Business Etiquette Indian Business Culture

A Study on 4 Most Successful and 4 Most unsuccessful Brand in Indian MarketProject conducted under the subject:

Brand Management (MMD - 505)

Submitted by: Arnab Bhattacharya

Roll: BUR DMBA No.: Jan2010/12

As any good work is incomplete without acknowledging the people who made it possible,this acknowledgement is incomplete without thanking our family, friends, and our faculty, without whose support this project wouldn't have taken shape.

Since we have joined The University of Burdwan we have gained so much knowledge, which has been possible due to the well-managed education imparted to us under conditions, which are quite conducive to learning, at our college.

We express our sincere gratitude to Dr. Pradip Kumar Mallick, our teacher of Brand Management, who has helped us clarify our concepts by sharing his valued experiences in his teaching, research and practical experiences which have thereby become guiding light to an unconscious part of our ideas and thoughts while surveying on market to conduct A Study on 4 Most Successful and 4 Most unsuccessful Brand in Indian Market. Without his sincere help and guidance the project report would have not been a possible.

Lastly I would like to thank my family and friends for their continuing support, blessings and encouragement.

IntroductionEveryday we all are using and purchasing lots of products Branded and Unbranded from the markets. Because of some features of the products, prices, promotions and positioning some brands are become very famous or successful and some of then become unsuccessful. General Reasons for Success & failure: From the various studies it is found that there are various reasons for brand success and failure. It is told that there are 7 strategic approaches for the brand success. Those are discussed below. 7 Keys for Brand Strategy Success: When startups and emerging companies are at a point in their evolution when a strategic approachto brand development becomes a critical business imperative, often times the whole process will begin and end with a shiny new logo and website. Its understandable that CEOs and their marketing teams will place much importance on the visual components of brand development. As important as these elements are to defining and expressing the brand, theyre not the foundation of what defines a successful brand strategy and development initiative.

(i) Brand strategy is a top down process: Executive management must lead the entire branding initiative. This is not only true for startup brands, but established global brands as well. Without the whole effort being led by the top executives, the process will die in the organization and in the marketplace. Rarely are such endeavors delegated to lower level managers who would have full authority to make critical business driven decisions. Its also not a democratic process. If you have a steering committee structure with lots of opinions to cater to, chances are the whole effort will get watered down, take twice as long to complete, and be half as effective.(ii) Brand development begins with a clear definition of purpose: Every company is in business to make a profit. Brand building is about defining the purpose the brand exists beyond money making. An enduring brand stands for something more important and transcends product development and the transactional nature of sales and marketing. Why your brand matters to people is reflected in the stated purpose the brand exists in the first place.

(iii) Brand development is about the art of sacrifice: The value the brand represents must be positioned in the minds of a target audience with exact precision. Brands live in the mind, and the mind has limited capacity to remember a long list of anything. Enduring brands represent a singular, simple idea that is motivating and unquestionably relevant to the target customer. If the brand does not stand for one thing, it will not mean anything to anyone.

(iv) Brand building is about organizational behavior not copywriting: The whole organization must be informed and aligned to the guiding principles of why the brand matters. How organizations deliver on their promise to customers is more than making snappy taglines, flashy brochures and ad campaigns. Employees must embrace the mission and values as if it were there own and behave inside and outside the organization accordingly. Brand development is about integrating the true north ideal of the brands purpose into its every day behavior in the marketplace.

(v) Brand development is not logo making: Previously CEOs get caught up in the excitement of logo making. Logos are important, but they are not the whole of the brand. Behind the symbols that represent the brands value must be mission, values and brand voice. Logo making is way down stream in the brand strategy value chain.

(vi) Brand development initiatives should never be completed in-house: Many early stage companies believe they are saving money by conducting Brand Development Initiatives in-house, but its a penny-wise and pound-foolish decision to tackle a brand development initiative in-house. Brand strategy is a highly specialized discipline -- far different from advertising or other forms of marketing communication.

(vii) Brand development initiatives must be measured for success: Its not enough to create and implement a brand development program and then hope for the best. Brand development is an on-going process not an event. How the brand is delivering against the success criteria it has established at the beginning of the process is critical to long-term success. This requires the brand gains insights from the marketplace all along the way. The brand should deliver the five key equity measures anddrivers of brand insistence-- awareness, value, accessibility, relevant differentiation and emotional connection.Reasons for Failure: Similarly there are some causes for brand failure. As one might expect, the cause is often one or many common brand problems combined. Earlier on Branding Strategy Insider we identified and analyzed the most common as well as notorious problems in brand management. Here is an encore of some problems that cause and or contribute to brand failure.

i) Brand amnesia: For old brands, as for old people, memory becomes an increasing issue. When a brand forgets what it is supposed to stand for, it runs into trouble. The most obvious case of brand amnesia occurs when a venerable, long-standing brand tries to create a radical new identity, such as when Coca-Cola tried to replace its original formula with Vanilla Coke. The results were disastrous.

ii) Brand ego: Brands sometimes develop a tendency for over-estimating their own importance, and their own capability. This is evident when a brand believes it can support a market single-handedly, as Polaroid did with the instant photography market. It is also apparent when a brand enters a new market for which it is clearly ill-suited, such as Harley Davidson trying to sell perfume.

iii) Brand megalomania: Egotism can lead to megalomania. When this happens, brands want to take over the world by expanding into every product category imaginable. Some, such as Virgin, get away with it. Lesser brands, however, do not.

iv) Brand deception: Human kind cannot bear very much reality, wrote T S Eliot. Neither can brands. Indeed, some brands see the whole marketing process as an act of covering up the reality of their product. In extreme cases, the trend towards brand fiction can lead to downright lies. v) Brand fatigue: Some companies get bored with their own brands. You can see this happening to products which have been on the shelves for many years, collecting dust. When brand fatigue sets in creativity suffers, and so do sales.

vi) Brand paranoia: This is the opposite of brand ego and is most likely to occur when a brand faces increased competition. Typical symptoms include: a tendency to file lawsuits against rival companies, a willingness to reinvent the brand every six months, and a longing to imitate competitors.

vii) Brand irrelevance: When a market radically evolves, the brands associated with it risk becoming irrelevant and obsolete. Brand managers must strive to maintain relevance by staying ahead of the category, as Kodak is trying to do with digital photography.

Methodology:

A method and a system for obtaining brand ranking and guiding brand consumption by network investigation are provided. The method includes that: the questionnaire information for investigating brands is loaded into a brand consumption service platform; a user terminal transmits the related answer information granted to the brand consumption service platform by the network; the brand consumption service platform collects statistics for the brand keys in the related answer information, and generates a brand investigation result report according to the statistics; the goods sale information is loaded into the brand consumption service platform, so as to make one to one correspondence between the goods sale information and the brands of the brand investigation result report; the brand consumption service platform provides the goods sale information to the user terminal which transmits the related answer information.

Respondent profile:

1. Chief Wage Earner (CWE) The person who makes the highest contribution towards household upkeep.2. Housewife Any married female and unemployed.3. Adult Male Any male, age 15-45 years, not married and not CWE.

4. Adult Female Any female, age 15-45 years, not married and not CWE.

The survey was restricted to SEC A, B and C in urban India, with a view to focus on the prime target audience for most branded products and services.

Brand evaluation:

Stage 1:Each respondent was asked to indicate the familiarity for each brand on a four-point scale. The scale range would be: 1 - I have not heard of this brand; 2 - I have heard of this brand, but know nothing about it; 3 - I have heard of this brand and know a little about it; 4 - I have heard of this brand and know it quite well.Stage 2:The respondent evaluated all brands that have been rated by him/her, 3 or 4 on the familiarity scale stated above. Those who rated a brand 1 or 2 on familiarity scale were not asked to evaluate the brand (their individual brand trust score is considered to be 0)Success & Failure: From the market survey, some most successful & unsuccessful products from same product category in Indian Market are selected. CategoryMost SuccessfulMost Unsuccessful

SoapLuxGanga

Soft DrinksMazzaOranjolt

Antiseptic lotionDettolSavlon

Specialty StorePantaloonSubhiksha

So the reasons for success and the failure are discussed below. Reasons for Successful & Unsuccessful: Lux Soap (Successful): Lux is a super brand that celebrated beauty across the world since 1925. The soap which was endorsed by the beautiful film stars came to India in 1929. Lux has been the largest selling personal wash brand in the country.

Lux has effectively managed its Product Life Cycle through careful brand building and changing the product in line with the changing consumer. The brand is being positioned as the favorite soap of Film stars has been consistent in terms of communication and positioning. The brand is also the classic example of successful celebrity endorsement. The first celebrity to endorse the brand was Leela Chitnis. From Leela to Aishwarya, From Madhuri to Madhubala, Lux has been endorsed by more than 50 film stars.Lux was always changing with the times. Whether it is in terms of the product or in terms of promotions, the brand kept the consumers excited. Lux has two basic extensions in terms of segments i.e. Lux beauty soap and International Lux.

Lux was initially a premium brand. Lux was being projected as an aspirational brand and the endorsements by stars further reinforced the positioning. The increasing competition in the soap category forced Lux to rethink on its targeting strategy. The brand had a choice either to compromise on market share and uphold the premium positioning or to retain the market share and dilute the positioning. Lux wanted to ensure that the brand be positioned as premium but also did not wanted to compromise on the share. Thus born International Lux which is the premium variant and the affordable segment was catered by Lux beauty soap.

Lux beauty soap is available in four variants: Exotic Flower Petals, Fruit Extracts, Almond and Sandal. Lux has a common ingredient of Milk cream in all the variants.

The brand enjoyed success and has sustained its leadership position.

In 2005, Lux deviated its tradition of roping in Bollywood Divas, this time none other than Shah Rukh Khan endorsed Lux. The ads created instant controversy with marketers discussing whether the brand has suddenly become MALE. Whatever be the controversy, the brand again succeeded in creating excitement in the market. Some argue that Hindustan Unilever was testing a new positioning to appeal to male users while others say that it was a one time endorsement to break the clutter. The Celebration range too created news because of its variant: Chocolate Seduction. These innovative products created lot of excitement that ensured that Lux remained in the top of mind of the consumers. Another variant is the Lux with Orchid which looked cool in terms of packaging and looks. But the actual package usually contains picture of international models ,not film stars.

Over these years, the positioning of Lux also evolved. Earlier the brand used the positioning Beauty soap of Film stars. But as the customer evolved, the positioning lost its charm because customers began to doubt whether the film stars actually used this brand. Taking a cue from the customers, Lux changed the positioning appealing to the need for becoming a star. The new positioning is communicated with the tagline Bring out the star in you".While Lux beauty soap is sticking to the age old positioning, Lux international has moved from being a soap brand to a skin care brand. Lux International has the tagline Not Just Soap, Its Skin Care". Under the Lux umbrella brand, HUL has introduced variety of personal wash products like body shampoo, hair shampoo etc.Ganga Soap (Unsuccessful):Ganga soap was launched with much fanfare in 1993. The soap was positioned on the religious platform and was claimed to be made of water from the river Ganges. The soap attained salvation in the early 2000.

The brand was promoted heavily and even had the film stars like Govinda endorsing it. It is promoted using the tagline Now bath in Ganga" very directly puts the soap in a religious platform. The brand's initial sales was encouraging and also there are reports that blame on the P&G and Godrej break up caused the brand to decline.

Ganga had a revitalisation effort in 1997 when Godrej tried to relaunch the brand under the name Doodh Ganga. But those efforts went in vain.

The primary reason why the brand failed was that the differentiation was not sustainable over time. Although Hindu's are very religious in nature and revers the tradition but the consumers are discerning when it comes to purchasing products. There is a clear divide between religion and products. Consumers seldom like mixing the two. The brand when launched was really praised for its innovative thinking. One could see through the logic of the launch. Just looking at the crowd at Kumbh Mela would encourage any marketer to think about launching a product for the devotees of Ganga. But a closer look at the customers could have proved the marketer wrong. Rather than using Ganga as a differentiator, Godrej could have positioned the product on the basis if Purity and Gentleness like thePears Soap. The can show the use of Water from Ganga to reinforce the positioning. But the religious platform failed miserably. More over this platform is too old dated for our new generation. Another funny element is that although Hindus revere the Ganges, people are aware that the river is the most polluted one. Hence there were consumer buzz that using a soap made from such water may be dangerous. Sensing this consumer talk, Godrej had to tell that the water was taken from places near the origin of Ganges hence not polluted. Overall it was a messy affair.Ganga is a brand that could have survived as a small niche. I am still not sure about the exact reasons that brand have failed in the Indian market. The failure of such a brand should inspire a marketer to delve deep into the psyche of Indian consumer before jumping into conclusions.Pantaloon (Successful): In India over 94% of the retail sector consists of traditional mom-and-pop stores and street-vendors. With no large players, infrastructure being far from adequate and a tiny part of the population being able to afford it, , Indian retail never attracted large business houses and majorly focused on niche product segments and luxury goods. The countrys towering economic growth of around 8% has resulted in major shifts in the Indian economic class, with higher incomes leading to the growth of the Indian middle-class. This middle-class is aware of the standards of living in other countries, thanks to exposure through the tools of Globalization the Media & the Internet. They have decided to thus adopt a Spending approach to improve their standard of living rather than the traditional Saving approach. The currently estimated value of organized Indian retails target population is larger than that of the entire United States.

Pantaloons success and continuous growth in the Indian organized Retail market can be attributed to a number of factors, some of which have been derived from the strategies of large retailers in the west, while others are completely tailor-made for the Indian market. What is evident at the outset is that Biyani has foreseen and understood the Indian retail roadmap better than anyone else.

Pantaloons major advantage over its competitors in the retail sector has been its unique understanding of the Indian organized retail market with all its quirks, shortcomings and challenges. By creating a retail business from the ground-up and expanding rapidly, Pantaloon has followed a WalMart-like pattern of growth. However, unlike Wal-Mart, it decided to experiment with as many retail formats, product-mixes and brands as was possible in order to gain maximum knowledge about the uncertain Indian mindset. In fact, newer entrants in the organized retail market would learn the ways of the unique Indian organized retail sector as well as find a way to combat Pantaloons dominant market share in almost all forms of organized retail a daunting task.

The Retail ExperimentMultiple Formats, Multiple Brands: Pantaloon has experimented with every retail format possible. Most of their experiments have proven to be successful and Pantaloon continues to experiment while expanding existing ventures. However, the real reward of these experiments is the knowledge and experience gained- This was most elusive in a previously untouched and unknown organized retail sector. This is an example of Pantaloon adapting itself to the Indian market rather than attempting to copy a Wal-Mart. The experimentation process did not end with testing different store formats alone: Pantaloon is also experimenting with a variety of products. From mens wear the company has moved on to introduce furniture, sportswear, kitchen appliances, food, electronics and childrens apparel. Again, it seems to know what works and what doesnt in the Indian market, something that would not have been this apparent even 1 decade ago.

Pantaloon has also introduced a number of private brands. Within the brand retailing space, Pantaloon has also tied up with some of Indias most popular brands like Gini and Jony to sell them at their stores. Rather than attempt to compete with existing popular brands the company has decided to partner with them and leverage them in the ambiguous Indian market. These brands have achieved success and a loyal fan following; Pantaloons move has brought in more customers then they could retain.

The Right Joint Ventures at the Right Time: In accordance with its experimentation policy Pantaloon has formed key joint-ventures with a number of popular names like Staples and Starbucks. With its first-mover advantage, it actively shut doors for the competition by snapping up major brands before others could get to them.

Versatile Retailing: Rather than expand as a menswear retailer alone, Pantaloons policy of comprehensive experimentation has given it an important advantage a versatile retail presence. Consumers see Pantaloon as an exclusive brand retailer, discount retailer, specialty retailer and food retailer: all at once. One of the reasons for this versatility is that the brand name has not been forced on, or even associated with the different products and stores other than the original menswear line. Instead, each store and product has been given its own identity and presence. Pantaloon is essentially an organized retailer in the guise of a large number and variety of unorganized retailers. This again represents the companys unique understanding of the Indian scenario consumers often feel threatened in a monopolistic environment, and are thus allowed to choose between multiple brands, all of which essentially belong to the same parent.Strengthening Back End Operations: Supply-Chain: A robust Supply chain serves as the backbone of a successful retail chain in the long-run. Although the company ignored these aspects in initial phases due to the inadequacies in infrastructure, it rightly favored experimentation over organization. But to continue to grow at the pace it had acquired in the first few years, it needed to pay attention to its sourcing network, transportation system and other logistics.. What Pantaloon is and will always have to improvise on is the absence of basic infrastructure like transportation and regulation. The pace of expansion of the retail industry is likely to outstrip that of development of the countrys infrastructure. Pantaloon will have to be innovative in deciding as to how it compensates for these inadequacies while efficiently managing its supply chain.

Money: The Ultimate Differentiator: Pantaloon has the upper hand as compared to most potential foreign and domestic competitors. However the same characteristics that have made it an exclusive and versatile retailer can prove to be a disadvantage. Much of Pantaloons competition comes from either retail ventures of other large Indian industrial houses (Reliance Retail, Birlas retail venture) or foreign retail giants (Wal-Mart). In other words, Pantaloons competition is rich, very rich. While the competition may not have made inroads into the Indian market as thoroughly as Pantaloon, it still has enough money to compensate for this shortcoming.Through a carefully executed policy of comprehensive multi-format experimentation, Pantaloon has managed to understand and take advantage of the compressed evolution of the organized Indian retail industry to become the dominant player. As far as industry knowledge, experience and skill are concerned, Pantaloon with its dream team is looking in good shape. Now it is facing stiff competition that is financially better-equipped. How it takes advantage of its existing resources, accesses additional capital and competes with its competitors in a race to develop an efficient supply-chain will determine the future of the company. While the task is daunting, Pantaloon has more leeway and an enormous head-start compared to anyone else.Subhiksha (Unsuccessful): Subhiksha was started by R. Subramaniam, an IIM A and IIT Chennai alumnus with its first store at Chennai in 1994 three years before Biyanis Pantaloon Both of them are discount stores at prices which are much lower than other retail outlets.

Though,Subhiksha has closed downand Pantaloon is still in the market, there are some points of similarity in their fall from glory which I personally believe are discussed below Un-mindful expansion spree across different parts of the country: Subhiksha didnt realize that with this only a few stores would be profitable and generate positive cash flows. It moved across different sectors such as medicine, grocery, IT, mobile etc very fast. they expanded without having the proper capital. They got the orders from the suppliers but when the stores didnt work out, the entire supply chain got choked.

Financial Management problem: Subhiksha was thinking of going for an IPO in 2007 but shelved it in view of uncertain market conditions. But I believe that they got greedy as they expected a market correction. So they are facing the problem with fund raising. It had 50 stores by then and was looking to expand to 130 stores in a year. But it went for short term debt which resulted in a big blow to their entire supply chain when the stores didnt happen as intended.

Subhiksha instead of stabilizing and consolidating itself first in different places and then moving to newer locations, tried to be the first in every town.

Poor inventory management: Subhiksha had a bad history of credit defaults and this led to supply breakages. This led to situations where sometimes the store had very high inventory and at others, the stocks were out. This led to great dissatisfaction.

Private Labels: Subhiksha tried to develop private labels in almost every category but had limited scale to support them. They failed to make some joint venture with other companies to become a multi-brand retail Store.Subhiksha closed down in 2009 amid allegations of defaults, non wages payments and bankruptcy. The people behind it are still struggling to come up with valid explanations.Dettol (Successful): The brand has been well known for years. Dettol is Rs 300 crore brand of Reckitt and Benckiser formerly Reckitt and Coleman. Heritage Brand: Dettol is a 70 year old brand. Launched in 1936 as an antiseptic lotion, the brand became a generic name for antiseptic lotion similar to Xerox in Photocopiers. From its launch to 1980's the brand had a dream run with virtually no competitors. Having no competition is a problem, the growth will be stagnant.

Antiseptic to Germ Fighter: During 1980's Dettol found that the sales are remaining stagnant, the reason being that the brand has its presence in most of the households but are seldom used. Hence the repeat purchases are not there.

Dettol had to expand the usage beyond cuts and bruises. Hence Reckitt and Coleman unleashed a campaign aiming to expand the usage of the brand to an all purpose antiseptic that can be used for shaving, rinsing, and as a general disinfectant.Dettol have always been positioned as a 100% germ fighter with germ fighting and protection as the core value.Brand Extention to Soap: Since the antiseptic lotion market was stagnant Reckitt wanted to leverage the brand to other categories. Dettol saw over these years plenty of brand extentions. The first launch was the soap in 1990's. The initial launch was unsuccessful because the brand moved from core value of protection to love and care. Since the brand faltered in its positioning, failure was imminent.The soap was again relaunched with positioning as 100 % protection" and now have a reasonable market share of 12% in the premium category.The next extention was in the form of liquid soap. The liquid soap category is only 12 crore worth but the hand wash category is expected to grow to 100 crore.The brand also tried to extend to talc, band aid, and shaving gel but failed miserably in those categories.Even as the brand is extending, Reckitt failed to strengthen the mother brand and faced competition in that category from Savlon.Change in PLC: Now Dettol is trying to make a foothold in the soap market with the launch of Dettol with moisturizer and glycerin variants. It has also launched a body wash recently.Dettol wants to do some thing with the brand because it was successful. Now after all these failures of Extention, still Dettol is trying with variants forgetting the core brand. I am not saying that the brand should not be extend, But don't do it at the expense of the mother brand. When an antiseptic brand tries to extend to a segment which is essentially cosmetic, it cannot compete with the major players on the cosmetic platform, what at best can happen is that the brand can exist as a niche brand extending its core value and creating a niche.

Savlon (Unsuccessful):

Savlon which was clinically proven to be a better antiseptic than Dettol, backed by Johnson & Johnson, having advantages like better scent and non-stinging properties miserably failed in the Indian market.

That is why marketing as a subject is so intriguing... it is full of surprises. Philip Kotler once said " Marketing is a subject that is easy to (pretend to) understand but difficult to practice ".

Savlon was a brand owned by a pharmaceutical MNC ICI ltd. Later ICI's OTC brands were acquired by Johnson & Johnson. Savlon was relaunched in Indian market in 1993. The brand was expected to give the market leader Dettol, a run for its money. But even after millions of rupees spent, Dettol still rules the antiseptic lotion market.

Clinical test Report not properly promoted: Savlon had lot of advantages over Dettol. According to media reports, some lab tests indicated that Savlon is an effective germ killer than Dettol. Another advantage about Savlon was that it does not sting while being applied on wounds. Dettol used to give a stinging sensation while applied on wounds. Savlon also had a better scent compared to the more clinical smell of Dettol.

Direct attack competitor during promotion: Armed with these properties, Savlon went into a direct attack on Dettol. The product was positioned as an antiseptic that does not hurt while healing. The main differentiators for the brand was its no-sting property and better smell. According to media reports, during the relaunch, J&J spent heavily on promoting the brand.

The relaunch was a success and consumers tried out the new product. But the story did not continue like that.

Dettol confronted the frontal attack from Savlon in a different manner. It tried to attack one of the most valuable brand of J&J - Band -Aid by launching Dettol plasters.

Less importance for further promotion: This move got J&J defensive. It never expected Dettol to attack another brand in retaliation. Dettol plasters had the potential to attract consumers because of the brand equity commanded by Dettol Antiseptic.

J&J scrambled to protect Band-Aid by launching a series of variants in the medicated plaster segment. In doing so, resources were spent on defending Band-Aid rather than in advancing Savlon.Savlon suffered heavily because it lost the support in terms of investment in brand building. Dettol had a brand equity built over more than 50 years (at that period of time) and it is not an easy task to break into that equity. It needed painful long term sustained investment.

How ever Savlon was pushed to a back burner after Dettol introduced the plaster. Savlon never re-emerged.Brand Extension with HUL: In 1998 HUL acquired the rights to launch Savlon Soaps from J&J. While the rights for antiseptic lotion remained with J&J, the marketing alliance was for soaps.

HUL was worried at the success of Dettol soaps. Armed with a strong association with antiseptic property, Dettol soap became a huge success and cornered a significant chunk of the premium medicated soap category. HUL, who wanted to rule the entire soap category, wanted to arrest the rise of Dettol soap.

Instead of trying to develop its own brand of soap, HUL looked for an easy solution. Thus came the idea of marketing alliance with Savlon. With much fanfare, Savlon antiseptic soap was launched. J&J was happy because it got some cash-flow by giving the rights of Savlon. The marketing alliance lasted only for 4 years.

But finally HUL put Savlon soap in dustbin in 2003 and repositioned its Lifebuoy brand to fight against Dettol.Irrelevant Message to Customers: There are marketing experts who say that the positioning of Savlon was not correct. No-stinging and sweet scents are not important for a consumer looking for an antiseptic lotion. What they look for is effectiveness. Hence Savlon was trying to differentiate on attributes which are not considered to be important by the consumers.

Message implanted by competitor Brand: More over, consumers tend to believe that the stinging sensation is a side-effect of the effectiveness of the antiseptic. So if it does not hurt, it is not effective. Dettol has taught them that way.I believe that Savlon did not achieve its desired success because J&J was not able to support it in terms of investment. Somewhere along the way, the company disowned the brand. One reason can be that antiseptic lotion is a small market that does not warrant such heavy investment. But if that is so, the company shouldn't have introduced a brand in such a category.

Savlon now occupies a negligible part of the market. It is a popular brand in the institutional market but in the consumer market, it is a no-brand.Maaza (Successful):

Maaza has been around since 1976 in India and it became a part of the Coca-Cola family in 1993. It is available in 200ML Glass Bottle, 200Ml Tetrapak package and 1ltr & 1.5Ltr Pet bottle in every shop from mall to local Pan Shops. Competitor lagging behind: However this year the mango juice brand has left the colas behind. Clearly the cola brands have a reason to worry if these ranks are any indication. Even globally the cola category has been coming under social ostracism by a section, for having too much sugar, too many empty calories and being too addictive. Somebody's loss is somebody's gain and in this case Maaza is the gainer.

The brand's strong heritage and consistent communication campaigns that have helped establish it as an alternate for mangoes regardless of season.

Proper Segmentation: When a brand finds a purpose in people's life then it is difficult not to love it. Maaza's purpose is to provide the authentic mango experience irrespective of seasonality." Leo Burnett has been Maaza's creative partner for nearly 10 years and the stable relationship has helped give the brand a consistent stance. As per independent industry estimates in the juice segment, Maaza has a chunky market share of 37%, followed by Slice at 22% and Frooti at 13%. Attractive Message: It's built its equity on campaigns like "Taaza mango Maaza mango", "Bina Guthli Aam" which tried to sell people on the superiority of Maaza to a plain vanilla mango and the current "Har Mausam Aam".

The campaign was designed to reinforce the fact that the brand offers a real mango experience through the year. It was based on the simple human desire to have the things we love accessible to us anytime we want. It is a well-known fact that the mango is India's favourite fruit with people eagerly waiting to consume it through the season.Logo Modification: Company designed new logo which is more attractive than the previous one. Previously it contains only red Sign of Mango, Now it comes with green leaves which make it more natural. The new version is very comfortable to see Eye-soothing. Positioning: This also means that during the non-mango season, shops are bare of the fruit and vendors seek alternate employment. The current campaign describes in a humorous manner how the mango season can continue all year round. The mainstream campaign was augmented with initiatives including out-of-home (OOH) media, point of sale merchandise and on-the-ground initiatives across all key markets. The brand is looking at increasing the occasions of consumption through its communication, activation and promotions and finally distribution.

Oranjolt(Unsuccessful): Piomas Rasna is even today one of the top selling brands in India but it hasnt had much success when it has tried to venture out of its comfort zone.

Oranjolt was a fizzy fruit drink Pioma came up with as an innovation. Oranjolt was a failure even before it could take off. It is often referred to as The drink that lost its cool (Ref - Matt Haig -Brand Failures: The Truth About the 100 Biggest Branding Mistakes of All Time).

The packing and the pricing of this product was pretty good. It was available in a1.5 liter Pet bottle with attractive packing at a competitive price. In spite of all this, the product failed and some of the reasons are mentioned below:

Storage problem resulting in Quality issues: Oranjolt was a fruit drink in which carbonation was used as a preservative. To last, it needed to be refrigerated. The problem was that Indian retailers tend to switch off their shop refrigerators at night. As a result, Oranjolt faced quality problems and the products would have to be discarded.

Low Shelf Life: The product had a shelf life of three to four weeks where as other soft drinks were assured a shelf life of over five months. This meant that whenever the products were brought in, they would have to be consumed right away and this in many ways was a loss to the retailer and if sold to the consumer could cause many issues.

Servicing and Distribution: Servicing outlets was also a problem. The low shelf life mentioned above meant that the product needed to be replaced with new stock every three to four weeks. Even Coke and Pepsi make replacements only once in three months. Hence replacing Oranjolt within the stipulated period of time was a difficult task and the company claims to not have the resources to cover all the areas that they had distributed to.

Oranjolt was therefore launched in select outlets and could not expand rapidly.

It is obvious that Rasna failed to anticipate the quality problems it faced and this shows that it had not done an in depth product and market analysis before launching the product.

Also research on the distribution and replenishment was lacking and it could be said that they were probably still in the Rasna mindset.

Pioma, already having a very strong product, Rasna, in hand, assumed that they would not have a lot many problems in the distribution. They probably failed to see the difference in the two products and hence did not foresee the quality and distribution issues. Oranjolt is said to have gone into the companys R&D department so that it could be bettered. The product has not yet been relaunched.

The Rasna brand is so strong that Oranjolt could not do any harm to it. Besides it was just an innovation tried out by the company. Even after Oranjolt, Pioma has launched many other products which have been a success. Some of them being Utsav and Fruitplus.Conclusion:

In that row lots of products or services are there. Some successful brands are like Ajanta Clock, Cadbury Silk, Maruti Alto, Airtel & Vodaphone Mobile Services, Nokia Mobile, etc. Similarly lots of brand failed to market in India like Seiko Watch, Amul Chocolates, Tata Nano, Videocon Mobile Services, Motorola Mobile Phone, etc. It can be concluded to make a successful brand they have to look after Product quality, Price, Packaging, promotion, channel distribution and understanding the need & choice of customers. If brands look after all those factors they may be successful in the Market. PAGE 1