Jump to:

Women's Collection from Marketing to Counter-Marketing

National Product Opinion Panel (Npop) Product Test Results Basic Menthol Lights Kings (Number 1200)

Date: 29 Jun 1998
Length: 13 pages
83102472-83102484
Jump To Images
spider_lor 83102472_2484

Fields

Type
Chart/Graph/Table
Author
Day, D.K.
Recipient
Deaton, W.R.
Copied
Benson, S.
Graham, H.
Harper, K.
Jessup, T.
Jones, L.
Jones, T.
Lindsley, V.
Mccarthy, K.
Orlowsky, M.
Pasheluk, A.
Smith, S.
Telford, G.
Thach, C.
Vaughan, V.
Williams, D.
Young, J.
Named Organization
Bw, Brown & Williamson
Low Tar Menthol Panel
Natl Product Opinion Panel
PM, Philip Morris
RJR, R.J.Reynolds
Roper, Roper Org
Brand
Basic
Doral
Gpc
Maverick

Document Images

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size:

Page 1: xiy68c00
Leve1 04 Com arison S3ate Tested Brand (Low Tar Menthol Kin s R&D Sam le # Tar Ct. (m Nicotine Level m) Menthol (% Test Product 6/98 U date Basic Menthol Li ts 1200 l2 0.8 0.67 Previous 8/94 Previous Basic Menthol Li hts 1298 11 0.7 0.59 Key Lorillard 2/98 Maverick Specials Menthol Li hts Box 1034/35 10 0.6 0.64 Com etition 1 l/94 GPC Menthol Li hts Kin s 1517 9 0.7 0.65 Com etition 6/96 Doral Menthol Li hts Kin s 1188 9 0.6 0.66 cc: S. Benson H. Graham K. Harper T. Jessup L. Jones T' J_ories= _ V. Lindsley K. McCarthy M. Orlowsky A. Pasheluk S. Smith G. Telford C. Thach V. Vaughan D. Williams J. Young 4
Page 2: xiy68c00
interoffice MEMORANDUM LORILIARD TO: W.R. Deaton June 29, 1998 FROM: D.K. Day RE: NATIONAL PRODUCT OPINION PANEL (NPOP) PRODUCT TEST RESULTS BASIC MENTHOL LIGHTS KINGS (#1200) This reports on the National Product Opinion Panel (NPOP) product test results for Basic Menthol Lights Kings (# 1200) among Low Tar Menthol Kings smokers. Rationale for Product Evaluation Basic Menthol Lights Kings is an established menthol competitor that was last tested in the panel in August of 1994. Since the last test, it appears Philip Morris may have increased the level of menthol in the Basic Menthol Lights Kings product to bring the menthol level more in-line with key competitors. An Update measurement of Basic Menthol Lights Kings has been conducted to determine whether panelists' perception of the brand has changed as a result of the possible adjustment made to its menthol level. KEY OBSERVATIONS Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings profiles as more acceptable in terms of strength of taste and menthol taste than in the previous measurement (last tested 8/94) and as such produces directionally greater overall satisfaction. • Increased satisfaction with the Update Basic Menthol Lights relative to the previous Basic Menthol Lights Kings test can be traced to a significantly higher level of satisfaction among male smokers and RJR smokers. (See Exhibit 1) • Sensory ratings indicate that panelists perceive the menthol taste of the Update Basic to be significantly more acceptable than when previously tested (55% vs. 45% "just right" rating). Strength of taste is also perceived as significantly more. acceptable (60% vs. 48% "just right" rating). Improved taste appears to result in enhanced smoothness and refreshment perceptions. (See Summary Table on next page and Exhibits 1& 2) 1 N)
Page 3: xiy68c00
APPENDIX RE: NPOP PRODUCT TEST RESULTS BASIC MENTHOL LIGHTS KINGS (#1200)
Page 4: xiy68c00
EXHIBIT I MEAN OVERALL SATISFACTION RATINGS BASIC MENTHOL LIGHTS: LOW TAR MENTHOL KINGS LOW TAR MENTHOL KINGS SMOKERS Update Previous Basic Basic Menthol Menthol Lights Lights Kings Kin4S Maverick Specials GPC Doral Menthol Menthol Menthol Lights Lights Lights Box Kings Kings # # # # # Total 7.2 6.7*' 7.0 6.1* 6.5* PM"*` 7.0 NA RJR*' 7.6 6.6* 6.8 NA NA 7.2 6.1* 6.4* Male 7.4 6.2* 7.0 6.0' 6.5* Female 6.8 7.0 7.0 6.2** 6.4 21 - 29 years"** 7.6 6.8 7.0 6.5** 6.4`* 30 - 44 years 6.9 6.6 6.8 5.7"` 6.5 45+ years*** 7.0 6.8 7.3 6.8 6.5 Significantly different from Basic Menthol Lights Kings at the .95 confidence level '* Directionally different from Basic Menthol Lights Kings at the .80 confidence level **` Caution: Some comparisons are against cells of less than 50 respondents NA Not included as a banner point in the Roper data Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1200) tested 6/98 Previous Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1298) tested 8/94 Prototype Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box (#1034/35) tested 2/98 GPC Menthol Lights Kings (#1517) tested 11/94 Doral Menthol Lights Kings (#1188) tested 6196 Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1200) Low Tar Menthol Kings Smokers - June 1998
Page 5: xiy68c00
COtiCLUSIOIVS Increasing the level of menthol appears to have had a positive impact on Basic Menthol Lights' panel performance by increasing the appeal to Low Tar Menthol King smokers. Relative to the comparison brands, Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings profiles as very similar to Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Kings and is perceived to be more appealing than the Previous Basic Menthol Lights product tested, GPC Menthol Lights Kings or Doral Menthol Lights Kings in terms of strength of menthol and overall strength of taste. FORWARD ACTION If the increased level of menthol in the Basic Menthol Lights Kings product was intentional, Phillip Morris appears to have succeeded in making this product a more acceptable cigarette to Low Tar Menthol Panel smokers. We will continue to monitor product performance of Basic Menthol Lights to determine changes in panelists' perceptions. BACKGROUND Sales Performance The Low Tar Menthol category continues to decline, posting a loss of 2.4% (-0.24 share point) to a market share of 9.73"/o for the 12 months ending April 1998. The Low Tar Menthol King segment shows a similar decline of-1.3% (-0.05 share point) to a market share of 3.85%. Within the Low Tar Menthol Kings segment, Discount priced brands demonstrate an even greater decline of -8.8% (-0.10 share point) to a share of 1.04% for the 12 months ending April 1998. Both Basic Menthol Lights Kings (PM) and Doral Menthol Lights Kings (RJR) show a decrease in market share (-.01 share point) to a market share of .27% for each, despite growth within the brand family. Maverick Specials Menthol Lights remains stable with a share of 0.01% since its introduction last year. GPC Menthol Lights (B&W) is also stable, as its share of .19% remains unchanged from April 1997. Products Reviewed All products included in this analysis are Low Tar Menthol Kings Discount products. The Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings is primarily compared to the Previous Basic Menthol Lights Kings. A Prototype reformulation of the key Lorillard discount brand in this segment, Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box, was tested in the panel in February 1998 and has been included as a comparison brand in this research. Two competitive Discount entries, GPC Menthol Lights Kings (last tested 11/94) and Doral Menthol Lights Kings (last tested 6/96) are also included as comparison brands. Product specifications are listed on the next page. 3
Page 6: xiy68c00
EXHIBIT 2 DIRECTIONAL RATINGS BASIC MENTHOL LIGHTS: LOW TAR MENTHOL KINGS LOW TAR MENTHOL KINGS SMOKERS Update Basic Menthol Lights Kinas Previous Basic Menthol Lights Kings Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box GPC Menthol Lights Kin s Doral Menthol Lights Kin s BASE: Total (203) (179) (196) (148) (138) Strength of Taste Too mild 14% 23%* 20%** 22%** 20%** Just right 60 48* 58 34* 50** Too strong 26 29 21 43* 30 Menthol Taste Too mild 25 39* 37* 37* 40* Just right 55 45* 50 42* 39* Too strong 19 16 11* 21 22 Tobacco Taste Too mild 26 23 23 24 27 Just right 56 57 62 57 55 Too strong 18 19 15 19 17 Menthol/Tobacco Balance Just right 58 52 57 47* 46* Not rlpht 42 48 43 53* 54* Needs more menthol taste 23 35* 30** 38* 31`* Needs more tobacco taste 22 17 12* 16** 22 Harshness of Taste Not harsh tasting at all 64 61 67 49* 57** Too harsh tasting 36 39 33 51* 43** Bitterness of Taste ao (A Not bitter at all 77 78 76 68** 77 -~ Bitter tasting 23 22 24 31** 23 N Aftertaste ~ No/pleasant aftertaste 68 67 71 67 70 v No aftertaste 67 63 70 61 70 CC) Pleasant aftertaste 1 4** 1 5* *• Unpleasant aftertaste 26 25 23 26 24 Table continues ~ Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1200) Low Tar Menthol Kings Smokers - June 1998
Page 7: xiy68c00
Appendix Exhibit A (continued) Mean Overall Satisfaction with Basic Menthol Lights Kings vs. Comparison Brands (By Age) Total 21-29 Yrs 30-44 Yrs 45+ Yrs*** Scale of Mean Ratings 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Total 21-29 Yrs*** 30-44 Yrs 45+ Yrs*"* High/low range of I 7.0 7.0 6.8 7.3 comparison brands I 6.1 6.0 5.7 6.5 Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings  7.2 7.6 6.9 7.0 Previous Basic Menthol Lights Kings • 6.7 6.8 6.6 6.8 Prototype Maverick Specials Menthol Light Box 7.0 7.0 6.8 7.3 GPC Menthol Lights Kings 8.1 * 6.5 5.7~ 6.8 Doral Menthol Lights Kings 6.5* 6.4 6.5 6.5 ' Significantly different from Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings at the .95 confidence level. *"" Caution: Some comparisons are against cells of less than 50 respondents. Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1200) L W a 1 2 8 Low Tar Menthol Kings Smokers -June, 1998
Page 8: xiy68c00
Update Basic Menthol Liehts KinEs Previous Basic Menthol Liehts Kines Mean overall satisfaction 7.2** 6.7 Strength of taste - j ust right 60%* 48"io Strength of taste - too m i ld 14% 23%* Menthol taste - just right 55%* 45% Menthol taste - too mi Id 25% 39%* Mean smoothness 7.3* 6.7 Mean refreshment 6.9** 6.4 *= Significantly greater at the.95 confidence level. ** = Directionally greater at the.80 confidence level. When compared to Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box (last tested 2/98), Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings performs at similar levels with regard to key sensory ratings, with one exception: Basic profiles as having a somewhat stronger menthol taste. • Update Basic Menthol Lights generate overall satisfaction, in total and across all key subgroups, similar to that seen for Maverick Specials Lights Box. (See Exhibit 1) • Sensory ratings for Basic Menthol Lights Kings are comparable to Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box's ratings, except that Basic Menthol Lights is perceived as having a stronger menthol taste. Comparison of menthol taste ratings show that although both products exhibit similar "just right" menthol taste ratings (55% Basic vs. 50% Maverick), significantly fewer panelists rate Basic "too mild" on menthol taste (25% vs. 37%) while significantly more rate Basic as having "too strong" a menthol taste (19% vs. 11%). In addition, among panelists who judge the menthol/tobacco balance as "not right", directionally fewer rate Basic as needing "more menthol." The two products are otherwise perceived as similar. (See summary table below and Exhibits I & 2) Update Basic Menthol Li¢hts Kint3s Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box Mean overall satisfaction 7.2 7.0 Strength of taste - just right 60% 58% Menthol taste -just right 55% 50% Menthol taste - too mi Id 25% 37%* Menthol taste - too strong 19%* 11 % * = Sign i ficantly greater at the.95 confidence level. Compared to two additional competitive Discount brands in the segment, GPC Menthol Lights Kings (last tested 11/94) and Dorat Menthol Lights Kings (last tested 6/96), Basic Menthol Lights Kings achieves significantly higher overall satisfaction. This superior rating appears to be the result of the more appealing menthol/tobacco balance panelists perceive in the Update Basic product relative to GPC Menthol and Doral Menthol. In addition, Basic Menthol Lights Kings profiles as less harsh tasting than the two competitive brands. (See Exhibits 1 & 2) 2
Page 9: xiy68c00
EXHIBIT 2 (continued) DIRECTIONAL RATINGS BASIC MENTHOL LIGHTS: LOW TAR MENTHOL KINGS LOW TAR MENTHOL KINGS SMOKERS Update Basic Menthol Lights Kinas Previous Basic Menthol Lights Kinas Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box GPC Menthol Lights Kings Doral Menthol Lights Kinos BASE: Total (203) (179) (196) (148) (138) Smoothness of Taste Mean Smoothness of Taste l#) 7.3 6.7* 7.0 6.2* 6.7* Distribution of Smoothness of Taste Ratings High smoothness (8-10) 56% 44%* 52% 37%* 46%** Medium smoothness (5-7) 34 37 33 38 40 Low smoothness (1-4) 10 18* 15`* 25* 14 Refreshment Mean Smoothness of Taste (#) 6.9 6.4** 6.7 6.0* 6.3* Distribution of Smoothness of Taste Ratinps High refreshment (8-10) 50% 41%"" 44% 36%* 29%* Medium refreshment (5-7) 36 35 35 38 55* Low refreshment (1-4) 14 24* 21** 26* 16 Sweetness Not sweet enough 26 32** 35** 35** 33** Just right 65 58** 58** 50* 61 Too sweet 9 10 7 14'* 6 * Significantly different from Basic Menthol Lights Kings at the .95 confidence level ** Directionally different from Basic Menthol Lights Kings at the .80 confidence level Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1200) tested 6/98 Previous Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1298) tested 8/94 Prototype Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box (#1034/35) tested 2/98 GPC Menthol Lights Kings (#1517) tested 11/94 Doral Menthol Lights Kings (#1188) tested 6/96 Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1200) Low Tar Menthol Kings Smokers - June 1998
Page 10: xiy68c00
APPENDIX EXHIBIT C DISTRIBUTION OF RATINGS INTO SATISFACTION SEGMENTS BASIC MENTHOL LIGHTS: LOW TAR MENTHOL KINGS LOW TAR MENTHOL KINGS SMOKERS Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings Previous Basic Menthol Lights Kings Pr M S M ototype averick pecials enthol Lights Box GPC Menthol Lights Kings Doral Menthol Lights Kinas BASE: Total (203) (179) (196) (148) (138) Mean overall satisfaction rating 7.2 6.7** 7.0 6.1* 6.5* Distribution of ratings into satisfaction segments High satisfaction (8-10) 56% 42%* 49%** 37%* 36%* Medium satisfaction (5-7) 33 37 36 37 44* Low satisfaction (1-4) 11 20* 14 25* 19* " Significantly different from Basic Lights Kings at the.95 confidence level Directionally different from Basic Menthol Lights Kings at the .80 confidence level Update Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1200) tested 6/98 Previous Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1298) tested 8194 Prototype Maverick Specials Menthol Lights Box (#1034/35) tested 2/98 GPC Menthol Lights Kings (#1517) tested 11/94 Doral Menthol Lights Kings (#1188) tested 6/96 Basic Menthol Lights Kings (#1200) Low Tar Menthol Kings Smokers - June 1998

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size: