MARKETING MANAGEMENT- II

SUBMITTED BY:

GROUP – A10
Name Division Roll No. SAP ID
Aman Sachan A A007 80012100207
Ambar Singh A A008 80012100707
Aryan Goel A A018 80012100675
Harshita Bhola A A028 80012100824
Soumyajit Mukherjee A A051 80012100181

SUBMITTED TO: Dr. VV Gopal

Procter & Gamble

Summary:

1981 was the year and time when Procter & Gamble's Packages Soap and Detergent division led the
light-duty liquid detergent market with 42 percent of the revenue. Colgate Palmolive (with a 24 percent
stake) and Lever Brothers were the two most important P&G players (with a 7 percent share). The
remaining 27% was divided and owned by tiny label private brands. The LDL market can be divided into
three categories depending on performance, mildness, and price sensitivity. According to 1981 sales
estimates, the industry is worth $850 million, with 59 million cases manufactured. LDLs are available in
four sizes ranging, with the 32 oz and 22 oz being the most popular. Since 1981, the mildness category
has accounted for 37% of total sales, followed by production (35%), and pricing (35%). The LDL market is
rather stable, with one new premium brand introduced every two and a half years and an average of
two price ranges introduced and withdrawn each year. Over the next five years, the figures are unlikely
to change significantly, with the production category predicted to lead the pack with 36% of total
volumes. The three products P&G has in the market are Joy (Performance, 12.1%), Ivory (Mildness,
15.5%), and Dawn (Mildness, 15.5%). (Performance, 14.1 percent). They also had a fourth product
named as Thrill which wasn’t successful so they called it off.

Forthcoming problems for the suggested solutions:

 Product Improvement on Existing Brand

One of the main disadvantages of product improvement will be that the consumers who would have
been acquainted with the product might feel that the essence of the same has been changed that can
cause a major backdrop which is that they will have spent millions to achieve something that is
ultimately going to harm them and then they would have to re process the entire effort that ultimately
will be futile. Meanwhile this can lead to market penetration shift towards rivals and loss of position in
the market as it is very unpredictive. It will also take 2 years to develop the changes and if testing is
required another year for the same

 Introduction of intro of new brand- time consuming and investment

If one is to bring in a new brand in the market as a sub brand or under the same brand name, it will
create a competition within the similar brand itself that will not only affect the market penetration of
the existing ones but also will take a huge amount of investment ($60 million) and source to bring it to
the same level as the others. The expenditure to create one and the hierarchy that one has to follow
with eventually land up to become even more expensive that the making an improvement on the
existing product.

 Increasing the Expenditure on Marketing of current brand

Given the present level of expenditure on the existing brand, there is little information on whether
market share will be increased as a result of this. If there is no price reduction, increasing advertising
and promotion will not improve sales and market share in sectors such as price labels, especially when
the economy is struggling.