Tobacco Documents Online

5')059 146 A

C0NFIDENTIAL cL,C -l0 7- ,Pr Advertising Research Report MRD#AR-67-81 December 8, 196? KOOL FILTER "CABLE CAR" PRINT TEST PUBLISHED BY THE MARKETING RESEARCH DEPARTMENT R. J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, R'1NSTON-SALEM, N.C. o s ~ .c

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE MRD Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . First Attached Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Verbatim Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 - 4 Related Recall -- Verbatims . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Unrelated Recall -- Verbatims . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Tear Sheet of Ad . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . Last Attached

SUMMARY KOOL FILTER "CABLE CAR" PRINT TEST (Saturday Evening Post) MRD#AR-67-81 This is a study to determine the recall levels of Kool Filter "Cable Car" print advertisement. RESULTS 1. The test ad obtained an overall related recall score of 3%. 2. No one situation element was mentioned by more than 1%. 3. The "cool taste" was noted by 2$. CONCLUSIONS Kool rilter "Cable Car" obtained the lowest overall related recall score yet seen for P4C inside ads. (Our average for this category is 9%.) Internally, specifically related recall was only 1%, and both salespoint and illustration recall was uoor. Possible reasons for the low scores may include difficulty in translation of the "slice-of-life" format from on-air to print. Catherine S. Genovese Marketing Research Department ,.M CSG : af f 0 r cc CC: • Mr. W. S. Smith, Jr. Mr. R. M. Odear ~ Mr. Mr. W. C. A. H. Sugg Judge Mr. T. E. Sandefur Mr. C. K. Lambeth ~ ~ J Mr. Howard Gray Miss C. Elizabeth Jackson Mr. R. A. Blevins, Jr. William Esty Co.--Mr. Bernard Ober Mr. Mr. R. B. A. R. Rechholtz, Jr. Stewart Mr. J. A. Mr. G. R. (~ree ~ Holmen Mr. Mr. Mr A. J. J G. A. F Weber Albanese Hind Dancer-Fitzgerald- Sample-- Miss Babette Jackson . Mr. Mr. . T. A. . P. J. Haller Berger Mr. R. R. Etienne

KOOL FILTER "CABLE CAR" PRINT TEST (Saturday Evening Post) MRD#AR-67-81 This is a study to determine the recall levels of Kool Filter "Cable Car" print advertisement. LOCATION Cincinnati, Ohio Buffalo, New York Atlanta, Georgia Minneapolis, Minnesota San Francisco, California BACKGROUND The four color, full page advertisement appeared on page 82 of the November 4, 1967, issue of the Saturday Evening Post. DATES OF INTERVIEWING October 21 through October 29, 1967. METHOD Any adult who smoked at least one cigarette per day and who had read or looked through the November 4 issue of Post no more recently than the previous day was eligible to be interviewed. Respondents were asked if they remembered seeing an ad for any cigarettes and, if so, what brands. If Kool Filter was not mentioned, they were asked if they had seen an ad for Kool cigarettes and, if so, what it said and showed. Respondents were classified according to sex, age, and education. SAMPLE Post magazine supplied a random selection of names of their subscri.bers in the test cities. MRD NOTE This ad was tested on a free-ride basis with Camel "Morocco". Also tested on a free-ride were print ads for Lucky Strike Filter 100's, Chesterfield 101's, Tareyton 100, and Marlboro 100's.

SUMMARY OF VERBATIMS MRD#AR-67-81 Cities Combined Base:Total who read or looked through magazine yesterday (205) $ Gave recall related to Kool Filter "Cable Car" 3 Gave specifically related recall 1 Gave only generally related recall 2 DETAIL OF RECALL Salespoints Cool/cooler/taste/extra coolness 2 "Come up to/Kools/the Kool taste" 1 Miscellaneous 1 Illustration Showed man and woman, just 1 Showed woman taking cigarette/from man 1 Showed the pack/with cigarettes sticking out 1 Showed lake/cool water 1 Showed mountains 1 Miscellaneous 1 Gave unrelated recall 2 Gave no recall 95 100 ~ ~ J ~

APPENDIX I CLASSIFICATION OF RELATED RECALL MRD#AR-67-81 Sex Men Women Base:Total who read magazine yesterday (122) 83 * $ $ Gave recall related to "Cable Car" 4 1 Difference is significant at 85% confidence level. Age Under Over 35 35-50 50 Base:Total who read magazine yesterday (59)* (76)* 69 * $ $ $ Gave recall related to "Cable Car" - 4 4 No significant difference. Education Grade High School School Colle e Base:Total who read magazine yesterday (14 ** 96 93 $ $ $ Gave recall related to "Cable Car" 141 11 3 lDifference is significant at 83% confidence level. *Denotes small base **Denotes extremely small base NOTE Age and education bases do not add to 205 because some respondents refused to divulge their age and/or education.

APPENDIX II Below is a list of inside, P4C magazine ads previously tested. Brand Advertisement Overall Related Recall Score Salem "Canoe" 12% Salem "Montage" 11 Tareyton "Ski Nose" 6 Pall Mall Filter "Gold Pack and Case" 10 Marlboro "Cowboy" 10 Colony 100 "Ben Willoughby" 9 Pall Mall Filter "Gold Pack and Lighter" 7 Kent "Football Fan" 4 Average for P4C, inside 9%

DEFINITIONS FOR USE IN DAY-AFTER PRINT TESTS In order to make each day-after print test comparable with all other such tests, certain definitions have been followed. These definitions are outlined briefly below: Related Recall - Verbatims which are classified as related are cor- rect play- acks of the test advertisement. These may either be gen- erally correct or specifically correct. A specifically correct Ver- batim contains elements of recall which can come only from the test advertisement, since they have appeared in no other advertisement. Generally correct verbatims contain elements which truly reflect things said or shown in the test advertisement, although these things are not exclusive to the test advertisement. Unrelated Recall - Verbatims which are classified as unrelated fall into one o t ree groups. The most obvious group contains those which do not have any elements of any cigarette advertising in them. In some cases these can amount to nothing more than the respondent's statement that he remembers the brand name but nothing else. In other cases there may be non-descriptive mentions of the cigarette pack. The second group consists of only elements which are incorrect. These may be either generally incorrect or specifically incorrect. A specifically incorrect verbatim contains mentions of elements which are clearly from an advertisement other than the thst one. A gener- ally incorrect verbatim consists of elements that cannot be associated with specific non-test brand advertising but which are certainly not valid renderings of the copy strategy for the test brand. An example of this latter case would be where the respondent says that a CAMEL advertisement contained mention of "mildness". (Note that a reason- able amount of judgment is sometimes necessary in these cases. If a respondent claimed that a CAMEL advertisement made a claim for being "a man's cigarette", even though this was not mentioned, it could be argued that this is a justifiable inference because of the visual context.) The third group consists of verbatims which contain both gener- ally correct plus specifically incorrect elements. Here it is fairly clear that the respondent is confusing the test advertisement with some other and has not, therefore, been able to give satisfactory evidence of having recalled the test advertisement. Base - The base on which percentages are computed must be comparable in all tests. To standardize and maintain consistency, the base used in day-after print studies is people who last read the magazine/news- paper/supplement the day before the interview. This helps to maintain a constant iecency of potential ad page exposure in all tests.

VERBATIMS The following section contains the verbatim responses given in answer to the questions that were asked to deter- mine what the respondent remembered about the test adver- tisement. These verbatims are not edited. They appear exactly as they were spoken and, consequently, some are not gram- matically sound. Information on the respondent's sex, age category, and educational level are given at the end of each verbatim. The verbatims are in three categories, specifically related, generally related, and unrelated recall.