. Imms ke Mi MARKETING PLANNING & RESEARCH Motivations for Competitor 'Lights' Marlboro Lights Report of Qualitative Research Study Prepared for : Gallaher Limited February 1996 Mike Imms, Hope Cottage, School Hill, Slindon, Nr. Arundel, West Sussex BN18 ORA Tel: 01243 814777 Fax : 01243 814700 VAT Registration No 5'_S 3541 43 Contents i) Background and objectives of the research ii) Details of the research - sampling issues, sample and stimulus material iii) Management Summary of Main Findings Main Findings 1 . Context - perceptions of Silk Cut and low tar 2. Marlboro Lights as a product 3. Marlboro Lights and it's smoker base 4. Marlboro Lights as a brand 5. Marlboro Lights marketing - packaging, promotions and advertising 6. Conclusions and implications for Silk Cut NOTE : This report should be seen in conjunction with another separate project carried out in tandem exploring Motivations for Lambert & Butler Lights i) Background and objectives of the research This project sought to understand smoker motivations for Marlboro Lights and was one of two projects carried out separately but in tandem exploring issues which affect Silk Cut. The other, 'tandem' project explored smoker motivations for another quite different low tar brand - Lambert and Butler Lights . Over the past twelve months, both Marlboro Lights and L & B Lights have shown significant share growth, and this has given rise to three marketing concerns a) whilst much of the growth of both brands has come from the 'parent' full strength variants, duplication data shows that 'most often' smokers of both brands are also more likely to duplicate with Silk Cut than any other brand . Thus some Silk Cut sales are at risk if these brands grow in strength and this duplication is eroded. b) it is assumed that the parent companies of both brands (Rothmans UK and ITL) will seek to maintain and capitalise upon this growth of their low tar brands . As Silk Cut is the dominant brand in the low tar sector, any such activity can only represent a threat to Silk Cut sales c) it is likely that any fight-back by ITL following the planned launch of Gallaher's 'Salamander' will involve L & B Lights Thus, in broad terms, Gallaher marketing personnel wish to augment their knowledge of these two low-tar competitors to Silk Cut, in order to help formulate plans to combat the threat they pose how strong are these brands? - what is the nature of their strength? - how does Silk Cut compare? Thus, the research objectives were 1 . To understand what factors motivated initial trial and continued use of Marlboro Lights 2. To explore attitudes to Marlboro Lights in terms of the brand, the product and past promotional activity 3. To investigate the comparative brand and smoker image of Marlboro Lights against its parent brand and against Silk Cut ii) Details of the Research The research took the form of a qualitative research study, consisting of seven group discussions. (A further five group discussion conducted around the same time made up the Lambert & Butler Lights project.) The smoker profile of Marlboro Lights is heavily skewed to younger and more upmarket smokers - and anecdotally it has a lifestyle bias towards the style conscious, urban trendy - and students, and the sample was structured to reflect this. The sample reflected five key Marlboro Lights demographic groups, plus two groups of Silk Cut smokers . The concern over the high level of Silk Cut 'duplication' amongst Marlboro Lights smokers meant that the groups were recruited to ensure that such duplications were represented in the research . The seven groups were therefore specified as follows 'Most often' Brand Sex Age Class Area Date 1 . Marlboro Lights ' Female 18-21 Student London 22 .11 .95 2. Marlboro Lights ' Male 18-21 Student Manchester 21 .11 .95 3 . Marlboro Lights 1 Male 22-27 BC, London 4.12.95 4. Marlboro Lights ' Female 22-27 2 C1C London 4.12.95 5. Marlboro Lights ' Male 28-35 BC, Manchester 8.12 .95 6. Silk Cut 2 Male 18-21 Student London 5.12 .95 7. Silk Cut 2 Female 22-30 BC, Manchester 21 .11 .95 1 At least three per group also duplicated with Silk Cut (smoke occasionally nowadays or regularly in the past three years) 2 Any Silk Cut variant - all duplicated with Marlboro Lights (smoke occasionally nowadays or regularly in the past three years Stimulus material for the project consisted of - Wide range of competitive packs Marlboro promotional material - 'T' shirt in a can - Marlboro Lights collection brochure - 'Marlboro Experience' leaflet Marlboro advertising - current 'red words' version of 'Marlboro Country' - previous (wordless) 'Red images' - Urban cowboy Lights campaign - 'Lighten up' Lights campaign Silk Cut promotional material - Cafetiere - CDs - magazines - Examples of Silk Cut advertising iii) Management Summary of Main Findings 1 . In PRODUCT terms Marlboro Lights (in common with L & B Lights) is regarded as a 'low tar cigarette with taste' . As such it is a beneficiary of the recognised gap in the Gallaher portfolio - being a happy medium between the 'fresh air' of Silk Cut and the strength of B & H Special Filter . 2. As a BRAND and a product it appeals to fairly committed smokers . It reflects a self-image - and conveys to the rest of the world - a sense of projecting : 'I am a real smoker - albeit I'm cutting down' . In this respect, it is a FUNDAMENTALLY different brand to Silk Cut, which is very 'totemic' in projecting smokers of the brand as 'I am publicly declaring myself to be a low tar smoker' . 3. Marlboro Lights is a 'line extension' of Marlboro Red (- and is NOT a separate brand) with generic low tar values 'bolted on' . This line extension to Marlboro Red is in many ways clumsy and uncomfortable. 'Marlboro' has very clear brand values - and these values are very aspirational to the self-assured (but can be intimidating to others). 'Lights' has very clear generic values - but these are a rather uncomfortable fit with Marlboro-ness . Thus 'Marlboro' and 'Lights means something but 'Marlboro Lights' ISN'T a coherent brand. Crucially, it is only the perceived smoker profile (which is both clear and distinctive) that holds it together . Marlboro Lights smokers are seen as independent, strong-willed and self-assured. The brand is strongly linked to students, 'abroad' and the trendy. These factors deliver quite strong EMOTIONAL rewards to smokers of the brand. It is also notably more 'macho' than Silk Cut - making it a much more acceptable low tar brand for younger men. 4. In terms of brand imagery Marlboro Lights is in many ways the 'mirror image' of Silk Cut, and the brand propositions and positions of the two brands are quite different; Marlboro Lights Silk Cut Proposition The smokeable Marlboro The established and obvious for today's young smokers brand for people who want with a mind of their own to smoke low tar Positioning The choice of independent, The classy but conventional distinctive and self-assured and safe choice people In many ways, the ESSENCE of Marlboro Lights' appeal is that it ISN'T like Silk Cut. 5. Unquestionably, much of Marlboro Lights' current smoker base is led by a dedicated minority - but these tend to be peer-group leaders. Many of the current Marlboro Lights smokers are, in effect, 'hangers on' - living within the peer group of the dedicated minority, and attracted by the association of the brand with self-assured, self-confident smokers (cool, casual, daring to be different, trendy). Peer group pressure combined with SOCIAL smoking habits appear to have been a major force behind the growth of the brand. As the 'hangers on' grow older (and peer group acceptance and social smoking diminish in significance) the appeal of Marlboro Lights will probably reduce. 6. The current Marlboro Lights pack reveals the contradiction of 'Marlboro' + 'Lights' - and for many it is too much 'Lights' - and not 'Marlboro' enough . In terms of promotions, the Marlboro executions are interesting for some - but at heart there is a contradiction between the deliberative, pragmatic usefulness of promotions per se and the casual relaxed 'cool' of the brand . The advertising works well in reinforcing core Marlboro values - albeit it reinforces the intimidation that some feel about the brand, and it does nothing to resolve the conflict between 'Marlboro-ness' and 'Light-ness' . 7. The real danger to Silk Cut from Marlboro Lights comes therefore from two directions the product performance (low tar with more taste than Silk Cut) the distinctive and aspirational peer group leadership that dedicated Marlboro Lights smokers represent to a large group of early 20s smokers The key task for Silk Cut in meeting this competitive threat is to re-invest Silk Cut with 'Street Cred' - especially amongst early 20s opinion leaders. At the same time, it is clearly necessary to AVOID alienating the mass of Silk Cut smokers, and this suggests a segmented, targeted campaign . This leaves unresolved two issues the stronger product taste that many Marlboro Lights smokers enjoy the perception that Marlboro Lights are a far more acceptable low tar brand for men to be seen smoking Main Findings 1. Context - General comments about Silk Cut and generic points about low tar 1.1 Silk Cut This project was not specifically about motivations to smoke Silk Cut, but perceptions of Silk Cut of course provide a relevant context to compare motivations to smoke Marlboro Lights . It is therefore worthwhile briefly summarising some key points about Silk Cut. These issues arose in this research and broadly reflect more detailed understanding revealed in earlier research exploring the Silk Cut brand. a) Silk Cut is seen by all smokers as THE definitive low tar brand.