BRANDING AND OWN LABELING

Contents
Introduction The importance of branding in diaper market Story Time Pampers leveraging Discussion on the success of Pampers and compare it with Competitors Threat from own labels Conclusion Recommendations Bibliography 3 3 4 4 6 6 7 7

Introduction
The report tells about its one of the major product Pampers, its importance in diaper market, its story of success from the birth of disposable diapers. It also discusses about the market aspects of Pampers. The threats from its own labels and other competitors are also discussed in the report. At the end of the report, seeing the statistics, marketing mix analysis, its competitors, market brand value, products and history of Pampers, some conclusions are made and some recommendations are provided for improving the profitability and brand value. In 1961, P&G introduced this disposable diaper brand which achieved a great achievement because of its premium quality. But in 1968, Kimberley Clark introduced Huggies as the only big competitor of Pampers which overtook the market till 2002 (Anon., 1961). But in 2002, Pampers again came back with increased sales and market share through various marketing strategies like SEO, social media marketing and B2C strategies.

The importance of branding in diaper market

Branding is not just a business buzzing word but it is more than that. It has become the crux of selling in the new economy. Brands play a critical role in a firm's international marketing strategy. So, branding is needed in each and every industry or market. (Brassington & Petitt, 2006) In diapers market, parents want most comfortable, easy to wear and convenient diapers for their babies. The branding is important in this market because of: Relevance to a customer's lifestyle i.e. it should be more attractive and soft and convenient to wear, as these are meant for small babies. Promises backed by support are necessary in a market for customers which a Pampers provide through the website as it very much helpful because expert tips for a healthy sleep are available on the website. The message of the brand is clear and focused as its brand name tells about. Pampers is a perfect name for the diaper line as it is easy to say, has positive associations, and links to the performance of the product which is pampering babies without compromising with comfort. Pampers' value for money concept is a must as cheaper

and branded the product, nor are the sales. (Anon., 2008)

Story Time Pampers leveraging

On April 2010, Rosanna Shah, a customer from the UK, complained about a diaper rash caused by Pampers new Dry Max technology. But Pampers didn't take the complaint seriously following which the lady took the matter to social media website Facebook and created an anti-Pampers page on it. Within weeks, her anti-Pampers site had close to 1000 followers which prompted the Consumer Product Safety Commission to launch an investigation into the matter. Mothers everywhere were calling news stations and posting videos and pictures of their babies diaper rash all over the Internet. This created a serious problem to Pampers. But later, on investigation, it was found no evidence for the product doing the cause effect for the rashes. This was the incident which could cause leveraging of Pampers on Facebook. (HEUSSNER, 2010)

Discussion on the success of Pampers and compare it with Competitors

The introduction of pampers, was the beginning of a technological breakthrough for disposable diapers as it was the first disposable diaper to use a plastic back sheet, coupled with absorbent wadding and a porous rayon sheet facing the baby's skin. Pampers were a highly priced product which thus hampered an early national role. P&G However continued to invest in technology to develop a more cost effective manufacturing process. Thus, it was able to achieve to a large extent, which then enabled P&G to reintroduce Pampers at a reduced price, and reach national distribution by 1968. It quickly became P&Gs most profitable and dominant brand. The brand continued to build the category stressing product efficacy and innovation. But something happened in 1968. (Anon., 2008) Kimberly-Clark entered the market with Huggies. It quickly becomes a P&Gs biggest competitor. But Pampers forged on. They sold leakage protection, barrier leg cuffs, absorbency and a host of other product innovations. What they did not sell was a brand. So, due to this their sales started from then as compared to Huggies as seen in the figure below:

But, coming back from 1968 to 2002, Kimberly Clark started killing the Huggies diaper brand in Europe, throwing in the towel after many years of trying to compete with P&G's Pampers brand. Huggies had a UK share of 40%, only 5pts behind Pampers on 45%. However, Pampers stepped up their investment and innovation in the core, such as Active Fit nappies for babies on the move, and lower-cost Simply Dry nappies. Fast forward to 2012 and the chart below shows that Pampers now has a 60% share, with Huggies only at 20%, not much bigger than own label. (Coaching, 2012)

Internet SEO added to the success of P&G and increase in its brand value amongst other brands in diapers. Here is a table below which shows the statistics about searches:

Threat from own labels

In London, Proctor and Gamble launched in the value sector with a lower-priced product under its Pampers baby care brand. It can affect its sales to a large extent as customers start getting away from the premium Pamper products which costs more. The introduction of this sub-brand is a daring move because it is broken from the core market trends of either slashing prices or demonstrating value (Kotler, 2010). There was always a threat that the customers might think that the premium product has depleted in quality but according to a source from P&G, it was a recession product. The basic nappy, at 3.99 a pack, or about 11p a nap, are designed to meet the needs of 'price-conscious' mums. Its more premium Pampers products, such as its Active Fit nappies, cost about 20p each. The defensive but brash launch took retailers by surprise. An insider at one well-known UK chain admitted there was a worry that the new Pampers range would cannibalize its own-label sales, but, with a brand as big as Pampers, it had little choice but to stock the range. The source also questioned the quality of the product, saying it was potentially a very dangerous move for Pampers as interpreted it proved to be true that many consumers couldn't realize it was intended as a value product and instead of that they think that the premium brand has dropped in quality.

Conclusion
From the discussion made in the report, and seeing the marketing strategies adopted by it, it can be concluded that Pampers has been successful in developing a well integrated communications strategy. Their message is consistent and they have coordinated their promotions to ensure that the consumers are well informed about their products. By educating parents about the developmental stages from newborn to toddler, Pampers has been able to successfully promote its products at the same time.

Recommendations
Pampers could promote their product a little more vigorously. For example, to gain new customers and keep loyal customers they could place a coupon for diapers on their package or inside the package of diapers. This could help increase sales since fewer customers would want to switch to another brand that has a better price. Coupons would give all the fair chance of being rewarded by saving money when they purchase their products. Other steps include introduction of other baby products like shampoo, body wash, etc.

Bibliography
Anon., 1961. Pampers. [Online] Available at: http://www.pampers.co.uk/pampershistory [Accessed 27 February 2013]. Anon., 2008. Branding Management. Journal of Brand Management. Anon., 2008. SG. [Online] Available at: http://www.semgeek.com/pampers-vs-huggies-40-year-old-branding-war-hitssearch-marketing/ [Accessed 24 feb 2013]. Brassington, F. M. & Petitt, S., 2006. Principles of Marketing. 4th ed. s.l.:Prentice Hall. Coaching, B., 2012. the brandgym blog. [Online] Available at: http://wheresthesausage.typepad.com/my_weblog/2012/11/huggieswithdrawal-shows-risk-of-being-a-follower-brand.html [Accessed February 2013]. HEUSSNER, K. M., 2010. ABC News. [Online] Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/parents-protest-pampers-diapersfacebook/story?id=10537369 [Accessed 26 march 2013]. Kotler, P., 2010. SWOT Analysis. In: P. Kotler, ed. Principles Of Marketing. s.l.:Pearson Education, pp. 48-52.