Marketing

Research
Project on
Indian Noodle
Market
March 15
2014








Submitted To:
Professor Shelendra K. Tyagi
LBSIM, New Delhi

Submitted By:
Group 10, Section C
Akhil Jain (131)
Subhash Arora (143)
Hemant Tejwani (153)
Shekhar Goel (163)
Gourav Bhut (174)













































Copyright is retained by the authors of this report, as stipulated by Indian copyright act 1957. Individual
researchers are responsible for using these materials in conformance with copyright law as well as any donor
restrictions accompanying the materials.
CERTIFICATE


This is to certify that the project report entitled Indian noodle market is a bonafide work
carried out by Group 10, Section C - 2013-15, under the guidance of Associate Prof.
Shelendra K. Tyagi, as a part of the final project for 3
rd
trimester, 2013-15.














Prof. Shelendra K. Tyagi
B.Tech (Mechanical Engg.), PGCSM, MBA
Faculty, Lal Bahadur Shastri Institute of Management
New Delhi

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

To: Prof. Shelendra K. Tyagi
From: Group 10
Subject: Submission of end-term project report.
Respected sir,
The group-10 (consisting of Subhash Arora, Hemant Tejwani, Akhil Jain, Shekhar Goel, and
Gourav Kumar Bhut) would like to present a project on the title Indian Noodle Market.
We have done a detailed research on the given topic and have tried to put forward the critical
learning in this report. We would like to express our gratitude to you for your invaluable
guidance.


Yours sincerely
Group-10, Section-C






















EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


This report entitled Indian Noodles Market deals with the study of Maggi brand that
was launched in India in the year 1983, by Nestle India Limited, which became
synonymous with noodles. In the initial years maggi faces a lot of hurdles as Indians used to
be very conservative about the food habits.

To overcome this Nestle conducted a research and started positioning the noodles as a
convenience product for mothers and as a fun product for children. Since then maggi has
been very successful in India as the combination of taste and convenience proved to be
potent. Over the years a number of other brands also wooed the space but could not make a
dent to maggi overwhelming 90% market share.

But now in last few years a number of big brands enter into this industry as noodles market in
India is set to grow from USD 403 million at present to around at least USD 564 million by
2015. These payers are innovating and adding values to establish a unique brand positions in
the consumers mind.

Due to this the instant noodle market share has undergone several changes, viz. the entry of
several new players , innovation in products and value addition in packaging , the emergence
of modern formats , a shift in consumption towards convenience foods etc.

As a result of all this Maggi which used to have 90% noodle market share is now have less
than 75% facing toughest challenge from Sunfeast yippie which grabbed 10% of market
share.

So in our study we need to find out what factors impacts the sale of noodles and also to
understand the trends which are affecting the customer behaviour and To do a study of
customer perceptions for all the competing brands by conducting a market research and on
the basis of it we come out with some recommendations, as what steps maggi should take to
increase its market share.





ACKNOWLEDGMENT


Every piece of hard work requires the combined efforts and talents of many people. An
Ambitious work of this kind, providing review to the subject would have remained a concept
rather than the finished product without co-operation of those who respondent to our request
to contribute.

We are very much graceful to our respected Director Dr. P.K. Biswas of L.B.S.I.M., New
Delhi who has enriched our knowledge and gave us a moral support to do this report. We are
also highly thankful to Prof. Shelendra K. Tyagi (Associate Professor, L.B.S.I.M., New
Delhi) for showing us the right path and encouraging us for the preparation of this report. We
are extremely thankful for his involvement and interest and providing necessary guidance
regarding concept clarity of the project and support during all the stages of this project. We
are very much thankful to all those people who gave us their valuable time and related
information about the project.


Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION..1
2.RESEARCH DESIGN.3
2.1 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION.....4
2.2 SCALES OF MEASUREMENT......4
2.3 QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT. ...4
2.4 SAMPLE SELECTION.4
2.5 STATISTICAL TOOLS USED ..4
3. PROCESS FOR THE SURVEY5
3.1 QUALITATIVE RESEARCH.. .5
3.2 QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH.7
3.2.1 CONJOINT ANALYSIS..9
3.2.2 MULTI DIMENSIONAL SCALING.14
3.2.3 REGRESSION21
3.2.4 STEP-WISE Regression..........................................................................................23
4. RECOMMENDATIONS29
LIST OF REFERENCES
BIBLIOGRAPHY.30
1

1. INTRODUCTION
Maggi noodles is a brand of instant noodles manufactured by nestle. Maggi has been the
highest sold noodles in India. It took several years and lots of money for Nestle to establish
its noodles in India. Maggi was invented in Europe by a person names Jullius Maggi. It had
merged with Nestle family in 1947. In India it was launched in 1980s by Nestle group of
companies Maggi has faced a lot of hurdles in its journey in India. The basic problem the
brand faced was the Indian psyche i.e. Indians used to be conservative about the food habits
so noodles faced a lot of problem in promoting sales.
When Maggi entered the country, Nestle used TV heavily to familiarize consumers with the
brand. Initially Maggi used to position the noodles on the platform of convenience targeting
the working women however the sales of Maggi was not picking up despite of heavy media
advertising. To overcome this Nestle India Ltd conducted a research which revealed that it
was children who liked the taste of Maggi and who were the largest consumer of the product.
Based on this input, they came up with 2-mins noodles with price of Rs. 2.10 with a margin
of 100% (approx.). Nestle then shifted its focus from working women and targeted children
and their mothers through its marketing. All the promotions positioned the noodles as a
convenience product for mothers and as a fun product for children. Hence the tagline, Fast to
cook Good to eat. Through its ads Nestle positioned Maggi as a fun food for kids which
mothers could prepare easily. Taglines like Mummy, bhookh lagi hai (Mom, Im
hungry).Bas 2 minute and Fast to cook -Good to eat effectively communicated the product
benefits to target consumers. These ads become so popular that the tagline Bas 2-Minute
immediately reminded Indian consumers of Maggi noodles even several years after the ads
were taken off the TV.
Maggis first product extension was Maggi instant soup launched in 1988. With the launch of
Maggi soups, Nestle had become a pioneer in the organized package soup market in India.
Since then Maggi has been successful in India and launched ketchup sauces and soups in
India, which was very successful in grasping market though Nestle tried to extend to other
ready to eat (RTE) products like pickles, cooking aids and paste it was unsuccessful so Nestle
dumped those products. Maggi is competing with Heinz sauce and ketchup, knorr soups,
Nissin sauces and ketchup, Top Ramen, Sunfeast Pasta in corresponding categories of
products and variants
In 2005, Nestle came out with Maggi atta (whole wheat flour) instant noodles. All over the
country, atta is considered healthier than maida or refined flour which the company was using
from day one. This helped the company take the health platform. It was then that it added the
tagline, Healthy nhi, Tasty bhi (health as well as taste). Maggis properties were expanded
from convenience alone to include taste and health as well. That was the time when Nestle
was repositioning itself worldwide as a health and wellness company. The 25
th
anniversary
campaign around the theme Mein aur meri Maggi acknowledged a generation that has
grown up on the brand and which is now poised to include it in the diet of its children.
2

BROAD STATEMENT
To increase the market share of Maggi.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Customer Analysis: To understand the customer choice criteria with respect to
noodles.

Consumer behaviour: To understand the trends which are affecting the customer
behaviour.
Consumer perception: To do a study of customer perceptions for all the competing
brands.














3

2. RESEARCH DESIGN
A research design is a framework or blueprint for conducting the marketing research project.
It details the procedure necessary for obtaining the information needed to structure and/or
solve marketing research problems. The research design provides a specific detail as to how
to implement the approach. A good research design will ensure that marketing research
project is conducted effectively and efficiently. Typically, a research design involves the
following components, or tasks:

Define the information needed.
Design the exploratory, descriptive and /or causal phases of the research.
Specify the measurement and scaling procedures.
Construct and pre-test the questionnaire or an appropriate form of data collection.
Specify the sampling process and sample size.
Develop a plan for data analysis.

Now after collecting and analyzing the secondary data, having defined research problem and
objectives, we will develop a research design which will help in conducting the market
research project, solve the market research problem, and address the research objectives.

Therefore, in order to study the customer perceptions for all the competing brands and to find
out the exact reasons & factors affecting the buying behaviour of customers, we will conduct
a descriptive research.

Key features of the research
Literature Review i.e., the secondary research from case as discussed in class and
websites.
An exploratory stage that is the Primary Research, consisting of two Focus Group
Discussion.

For the focus Group Discussion, participants were asked to discuss about various
attributes that has a significant impact on the sale of noodles. After the Focus Group
Discussion a common consensus was reached where we came out with 5 most important
factors that influence a consumer buying behaviour.


4

2.1 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

It details the procedure necessary for obtaining the information needed to structure or solve
marketing research problems. The present study is an exploratory research and involves the
use of Survey Method. Quantitative data collection has been achieved via self-
administration of the questionnaire. For the quantitative survey five point scales were used
for measuring importance of variables such as Brand image, Availability ,Taste , health
ingredients etc.


2.2 SCALES OF MEASUREMENT

Instrument of data collection will be a structured questionnaire. Scales used for this are
nominal, ordinal, and interval. We will use paired comparison scaling, rank order scaling.
Further non comparative scale will be used for impact of brand on consumer purchase
decision. Here we will use both continuous rating scale and itemized rating scale (Likert
scale)


2.3 QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT

The Questionnaire was developed on the basis of the hypothesis and the objectives of the
research after identifying the underlying factors. The questions were worded in simple and
uncomplicated manner for the ease of the respondents. Questionnaire consisted of structured
questions in the form of multiple choice questions and scales.


2.4 SAMPLE SELECTION
The sampling technique involved will be non probalistic sampling.The respondents were in
the age bracket of 15 to 45 years and hailed from different parts of the Delhi/NCR. A total of
243 responses were collected.

2.5 STATISTICAL TOOLS USED
Data analysis has been mainly done using Microsoft Excel and SPSS 20.0.






5

3. PROCESS FOR THE SURVEY

Before starting with the primary research, some secondary research was needed to be
analyzed to draw insight into the problems for the decreasing market share of maggi noodles.
It was observed from research that Sunfeasts Yippie has emerged as the biggest
competitor for maggi with a market share of almost 10%, followed by Top Ramen at 5% and
a host of other players like Knorr Soupy noodles (HUL) and Horlicks Foodles (GSK).





For the primary data collection and analysis, we need to understand Why people buy
noodles? Also questions like trends that are affecting consumer behaviour and consumers
perception towards competing brands.

3.1 QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
To understand the factors for which consumers buy noodles, focus group discussions were
conducted. During the discussion, the respondents came up with various attributes and labels
as mentioned:



Maggi
75%
Yeppie
10%
Top Ramen
5%
Others
10%
Market Share
6

Attribute Labels
Price
10
20
80

Size of pack
1 piece pack
2 piece pack
8 piece pack

Convenience
Ready to eat
Availability

Taste
Masala
Chicken

Shape
Round
Square

Type of packaging
Visual Aesthetics
Reseal ability
Language of communication
Product detailing



The discussion brought forward a lot of factors. However when asked to discuss the
factors in detail, price and size of pack were considered same by the respondents as
the size of the pack dictates the price. Another observation was that not all the price
labels were important to the respondents.

Type of packing was not considered important by over 90% of the respondents and
hence was not included in the quantitative research.

The table below shows the final attributes and labels considered for primary research.

Attribute Labels
Price
10 (1 piece pack)
20 (2 piece pack)
80 (8 piece pack)

Convenience
Ready to eat
Availability

7

Taste
Masala
Chicken

Shape
Round
Square


To understand the trends affecting consumer behaviour with respect to noodles industry,
another round of focused group discussions were conducted. The factors that were
highlighted are as follows:

Increase in the no. of nuclear families
Increase in the no. of working class population
Health consciousness
Availability of alternate ready to eat products
Increase in home delivery service
Change in preference of taste

With these findings, quantitative research was conducted.

3.2 QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH
A sample of 244 respondents was taken.


Occupation
Business / Self Employed
doctor
Service
Student
8

0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
15 - 20 years 21 - 25 years 26 - 30 years 31 - 35 years
Age group
Total

We took survey of various occupations among which maximum were students (77%)
followed by servicemen (15%), business (7%) and doctors (1%).

We have taken a very diversified sample in terms of age. The same pattern can be seen here
with the age bracket of 21 25 years being the highest.


Respondents from various economic groups were asked to take the survey. Their net annual
family income is well distributed from 1 3 lakhs to above 10 lakhs.

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 - 3 lakhs 3 - 5 lakhs 5 - 8 lakhs 8 - 10 lakhs Above 10 lakhs
Income
Total
9



Again as we can see, the ratio of male to female is fairly uniform. This helps in avoiding
biasing error and gives a clear picture.
From the collected data we have found that 53.7% of the respondents get affected by
advertisements and the average rating of the Maggis tagline Taste bhi, health bhi (3.508) is
the highest among its competitors.

3.2.1 CONJOINT ANALYSIS
Conjoint analysis is a multivariate technique that captures the exact level of utility that an
individual customer puts on various attributes of the product offering. It enables a direct
comparison between the utilities of different attributes. And once we find out the utility value
for every attributes we can combine these to find the best combinations attributes of the
customer choice in order to understand the customer choice criteria with respect to
noodles.

As in our research project of noodles we want to find out the combinations of best attributes
which customer prefers while buying noodles. We first identify the attributes of the noodles
which are important to customers and then the levels of each attribute that we are willing to
design and offer to a customer. And finally we come up with the following four attributes and
their levels.
Price Rs 10 , Rs 20 , Rs 80 (3 levels)
Taste Magic Masala , Chicken (2 levels)
Shape Square , Round (2 levels)
Convenience Easy to cook , availability (2 levels)
Gender
Female
Male
10


Variables Entered/Removed
a

Model Variables
Entered
Variables
Removed
Method
1
Z1, Y1, V1, X2,
X1
b

. Enter
a. Dependent Variable: Rating
b. Tolerance = .000 limits reached.



Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .798
a
.637 .537 4.813
a. Predictors: (Constant), Z1, Y1, V1, X2, X1



ANOVA
a

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression 733.083 5 146.617 6.330 .001
b

Residual 416.917 18 23.162

Total 1150.000 23

a. Dependent Variable: Rating
b. Predictors: (Constant), Z1, Y1, V1, X2, X1



Coefficients
a

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 12.500 .982

12.724 .000
X1 4.000 1.389 .472 2.879 .010
X2 -.125 1.389 -.015 -.090 .929
V1 3.833 .982 .554 3.902 .001
Y1 -2.333 .982 -.337 -2.375 .029
Z1 -.250 .982 -.036 -.254 .802
a. Dependent Variable: Rating
11




Excluded Variables
a

Model Beta In t Sig. Partial
Correlation
Collinearity
Statistics
Tolerance
1
Price .
b
. . . .000
Taste .
b
. . . .000
Shape .
b
. . . .000
Convenience .
b
. . . .000
a. Dependent Variable: Rating
b. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Z1, Y1, V1, X2, X1





Tables of Attributes along with their levels and input data coded for Regression

Table 1
Price X1 X2
10 1 0
20 0 1
80 -1 -1

Table 2
Taste V1
Magic Masala 1
Chicken -1

Table 3
Shape Y1
Square 1
Round -1

Table 4
12

Convenience Z1
Easy to cook 1
Availability -1



Utility Table
Attributes Levels Part Utility Range of utility
(Maximum Minimum)
Price 10 4.00 4.00 ( - 3.875)
= 7.875 20 -0.125
80 -3.875
Taste Magic Masala 3.833 3.833 ( - 3.833)
= 7.66 Chicken -3.833
Shape Square -2.333 2.333 ( - 2.333)
=4.666 Round 2.333
Convenience Easy to cook -0.250 0.250 ( - 0.250)
=0.500 Availability 0.250
The two variables X1 and X2 are used to indicate the 3 levels of price as per our coding.
Similarly variable V1, Y1 and Z1 are used to represent the two levels of taste (magic masala,
chicken), shape (Square, round) and convenience (easy to cook, available) respectively as
shown in the tables. All the 5 variables are independent variables in the regression run and
ratings as given by the respondent forms the dependent variable for the regression curve.

Rank 1 can be considered as the highest rating and given a rating of 24. Similarly Rank 2 can
be given a rating of 23 and so on.



INTERPRETATION

Now as the price 10 is represented by variable X1, its utility comes out to be 4.
Similarly the utility for variable X2 which represents price 20 is -.125. The utility for
3
rd
level is not obtained from table, but we can calculate it by using the utility value of
other two variables as all the utilities for a given variable should sum equal to 0. Thus
utility for price 80 should be equal to -3.875 (4.00 -.125).

13

For taste, the utility values of Taste (magic masala and chicken) are given by the
numbers 3.833 and -3.833 respectively as the sum of all the utilities for a given
attribute should be equal to 0.

Similarly for shape square has the utility value of -2.333 and round has a utility value
of 2.333.

Finally for convenience easy to cook has utility value of -.250 and availability has a
utility value of .250.

From the Utility table we can conclude that the price of Noodle is the most important
attribute for the customers.

There are two Indicators for this:
The range of utility value is highest (7.875) for the price.
The highest individual utility value of this attribute is at its first level.

Also, the taste seems to be the second most important attribute as its range of utilities is 7.66.

Combination Utilities
The total utility of any combination can be calculated by picking attribute level of our choice.
For example the combined utility of the first combination i.e. price 10, taste magic masala,
shape round, convenience availability is equal to 10.416.


Individual attributes
The difference in utility with the change of one level in one attribute can also be checked. For
example decrease in price from 20 to 10 increases the utility value by 4.125.


14

3.2.2 MULTI DIMENSIONAL SCALING

OBJECTIVE
As stated earlier, our objective was to do a study of customers perception for all the
competing brands.
PROBLEM
We wanted to know how different brands of noodles taken in our research are positioned in
consumers mind as per the different attributes that are Brand image, taste, and variety of
flavours offered, price, health ingredients, and availability. And for the same we have used
Attribute-based perceptual mapping using Discriminant analysis. Now we wanted to draw a
perceptual map using an attribute-based procedure, of noodles consumers perceptions
regarding all the brands taken in this research. It was Maggi against Yippee, Knorr, Top
Ramen, and Horlicks Foodles.


Analysis Case Processing Summary
Unweighted Cases N Percent
Valid 1215 100.0
Excluded
Missing or out-of-range
group codes
0 .0
At least one missing
discriminating variable
0 .0
Both missing or out-of-range
group codes and at least
one missing discriminating
variable
0 .0
Total 0 .0
Total 1215 100.0



Group Statistics
Brand Mean Std. Deviation Valid N (listwise)
Unweighted Weighted
1
Brand Image 4.25 1.040 243 243.000
Taste 4.30 .995 243 243.000
Variety of Flavours Offered 3.86 1.113 243 243.000
15

Price 4.07 .985 243 243.000
Health Ingredients 3.34 1.158 243 243.000
Availability 4.44 1.040 243 243.000
2
Brand Image 2.95 .984 243 243.000
Taste 2.96 1.036 243 243.000
Variety of Flavours Offered 2.85 1.027 243 243.000
Price 3.32 1.074 243 243.000
Health Ingredients 2.73 1.012 243 243.000
Availability 3.25 1.008 243 243.000
3
Brand Image 2.90 1.053 243 243.000
Taste 3.01 1.083 243 243.000
Variety of Flavours Offered 2.86 1.146 243 243.000
Price 3.14 .969 243 243.000
Health Ingredients 3.19 1.090 243 243.000
Availability 3.24 1.095 243 243.000
4
Brand Image 2.94 1.175 243 243.000
Taste 3.02 1.111 243 243.000
Variety of Flavours Offered 2.64 1.068 243 243.000
Price 3.10 1.069 243 243.000
Health Ingredients 2.73 1.099 243 243.000
Availability 2.96 1.129 243 243.000
5
Brand Image 2.21 1.157 243 243.000
Taste 2.24 1.100 243 243.000
Variety of Flavours Offered 2.16 1.078 243 243.000
Price 2.81 1.209 243 243.000
Health Ingredients 2.83 1.241 243 243.000
Availability 2.40 1.158 243 243.000
Total
Brand Image 3.05 1.270 1215 1215.000
Taste 3.11 1.256 1215 1215.000
Variety of Flavours Offered 2.87 1.218 1215 1215.000
Price 3.29 1.144 1215 1215.000
Health Ingredients 2.96 1.149 1215 1215.000
Availability 3.26 1.274 1215 1215.000


Tests of Equality of Group Means
Wilks' Lambda F df1 df2 Sig.
Brand Image .727 113.799 4 1210 .000
Taste .718 118.720 4 1210 .000
Variety of Flavours Offered .795 78.224 4 1210 .000
Price .863 47.920 4 1210 .000
Health Ingredients .951 15.427 4 1210 .000
16

Availability .727 113.836 4 1210 .000




Summary of Canonical Discriminant Functions

Eigenvalues
Function Eigenvalue % of Variance Cumulative % Canonical
Correlation
1 .575
a
91.0 91.0 .604
2 .036
a
5.7 96.7 .187
3 .017
a
2.7 99.4 .128
4 .004
a
.6 100.0 .062
a. First 4 canonical discriminant functions were used in the analysis.


Wilks' Lambda
Test of Function(s) Wilks' Lambda Chi-square df Sig.
1 through 4 .600 616.590 24 .000
2 through 4 .946 67.614 15 .000
3 through 4 .980 24.729 8 .002
4 .996 4.612 3 .203


Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients
Function
1 2 3 4
Brand Image .311 -.412 -.384 .525
Taste .419 -.018 -.896 -.376
Variety of Flavours Offered .042 .201 .673 -.433
Price .052 -.454 .453 .908
Health Ingredients -.231 .986 -.277 .390
Availability .494 .307 .524 -.469

Structure Matrix
Function
1 2 3 4
Taste .823
*
.091 -.405 .032
Brand Image .807
*
-.007 -.237 .284
Availability .803
*
.306 .381 -.058
17

Variety of Flavours Offered .666
*
.256 .241 -.030
Health Ingredients .205 .846
*
-.121 .468
Price .519 -.042 .333 .704
*

Pooled within-groups correlations between discriminating variables and
standardized canonical discriminant functions
Variables ordered by absolute size of correlation within function.
*. Largest absolute correlation between each variable and any discriminant
function


Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients
Function
1 2 3 4
Brand Image .287 -.380 -.354 .484
Taste .394 -.017 -.840 -.353
Variety of Flavours Offered .038 .185 .619 -.398
Price .049 -.427 .425 .853
Health Ingredients -.206 .879 -.247 .348
Availability .454 .283 .482 -.432
(Constant) -3.237 -1.444 -.324 -1.663
Unstandardized coefficients


Functions at Group Centroids
Brand Function
1 2 3 4
1 1.351 .036 -.017 .054
2 -.042 -.186 .213 -.035
3 -.146 .312 -.003 -.069
4 -.170 -.210 -.195 -.041
5 -.993 .047 .002 .092
Unstandardized canonical discriminant functions evaluated
at group means


Classification Statistics

Classification Processing Summary
Processed 1215
Excluded
Missing or out-of-range
group codes
0
18

At least one missing
discriminating variable
0
Used in Output 1215


Prior Probabilities for Groups
Brand Prior Cases Used in Analysis
Unweighted Weighted
1 .200 243 243.000
2 .200 243 243.000
3 .200 243 243.000
4 .200 243 243.000
5 .200 243 243.000
Total 1.000 1215 1215.000


Classification Results
a


Brand Predicted Group Membership Total

1 2 3 4 5
Original
Count
1 192 10 16 19 6 243
2 45 59 54 28 57 243
3 45 32 78 30 58 243
4 40 42 48 51 62 243
5 19 27 42 22 133 243
%
1 79.0 4.1 6.6 7.8 2.5 100.0
2 18.5 24.3 22.2 11.5 23.5 100.0
3 18.5 13.2 32.1 12.3 23.9 100.0
4 16.5 17.3 19.8 21.0 25.5 100.0
5 7.8 11.1 17.3 9.1 54.7 100.0
a. 42.2% of original grouped cases correctly classified.


19



INTERPRETATION

The means and Standard deviations of the different independent variables across the
various brands indicate that the performance of these brands varies greatly across
the different attributes. Also while the performance of brands is around average for
health ingredients, Maggi performs really well in terms of brand image and taste.

The Univariate ANOVA test results indicate that the brands vary significantly
across all the attributes.


The table for Eigen values and Wilks lambda indicates that the first two functions
explain most of the variance in the input data while the contribution of third and
fourth is almost negligible. Hence these two functions have been used for the further
interpretation.

20

Using the Standard coefficients of the attributes on the functions 1 and 2, the plot for
the different attributes has been plotted as shown in fig.


As seen from the perceptual map in this fig. Maggi, Sunfeast yippie, knorr soupy,
Top ramen and Foodles, the five brands have their unique positions on the map.
In addition, on the same map, we have now plotted values of the attributes on the
same two dimensions.

Now based on distances of the attribute vectors from the axis and their lengths, it can
be concluded that Availability, Taste and Brand image weight heavily on
dimension 1 though weightage for brand image is relatively lower. This is also
evident from the standardized discriminant coefficients on dimension 1.


The graph also indicates that health ingredients weigh heavily on dimension 2.

The positions of the brands under study with respect to these attributes are obtained
from the graphs.
It appears that Maggi is strongly represented by the attributes of availability, taste
and brand image. Hence it can be concluded that maggi is perceived to be easily
available and also have a good taste as compared to its competitors.

It is also observed that other than maggi Knorr soupy also perform better in terms of
health ingredients as compared to other noodles.


None of the attribute vector point towards Foodle. Hence it can be concluded that
none of these factors contributes to the differentiation of this brand from the rest.

Also we can say that yippie and top ramen are represented by the attribute of price.
The arrows of the other attributes point in the opposite direction and therefore do not
have a significant influence on their perception.
21

3.2.3 REGRESSION

There are 2 methods of Regression:
Enter method

Step-wise method, which further consists of:
Forward method
Backward method

3.2.3.1 ENTER METHOD
It is the one in which all variables are considered which affect the sales.

Variables Entered/Removed
a

Model Variables
Entered
Variables
Removed
Method
1
Home delivery,
Health, Nuclear,
Alternate,
Working
b

. Enter
a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you
consume in a month?
b. All requested variables entered.


Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .698
a
.487 .476 1.659
a. Predictors: (Constant), Home delivery, Health, Nuclear, Alternate,
Working

ANOVA
a

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression 621.904 5 124.381 45.166 .000
b

Residual 655.424 238 2.754

Total 1277.328 243

a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you consume in a month?
b. Predictors: (Constant), Home delivery, Health, Nuclear, Alternate, Working
22


Coefficients
a

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 2.443 .722

3.383 .001
Nuclear .854 .120 .394 7.118 .000
Working .454 .095 .269 4.800 .000
Health .047 .110 .021 .424 .672
Alternate -.042 .113 -.021 -.373 .709
Home delivery -.374 .110 -.199 -3.392 .001
a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you consume in a month?



INTERPRETATION
Null Hypothesis: There is no significant impact on purchase of noodles.
Alternate Hypothesis: There is significant impact on purchase noodles.

In model summary, the R
2
value is 0.487 which means change in independent
variables will lead to 48.7 % change in purchase.

Statistical Significance of the Model
In ANOVA table, the significant value is 0.000
b
which is <0.05 @ 95 % confidence
interval. Hence we will reject null hypothesis and will conclude that there is
significant impact of all the independent variables on Purchase.

In the coefficient table, we can see that t-test for the significance of individual
independent variables indicate that at significance level of 0.05, increase in number of
nuclear families, increase in working class population, and increase in home delivery
services are statistically significant at confidence level of 95 %. The other two
variables health consciousness and availability of alternate products are not
significant.

The results of this regression model are in coefficients table in table form. Under
unstandardized coefficients column, a column titled B lists all the coefficients for
the model. According to this, A (Intercept) = 2.443, b1 = 0.854, b2 = 0.454, b3 =
0.047, b4 = -0.042, b5 = -0.374.


23

Now these values are substituted in the following equation:
Y = a + b1x1 + b2x2 + b3x3 + b4x4 + b5x5

Where,
Y is dependent variable, a is intercept, b1, b2, b3, b4, and b5 are coefficients and x1, x2, x3, x4,
and x5 are independent variables.

Purchase = 2.443 + 0.854 (increase in no. Of nuclear families) + 0.454 (increase in working
class population) + 0.047 (health consciousness) - 0.042 (availability of alternate ready to eat
products) - 0.374 (increase in home delivery services).

The equation we have obtained means, in effect, that purchase will increase if there is
increase in no. Of nuclear families, increase in working class population, and increase in
health consciousness and will decrease if there is Increase in availability of alternate ready to
eat products, and increase in home delivery services. All the variables have a significant
value of <0.05. Hence, we will reject null hypothesis and will conclude that change in any or
all of these combinations will have impact on Purchase.

But health consciousness variable doesnt make too much intuitive sense.

3.2.3.2 STEP-WISE Regression
Forward Method
It is the one which involves starting with no variables in the model, testing the addition of
each variable using a chosen model comparison criterion, adding the variable (if any) that
improves the model the most, and repeating this process until none improves the model.


Variables Entered/Removed
a

Model Variables
Entered
Variables
Removed
Method
24

1 Nuclear .
Forward
(Criterion:
Probability-of-F-
to-enter <=
.050)
2 Working .
Forward
(Criterion:
Probability-of-F-
to-enter <=
.050)
3 Home delivery .
Forward
(Criterion:
Probability-of-F-
to-enter <=
.050)
a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you
consume in a month?




Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .611
a
.373 .371 1.819
2 .676
b
.456 .452 1.698
3 .697
c
.486 .480 1.654
a. Predictors: (Constant), Nuclear
b. Predictors: (Constant), Nuclear, Working
c. Predictors: (Constant), Nuclear, Working, Home delivery

ANOVA
a

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression 476.933 1 476.933 144.201 .000
b

Residual 800.395 242 3.307

Total 1277.328 243

2
Regression 582.866 2 291.433 101.136 .000
c

Residual 694.462 241 2.882

Total 1277.328 243

3
Regression 621.128 3 207.043 75.724 .000
d

Residual 656.199 240 2.734

Total 1277.328 243

25

a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you consume in a month?
b. Predictors: (Constant), Nuclear
c. Predictors: (Constant), Nuclear, Working
d. Predictors: (Constant), Nuclear, Working, Home delivery



Coefficients
a

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 1.094 .331

3.306 .001
Nuclear 1.324 .110 .611 12.008 .000
2
(Constant) .555 .321

1.729 .085
Nuclear .990 .117 .457 8.475 .000
Working .552 .091 .327 6.063 .000
3
(Constant) 2.444 .594

4.115 .000
Nuclear .859 .119 .397 7.222 .000
Working .456 .092 .270 4.936 .000
Home delivery -.376 .100 -.200 -3.741 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you consume in a month?



Excluded Variables
a

Model Beta In T Sig. Partial
Correlation
Collinearity
Statistics
Tolerance
1
Working .327
b
6.063 .000 .364 .777
Health -.089
b
-1.729 .085 -.111 .972
Alternate -.158
b
-2.971 .003 -.188 .887
Home delivery -.274
b
-5.086 .000 -.311 .811
2
Health -.033
c
-.670 .503 -.043 .935
Alternate -.082
c
-1.564 .119 -.100 .823
Home delivery -.200
c
-3.741 .000 -.235 .748
3
Health .019
d
.378 .706 .024 .861
Alternate -.017
d
-.320 .749 -.021 .724
a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you consume in a month?
b. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Nuclear
c. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Nuclear, Working
d. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Nuclear, Working, Home delivery
26

Interpretation

From the coefficient table, we can see that after a running a forward step wise regression we
end up with only 3 variables out of 5 independent variables. The 3 variables in the model are
increase in number of nuclear families, increase in working class population, and increase in
home delivery services. Again we notice that all the 3 variables are significant at a
significance value of 0.05. Now we can economize on the 2 variables by reducing the
equation to 3 variables instead of 5 independent variables.

Purchase = 2.444 + 0.859 (increase in no. Of nuclear families) + 0.456 (increase in working
class population) - 0.376 (increase in home delivery services)

Backward Method
This regression starts with the 5 variables in the model and gradually eliminates those one
after the other which do not explain much of the variation in purchase until it ends with an
optimal mix of independent variables.

Variables Entered/Removed
a

Model Variables
Entered
Variables
Removed
Method
1
Home delivery,
Health, Nuclear,
Alternate,
Working
b

. Enter
2 . Alternate
Backward
(criterion:
Probability of F-
to-remove >=
.100).
3 . Health
Backward
(criterion:
Probability of F-
to-remove >=
.100).
a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you
consume in a month?
b. All requested variables entered.

27


Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .698
a
.487 .476 1.659
2 .698
b
.487 .478 1.656
3 .697
c
.486 .480 1.654
a. Predictors: (Constant), Home delivery, Health, Nuclear, Alternate,
Working
b. Predictors: (Constant), Home delivery, Health, Nuclear, Working
c. Predictors: (Constant), Home delivery, Nuclear, Working

ANOVA
a

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1
Regression 621.904 5 124.381 45.166 .000
b

Residual 655.424 238 2.754

Total 1277.328 243

2
Regression 621.520 4 155.380 56.626 .000
c

Residual 655.807 239 2.744

Total 1277.328 243

3
Regression 621.128 3 207.043 75.724 .000
d

Residual 656.199 240 2.734

Total 1277.328 243

a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you consume in a month?
b. Predictors: (Constant), Home delivery, Health, Nuclear, Alternate, Working
c. Predictors: (Constant), Home delivery, Health, Nuclear, Working
d. Predictors: (Constant), Home delivery, Nuclear, Working




Coefficients
a

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized
Coefficients
T Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) 2.443 .722

3.383 .001
Nuclear .854 .120 .394 7.118 .000
Working .454 .095 .269 4.800 .000
Health .047 .110 .021 .424 .672
Alternate -.042 .113 -.021 -.373 .709
Home delivery -.374 .110 -.199 -3.392 .001
28

2
(Constant) 2.335 .661

3.532 .000
Nuclear .858 .119 .396 7.197 .000
Working .460 .093 .272 4.938 .000
Health .041 .109 .019 .378 .706
Home delivery -.387 .105 -.206 -3.690 .000
3
(Constant) 2.444 .594

4.115 .000
Nuclear .859 .119 .397 7.222 .000
Working .456 .092 .270 4.936 .000
Home delivery -.376 .100 -.200 -3.741 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you consume in a month?


Excluded Variables
a

Model Beta In T Sig. Partial
Correlation
Collinearity
Statistics
Tolerance
2 Alternate -.021
b
-.373 .709 -.024 .711
3
Alternate -.017
c
-.320 .749 -.021 .724
Health .019
c
.378 .706 .024 .861
a. Dependent Variable: Q 5 How many Packets do you consume in a month?
b. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Home delivery, Health, Nuclear, Working
c. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Home delivery, Nuclear, Working


Interpretation
This regression results in a model with only 3 independent variables that are increase in
number of nuclear families, increase in working class population, and increase in home
delivery services. The R
2
of this model has been slightly increased to 48.6 %. Also all the 3
independent variables are significant at a significance value of 0.05.
If we decide to use this model, we need to form the following equation for prediction.
Purchase = 2.444 + 0.859 (increase in no. Of nuclear families) + 0.456 (increase in working
class population) - 0.376 (increase in home delivery services)


29

4. RECOMMENDATIONS
Maggi should concentrate more on health part and should reposition its brand in
consumers mind as a healthy snack which can be done by aggressive marketing of its
Healthy atta noodles variant and new flavours in it.

Maggi should come up with round shape as round shape is attracting people towards
Yippie.

The quantity of masala mix in the maggi packet should be increased as people prefer
more spicy noodles.


Reseal of packet option should be launched with bigger packs (just like Haldiram
Namkeen) as there is storage problem associated with the current packaging.

Competitors offer more quantity at the same price which acts as a drawback. So what
maggi can do is increase the quantity offered.

























30

LIST OF REFERENCES
Bibliography
Indian treat Maggi Noodles case discussed in class.
Marketing Research by Rajendra Nargundkar.
References
https://www.maggi.in/
http://www.technopak.com/files/Instant_Noodles_Market_in_India.pdf
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010-08-
30/news/27597085_1_noodles-maggi-hul-and-gsk
http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/hul-goes-for-second-try-in-
noodle-war-with-nestle-itc/article1-933760.aspx
http://the--noodles.blogspot.in/2009/08/history-of-maggi-noodles.htmlga