Tobacco Documents Online

L,oItI LIbhIZD R&D OR'IENTIYTION - GREENSBORO 10 /9/74 1. How do a) expert graders, and b) consumers perceive each of the technical.characteristics listed in~the R&D semi-annual reports -- total nitrogen, total volatile bases, nicotine, volume, color, ash, reducing sugar and menthol. 2. How do a) expert graders, and b)~ consumers perceive each of the physical and filter characteristics typically shown in competitive analyses -- length, circumference, porosity, type of paper (could this be problem for Silva Thins vs. Virginia Slims), percent moisture, pressure drop and type of material used for filtration. 3. Results• of any tabulating that may already have been done bei.ween a) absolute volume and two-year growth, patterns by item, and b) ranking of brands in upper/ middle/lower ranges for the attributes mentioned above. 4. Results of any tabulating that may already have been done between al absolute volume and two-year growth patterns by item, and b) expert terminology ratings -- taste impact, chest and throat impact, physiological strength, pepperiness, irritation, and,overall strenghl. Also interested in smoothness if available. 5. What can one selectively filter, what are the ranges,_ what combinations have been tes ted witli expertt panel, in-house panel or consumers, how do these perceive the variations introduced by selective filtration alter- natives in expert panel vocabulary and consumer language. 6. Expert grading results for non-filter brands on same scale as used for filtered items. Also, any information av~rilal~.li on di f.fc rcnc(~:-, hot.ween thn way non-filtcr smokers perceive their brand/competitive filtered products, and the way filter smokers perceive their brand vs. competitive filters. 0 Ga ~ ~ ~ F+ GJ

.i r • 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Information~concerning what non-filter brand smokers dislike about filters (includirrg varieties of filter if available); what do they like about smoking a filter brand (perceived advantages of the latter, in ord'er, if available). Information on consumer reaction to filtration by color of filter wrap,•color of filter, recessiveness of filter, presence or abasence of air ventsQpreasure drop, etc. Basis for overall quality index ratings, a d available consumer evidence supporting the criteria used to assess overall quality and~weight of each attribute. The aging,process - average age at whichicigarettes typically consumed by brand, expert panel ratings of aged vs. non-aged samples of same product/brand, consumer reaction to aged vs. non-aged, alternatives available to retard/accelerate aging process before it gets to consumer from atechnical (including packaging) standpoint. Available information on consumer reaction to texture -- proportion, distribution and internal arrangement of various lengths/thicknesses of tobacco within a cigarette; effect of various textures on each of the attributes considered by expert graders. Sources of burley, Turkish, and bright tobacco -- list of other minor sources used occasionally. Technical feasibility of a) use of additional alkaloid or other type additives to modify/enhance/accelerate/modulate pharmacological effects of nicotine, b) use of active agents beyond nicotine which might provide an additional dimension of physiological effect -- facilitate/depress sleepiness, enhance/reduce appetite feeling, enhance skeletal muscle relaxation~, reduce feelings of stress, provide relief from minor headache pain, etc., c) use of alternative paper/tobacco blendsto reduce perceived negatives of current cigarettes -- is too hiarsh, induces coughing, etc., d) incorporation-into cigarette form of benefits now associaLed with activities closely related to cigarette consumption (e.g., drinking coffee), or possibly usedto replace cigarette,consumotiion (e.g., chewing gum), once they are identified with consumers. Legal implications for each of the types of change out- lined above. 03365614

I \..). 1 16. Review of foreign technology/bencfit positioning, e.g., greater use in sonic countries of C02 filtration as a positive in advertising, with particular emphasis on recent changes andiimportant year to vear trends. Review of packaging feasibilities -- length, circumference, cigarettes per package -- including opportunities for short-run packing changes for promotional use -- in package and on-package premium/coupon packing, in carton and on-carton premium/coupon packing, multiple unit packing opportunities, etc. lV) 1~ G~IQU~ - AV BV/Ys 10/9/74

b. Cr.,iCaC~.uu 1.25 2.75 G.o 3, 25,1.75, , 4.15 4,•15 3.7'5 i 4.'15 4.25 4.5 5 . (r 7.5 5.U 5'. 5 4i.75 i (i _n 1 t 5.O I

1 I i ® 9 d N. r:•rfaLa`~12u ~ ~Ice 1Jery 1.(7(i 'al'rue, ~G `e E15 ti, ~ . ~ I'' Luf ~jr. GrF er[ • lU,Y• Uor°EkJ ~~HS tt TV,~n1:~ve E35, . ~ ~-~ S.a~~va.'ll1sii`ALUU ~ ~Q().~;1{ ,,. ; .. ~~V;ii r~g;.l"1113 y~5 l11kic;' J Uu ~ Supe1 . tJ '41 ;Wa rlc~tc~s Le ~. t'? ,13e1a j a-'E35 1 N~wpo~~ L F3 ~ S a 1 ern~`~8 5 , J Sa ~ GI11qT';rt1 tJ tuQ ~ ~, +y ~, ~ -Scnleiii'~ ,~ ria r,ou,,(yr)_6 ~ g'TCoh ~:l~T~J ri tt~t ~` ~T3, tI1 ~L00 . Ba o,?;l 9080) `l j:oo F~ , +r1 a a ~: Yl l i 9 ~ ~~ t.: Ll a ® m { { d { ) ..y d r <tC r 1 + f rl . .. ( 2; {1;~yr"~a~~ E1,fJ L. ~' 3o SNa ~ ~~ ( , 1 ) , 1 ls~ ~ r)~.~ ~ '1 4 i i '4. . . 1 . .~ i~!Ir r 4 . ~ J, . ~ .c1.C~t~.~~~. .~-- . , I k r n i . . .. ..tr i1 jji 1l:aLio_n . ~ .~.~: 1 ,. ~1:., 2 5 ! 3.75 4. 0! 5'.25 :5.5 ; + 0 Mun(:1101' ;3.25 r ~ '; ~4 •0 ~. : 4 . 5 ;, {4.?~i fl { r 4.0 ~ {~~.88 + _4.13 ~5.5 ° 5. 25 .. , ~: 1 f~ ~ .Y ~5.755 ~ t k ~.5 k y S.U t ' i ~6 25 5 , ) , =r 4 Y ~.F.,~.~..