Sunday, February 28, 2010

Rin Vs Tide new Ad campaign Hungama...

.
Who says HUL crossed the lane?? Who says HUL's new RIN vs Tide advertisement is illegal?? And it is misleading customers?? I feel P&G has tried to mislead the customers and HUL is trying to educate them...
.
I didn't believe my ears.. Came almost running from Kitchen and re-confirmed what I heard with my friend who was watching the television and waited for the ad to appear again... Main tho Chaunk gaya.. stood absolutely stumped in front of the TV... Couldn't believe my eyes that HUL has gone for such a direct attack against P&G's Tide.. Kept on thinking what might be the reason only to guess after watching the ad on youtube closely for some 9-10 times. But, defenitely the Ad agency as well as HUL didn't get the customers perception right.. atleast definitely not as of now If the reason that I think of, is true behind this campaign.
.

There's a huge buzz in the blogging arena about Rin taking on Tide directly in its new campaign. Rather than questioning HUL's ideology behind the campaign, people started crying foul over the campaign and expressing their concerns that it will be off the screens very soon... How does taking off the screens make things better for Tide??

.

Already the damage is done to an extent although not to the extent HUL is expecting it to. As far as the legal or the ASCI rules are concerned HUL has played it safe with it's small disclaimers and notes below the ad as well as at the end of ad.. "As tested by Independent Lab" and "Issued in the interest of Rin Users". But still what's the logic behind such a campaign?? Definitely not the normal Rin Vs Tide attack.. definitely HUL tried to convey something which is not getting on to the customer's mind as easily as they expected it to get on...

.

It's a well known fact that HUL and P&G have been trying to gain market share through price cuts although this has reduced their revenues for FY09-10. Recently in the month of January2010 P&G introduced an extension on it's brand line "TIDE" with the name of "TIDE NATURALS". This at a lower price. And around the end of January itself, HUL has brought down the prices of their detergents RIN, Surf Excel by 10-30%.

.
Remind you!! P&G haven't cut the price of other versions of Tide to the price levels of Tide Naturals. But, In reality what the customers have started seeing in the supermarkets is Tide available at such a low price. Most of them never realized that it's Tide Naturals and not all versions of Tide are available at same price. As per relativity, If prices of actual RIN and Tide versions have come down by same extent the volume levels will not show much of a movement from RIN to Tide or Tide to RIN. But, there came a new entrant called "Tide Naturals" which started pulling the volumes of RIN. But, what's customer thinking while picking up a packet of Tide Naturals is..
.
"I am getting Tide 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 this 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"
.
Open for Comments

44 comments:

Sid Saxena said...

The campaign is very effective...it would definitely prompt housewives who have been buying Tide to consider Rin... comparison is with Brand Tide...and thats where Rin seeks to gain an edge...

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Sid: I do agree that it will score well against Tide in promting the housewifes.. But, what about the maximum population which is still price sensitive in the segment.. I feel that is the segment they are trying to address by explaining it is Tide Naturals and not Tide available at lower price.. On the ground in the supermarket, they might not really score to the level as expected..

Anonymous said...

I think that there is nothing wrong with the campaign at it does not slander Tide, but merely says that Rin is better.In today's marketplace such 'objective' comparisions should certainly help consumers choose better.Also, there is news that P&G has been asked to pull off its 'Tide Naturals' tvc off air by the Madras High Court.Apparently there is nothing 'natural' in Tide Naturals!

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Anonymous: Obviously there's nothing wrong with HUL's TVC and I think Tide will find it difficult to object the same..

Sudhanva said...

Concerned and responsible Indian citizens can encourage sensible consumption behaviour — by shopping less and wasting even lesser. By buying local products to keep the cottage industries, bazaar culture, traditional crafts and wisdom alive. In essence, by valuing their rich heritage and living simple and meaningful lives, Indians can set an example, and show the West that Mother India is much more than a well of business opportunities. It’s not just a matter of common sense; it’s about our survival.

BE INDIAN - BUY INDIAN

Sneha said...

wow! thanks for the insight...I saw the ad today and I was boggled too!!

My take on the ad...Two-in-one by HUL

Ankit Dohare said...

What is objectionable and probably deliberately misleading in this ad is that the voice over says "Rin is better than Tide" rather than saying "Rin is better than Tide Naturals". Intuitively it sounds very smart to attack the competitor at it's stronger brand (Tide) in the guise of attacking a weaker sub-varient (Tide Naturals). But that's also what makes it unethical.
Also if HUL is forced to subsequently compare Rin with "Tide Naturals" then Rin (a mid-tier product) is comparing it with "Tide Naturals" a mass Tier product, which P&G may anyways like. An exaggerated example would be Honda City comparing itself with Maruti 800 (and not SX4 which is in its segment)and saying Honda city is better than Maruti 800. This will only dilute Honda City's equity. The background to such high voltage campaign is that January 2010 saw Rin at it's lowest market share in 10 years and there have been several reports of HUL India team getting the flak for not being able to even maintain shares let alone grow.

Rehman said...

To the lines
"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.. "

Reply:
I believe the lady has Tide naturals in the AD and not the tide original version"

Tide original version is in Orange and not in green " :-)

pranay said...

I was astonished after watching the ad. I firstly thought, may be i heared the name wrongly as Tide. Having noticed the ad more than 5 times, i think this direct attack on component will lead to legal actions against HUL. Recently, when directly attacked by one of its competitors (water purifier devision)HUL filed a legal case and infact as a result the Ad was withdrawn on air. Now its HUL who has come openly for a cold war....
I am sure, soon HUL's legal department is gonna come in picture.
But overall, its a new era in ad industry having seen such kind of direct attack for the first time ever.

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Ankit: I agree to your point to an extent but not to the whole.. Yes,the voice over says Tide rather than Tide Naturals.. But I don't agree on the comparision with Maruti Vs Honda.. In the case of Maruti Vs Honda customer knows what he/she is buying and they are not under the impression that they are buying a Honda while buying a Maruti... Here, the customer is under the impression that they are buying Tide at a lower price where as they are buyind Tide Naturals. And yes they are doing this under the pressures of market share dipping down but, I doubt if this will be able to help it in control the dip to the extent required or expected.

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@Rehman: Absolutely Rehman.. This is what I am saying. The Lasy has Tide Naturals(Green packet) and not Tide(Orange packet). But, tell me how many customers in reality are observing this so clearly to make an effect as expected by HUL.. Hence, they should have done it much better to create the effect much better...

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Pranay: HUL has filed against other players for water purifier ads.. But, I think HUL has its point here by saying, "Issued in the interest of Rin users" like the way Anil Ambani used in his attack against Mukesh and govt of India in the gas war ads, "Issued in the interest of ADAG shareholders".. Still at the max, P&G may try to get an order against HUL to stop airing the ad.. But, damage is done..

Archer said...

A very pertinent point has been raised.It is P&G which started misleading consumers by calling a lower tier mass market brand Tide, trying to use the established equity of Tide core. Moreover if you have seen the Tide Naturals ad and noticed the disclaimers, they say "contains only fragrance of lemon and sandal", one wonders if by merely adding fragrances to detergent, they should be calling it 'Naturals' and also if fragrance alone can deliver softness on hands, which is their claimed benefit. I think Rin has taken a bold step, and it is justified.

Anonymous said...

As long as HUL has an independent study proof that it is indeed superior on the parameters of 'fragrance' and 'whiteness' than Tide Naturals, there is nothing illegal in this TVC.

In any case, Tide Naturals is a clear misleading of the consumer, simply because there is nothing 'natural' in it.

In a media environment that gives complete right of choice to the consumer, and protects the consumer against false claims; there is nothing Illegal about the Rin Vs Tide Naturals TVC.

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@Archer & @Anonymous: Exactly, it's P&G who's misleading and people are still not ready to accept it and blame HUL for the same..

Seema Gujral said...

I think Rin (HUL) took this move after the Madras court injuncted Tide Naturals' ad. A case was filed against the Tide Naturals ad, saying that there is nothing 'natural' about Tide Naturals and it is not really 'soft on hands' (in the sense that while it does not damage your hands it also does not do any good for your hands). That's why if you see this Tide Naturals ad, which used to be on air all the time, has been pulled off air by P&G.

Secondly, it isn't illegal to show a competitor pack in your ad and Rin has only shown the competitor's pack. What is illegal is if you defame the pack etc. And Rin has very smartly not defamed the Tide pack. Infact the Rin user in the ad says absolutely nothing about Tide so it's really a very smart piece of communication that hasn't broken any laws.

I'm curious to see what Tide's reaction to this will be.

ankit said...

we are talking three separate things here. Lets take them separately. First - was P&G was unethical in naming it's lower tier varient Tide ; second can P&G call its product naturals without anything natural in it and third Is unilever unethical in airing this Rin's present ad:
1. was it unethical to name a supposedly not so good product "Tide" and using Tide's equity: There are innumerable examples in the industry - lets see some from Unilever itself- Surf excel quick wash is the better product and surf excel blue (a cheaper and inferior product). Wheel active gold (a better product) and wheel active easy wash (an inferior product). Unilever has or at least had at some points variants of Lux (Lux international being the premium variant); in shampoos clinic all clear (premium) and clinic plus (mass variant). there are at least 5-6 Unilever brands which do what is a commmon practice in the industry. Can we stop Tata to not use it's equity from products which are not so good. Colgate toothpastes are present across segments with just the sub-nomen changed.
2. let's take the 2nd point which some people have mentioned that Tide cannot call itself Naturals if there is no natural ingredient. Can someone tell me Wheel Lemon and jasmine or wheel lemon and orange has any of these. I know for sure they don't have it. Pond's sandal talc has sandal wood in it? for sure NO. Or Cif lemon has lemon in it? answer still remains NO. If you see Unilever's portfolio 40% of Unilever India's sales survives on lemon without having it!!
and I still believe that Unilever was unethical in airing such ad for the reasons mentioned in the earlier post.
I am sure people from P&G would be contemplating action against this - and if Unilever wasn't scared of legal consequences probably it wouldn't have timed it for the long weekend. It just can't be a co-incidence!

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@Seema: Want to correct you slightly on the defaming affect.. As Ankit Dohare was earlier pointing out.. The voiceover says "Rin gives a better whiteness than Tide".. and am also curious to see if how will Tide react to this...

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@Ankit: It's obviously not wrong to use Tide's brand equity to name a new variant as Tide Naturals and it need not be something natural to be named as "Tide Naturals".. but, it cannot promote it as something that contains sth that is natural and it will protect ur handse due to that.. I agree with you that it's not wrong to name the variant as it was.. but it's definitely wrong to promote in the way it is done..

And about coming on a weekend I too am not sure it is a coincidence but it doesn't seem to be a coincidence as u said..

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

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"

Archer said...

@Ankit: there is subtle yet very important difference wrt Tide Naturals.The question is one of misleading nomenclature when it is known that no natural ingredients are present.The objectional word is "Naturals" and not lemon or sandal. As you have said, Wheel is called "Wheel Active Easy Wash" and not anything else which is related to lemons or natural ingredients. Tide has a Jasmine-Rose, has anyone objected to that? Why didnt they call this "Tide Lemon Sandal"?? If you call a product 'Naturals', it better have something natural. You can't also ignore that if the product has only fragrances, how does it make hands softer, as claimed in the ad.It is nothing but a very unethical move by P&G to deceive consumers.

gopal krishna said...

Good post. trying to figure out the thinking behind what we see on TV. makes sense to me. P&G launched a cheaper, inferior version of its usual Tide, Rin retaliates by price cut and claims to b better than the new kid on the block. Fair game in my view. Importantly - Good for consumers, finally they'll know green tide is not the same as the other tide and will be better off buying Rin at that price than tide green.

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@Gopalkrishna: Thanks for your comments.. I too hope customers understand what Rin's trying to prove.. And Rin should have tried to make the idea a bit more clear...

Anonymous said...

Never mind. i Use Arial..

uday said...

Woooaaahh...Geat job done sajja...I really appreciate ur insight and the discussion after that. Truly the ad is a masterpice when it comes to comparing tide naturals...but yes as rightly mentioned, that point is not clearly put forward by the ad agency, which is misleading on HUL's front.
Overall, it seems now am satisfied after a long restlessness on this ad.
Gr8 job done.

UDAY

uday said...

Woooaaahh...Geat job done sajja...I really appreciate ur insight and the discussion after that. Truly the ad is a masterpice when it comes to comparing tide naturals...but yes as rightly mentioned, that point is not clearly put forward by the ad agency, which is misleading on HUL's front.
Overall, it seems now am satisfied after a long restlessness on this ad.
Gr8 job done.

UDAY

Sanket said...

I think has become, whats right and whats wrong. Instead of being neutral consumer each is trying to prove who is right and what has gone wrong.

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Uday: Thanks Uday for your appreciation..

@ Sanket: I think we are just trying to analyse bcoz all these people debating on the ad are related to the marketing community...

Anyways... still the ad runs successfully today too.. It's 21:44 hours on turesday and I think P&G hasn't found much of a logic stop HUL from airing the ad..

Aakash said...

Thank you for the wonderful information.

But there is one doubt, in the ad , they say,"Tide se kai behtar safedi de Rin.". Here, they said 'Tide', not 'Tide Naturals'.

How will HUL react if P & G get on this point ??

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@Aakash: I think tide has already got onto the same point in the court. But, there might be 2 reasons behind this quote of Tide instead of Tide Naturals.. Either, HUL and the ad agency tried to play smart on attacking Tide with a logic that they tested against Tide Naturals.. And this logic will not sustain the court or with ASCI.. The second might be they tried to attack on Tide Naturals but somewhere they missed the logic of communicating it directly to the customer..

RK said...

Read your blog and comments...thanx for sharing such a interesting information ... specially this one- "Issued in interest of RIN Users.. similar to the anti-RIL gas campaign by anil ambani's "Issued in interest of RADAG shareholders"

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@RK : Thanks for ur comments..

Satya Srikanth said...

Great Sajja, gud insight!!! worth reading to know the complete picture

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Sathya Srikanth: Thanks for the appreciation...

binu.work said...

Thank you Sajja for your post.

Today morning only I saw the ad for the first time, and just some time back I saw the ad a couple of times again. I really wanted to know what's the credibility of this ad and so googled. Before reading your post I read 2 other articles, which (i feel) were biased, and were complaining that HUL has done something wrong. After reading your post only I got the full picture and other happenings which lead to this ad.

Actually I don't use to notice any "special offer", "20% extra", "ab sirf Rs. xx/-", "now with natural/lemon/fruit", etc. kind of ads and so I was unaware of what Tide did for misleading the consumers. But this ad of Rin was different enough to get noticed even by people who don't care much about ads.

What I would say is, now that Tide has already presented "Tide Naturals" as if "Tide" to mislead people, they deserve to be called just "Tide" rather than "Tide Naturals" in HUL's ad (No offense to anyone).

Anonymous said...

The heartening news for most people that Calcutta high court has ordered Rin ad to be taken off-air in 2 days! It found HUL guilty of disparagement of competitive brand! This order is historic as as if the ad had not been stopped it would have meant that a bad trend would have started in the Indian advertising industry and HUL would have got away with a malicious and unethical act.

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@Binu: Thanks for your comments..
@Anonymous: How does it matter now.. Already the damage is done to the extent required..

Daddu_Rajasthan said...

Happy to share , that the Kolkata High Court has passed an ad interim order asking Hindustan Unilever Limited to take the Rin Advertisement off air effective immediately. The Hon’ble Court supports P&G view that the recent Rin advertisement is misleading & the comparison made by HUL in their Rin advertising is false and incorrect. The court has also stated that HUL is barred from showing any such advertisements in the future. @ I am Happy with Tide , and I donot want to purchase any HUL brand because ethices and intigrity of company is matter for me.

daddu_Rajasthan said...

Some of you have seen the disparaging advertisement on air against Tide Naturals. Thank you all for your concerns and support shown towards P&G brands. Tide is the leading mid-tier detergent brand & one of the fastest growing laundry brands in India. Its promise to deliver ‘superior whiteness & great cleaning’ is backed by extensive research by P&G’s strong, scientific team of over 1700 scientists and researchers worldwide, focused on delighting consumers through superior performance and great value propositions. The growing market share of the brand is testimony to the performance it delivers. P&G have been receiving several consumer messages and are truly encouraged by the trust they have in us and the support we are receiving from them. P&G will continue to stay focused on growing our share via delighting more consumers and communicating the benefits of our brand. as a scientist i beleve Tide is good product. Plz use it then u realize the diffrence.

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Daddu_Rajasthan: No one is here to argue that Tide as a brand is bad or doesn't have value for money.. You can be happy with Tide to continue with it.. and I too agree with that logic "If you are happy with a brand, you should continue with it" But I totally oppose your view which says "I donot want to purchase any HUL brand because ethices and intigrity of company is matter for me"..

If you speak of ethics and integrity, where has these ethics gone when P&G advertised about Tide Naturals in a wrong way that was asked by the court to pull off air??

I am clear on my view(unbiased) but, the way u comment seems to be that U are either an employee or a distributor of P&G or Tide...

Anywayz.. It was P&G who started the game by misleading consumers with Tide Naturals as Tide.. and HUL just has hit them back with their own logic..

Ur comments are welcome...

Anonymous said...

Interesting blog.
But i fail to understand how u say P&G "misled" consumers by passing off tide naturals as tide.

When Tata launched Nano, were they expected to say "THIS IS NOT TATA SUMO or TATA INDICA" which are better, bigger cars? I dont remember them saying that.

When Tide naturals launches, what should P&G have said? I remember the ad saying "NAYAA Tide Naturals". And it was priced at half of Tide. Is this not clear that Tide Naturals is a cheaper product, that is therefore intuitively not as good as Tide.

I agree about the "naturals" part, but that is a different discussion.
To me, it is a CLEAR case of a desperate below the belt attempt by HUL, putting an ad on air just before a 3-day weekend. And then saying "Rin is better than Tide", when the visuals show a comparison with Tide NATURALS.
Serves HUL right, that they have been ordered to take the commercial off air. I cannot believe they are a multinational company. SO CHEAP!
I wish the courts slap a 100 crore fine on them too!
Ha ha!

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Anonymous: Thanks for ur appreciation..

I think u r comparing two different categories when u took the example of NANO.. Cars are a rare purchase items per family.. whereas detergent powder is something that u purchase almost every month.. The consumer behaviour is totally different across these 2 categories..
And coming to ur point of misleading, Tide need not come out and say Tide Naturals is same as Tide to mislead customers.. The way it came out with a campaign of Naturals saying about the lemon and it's other effects on hands etc.. made the required damage in misleading customers that it is not a low value version.. P&G didn't say it is a low cost product but, it showed Naturals as a high value product.. Monetary Cost and Value perceived has it's differences in the mind of consumer..

P&G had it's way in making the customers perceive something as a high value though it is a low value product.. And HUL had it's way to counter it and make sure that users of RIN are protected against..

ankit said...

Sajja,
Great discussion on this blog. I agree with Anon's comments about using the automobile analogy (I know u don't agree!). Infact detergents being a monthly purchase category even more gives you an opportunity to switch your brand if you don't like it. Now if Rin believes it is better than Tide Naturals (the claim was not admitted by Calcutta high court because of inherent flaws in the lab report) and the consumer if misled by Tide Natural's advertising would definitely not be satisfied by the product and would go and buy Rin in next purchase cycle. So only 2 things can happen- either Tide Natural's advertising is not misleading (and it delivers on the promise in the ad) or Rin is making a false claim of superiority . If neither is the case then there is nothing to worry for Rin (and stoop to such level of advertising and endanger the whole company with a 100 crore suit!) as the consumer would have come back to it(Rin) anyways.
Regarding the lemon and chandan claim, I had earlier given innumerable examples from Unilever's portfolio where Wheel has "lemon ki shakti", Vim has "Lemon ki Shakti", Pond's has "Chandan ki khushboo" without actually having any of them!
And one more this which needs to be factually corrected here is that while Calcutta high court has ordered Rin's ad to be taken off air with severe criticism of the ad and the motive, Chennai high court has allowed P&G to go on airing the "Tide Naturals" ad with a super at the bottom "Does not contain Lemon and Chandan" (and only its fragrances). (I can bet if Wheel's lemon, Pond's chandan etc. come to court the court will not stop the ad bt ask HUL to put Supers saying Wheel/ Pond's doesn't contain Lemon or Chandan).
So either Unilever had an incompetent legal team which was not able to prove in court either Rin's right to go ahead with that a (supposedly) true comparision and stop airing a (believably) misleading Tide Naturals ad or the Brand managers out of desperation did both these acts which fell flat. Even legally the courts seem to have accepted (and rightly so) the P&G stand.

sajjapraveenchowdary said...

@ Ankit: Wonderful Ankit.. I think u have hit at the right spot but, not in the right angle.. Obviously detergent being a monthly purchase item, the customer can change it the next month if he/she is not satisfied with the current one..

There are 2 or 3 different factors that P&G as well as HUL tried to play in their ads to attract the customers.. P&G pushed on the factors like lemon, chandan, softness to hands. HUL played upon the factor of superior whiteness.. Tell me as a customer, if you have been buying a detergent every month and you tried out a new detergent this month.. Which of the above factors will you be able to evaluate yourself between your old detergent and the new detergent?? Only Superior whiteness that to a 50:50 extent.. not totally.. and if you say about the other factors such as softness to hands, lemon, chandan.. it is zero percent of evaluation that you can do..

This is where you can see the difference between HUL and P&G. If a customer brought Rin expecting superior whiteness and didn't get it, they would get back to Tide or Tide Naturals.. But, if a customer brought Tide Naturals expecting Lemon, Chandan, Softness to hands factor the customer will not return back to Rin bcoz, there is no way a customer can evaluate the same... This is the reason I said , you have hit it in the right spot but not in the right direction.. Your logic is very true but, it doesn't sustain in reality in the direction that you said but, definitely works out in the other direction.

Now, again comparing Tide Naturals with Lemon wheel and Pond's chandan.. I too agree that it might not have the ingredients thought promoted as they are.. But, they are not introduced at certain prices as a strategy to defend HUL in the price war.. whereas, Tide Naturals is definitely a category that took birth to defend the price wars in the detergent segment and that's where the difference between a Lemon Wheel and a Tide Naturals is.. I am not saying HUL promoting Wheel with lemon and Ponds with Chandan is right, but I am saying you cannot compare it with this sort of a strategic launch..

Open for comments...