Tobacco Documents Online

OGF VITALITY TEST WAVE II (MRD #5544/1177)

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Ho. Background & Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Overv i ew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Summary of Preliminary Findings I. Effect of OGF Ad Approaches on (1GF &()G1_ A. OGF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 B. OGL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 I I . Ol d Gol d Li ghts Tracki ng . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

BACKGROUND A recall test was conducted in September 1977 to determine which of 4 proposed OGF ad approaches were most viable for the brand in terms of brand noting, specific recall and message communication. Based on the results of this test, two ad approaches were selected "Nostalgia/Pack" & "Nostalgia/People") for placement into test market. Four sets of test markets were then selected. An AAU was conducted in each of these markets prior to the placement of any test advertising in order to develop base period data (Pre advertising). Subsequently, during the week of November 28, 1977, each of the aforemen- tioned ad approaches and a control ad ("Man on a Rock") was placed into a separate set of the four sets of test markets. The fourth set of test markets contained no OGF advertising. OGL advertising was present in all of the four sets of markets. All OGF advertising ran through February 20, 1978. Shortly after, a second wave AAU (Post advertising) was conducted in each of the four sets of markets. OBJECTIVE These OGF ad approaches were placed into test markets primarily to aid in determining: 1. The effect that each has on the OGF brand and, 2. Which has a more positive effect on OGF, a combination of OGF & OGL advertising or onl OGL advertising. ~ ... ~ ~ cn cn ~ .a

2 Additionally, this test gave us the opportunity to track the progress of OGL since its introduction in late August 1977. Wave I tracks OGL 3 months after introduction; Wave II 6 months after introduction. Primary criteria for analysis was: - advertising and brand awareness - trial - conversion - attitudes This preliminary report addresses the first three aforementioned criteria. The fourth (diagnostic data) will be included in the final report. The following analysis is set up in two parts: I. Effect of OGF Ad Approaches on OGF and OGL II. Old Gold Lights Tracking

3 METHOD In each wave, a total of approximately two thousand interviews were completed with adult smokers (ten or more cigarettes per day) 18 years of age or older, half with men and half with women. Additionally, in each wave the number of interviews with 18-24 year old males was boosted by approximately 165 (to a total of approximately 375) to insure that we have enough of these respondents to analyze separately. The sample was mathematically balanced so that in each wave,each city had the same number of males and females in each of the four age groups (18-24, 25-34, 35-49, 50 and over). In addition, the total number of males 18-24 (random plus boosted) was weighted to their proportion in the random sample. Additionally, it should be made clear that interviewing with adult smokers between 18-20 years of age was done to provide us with valuable attitudinal information. This information will aid in projecting their future behavior when they reach 21 years of age. Interviews were conducted by telephone via AHF WATS facilities during daytime, evening and weekend hours. Telephone numbers were selected at random from local telephone directories in ten Old Gold high BDI markets. In addition, 20% of the numbers were selected using random digits in order to reach some unlisted telephone numbers. The ten test markets were:

4 MARKET SET COUNTY AD APPROACH 1. Salem, Oregon Marion "Nostalgia/Pack" Utica/Rome, N.Y. Oneida 2. Springfield, Mass. Hampden "Nostalgia/People" Davenport, Iowa Rock Is. (Ill.) 3. Lincoln, Nebraska Lancaster "Man on a Rock" Sioux City, Iowa Woodbury 4. Waterloo, Iowa Black Hawk No OGF Adv. Binghampton, N.Y. Broome Kenosha; 4Jisconsin Kenosha Portland, Maine Cumberland Field Dates: Wave I - random sample Sep. 30 - October 18, 1977. Booster sample completed November 1, 1977. Wave II - random sample Feb. 27 - March 15, 1978. Booster sample completed March 22, 1978.

5 OVERVIEW I. Effect of OGF Ad Approaches on OGF and OGL Overall, there is no evidence to suggest that OGF advertising, as represented by the three approaches tested - enhances the overall franchise or is of substantial advantage to either brand. A. Old Gold Filter With minor exceptions, the brand presents an essentially static picture: All key measures remain essentially unchanged whether or not OGF advertising is present. Only among younger adult females (18-34 years old), low tar and very/ultra low tar smokers is OGF at somewhat of'a disadvantage with only OGL advertising support in generating total trial and purchase trial. This was true for both "Nostalgia" approaches among the aforementioned female group and very/ultra low tar smokers and for "Nostalgia/People" among low tar smokers. However, the marketing value of this advantage is questionable since there is very little likelihood that low tar or very/ ultra low tar smokers will switch (back) to a lo-fi brand. B. Old Gold Liqhts There are no indications that OGF advertising has any positive effect on OGL. The key measures of advertising awareness, total trial, 10 ~. ~ purchase trial and conversion, as well as the proportion cn of acceptors, remain virtually unchanged. cn w

6 In fact, a substantive increase in total brand awareness of OGL among those not exposed to OGF advertising would suggest that concentrating efforts on OGL alone would benefit the brand more and possibly avoid confusion between the two brands. II. Old Gold Lights Tracking Approximately 7 out of 10 smokers were aware of OGL six months after introduction--a substantial increase among total smokers and vir- tually all selected subgroups. Additionally, this level of awareness is considerably above the levels attained by KGL, Now and Merit six months after their intro- duction. About one out of four smokers were aware of OGL advertising (no change vs. 4lave I). This compares favorably with the level attained by KGL (20%) six months after national introduction. Unaided advertising awareness at 3% remained the same, however, it should be noted that among low tar smokers there was a substantial decrease--from 6% in Wave I to 3% in the current wave. 8% of all smokers tried OGL while 4% actually purchased the brand--no change vs. Wave I. The proportion of triers who actually purchased the brand (50%) was slightly below that achieved by KGL (58%) at a similar point in time. A substantial increase in total trial (Wave I vs. Wave II) was noted among females, however, this gain was virtually all in non-purchase trial.

7 0.3% of total smokers claim OGL as their regular brand - no change vs. Wave I. It should be noted that the level is slightly higher among males (0.5%) than the other selected subgroups. Purchasers of OGL are still proportionately more likely to be male and still proportionately more likely to be a younger adult if the smoker is male. However, in contrast to Wave I, the OGL purchaser is proportionately more likely to be a lo-fi smoker than a low tar smoker.

SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY FINDINGS I. Effect of OGF Ad Approaches on OGF and OGL A. OGF B. OGL II. 'OGL Tracking