Tobacco Documents Online

svuVc,:1 /KtI4 Test of p!1d Production M1airTtioro 65 versus. ~ Tes~t~~ X400 "A"' VWWr%)~ th~ wi~t~h~~ 10%, ail~uti'on~ and~l6 gr' ~ lfrJ~rpjleo;_. 2406/2407~~1 DA?ED: AM1e 22', 19T9' ` ~ : -------- QY'ERYIEIf Asr*ng the Marlboro Red' smokers, thoovrerall, preference vote was 528 for old prod'uctlon Marlboro varsus 48% for test M'arket "A" Merlboro., QualitdtiWely, tncse Marlbolo smokers were not able to isolate any meaninqfull differencesbebreen'the:lgarett.~ss However, the followinq two, results shouldl bz noted: 1) yrcunger so*kers expressed a directional preference for toth, the taste of old rr;;i'tict1';n Martboro and the cigarette overa'1'lil and 2) whllle there were few 045; Marltioro s+n3kErs saspled fro* the southern states regllon, these paneli'sts signific,antlX preferred old Production liarlimaro. PA::n!y DL 5TRLBUT'[dN: Messrs. R. Danieli - R'ici~.. F. Daylor - RI'.'ch. T. Goord'alie w'. Hc4ri,re11 L. Meper - R'ilclh. S. Ne1'son G. Raed F. ltesntk. R. Seliilgman, - RI'chi. A. idCow, Ji. Zoler PHllILt,f l10RRIS, (~.S.A. ., MARKETING RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REP'OR'T FII.Z t 2©47396289.

M[i TEST QF Ola PR00lKTiIOM WARLt0R4 83 IIWF VERSUS TEST WUtICET A. MRl:a0R0 jnI rTTiH 10% DIh'iTIQN M{a 1~6 Ma. J/IR_ BACK-tut4fN0! The ourpose of' this test was to deteroi~re the co-+s1nner acceptabiltlty rf Test' M3 r..et 'X' Marlboro 85 with 109 dilution and' 15 u.j. tar relative to oiq Qroduction Hdrllbora 85 NMF. &iaitrt,fcall'y. these two cigarettes differel in that Tett Market 'A' Marlt}oro, had 7q+rer tar del'ilvery„ total 4Ya and` CO del i:ery ; and had 1'at' fi lter dillution, versus none for old' prodbction, Marlihnrro. Thi, J test was conducted among Marlboro P.ed Soft Pack sxnkers. Both c iqarettes w,qro i'denti'fiedl as M:irl*•aro and ptckaged' In FvoductioftNarlboro packages that yefie coded to a1loM for di'ffer+entiiaticn. This test was conducted vim ewil piaz4A#nts and' :elephoine calilbacks. B I!N'DIINGS Marlboro Aed Soft Pack Smokers L Ove_~r~a~ll~! Pre!erence. Ka~lboro Red s~nokersvoted about equally fo~^ti~~et'v~sc q,-1 aette-s ---4f"or Test Market 'A"l Parlboro vs. 52x for old pK~yd'uction, INariboro!., Within the various de,evgirapb ~t subgrrouGs, yrounypr smokers appear to lean lowardt the old production, Marlboro. Ad'dfitianalily, smokerm (l42al) from t}^ south regior si'gnilficant'lyr preferred o'd production sla•.livaro.. (Tabl'e 1 ). 2. Reasons Wor Preference. Wdsen asked'abGut their reasons for preference es~smoc+ers did ,wt signilficantly single out any ono characteristic more often for one Oirand tfiani the other. Cl'able 2). 3. dislikes. In mentioning their dislikes about each cigarettr these panelists c ted' est Market "A" Marlboro 85 as being "too, strong". (Table 3) Taste. There were no siqnilficavit diffferences in the voting with :~'gard To--S~thi more taste (Old Pr*dvctibn Marlboro 40%/Test Market "A" 3h~)! and taste pre, erence tOld Proovction Kbrlbora i'0!t/Test Market "/A" 33%). However, smokers aged~ under 35 y~ears exairessed a directional preferencee for the taste of Uld Prodtntion Marlboro. (Table 4) 1k. Harshness. T~hese~~ snwak~ers~ no+aiced noi dtf~fmrencm~~ iw hi~rshniess~ between tht Go c geretCtes (Table 5) 20147396290 .

lLI aYERAII LREFfK14CE _ _.._..~._. l+larrlmoro 85 Hii Smokers To tarli ?r.,e: Ttaase, ir each 9r4ni; T"4T s Sex' ~ Ma~T~l,7 Fee t % Act Un~~~ 3S arer TmT MY 1I X [refer Test i4artet 'k' 11 Marlboro 85 41i(14,*),; 43 37 3$' 46 Prefer Old Nrn.daact'ipn I E'. Marl~Dciro! 85' 44(,52)45 43' 4'7 39, wr, Preference 1 s 1 13 21 1 S 1l5 i~ II 17 Sma ,l l' Ff3se -- - - 5tatiist{caTly significint at the 95s level. • (S r East M1d6i st_ 5oW , ~' est~ ~~ t% 2] --- 44 44 12 45' 1'i1 46 64* 36 16 10 24 19 9 2a4739629f

D~ Ot1T E ,ra ers por e Marlboro 85 OF Snoh$rs Test Market 'A" Marlboro 85 Production Marljg1M 12 ;, { } .. 6ase: ~--•--204-.---- Taste -57! 45 #l avor too s t mong Left a bad aftertaxte TI 14 T 17 Flavor too miid' 13 17 Poor fiavror/dislii'ked tastr & 3 SRrsnge, peculiar tatte 4 1' Dry taste 2 4 Strenqt~fi 65 49 ~strong Too mild Ts~' 19 a 20 Eflrrct On, Mbuth & ~~~ roat 36 26 rr ta te mawlt ' urned throat Left mouth d~rX 3' 6 Caused cough 3 3 Burning Qualities 12 13 urne oo ast IF $ Didnil t burn rrell 3 4 Difficulits- In, S+eokin o Niot easy drawing Physical Characteiiistlc,;. 1i6 Too dry and siiat Coolness 3 2' Filter 1 1 i Miscellaneous 8 12' Not salTsfylnq '9 Disliked package 11 51 TASLff' 3' .r 2047396292

Test girr.et 'A° HarliNlrol ltas~~ ~o~ste ) ~~r~'~~tSILe 4!~ F~~ala(Y;C, "A" . 5ex iM'ale, Female TRI)i- X Z x V. Narl'!!mr~ 26 26, 22 'Pmefier taste o!'' Old Producr.ion Marltiuro 9 10 4c qreferernce 1Ini tastn +y1 d A roduc t i'on M'ari boro IKas' Maire lfa ~ ~!~ 40 411 a 37 . Pe ~r teste ~ ~es~Ro-rket "A' hlsrl6oro 8 9' 6 Prefer taste of @idINroduction Marlboro 311 3l 30 tto Pi amfeirente 11n taste - i - ~' Kotilced' f!o Wffereece Dn Toste_ 2rb' 24 Tntal, Mrre~11 taste~ of Test Mlarltet'A"Karibcro 33 3'5 2e Preferred ta%te of' Old Production Nbrltioro 40 4;0) 40, No prefierence/d'i ffer8nce 11n taste 2!& 2'5' 32 1_4 i 24, 2 25 1 - 413' 39 6 11 34 21'' - 1 26, 25 301 36 43 37 27 26 TARL'. E I 2047396293

.,.4 . ` '' ,.t vr;~Y. am wUlsH'HESS UVEL Mar;yWEo 85' MNF Smokers Test Ttwose 11n', each group Flarket.' "A hl ~ rlimoro" ~rlimoro 85 x x 11s ha rs h~e r 32 . 27, 34 Old Prod'ucticn, Mhrlboro 85 I harsM~er 32 3'5 27 33 32' 1;0 . GIceQ' No Difference Im Harshness 36 31 4*) '. 34 39 0 0 0 . 2047396294