Complan Vs Horlicks: Comparative Advertising and the Question of Ethics

This case is about the advertising war between two popular health drink brands Horlicks and
Complan in India. The war for supremacy between these two brands started as early as in 1960s
and had continued ever since. Over the years, the brands were involved in aggressive
comparative advertising in print and television over attributes such as ingredients, protein
content, growth, and flavors. However, in late 2008, the makers of Horlicks, GlaxoSmithKline
Consumer Healthcare (GSK), and the makers of Complan, Heinz India (Heinz), came out with
advertisements that directly compared the brands using the competitor brand's trademarks.
Industry observers felt that in their bid to outdo each other, the two companies had ended up
denigrating the competitor brand.

Horlicks:
Horlicks was invented by William Horlicks (William) and his brother James Horlicks (James) (1844-
1921) in 1873. The brothers belonged to Gloucestershire, England. James was a chemist and worked for
a company which made dry baby food.

Complan:
Complan, owned by the Heinz Company, was one of the most popular health drinks in India. The name
Complan was coined from the words "Complete" and "Planned". Complan was introduced by Glaxo
Laboratories (Glaxo) in the UK during World War II (1939-1945), as an essential nutritional supplement
for soldiers at the frontline.

Usually issues related to disparaging ads by rival companies were resolved by the Advertising Standards
Council of India (ASCI). But with constant mudslinging at each other, the two companies decided to
solve the issue in courts. In September 2008, Heinz moved the Bombay High Court objecting to the
Horlicks ad, while in December 2008, GSK approached the Delhi High Court against the Complan ad.

Experts felt that the latest tiff between GSK and Heinz had brought to the fore the issues and challenges
involved in comparative advertising and the legal/ethical issues involved in such kind of advertising.

The fight for the Indian health drink market turns ugly:

In late 2008, a legal battle broke out between GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare (GSK) and Heinz
India (Heinz) over the advertisements of their respective health drinks Horlicks and Complan.

The advertisements talked about how their respective brand was better than the other and showed the
competitor's product in bad light when compared to the company's products. In September 2008, Heinz
moved the Bombay High Court objecting to advertisements of Horlicks which highlighted the nutritional
content and price gap between the two brands, and showed Horlicks as a better and more inexpensive
health drink than Complan.
The advertisement showed the competitor brand clearly while making the
comparison. Heinz later followed up with its own ad comparing Horlicks unfavorably with Complan.
This prompted GSK to file a case in the Delhi High Court in December 2008 claiming that the ad
released by Heinz disparaged its brand by calling it low priced, and thereby damaging its reputation.
Experts felt that in their quest to outdo their rivals, advertisers resort to comparative advertising and at
times ends up denigrating the competitor brand. Some analysts felt that companies resorted to
comparative advertising to gain publicity and to increase sale. Though both the companies backed their
claims with scientific research data, they were still locked in a legal battle. Issues of disparaging ads by
rival companies were often resolved by the ASCI. But with constant mudslinging at each other, the two
companies decided to battle it out in the courts instead.

ISSUES:

 Analyze the advertising strategies adopted by Complan and Horlicks over the years.
 Study the implications of the advertising war between Complan and Horlicks.
 Study the implications of the advertising war between Complan and Horlicks.