Nestle are satisfied or not, these questions were asked.

Findings : Most of the retailers are not satisfied with the credit terms
because of the trade is on cash terms. Barring a few retailers in big
markets, no retailer is given credit. But retailers of Nestle are slightly better
than that of Cadbury as they score 3.83 as against 4 on the scale of 5.

Retailers are more satisfied with Cadbury as regard to timely delivery as

they score 1.37 which is highly satisfied and Nestle scores 2.16 which is
satisfied. Here one can see why is Cadbury doing better than Nestle.

As regard to Replacement, both the companies are fairly close to each

other but Cadbury again is slightly better than Nestle as it scores 2.75 and
Nestle scores 2.79 which is neutral.

The Promotional Activities of Cadbury keep the retailers slightly more

satisfied than that of Nestle as it scores 3.25 as against Nestle 3.33.

POP Material given by Cadbury is more satisfying for retailers than that of
Nestle as they score 2.70 and 3.08 respectively. On the commission front,
both the companies fair poorly on the scale as the retailers are dissatisfied
with the company. The scores of 3.29 and 3.83 for Cadbury and Nestle
respectively are an indication of the same. What is surprising, is that both
the companies give the same commissions but the scores of Cadbury are
better than Nestle.

Cadbury is also doing better than Nestle in terms of Complaint Handling,

though the retailers are dissatisfied with both the companies. In terms of
Company Support both the companies are once again close and they are
on the neutral mark with 3.0 and 3.33 as the scores.
Retailers are satisfied with advertising of Cadbury and neutral with that of
Pepsi. The scores are 1.62 for Cadbury and 2.13 for Nestle.

By analyzing these attributes we can see that both the companies are neck
to neck on the satisfaction scale, but due to the customer pull, the retailers
have to keep both the brands. But shelf space provided and the retailer
push is more towards Cadbury than Nestle. Some retailers even told that if
a consumer asked for no particular brand of chocolate, they give them
Cadbury instead of Nestle.

C redit 4
2.83

T imely Delivery 1.37

2.16 Cadbury
2.75 Nestle
R eplac ement
2.79
P romo tio nal 3.25
A ctivities 3.33

P OP M aterial 2.7
3.08

C ommissio n 3.29
3.41

C o mplaint Handling 3.62

3.83

C o . Support
3
3.33

A dvertising 1.62
2.125

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

6. There are so many promotional schemes that these two companies

indulging, but to find out whether the sale of a particular brand is
affected by others or not, is answered by this question.

Findings :

56% retailers said that the sale of a particular brand is not affected by the
promotional schemes of the other brand. This could be because, not all
retail stores are given this scheme and since those stores that do not give
a chance to run the schemes may not like to talk too high of the sales
being affected .
TO BECOME A NUMBER ONE BRAND
(IN FMCG) ONE HAS TO BE...
1. At the Top of the Mind Recall. It is established that there is a perfect
correlation of 1.0 between the Top of the Mind Recall and the
consumption of the chocolate this means that the chocolate which
strikes the mind first is consumed.

2. Change the style and code of the brand which Cadbury did by bringing
in Vending Machine.

3. The product should be widely available in the case with Cadbury. As

there is a high degree of correlation of 0.73, between preference of a
brand and its availability, it is suggested that the brand should be widely
available. Cadbury eaters have rated availability on the higher side of
the scale after Taste and Advertising. Moreover, since the brand loyalty
is very low, as 82 % consumers changed their mind if they don’t get the
Chocolate of their choice, availability of the brand becomes even more
important.

4. Advertising plays a very important role in making a brand Number One

and the communication should be done by adapting to the culture of the
particular country as done by Cadbury and not done by Nestle. Nestle
eaters feel very strongly that because of advertising Cadbury is doing
better than Nestle. On the overall raking scale advertising is at #4. If we
look at the history of the Nestle company, we find that Nestle had spent
a lot of money on advertising.

5. The brand should be kept alive as done by Cadbury through effective

Event Management and with a larger voice share. Keeping the Brand
Alive ensures brand awareness and that contributes towards brand
recall.
6. A clear brand personality is a must so that the consumers can identify
themselves with the brand. A conflicting brand personality does not help
the sales of a brand.

Nestle has a conflicting brand personality as people have portrayed a

confused image when they think of Nestle as a person. They have used
different attributes to define Nestle as a person like Lazy, Full of Life,
Hardworking. Maybe, due to this the sales of the company are hit hard.

On the other hand, Cadbury has a much clearer brand personality. People
can identify themselves with the positioning of Cadbury as can be observed
from the analysis of the questionnaire.

7. Retailers must be kept satisfied as they only push that brand with which
they are more satisfied (in this case Cadbury).

It is clear from the analysis of the questionnaire of the retailers that even
though they have to keep all the brands of chocolates because of customer
pull, but as far as pushing the brand, the dealers play an important role.
They provide shelf space to that brand with which they are satisfied. In this
case, the commissions provided by both the companies are the same but
still the retailers are more satisfied with Cadbury and therefore they push
the brand more than Nestle.
 ANALYSIS OF SUCCESS OR FAILURE

The Indian chocolate market has almost totally depended on kiddie

purchases. The market tends to wildly swing up and down with chocolate
prices. CDM took a major initiative at bringing grown ups into the market.
The objective makes chocolates a ‘legitimate’ indulgence for adults. To
move chocolate from the realms of pure indulgence for children to
indulgence for every one.

CDM advertising has shown adults eating chocolates, at times self –

consciously, at times brazenly. All set to warm, emotive sound track; like
the ‘real taste of life’ and ‘your license to dream’.

Contrast this with Kit Kat. The entire brand advertising is focused on the
product. Open the pack break the foil along the ridges, Peel the foil off,
Break the chocolate wafer finger and prop it right in.

An elaborate ritual that is legitimized by the promise. “ Have a break have

a Kit Kat’. There is no mention of chocolate. There is no mention of milk.
All the communication is product- centric. No great music No. domining
girls and premium pricing to boot.

Who is Playing it Right ? CDM or Kit Kat

While CDM is trying to sell an indulgence to adults, Kit Kat is selling a

‘ritualistic’ break to teenagers/young adults. Now pull back a bit and the
mosaic that is India. Indians are not used to sweet snacks. Almost all our
snacks are salty.

So the questions are Is selling sweet snack a sound strategy? Will Indians
accept a chocolate wager at a higher price.
Reports indicate that within a very short period of time, Kit Kat has caught
in a very big way across the country. While numerous global brand, have
failed to make an impact in the foods arena, Kit Kat has punched a huge
hole. That too with strategies pretty much perfected in over 50 countries. At
prices that appeared to be very high at one stage.

Cadbury’s Dairy Milk is supposed to be full of milk. Milk is supposed to be

good for you, any time, any place could Cadbury have gone after tasty-
snacking in a more focused manner?

Now who will own the ‘snacking’ market? Will it one day become larger
than the ;indulgence’ market?

Very often, while creating communications for consumer products, it is

tempting to fly too much on pure emotions. Which can relegate the product
an ‘also ran’. This is what exactly had happened with CDM. While showing
the emotions the product was over looked.

But at the same time, Kit Kat, as mentioned before focused on the product
itself without any emotional attachment. This working on the fringes of
marketing and entertainment, come as a remainder to us , that it is often
more effective to make the product the hero. Albeit, in an interesting,
amusing, manner. No doubt, this is the secret behind the success of Kit
Kat.
 CONCLUSION
The objective of the study was to find out the attributes which make a
brand No.1. After the study we find that the following attributes are
important in making a brand No. 1.

a. Advertising plays an important role in creating brand awareness, brand

recall and brand recognition which are important in helping a customer
make purchase decision of that brand.

b. Brand should adopt itself to the local culture.

c. Brand should be kept alive.

d. The styles and code to the brand should change as clientele advance
and grow.

e. Brand should continuously evolve with the culture and the product
should innovate.

Thus, we can say that companies which want to make their brands No. 1
should adopt the above findings in their brand building exercise. However
for generalization of the results, a study needs to be undertaken based on
a larger sample across different industries.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 David A. Aaker (1991), “Managing Brand Equity”, The Free Press.

 Jean-Noel Kapferer (1994), “Strategic Brand management”, Macmillan

Publishing Co.

 Philip Kotler (Eighth Edition), “Marketing management”, Prentice Hall of

India Pvt. Ltd.

 Stewart Pearson (1996), “Building Brand Identity”, Macmillan Publishing

Co.