/

}. !UV! ('4:- c
J

-.
Gillette Safety Razor Division:
1986 Group Promotion
Gillette's sales promotion director must develop a sales promotion plan involving several of
the Safety Razor Division's brands. The trade promotion portion of the plan is set, but the
consumer promotion plan entails a difficult choice between two promotional vehicles,
coupons and premiums. A final plan and budget are caned for.

INTRODUCTION

It was April 13, 1985, and Bob Adams, sales promotion director for the Gillette
Safety Razor Division, was in the midst of a difficult decision. He had on his desk
two proposals for a group promotion on the Atra, Trac II, and Good News brands.
The first option was to go with a high-value coupon redeemable on one of the three
brands. The second was to offer, instead of the coupon, a free Travel Kit premium.
In making his decision, Bob had to consider such factors as costs, sales, expected
redemptions, impact on brand image, and trade/sal~s force response. The product
managers responsible for the three brands were expecting his recommendation the
next day.

COMPANY BACKGROUND 1

In 1901, the American Safety Razor Company-renamed the Gillette Safety Razor
Company in 1903-was founded in Boston, Massachusetts. The new business
venture represented the partnership of King C. Gillette, an inventor, and William
Nickerson, an MIT graduate and master machinist. King Gillette's idea for a
double-edged safety razor was awarded a patent. Nickerson's mechanical genius
soon became apparent as he created machines and production methods that were
as novel as the razor itself. Sales and production, which began slowly in 1902, grew

I This and the succeeding section are based on two Gillette Company publications: The Gillette
Company, 1901-/976 and the 1985 Annual Report.

This case was prepared by Robert 1. Kopp.

Published /986 by Babson College alld Robert 1. Kopp.

443
 - _....... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ­

444 Cooperative Advertising, Sales Promotion, and Publicity Chap. 6

rapidly. By the end of 1905. annual production had grown in 250.000 razor sets and
100.000 dozen-count blade packages.
Spurred on by a U.S. government order for 3.5 million razors and 36 million
blades to supply servicemen in World War I. Gillette sales grew steadily. Interna­
tional operations were initiated and expanded. and new product lines were added
by means of both internal development and acquisition. Key acquisitions included
the Toni Company. maker of home permanents. in 1948; Paper Mate, a California­
based manufacturer of writing instruments, in 1955; and Braun AG. a large German
producer of electric shavers and small household appliances. Internally developed
new products included Foamy shave cream (1953). Right Guard aerosol deodorant
(1960), and Soft & Dri antiperspirant (1963). Sale;; of pt;T~onal grooming products
became so large that a separate marketing group, the Toiletries Division, was
formed in 1968 to manage these brands.
In 1985, the Gillette Company earned $160 million on sales of $2.4 billion.
Company sales were accounted for by the following business areas: "

Business Major products! 1985 Operating

segment brands (U .S.) sales ($OOO's) profit, 1985 ($OOO's)

Blades & Razors Trac II. Atra, Good $794.200 $265.600

News. Widget
Toiletries & Cosmetics Sitkience, Right 730,300 59,400
Guard, Dry Idea,
Aapri. White Rain
Writing Instruments & Paper Mate. Liquid 269,500 9.900
Office Products Paper, St. Dupont
Braun Products Electric shavers. alarm 413.800 50.300
clocks. hand
blenders. hair driers

SAFETY RAZOR DIVISION

The U.S. Safety 'Razor Division (SRD) accounted for roughly half of the worldwide
sales of blades and razors. Since its beginning, the Gillette safety razor business
had maintained market leadership through an unwavering commitment to product
innovation. Founded on a strong program of research and development, Gillette
SRD managed to market new shaving products which represented the state of the
art. In 1971, SRD introduced a technological triumph-the Trac II twin-blade
shaving system. Trac II quickly became the market leader. The twin-blade concept
was then transferred to two disposable razors-the Daisy Shaver for women and
Good News! for men, both launched in 1975. In 1974, SRD took the Trac II concept
even further with the introduction of Atra, a lightweight. twin-blade razor with a

.,
 Gillette Safety Razor Division: 1986 Group Promotion 445

pivoting head. In addition to Trac II, Atra, Daisy, and Good News, Gillette SRD's
1985 product line consisted of Cricket disposable lighters and Widget, an all­
purpose household scraper introduced in 1980.
Gill ~tte SRD employed a product management form 0;: organization. Each
orand was managed by a product manager (PM) who was responsible for de­
veloping marketing strategies and deli':ering upon sales and profit commitments. In
developing and implementing marketing progr '11S, product managers were as­
q

sisted by an advertising agency as well as internal staff groups that handled such
business areas as marketing research, the sales force, and manufacturing coordina­
tion. In the area of sales promotions, SRD PMs could get input from the sales force
and outside suppliers. In addition, there existed a corporate sales promotion
planning group headed by Bob Adams.

ADVERTISING AND SALES PROMOTION HISTORY

In seeking to target promotional dollars to a male audience, Gillette made its first
large commitment to sponsoring sports events by inVl'~sting roughly $200,000 in
sponsoring the 1939 World Series. When sales increased more than four times the
estimated figure, additional sports sponsorships were aggressively sought. Soon
thereafter, Gillette sponsored the Orange Bowl and Sugar Bowl, the Kentucky
Derby, and the 1940 World Series.
In 1941, Gillette added boxing to its list ofsponsored sports events, which had
been given the umbrella title the «Gillette Cavalcade of Sports," In 1944, boxing
broadcasts moved to a new medium, television. As television became established
across the country, GHlette and its boxing program kept pace. More than any other
company promotion, the Friday night and Moneay night fights reminded American
men that a good day began with a good shave, In all, Gillette presented over 600
nights of boxing before ending the program in 1964.
Gillette may have been the first company to use testimonials by sports figures
as an advertising technique. In 1910, newspaper advertisements showed the leg­
endary John McGraw, testy manager of the New York Giants, making unlikely
statements such as, "Gillette makes shaving all to the merry." During the 1940s
and 1950s, Bob Feller, Warren Spahn, and Willie Mays, among many others, were
hired to extol the advantages of shaving with a Gillette razor.
In 1970, when major league baseball returned the selection of players for the
annual All-Star Game to the fans, Baseball Commissioner Bowie Kuhn asked
Gillette to conduct the balloting, which the company has done ever since. This
election may now be the largest held in the United States other than the presidential
election.
In 1985, the Gillette Company budgeted roughly $165 million for advertising,
ranking it as the nation's 46th-largest advertiser. For the Safety Razor Division, the
advertising and sales promotion schedule is still based around three major sports
events: the Super Bowl, the All-Star Game, and the World Series.

- - - - - _...... __ _ -... -------­

 446 Cooperative Advertising, Sales Promotion, and Publicity Chap. 6

SALES PROMOTION AT SRD

The typical SRD brand was promoted six to eight times a year. All promotion
events involved some form of trade promotion, and many events combined the use
of a trade promotion and a consumer promotion. Generally trade promotion in­
volved offering wholesalers and retailers a discount off the regular case price. In
return, the trade was asked to provide some form of "performance" in support of
the promoted brand. That is, in return for discounts and other incentives the trade
would agree to undertake one or more of the following performance options:

1. Reduce the shelf price to the consumer for a specified period of tiine (e.g.,
stores running "weekly specials").
2. Display the brand in a second location in the store, in addition to the regular
shelf stock.
3. Advertise the brand as part of the retailer's regular promotional adver­
tisement carried in the local newspapers, hand bills, and the like.

While the trade was bound by a "performance contract" to provide some

form of promotion support as outlined above, such contracts usually required only
a minimal level of promotion. It was the aim of the SRD marketing group, and the
sales force particularly, to convince the trade that SRD brands were deserving of
high levels of promotion support. Following are hypothetical examples of what
might be considered high and low levels of trade support:

Examples of trade support levels

Retail promotion activity

Low High

Price reduction 5% off regular price 20% off regular price

Display 2 dozen units on display 10 dozen units on display
Advertising 1 column inch ad 10 column inch ad

In Adams' view, trade support depended on several factors, including the

amount ofallowances, the structure of the promotion to include any accompanying
consumer offers, the brand's market position, the company's reputation, and the
professionalism of the Gillette sales representative who would present the pro­
motion to the trade buyer.
While trade promotions were dependent on trade support in passing-through
allowances to the consumer, consumer promotions tended to be aimed directly at
the final consumer. In the consumer packaged goods industry, consumer pro­
motions consisted of such tools as coupons, refunds, premiums, and sweepstakes
-
Gillette Safety Razor Division: 1986 Group Promotion

(see Exhibit 1). Media-delivered consumer promotions-e.g., newspaper­

447

delivered coupons-did not require trade approval to implement. However, the

impact of such promotions would be enhanced if the trade supported the event by
performing various tie-in activities.
A tie-in activity could be as simple as carrying extra inventory to handle the
increased consumer take way expected as a result of the consumer promotion.
Beyond this a trade account could tie in to a consumer promotion by featuring the
brand in its weekly promotion and by displaying the brand in stores, using shelf
signs and so forth. These types of tie-in support activity tended to be more
important for mail-in offers like sweepstakes which required that the consumer
obtain "official" entry blanks, proofs-of-purchase, and the like. Some consumer
promotion advertisements even contained a statement such as, "Promotion details
available on displays in your local stores. "
Manufacturers competed heavily against each other to obtain high levels of
promotional support from the trade. In rough figures, the typical retail buyer would
be presented 200-300 separate promotions to fill 25-50 promotion slots weekly. As
one strategy for competing more effectively for trade support, manufacturers were
making greater use of promotions combining trade and consumer promotions.
These manufacturers viewed such combined events as having a "push-pull" ef­
fect; that is, trade promotion's role was to "push" high quantities of the brand into
the trade's inventory, and consumer promotion was employed to "pull" this extra
volume through to the consumer. Overall, many trade buyers were enthusiastic
about combined promotions, and as a result, manufacturers were making increas­
ing use of this type of promotion.

FREE-STANDING INSERT

In the 1980s the free-standing insert (FSI) had emerged as one of the most popular
vehicles for conveying consumer promotions to target audiences (see Exhibit 2).
An FSI is a full-color, magazine-quality insert which contains only advertising­
promotion related materials. The FSI is delivered to consumers as part of the
Saturday or Sunday edition oflocal newspapers. FSIs provided the consumer with
a very handy and easy-to-read source of promotions and special offers. As evi­
dence of the high impact of the FSI vehicle, Exhibit 3 shows the typical coupon
redemption rates of various media.

GILLETTE SRD PROMOTION PLANNING PROCESS

In order to allow adequate lead times for the production of selling materials,
displays, special packages, and the like, product managers had to receive final
approval for trade/consumer promotions 16 weeks in advance of the first selling
date (see Exhibit 4), Promotions were put together by a team led by the product
 - - - - - - - - - -

448 Cooperative Advertising, Sales Promotion, and Publicity Chap. 6

manager. The planning team consisted of members of the sales planning depart­
ment (a sales-marketing interface group reporting to the national sales manager),
the sales promotion department, and representatives from manufacturing and
distribution.
All of the team members were expected to contribute based on their own area
of expertise. The product manager's task was to coordinate the group and to
provide guidelines with respect to the brands' overall r.1arketing objectives and
available budget.
Each of the six to eight promotion periods mentioned above were called "a
Cycle." Cycle I was the first promotion period of the selling year.

CYCLE I PROMOTION

As sales promotion manager, it was Bob Adams' job to recommend promotions to

the brand groups that would maximize results against consumer marketing objec­
tives. As part of this Bob had, over the years, witnessed the failure of many
"brilliant" and "innovative" consumer promotions which had not seen the light of
day due to lack of support from the trade and from the SRD sales force. Thus he
was concerned with putting together a total promotion package which would offer
"something for everybody"-i.e., a promotion that would successfully motivate
consumers, retailers, wholesalers, and the SRD sales force.
Adams knew that he had a budget of $1.2 million for consumer promotions for
the safety razor brands. Tentatively, he had planned to use this budget to run a
consumer promotion concurrent with three to four of the brands' six trade pro­
motions throughout the year. Neither the media costs of the FSI nor the costs of
trade allowances would come out of this budget.
As a starting point, Bob had decided upon recommending a combination
trade-plus-consumer offer, and he was fairly certain that the consumer offer should
be delivered via the FSI vehicle. This latter decision was based on the high
consumer impact of FSls as well as their current popUlarity with the trade. Such
popUlarity was not without its cost, however. A national FSI program which would
reach 42 million homes would cost $10 per thousand for media costs alone.
Finally, foiIowing past practice, Bob had tentatively decided to combine
three popular razor blade SKUs2 into a combined "group" consumer promotion.
The SKUs chosen were: Atra cartridges 5-pack, Trac II cartridges 5-pack, and
Good News razor lO-pack. Atra 5's and Trac II 5's were two of the largest-selling
SKU s in the shaving market, having achieved distribution in roughly 95% of all
retail food and drug outlets nationally.
Good News lO's was a newly introduced package size in the rapidly growing

2 SKU stands for "stockkeeping unit." An SKU denotes a single item canied by a retailer. For
example if a single brand like lello has five flavors and each is available in two sizes, the lello brand
would consist of to SKUs.
Gillette Safety Razor Division: 1986 Group Promotion 449

disposable razor category. SRD had launched the 10-pack size in order to take
advantage of category growth as well as to counter the competitive threat of a
similar package format recently introduced by Bic. Both the Good News and Bic
10-packs offered the consumer a substantial discount in terrn.s of cost-per-razor as
compared with their respective 5-pack sizes. As of October 1985, Good News lO's
had achieved distribution in less than 15% of food and drug stores nationwide.

Trade Promotion Offer

For the trade portion of the Cycle I promotion, Bob had received a recommenda­
tion regarding promotion allowances from the SRD Sales Planning department. In
his view the allowances looked just about right. Adams planned to use these
allowances regardless of the consumer promotion finally selected.

CYCLE I PROMOTION: SUGGESTED TRADE ALLOWANCES

Retail Regular 00- Advertisingl

Item price cost/dozen invoice display

Atra5's $1.99 $16.00 $1.60 $ .90

Trac II 5's 1.85 15.00 1.50 .85
Good News 10's 3.75 31.50 2.85 1.00

Next, Bob Adams turned his attention to the details of the consumer offer
itself. As five o'clock was approaching, the phones had stopped ringing. Bob
cracked open a Pepsi and settled back to ponder what he thought to be two strong
options.

Consumer Promotion: Option I

Option I involved using the FSI to deliver a 20¢ coupon, redeemable by the
consumer on anyone of three promoted items. Based on past experience in the
shaving market, Bob estimated that consumer redemptions would come to 4% of
all coupons delivered. In addition to the 20¢ face value, coupon handling charges
would come to an additionallO¢ per coupon redeemed ($.08 to the retailer, $.02 to
the coupon clearinghouse).

Consumer Promotion: Option II

Option II would substitute for the coupon a free Travel Kit offer. Details of the
offer were as follows:

Consumer receives by mail:

• Travel Kit-man's zippered canvas bag with carry strap to be used for
carrying and organizing soap and toiletries inside of regular luggage.
 450 Cooperative Advertising, Sales Promotion, and Publicity Chap. 6

• Trial-sizes of four Gillette Personal Care Division products (packed inside

Travel Kit):
• For-Oily-Hair-Only (FOHO) Shampoo-1.75 oz.
• FOHO Conditioner-1.75 oz.
• Foamy Shave Cream-2 oz.
• Dry Idea (roll-on deodorant)-.5 oz.
Redemption requirements: consumer must send $1.00 to cover postage and
handling and two proofs of purchase from any of the following:
• Trac II 5's
• Atra 5's
• Good News lO's

Bob Adams had determined that the combined retail value of the Travel Kit
and four trial sizes was $10.95. He broke down the costs of the travel kit offer as
follows:

Travel Kit: $1.10

Postage: .65
Fulfillment: .35
$2.10

In addition, the four trial-sizes would cost approximately $1.00. However,

this cost would be borne by the various Personal Care Division brand groups as
part of their ongoing sampling programs and would not be charged directly to the
promotion. Based on SRD experience, Bob projected that the Travel Kit offer
would redeem at a 0.3% rate.

BOB ADAMS' DELIBERATIONS

In sorting through the background material above, Bob was aware that he must not
only come to a decision, but he must, at the same time, consider how best to
present his conclusions to the product managers involved.
At the outset, he knew he would have no problems in presenting a strong case
for the coupon promotion, Option I. FSI coupons had over the past few years
become regarded as the "gold-standard" of consumer promotions. Whereas
sweepstakes and premiums had to be particularly well-designed to elicit a favor­
able response from the sales force and trade, an FSI coupon was automaticallY
viewed by these two audiences as a "major" promotion event. As a result the
coupon promotion would require no special efforts to "hype" the promotion with
the sales force and trade. The SRD sales force would approach sales calls posi­
tively, confident that the promoted brands would receive their fair share of tie-in
promotional support from the trade.
-
Gillette Safety Razor Division: 1986 Group Promotion 451

In addition, Bob's best estimates said that the 20¢ coupon would redeem at
roughly 13 times the rate of the premium offer. Thus it appeared more likely that
the sales effect of the coupon event would show up in market-share data collected
after the rromotion. On the other hand, Adams was aware of the following data
from the Nielsen Clearinghouse which revealed that the average American male
rated low as a coupon clipper/redeemer.

Coupon Redemption Facts

Head-of-household who does the grocery shopping

• 81% female
• 19% male

Coupon redemptions

• 83% of females are redeemers

• 57% of males are redeemers

Heavy coupon users (5+ /Week)

• 27% of females are heavy users

• 13% of males are heavy users

While Bob's overall redemption estimates had already taken account of this
factor, he was concerned about the promotion's impact on long-term sales. Just
perhaps, he thought, the Travel Kit would be the kind ofoffer that men themselves,
not their wives or women friends, would get involved in. Such involvement, he
reasoned, might have favorable implications for cementing long-run brand loyalty
among current Gillette blade customers and might even attract some users of
competitive brands to try or retry a Gillette product.
In Adams' v:ew, the nature of the premium itse1f was a positive factor in the
issue of long-run impact. The Travel Kit would be seen by many customers as an
aid in organizing their shaving materials during travel. Thus Adams saw this
premium as highly supportive of the brand images of the three SRD brands in­
volved. Along these lines, Bob considered whether the Travel Kit itself should be
imprinted with the Gillette name and logo. He estimated that this would add tOto
20 cents to the cost of the kit.
Next, Bob's thoughts turned to the issue of implementation. While execution
of the coupon event was fairly straightforward, the Travel Kit promotion would
require very careful planning. First, the ultimate "success" of the whole event
appeared to be heavily dependent on Bob's redemption estimate. If his projections
'were too high, the brand groups would be stuck with thousands of Travel Kits
gathering dust in some warehouse. If his projections were too low, the brand would
be faced with a major shortfall in deliveries of Travel Kits to consumers. In this
event, all of the efforts to get more promotion involvement from male consumers
might be wasted. Worse yet, negative publicity and word-of-mouth could poten­
tially affect three of SRD's leading brands.
452 Cooperative Advertising, Sales Promotion, and Publicity Chap. 6

Further, the Travel Kit would pose special challenges in marketing to the
trade. Trade buyers at the larger accounts might be aware of the relatively lower
redemption rate for mail-in premiums. Thus the long-run business-building aspect
of the Travel Kits would have to be sold heavily to the trade. On the positive side,
the relatively high retail value-to-cost ratio of the Travel Kit made it an excellent
consumer value in Adams' view; this would help to convince trade buyers to
support the promotion. Finally, Bob wondered whether he should recommend that
trade buyers be offered a free Travel Kit for themselves as an extra incentive and as
a means of getting them personally involved in tne promotion. (In looking at a
recent report, Bob saw that the SRD sales force called Ou roughly 15,000 key
accounts.)
Next, Bob wondered whether the Travel Kit event should be supported by
in-store display units which would feature the promotion offer. As was the case in
similar past promotions, the display unit would flag the premium offer and would
contain a pad of entry-blanks for the consumer to take home. Such displays would
not only rdnforce the FSI delivery vehicle, but they would extend the promotion's
reach to customers who did not receive or r:ead FSIs. If a display were used, Bob
considered whether separate display units should be offered for each brand or
whether all three brands should be packed into a common display vehicle. (The
latter method would be a possible means of "forcing" new distribution for Good
News lO's.) Also it occurred to Bob that different-size display units might be
appropriate to meet the needs of small and large retail outlets. Finally, Bob
wondered whether each display should contain an actual Travel Kit (to be taken
home after the promotion by the retail store manager).
Adams knew he would have to consult with the sales force on all these issues.
However, based on past experience, he estimated the number of displays that
would be needed nationally, as shown in the following table. He recalled that a
typical display piece-cardboard display plus shipper and packing costs-cost
about $2.50. This did not include the cost of including a sample Travel Kit with
each display.

TRAVEL KIT PROMOTION: DISPLAY QUANTITIES NEEDED

If separate displays If combined displays

Atra 2,000
TracII 2,000 4,000
GoodNews 2,000

It was at this point in his deliberations that Bob Adams came back to a
somewhat disturbing fact. Success of the Travel Kit premium would require not
only full support from the SRD sales force and the trade, but redemption of the
offer would require a major monetary and time commitment on the part of con­
sumers. Not counting time and effort, compliance with the terms ofthe offer would
-
Gillette Safety Razor Division: 1986 Group Promotion .453

cost the consumer upwards of $4.00 in handling cost, purchases to obtain proofs­
of-purchase, and postage. Was a single FSI exposure, possibly aided byin-store
displays, sufficient to motivate the target male shaving customer all the way from
apathy to the bvel of action demanded by the mail-in offer? If not, maybe the
Travel Kit offer itself should be promoted by additional advertising. Bob thought
that a low-level campaign would cost $100,000 and could be funded out ofthe three
brands' advertising budgets. In this way the advertising costs would not be billed
directly to the promotion. (Because of the close association between the brand's
function-shaving-and the Travel Kit's function-carrying shaving gear-he
reasoned that product managers would agree to this funding approach.)
In addition to the added advertising weight, the use of supplemental advertis­
ing would enable SRD to extend the reach ofthe promotion beyond the FSI to more
male-oriented media vehicles (e.g., radio).

THE FINAL DECISION

Finally, in his discussion the following day with the product managers, Bob Adams
knew that he must be prepared to discuss some of the "short strokes" of the two
promotion options. For example, SRD PMs might well question the selection of
Personal Care Division trial-sizes planned for inclusion in the kit: i.e., would these
be appealing to the male blade-user or to his wife? Should special point-of-purchase
displays be offered, and if so, how many and with what product assortment, or
should the promotion include regular stock only? Should supplemental advertising
be proposed for the Travel Kit? Should the kit be used as a premium to be given to
trade buyers and retail store managers?
Should the premium concept be used, except in a different way? For exam­
ple, the SRD PMs were aware of the Paper Mate Division's desire to conduct
cross-ruff sampling in blade products. Thus SRD could obtain Paper Mate pens as
premiums at a very favorable cost. .
In looking back at all the material he had gathered together on the two
promotion options, Bob Adams thought: "The coupon will generate greater total
redemptions. The Travel Kit may bring in some new users and reinforce brand
image. I wonder what I should propose to the product managers in tomorrow's
meeting?"
 454 Cooperative Advertising, Sales Promotion, and Publicity Chap. 6

. .
Exhibit 1 Types of Consumer Promotions Used During 1983-85

Types of Promotion Percent of respondents in each year

1983 1984 1985

I. Couponing (Consumer Direct) 93% 95% 93%
2. Money B..ck Offers/Cash Refunds 83 81 85
3. Premium Offers 82 82 79
4. Cents-Off Promotions 66 64 78
5. Sweepstakes 78 73 77
6. Sampling New Products 61 62 77
7. Sampling Established Products 47 36 76
8. Prepriced Shippers 45 49 70
9. Couponing in Retailers' Ads 46 40 56
10. Contests 45 29 55

Source: Eighth Annual Survey ofPromotional Practices, Donnelley Marketing, Stamford, CT. 1986.
- Gillette Safety Razor Division: 1986 Group Promotion
•
455

Exhibit 2 PERCENT OF COUPON DISTRIBUTIONS BY MEDIA

IGROCERY PRODUCTS I
PERCENT OF DISTRIBUTIONS BY MEDIA
Total
Distributions 100% 100% 100%

Daily Newspaper 20.1%

R.O.P. Solo 27.6% 23.1%

10.9
13.4
Co-Op (AliI 16.1 Fr.-St. }
9.7
6.8 Insert

Sunday Paper
Fr.-St. Insert

Supplement
P"'==~

Magazine 10.4
9.1
Direct Mail f-~.!..-- .6 3.8
IniOn Pack 7.3 5.9 4.9
1982 1983 1984
Total Cpn. Distributions (Billions) 95.5 118.3 133.5
Copyright 1985 A. C. Nielsen Company

Source: Coupon Distribution and Redemption Patterns, 1985, Nielsen Clearing House, A.C.
Nielsen Company, 1985.

- .... _ - _ . _ - . - - - - - ._-­
 - - - - - - - - ...... --.~.~

456 Cooperative Advertising, Sales Promotion, and Publicity Chap. 6

Exhibit 3 COUPON REDEMPTION RATES BY MEDIA

... ~

I GROCERY PRODUCTS

COUPON REDEMPTION RATES BY MEDIA

Media Average Redemption Rate Middle-Half Range

Daily Newspaper R.O.P. Solo !i:]2.6% 1.0% 4.0%

Co-Op (All) 1.3 4.1

Free-Standing Insert 4.2% 2.4 6.1

Sunday Paper Free-Standing Insert 4.5% 2.7 - 6.3

Supplement 1)/:12.1 % 1.1 3.0

Magazine On-Page 1.0 3.0

Pop-Up 4.7% 2.5 6.6

Direct Mail ·18.1% 4.7 - 13.1

In/On Pack Regular In-Pack 7.0 - 27.1

Regular On-Pack 6.3 - 24.7

Cross In-Pack 2.6 - 8.7

Cross On-Pack 2.4 - 8.0

Instant On-Pack 27.9% 14.0 47.4

Copyright 1985 A.C. Nielsen Company

Source: Coupon Distribution and Redemption Patterns, 1985, Nielsen Clearing House. A.C.
Nielsen Company. 1985.
1
.
Gillette Safety Razor DivisioA: 1986 Group Promotion 457

Exhibit 4 Gillette SRD Trade Promotion Timetable Cycle 1-1986

Promotion Stage Key Dates

Planning March I-April 14, 1985

Final approval April 15
Production of materials May I-July 31
Announce to sales force August I
Selling period Sept. I-Oct. 15
Shipping period Sept. I-Oct. 21
Performance period Sept. 15-Jan. 10

QUESTIONS
1. Evaluate the various promotional tools describe~ in the case. What is the specific
marketing objective(s) of each?
2. Put together two promotion plans-one for Option I and one for Option II. Make sure
that each plan has objectives and a listing of tools and their costs.
3. What are the pros and cons of each option?
4. Which do you choose? Why?
S. For eaci}-ptomoted item, what feature price should the Gillette salesperson suggest to the
retailer assuming that the retailer will use the off~invoice only as reducing retailer costs?
6. How do sales promotion and advertising differ in the planning process? In execution?