Tobacco Documents Online

5OOS9 1621$ ~

CONFIDENTIAL 0,0- -Z 7-i7 Advertising Research Report MRD#AR-67-17 October 13, 1967 KOOL FILTER "TOBOGGANING" :60 ON-AIR TEST PUBLISHED BY THE MARKETING RESEARCH DEPARTMENT R. J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, WINSTON-SALEM, N. C. ~ 0 .~ ~ a N ~

INDEX TITLE PAGE MRD Summary ..................................•...First Attached Background .............................................2 Verbatim Summary .......................................3 Appendices ............................................4-5 Dialing Record .........................................6 Verbatims - Related Recall .............................9 Verbatims - Unrelated Recall ........... :.............. ll Script ................................................12

SUMMARY KOOL FILTER "TOBOGGANING" :60 ON-AIR TEST ay-after Reca11 MRD#AR-61-17 This is a study to determine the recall levels of Kool Filter "Tobogganing" :60 commercial. RESULTS 1. The test commercial obtained an overall related recall score of ten percent, of which two percent was specifically related. 2. The slogan, "Come/all the way/up to/Kools/the Kool taste," was played back by three percent. 3. Three percent recalled•"cool/cooler/taste" and three percent remembered "refreshing/better/best/menthol cigarette." 4. The situation element of "Man offered (first) man a Kool" was noted by four percent. CONCLUSIONS "Tobogganing" :60 obtained an overall related recall score of 10 percent,.which compares unfavorably with our average for RJR 60-° second commercials (24%) and is considerably below our average for Kool Filter :60's previously studied (20%). Only two percent gave specifically related recall. Internally, situation recall was low, and salespoint recall was poor. Possible reasons on the sli ce-of-life the visual situation in the jingle. for the low scores may include an overemphasis format and an insufficient correlation between and the sales messages, which are found entirely Catherine S. Genovese Marketing Research Deportment CSG:mh Attachments CC: Mr. Mr. Mr. W. W. C. S. A. H. Smith, Jr. Sugg Judge Mr. Mr. Mr. T. R. T. P. Haller M. Odear E. Sandefur Mr. Howard Gray Mr. C. K. Lambeth Mr. Mr. Mr. R. R. B. A. A. R. Blevins, Jr. Rechholtz Stewart Mr. Mr. Mr. B. J. G. Ober A. Greene R. Holmen Mr. J. J. Bresnahan Miss Babette Jackson Mr. Mr. Mr. A. J. J. G. A. F. Weber Albanese Hind Mr. Miss R. R. Etienne C. Elizabeth Jackson

KOOL FILTER "TOBOGGANING" :60 ON-AIR TEST (Day-after Recall) MRDWAR-67-17 This is a study to determine the recall levels of Kool Filter "Tobogganing" :60 commercial. LOCATION: Denver, Colo. Oklahoma City, Okla. Louisville, Ky. Columbus, Ohio Seattle, Wash. BACKGROUND: The test commercial appeared in the first commercial position of the first half hour of Run for Your Life (at 10:17 P.M. EST) on February 27, 1967. DATE OF INTERVIEWING: February 28, 1967 METHOD: Any adult who smoked at least one cigarette per day and who watched television the previous night was eligible to be interviewed. They were asked if they had seen any cigarettes advertised and, if so, which brands. If'the test brand was not mentioned, they were asked if they had seen a commercial for Kool cigarettes and, if so, what it said and showed. They were asked if they had seen the scenes just before, during, and just after the test commercial. Program and activity prompts were used to determine if the respondent was actually in the commercial audience. All respondents were classified by sex, age, education, and type of television viewed. SAMPLE: Numbers were selected at random from local telephone directories. I MRD NOTE: Kool Filter "Tobogganing" :60 was tested on a free-ride basis with Winston "Girl and Trumpet" :30 and Carter Hall "Beach" :30.

3 SUMMARY OF VERBATIMS MRD#AR-67-11 Cities Combined Base: Total in commercial audience (115) $ Gave recall related to Kool Filter "Tobogganing" :60 10 Specifically related recall 2 Generally related recall 8 DETAIL OF RECALL Salespoints "Come/all the way/up to /Kools/the Kool taste" 3 Cool/cooler/taste 3 Refreshing/better/best/menthol cigarette 3 Good/better/taste 2 Is a menthol cigarette, just 2 Change to Kools • 2 Miscellaneous 3 Situation Man offered(first) man a Kool 4 (First) man tired of his regular/menthol/ cigarettes 3 Sang a song/jingle 3 Showed a package of Kools 2 First man liked Kools better/said they were good 2 Showed a cabin/lodge 2 Miscellaneous situation recall 7 Gave unrelated recall 5 Gave no recall 85 100

APPENDIX I CLASSIFICATION OF RELATED RECALL MRD#AR-67-17 Sex Men Women Base: Total in commercial audience (47)* $ (68)* $ Gave recall related to "Tobogganing" :60 9 12 A2e Under Over 35 35-50 50 Base: Total in commercial audience (35 * (44)* (31 * $ $ $ Gave recall related to "Tobogganing" :60 9 9 13 Education Grade School Nigh School Colle e Base: Total in commercial audience 9)** 57 * (45 * $ $ $ Gave recall related to "Tobogganing" ' :60 -- 11 11 No significant difference B&W vs. Color B&W Color Base: Total in commercial audience (92) (22)** $ $ Gave recall related to "Tobagganing" :60 11 I 9 No significant difference , NOTE: The bases within a classification may'not add to 115 because some respondents either refused to answer or were not asked the question. *Denotes small base. **Denotes extremely small base.

APPENDIX II Below is a list of Reynolds 60-second commercials been tested and whose results have been reported. which have 1966-1967 Season Brand Commercial Overall Related Recall Score Winston "Home Movies: Skiing" 16% Winston "Montage" 19 Camel Menthol "Beach" 16 Camel Filter "Surf Fishing" 21 Camel "Men and Railroads" 6 Salem "Down River" 13 Winston "Fireworks/Interrupter" 33 Winston 100 Menthol "Jetty" 51 Winston "Girl and Trumpet/Interrupter" 36 Winston 100 Red "Golden Pack" 35 Winston "Girl and Trumpet" 25 Winston "Musical Notes" 23 Camel/Camel Filter "Surveyor/Puppy" 28 Salem 100 "Extra Time #2" 19 Average overall related recall score 24% Below is a list of Kool Filter 60-second commercials which have been tested and whose results have been reported. Commercial Score 'Birthday :`Pa 'r.ty 17% Music Store 16 RehersalJ 20 Auto Transport 26 Average related recall score -- 20%

DIALING RECORD MRD#AR-61-17 Total dialings 8,691 No television 119 Not smoke 2,274 Not watch last night 582 Not watch any test program 371 Other channel, set off, not remember program 280 In program audience 159 In "Tobogganing" commercial audience 115

-7- DEFINITIONS In order to make each on-air-test comparable with all other on- air tests, certain definitions have been followed. These definitions are outlined briefly below: Related Recall - Verbatims which are classified as related are correct play-backs of the test commercial. These may either be generally correct or specifically correct. A specifically correct verbatim contains elements of recall which can come only from the test com- mercial, since they have appeared in no other commercials. Generally correct verbatims contain elements which truly reflect things said or shown in the test commercial, although these things are not ex- clusive to the test commercial. Unrelated Recall - Verbatims which are classified as unrelated fall into one of three 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 a commercial other than the test commercial. A generally 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 respon- dent says that a CAMEL commercial contained mention of "mildness". (Note that a reasonable amount of judgment is sometimes necessary in these cases. If a respondent claime8 that a CAMEL commercial 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 v?rbat.ims which contain ~oth gener- ally correct plus specifically incorrect elements. Here t is fairly clear that the respondent is confusing the test commercia with some other and has not, therefore, been able to give satisfact ry evi- dence of having recalled the test commercial. Commercial Audience - The base on which percentages are computed must be the same in all on-air tests. Ideally, the base`should be people who were present in the same room as the television,set when the commercial was shown, i.e..the "commercial audience". The reason for using the same base for each test is to make all tests comparable and to present the results in a way that accurately reflects commun- ication efficiency. This goal is not achieved if the base is, for example, the number of people who say they saw the test commercial, because this in itself is a variable that depends on the ability of the commercial to be remembered; and since it will vary from test to test, the results of many tests cannot be compared.