|
GRAPE-NUTS |
During the past two decades, Post Division experienced substantial fluctuations in its Grape-Nuts brand. New advertising campaigns in the 1980s had slowed the decline but had not reversed the trend. By the end of the decade, Grape-Nuts had fallen to an all-time low of 2.1% share of the ready-to-eat (RTE) cereal market. Some progress had been made in the early 1990s to reverse the share decline, but this reversal was short lived. By 1996, the brand had fallen out of the top 10 selling RTE brands with a market share that was just under 2%. Carin Gee, the group product manager on the Grape-Nuts business wondered whether the brand would have to be satisfied with this more modest share position, or whether it was feasible to return the Grape-Nuts business to its former status as a leading brand. She examined the brand’s history to help her make this judgment.
Brand History
Charles Post developed Grape-Nuts in 1898. It was marketed as a natural cereal that was good for health and well being. Grape-Nuts was reputed to be a brain food that was good for red blood cells. So Post started a franchise that developed into one of the leading brands in the RTE cereal category. The modern history of the brand is summarized in Table 1.
During the 1960s, the franchise grew steadily. Advertising for the brand promoted Grape-Nuts as the cereal that "fills you up not out." Brand users were shown engaged in activities such as
tennis and horseback riding. Grape-Nuts sustained its performance in the 1970s by finding a contemporary way of presenting its position as healthful nutrition. In 1973, Euell Gibbons became the spokesperson for the brand and he promoted Grape-Nuts as the "Back to Nature Cereal." Despite the success of this campaign, it had to be discontinued when Gibbons died (went back to nature) in 1976. The suddenness of Gibbons’ passing left the brand without advertising. Spots were quickly developed to fill the void while a replacement for Gibbons was sought. "First Time" was aired during this time. In 1979, Will Rogers Jr. served as the spokesperson for the "Simple Cereal" and in 1981 a wilderness man with respect for nature was employed as the spokesperson for Grape-Nuts.By the mid-1980s, Grape-Nuts market share began to drop at an alarming rate. The association of Grape-Nuts with spokespeople who communed with nature was no longer a contemporary way to represent healthful nutrition. To achieve greater modernity, the 1985 campaign focused on announcing the virtue of Grape-Nuts with a hard-hitting execution called "
Horseman" and a spot called "Climber." While these were on air, Grape-Nuts was testing a more serene execution called "Breakfast Experience" with male and female consumers talking about their morning with Grape-Nuts. These spots were aired nationally in 1986. Modified versions of both the male and female executions were presented in 1986 and in early 1987.While these campaigns slowed Grape-Nuts’ decline, it did not halt it. In 1987, a radically new advertising strategy was developed in the
"Little Nugget" campaign. The focus of these ads was on the discovery of Grape-Nuts’ texture and benefits. ThisTABLE 1
|
Year |
Share % of Market |
Campaign |
Selling Idea |
Creative Idea |
|
1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 |
2.2 2.4 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.7 |
Fills you up, not out |
Weight Maintenance |
User testimonial around activity/sport |
|
1973 1974 1975 1976 |
2.6 2.9 2.9 3.2 |
Euell Gibbons |
Natural Cereal |
Expert testimonial in natural setting |
|
1977 1978 |
2.9 3.3 |
First Time |
Special taste/texture |
Candids of consumers trying Grape-Nuts |
|
1979 1980 |
3.3 3.2 |
Will Rogers, Jr. |
Simple, wholesome food |
Celebrity spokesperson in natural setting |
|
1981 1982 1983 1984 |
3.0 3.2 2.7 2.4 |
Wilderness man |
Food value, crunchy good taste |
Spokesperson with basic values that Grape-Nuts stands for |
|
1985 1986 |
2.5 2.4 |
Horseman Breakfast experience |
Satisfying, natural experience |
Grape-Nut users in pleasant, natural morning environment |
campaign halted the decline in Grape-Nuts share for one year, after which the brand’s decline resumed.
In the early 1990s, the senior vice president of marketing who was managing the business had an idea to present a challenge to consumers to use the brand. In this case the challenge was to try the product for a week and see whether it enhanced the user’s energy. The insight was that people who took up the challenge would fill their bowl with Grape-Nuts, which given its density would double the amount of cereal consumed in relation to most flaked cereals. "Try it for a Week" was successful not only in halting the erosion of the brand but in growing the business. However, by 1993 this campaign was no longer sustaining the business and Grape-Nuts was in danger of falling below 2% share of the cereal business. The "Little Choices" campaign did little to halt this decline.
In an effort to rejuvenate the brand, a new campaign was run in 1994. It attempted to present Grape-Nuts in a setting that represented the way users thought of health. These executions highlighted the purity of Grape-Nuts and showed relaxed activities. While these efforts have served to stabilize the brand, the share at the beginning of 1996 was under 2% of the cereal market. Grape-Nuts is thus still a power brand, but it has fallen from the ranks of the top ten cereals.
Gee’s goal is to grow the Grape-Nut franchise so that it is over the 2% level. "I don’t think we can do it with a new form, because we have tried developing a Grape-Nut flake and it did not sell well." She also questioned returning to the "try it for a week" approach, noting that "try it for a week worked the first time it was used in 1990, but it really has not grown the business over the long haul." Gee turned to consumer data to see if he had overlooked any insight that the findings might afford.
Consumer Analysis
Grape-Nuts is a highly distinctive brand in the RTE category. It has a crunchy texture that appeals to a small percentage of the adult population. Table 2 shows that percentage of the population that annually eats the leading cereal (i.e. penetration), Frosted Flakes, the 8th most popular brand, Special K, and the 17th most popular brand, Wheaties. In relation to these brands, Grape-Nuts penetration is small and the amount consumed by each user is substantial.
TABLE 2
1995 Penetration (% of RTE Cereal Users Who Use the Brand)
|
Brand |
Market Share |
Penetration |
Lb Per Person |
|
Frosted Flakes |
4.24 |
22.5% |
3.6 |
|
Special K |
2.11 |
16.7% |
2.4 |
|
Wheaties |
1.68 |
10.9% |
2.9 |
|
Grape-Nuts |
1.90 |
9.6% |
3.9 |
Although the Grape-Nuts franchise was composed of a relatively small group of consumers, those who purchased the brand did so with great regularity. Loyal users of Grape-Nuts purchased the brand every 30 days on average and all Grape-Nuts users purchased it every 46 days on average.
To develop the marketing plan Carin Gee consulted a variety of data sources. A user profile study provided a demographic description of the Grape-Nuts user (Exhibit 1). Psychographic research provided some induction of the attitudes, interests and lifestyles of Grape-Nuts users (Exhibit 2). Research conducted for Grape-Nuts by Grey Advertising in which consumers were asked to personify Grape-Nuts offered further information about the brand’s essence (Exhibit 3).
In the summer of 1996, with this information in mind, Carin began to develop the 1997 marketing plan. Who should be targeted, she wondered--the current franchise or nonusers of the brand? What should the brand position be--a regular, nutritional or some other sort of cereal? What benefits should be stressed and what should the tone of the advertising be? And if the campaign were successful, what strategy might be used to sustain brand development over time.
Exhibit 1: User Profile
Demographics
|
1. Age |
||||||
|
% GN Users |
%RTE Cereal Users |
|||||
|
Age |
1986 |
1996 |
1986 |
1996 |
||
|
18-24 |
03.8 |
5.7 |
9.6 |
8.3 |
||
|
25-34 |
24.9 |
20.3 |
24.3 |
24.7 |
||
|
35-44 |
22.4 |
23.0 |
19.8 |
21.8 |
||
|
45-54 |
13.0 |
19.5 |
14.3 |
14.4 |
||
|
55-64 |
15.5 |
14.0 |
14.2 |
12.2 |
||
|
65+ |
18.3 |
17.4 |
17.8 |
18.5 |
||
|
2. Sex/Age (1996) |
|
|
% of Volume |
|
|
Children |
7 |
|
Adult Males |
45 |
|
Adult Females |
48 |
|
3. Income |
|||||||
|
% GN HH |
Index to RTE |
||||||
|
Grape-Nuts Household Income |
1986 |
1996 |
1986 |
1996 |
|||
|
$35+ |
49 |
53 |
111 |
125 |
|||
|
$25-34.9 |
20 |
17 |
88 |
102 |
|||
|
$15-24.9 |
17 |
13 |
67 |
80 |
|||
|
$15- |
14 |
17 |
45 |
74 |
|||
|
4. Education |
||||||||||||
|
% GN HH |
Index to RTE |
|||||||||||
|
Female Homemakers |
1986 |
1996 |
1986 |
1996 |
||||||||
|
Graduated College |
21 |
24 |
119 |
141 |
||||||||
|
Attended College |
23 |
22 |
115 |
119 |
||||||||
|
Graduated High School |
39 |
41 |
75 |
98 |
||||||||
|
Didn’t Graduate High School |
17 |
13 |
51 |
58 |
||||||||
|
5. Avocation Female Homemakers |
GN Index |
||
|
1986 |
1996 |
||
|
Cross Country Skiing |
334 |
113 |
|
|
Backpacking/Hiking |
219 |
121 |
|
|
Tennis |
205 |
131 |
|
|
Bicycling |
178 |
155 |
|
|
Boating |
171 |
112 |
|
|
Swimming |
170 |
122 |
|
Exhibit 2: Psychographic Profile of the Grape-Nuts User
The Grape-Nuts user psychographic profile has been developed in two steps:
1. The general consumer population is segmented based on VALS and PRIZM clusters and high indexing clusters are identified as GN user types.
2. Brand imagery, user imagery and product attribute research is then conducted on GN users/user types to further define the Grape-Nuts user (Focus Groups, Structure Study, Quadrant Analysis, Tracking Study and the Attitudes and Usage Study).
This compilation of Grape-Nuts user psychographic research describes the Grape-Nuts user as:
People concerned with their overall well being who recognize the valuable role of wholesome are nutritious foods in good health without being heath-food fanatics. These target consumers appreciate wholesome and natural tastes in their breakfast cereals. They are intelligent and motivated, leading healthy, active lifestyles. Other characteristics are:
Psychographics
A key differentiating aspect of the Grape-Nuts target is their interest and concern with their own health and well-being. While they are not health extremists or faddists, they are people who are active, enjoy life and are interested in a pure, wholesome, good-tasting diet.
|
GN |
|||
|
Top 2 Box Agreement |
Users % |
Non-Users % |
|
|
I purchase foods that are high in: |
|||
|
Protein |
91 |
84 |
|
|
Vitamins |
89 |
86 |
|
|
I avoid food with: |
|||
|
Fat |
61 |
55 |
|
|
Cholesterol |
60 |
55 |
|
|
Sugar |
66 |
57 |
|
|
I only serve things I consider nutritious |
54 |
48 |
|
|
What I eat shows up in how I look |
74 |
67 |
|
VALS
A review of the Grape-Nuts VALS groups suggests that our users can best be defined by focusing on two VALS groups. These include the VALS Actualizers and Experiencers segments.
PRIZM
PRIZM data, which is more demographically oriented than VALS, indicates that the Grape-Nuts user base is clustered around two general typologies:
|
GN User Index |
PRIZM Data Codes |
Descriptive Titles |
|
121 |
S1 |
Educated, affluent. Elite white families in owner-occupied. Green-belt suburbs. |
|
96 |
S2 |
Educated, affluent. Semi-urban sophisticates with singles. University enclaves. |
|
146 |
T1 |
Mobile. Upper-middle. Child-raising families in new suburbs & ex-urban towns. |
|
84 |
U1 |
Educated singles in high-rise areas with university. Artistic & downscale elements. |
|
97 |
S3 |
Middle-class. Native-white. Blue-collar families in industrial urban fringes. |
|
57 |
U2 |
Mixed. Middle-class. Foreign stock & minorities in dense urban row-house areas. |
|
113 |
T2 |
Low-mid to downscale mill & factory towns with educated gentry & blue-collar labor. |
|
125 |
R1 |
Minor cities & rural towns amidst farms & ranches. Across agricultural America. |
|
53 |
U3 |
Mixed black,Hispanic and foreign stock in aging, center city. Row & high-rise areas. |
|
43 |
R2 |
Mixed. Unskilled whites. Blacks, Hispanics & Indians in poor rural towns & farms. |
Exhibit 3: Brand Character Research
A Grape-Nuts Brand Character Study utilized focus groups and quantitative personal interviews against both users and non-user prospects. A well-defined Brand Personality was identified that was manifested in a definite set of images associated with the brand.
Those images proved to be consistent in the minds of both users and prospects and are summarized in the sample results below:
|
|
% Selecting phrase |
|
Down to earth |
79 |
|
Health conscious |
75 |
|
Wholesome |
73 |
|
Enjoys simple things in life |
71 |
|
Loves the outdoors |
66 |
|
Energetic |
65 |
|
Physically fit |
60 |
|
Interesting |
59 |
|
Old fashioned/traditional |
57 |
|
Practical |
55 |
|
Independent/self-reliant |
52 |
|
Knows his/her own mind |
51 |
|
|
|
|
Career-oriented |
14 |
|
Sophisticated |
11 |
|
Stylish/fashionable |
10 |
|
Urban |
6 |
|
Insensitive |
5 |
How do users and prospects describe the type of person they want to be like or be with? (Base: Total in each group)
|
Rank Order of |
||||
|
Users |
Prospects |
|||
|
Interesting |
1 |
1 |
||
|
Responsible |
2 |
3 |
||
|
Honest/trustworthy |
3 |
5 |
||
|
Intelligent |
4 |
11 |
||
|
Knowledgeable |
5 |
9 |
||
|
Considerate |
6 |
2 |
||
|
Independent/self-reliant |
7 |
5 |
||
|
Enjoys simple things in life |
7 |
7 |
||
|
Down to earth |
7 |
7 |
||
|
Knows his/her own mind |
10 |
14 |
||
|
Confident |
12 |
3 |
||
|
Fun-loving |
18 |
9 |
||
Brand Character Research (continued)
How is the Grape-Nuts person visualized? (Base: Total sample)
|
% Rating Exactly/ Very Much Like |
|
|
Woman carrying baby on back |
5 |
|
Young mountain climber |
50 |
|
Euell Gibbons |
48 |
|
Tennis player |
46 |
|
Rancher |
43 |
|
Wilderness man |
22 |
|
City children playing in street |
10 |
|
Business executive team |
8 |
|
Man in tuxedo |
4 |
|
Sexy lady with hairdryer |
1 |