Whiskas swot analysis Whiskas canned is the number one pet selling brand in the UK. It made 87.5 million last year. Followed by pedigree canned at 82.1 million (also owned by mars incorporated). The 3rd biggest brand is Nestlé’s Felix canned which made 82 million. Mars master foods dominates the pet food market in the UK as it has a share of 45% of the market. So it doesn’t have many competitors except for nestle Purina pet food care that has a share of 32%of the market. Although Whiskas is the number one selling brand you could argue that the pedigree canned food takes away some of the market share that Whiskas could potentially have even though they are both owned by the same parent company where the profits go to the same place. According to experts the pet food market has little prospect of any major growth. “ As a result, pet food manufacturers looking for sales growth are trying
to enter related markets by extending their brands into pet services”. Most major development in the pet food market over the last few years have come from an increase of segmentation.in the pet food market it is segmented into 4 main sections Life cycle, Added convenience Lower maintenance and Health claims. http://tutor2u.net/business/marketing/casestudy_petfood.asp Problems with the asa
WHISKAS POUCHES Complaint from: 1 competitor Background An advertisement for Whiskas Pouches moist cat food made a series of claims about cats' preference for this cat food:� "Does your cat want to be fed differently? 90% of the cats we asked did"� "In a nationwide test 90% preferred Whiskas Pouches to tins everytime"� "90% prefer Whiskas Pouches to tins"The following text was displayed in the commercial:"1.4 million owners questioned. 173,219 responded".A competitor agency, BMP DDB, complained on behalf of its client Friskies that:1. The percentage had been overclaimed given the low level of response as compared to the total sample.2. Participants were supplied with Pouches free of charge so could not give an objective view.3. The research methodology was flawed because there had been no direct comparison between Pouches
and tinned food, as there would be in aside-by-side test. Assessment The ITC was informed by Pedigree Petfoods via the BACC that 1.4 million cat owners (known to the advertiser to feed wet food, which included tins, to their cat either on its own or mixed with dry food) had been sent a Whiskas Pouches sample, and asked to take part in the survey. Those who agreed to participate (173,291 owners) were supplied with three days worth of the product in order for them to be able to follow the test instructions to feed their cat "one pouch for breakfast and one pouch for dinner for the next three days�supplement feeding during the day with dry food�observe the cat's response and fill in the diary." Participants were asked to indicate what they perceived to be their cats preferred food, based on measuring the amount of uneaten Pouches food remaining after each meal, compared to the amount that would be left when the cat was fed its normal food. The results of the test formed the basis of the claimed preference which appeared in the advertisement. 90% of those owners who participated stated a preference for Whiskas Pouches over tins.The ITC assessed the three elements of the complaint as follows:1. It noted that the figure of 1.4 million referred to the number of owners who had been asked if they would like to participate in the survey, and not the number who actually participated which was 173,291. The ITC considered it was fair to state a "90% preference" referring to those who participated, thus excluding those who did not. It also judged that, although 173,291 represented only 12% of the initial mailing, it was still a substantial sample inits own right and that therefore to state that "90% preferred..." was not an overclaim. Not upheld.2. It considered it reasonable for the advertiser to provide participants with free samples of the cat food to be tested, and did not consider that by doing so participants would necessarily feel pressured in to showing bias in favour of the product. Not upheld.3. It noted the points made by BMP BBD that they believed side-by-side tests were a more reliable method of judging taste preference. The ITC observed, however,
that the so-called "monadic" method of taste testing, whereby cats were fed for a period of time on one food and the consumption measured, followed by a similar period of testing on another food brand, has been accepted by pet-food nutritionists for many years as a reliable methodology. It did not support the complainant's view that the methodology was flawed due to a lack of a direct comparison. Not upheldHowever, although the ITC did not support the complaint by BMP BBD, it considered that the advertisement had on two counts communicated the test methodology and results in a misleading manner.1. The phrase used in the qualifying text "1.4 million owners questioned. 173,219 responded" was in the ITC's judgement ambiguous, as it could leave the impression in the short time it was on screen that a much larger number had participated in the survey. In fact, 1.4 million owners were not "questioned", but were sent a sample of cat food and invited to take part in the survey. In reality, only 173,219 people were actually questioned.2. The way in which the claims about the survey results were phrased ("90% of the cats we asked did" "In a nationwide test 90% preferred Whiskas Pouches to tins everytime") gave the impression that a scientific, objective, evaluation of cats' preferences had been carried out. In fact, 90% of the owners who responded to the research expressed the view that their cat preferred Whiskas Pouches to tinned food, based on a taste test conducted in the home by the owners themselves. Whilst this partially subjective methodology may produce usable results, the ITC judged that the commercial, by making cats and not owners the subject, had misleadingly implied that a more stringently controlled scientific taste test had been performed than was in fact the case.The ITC advised the BACC to ensure that future claims relating to pet food tests more accurately reflected the nature and results of the tests. Conclusion Original complaints not upheld, but Staff Intervention in relation to the communication in the advertisement.
“An advertisement for Whiskas Pouches moist cat food made a series of claims about cats' preference for this cat food:� "Does your cat want to be fed differently? 90% of the cats we asked did"� "In a nationwide test 90% preferred Whiskas Pouches to tins everytime"� "90% prefer Whiskas Pouches to tins"The following text was displayed in the commercial:"1.4 million owners questioned. 173,219 responded.” There are a number of problems with this number one cats can not be asked if they want to be fed differently. Number 2 you also cant ask cats if they prefer whiskas pouches to cat food but not only that they can not compare tinned cat food with food ion a packet because they are two totally different things. Thirdly the percentages were over claimed given the low level of response as compared to the total sample. Fourthly the participants in the survey were provided with the pouches free of charge so they cant give an objective view. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/itc/itc_publications/com plaints_reports/advertising_complaints/show_complaint.aspad_complaint_id=579.html the target audience for my product is cat owners