I. Point of View
The point of view of Mr. Ricky Bautista, president of Vive Chem Philippines (VCP), and Mr. Willy Tan, King Matches Corporation’s product manager, were considered since they can best tackle the problem, suggest and analyze proposals, decide, implement and follow-up the resolution that was chosen.
II. Market Situation Analysis
1. Opportunities - threats analysis.
• There a high market potential on herbal-based astringent. ▪ Since all the current brands in the market were chemical-based, the concept of herbal-based astringent is an innovation.
• Astringent users have the tendency to switch brand.
▪ Astringent users were looking for brand that will satisfy their requirements, until the requirements meet, they will try and use different brands to look for the qualities and attributes of their “ideal” astringent.
• Market competition was not strong.
▪ Since the competition was not strong, a large part of the market was still not captured the market segments.
• New brand entrants
▪ It will make the market to change and accept the concept of “natural” products.
• Consumers don’t have product loyalty.
▪ Marketing efforts leads to switching behavior.
• The market was not yet ready for “natural” products. ▪ Consumers didn’t have a strong grasp about the product being a natural.
• Eskinol has a large share in the consumers’ mind.
▪ It will hard to make the users to shift from Eskinol to Provive since 61% of the market currently using it.
• Current product has more reasonable price.
▪ Some astringent users were more concern about the price of the brands. Because Provive was in the introduction stage of the product life cycle it was expected to be costly.
• There is a possibility that a large multinational company with a market leader position in several hygiene categories was seriously considering entering the astringent market in the next five years. 2. Strengths – weaknesses analysis
• VCP has a long-term relationship with the KM group of companies. ▪ Having KMC as a possible carrier of the ProVive penetration in the market will be easier since KMC is a well known nationwide distributor of consumer products.
• The Provive has a same attributes as the leading brand. ▪ If the product qualities and attributes were comparable to the leading brand, consumers will don’t care about what they will use because it’s the same.
• The package and the positioning statement were completely accepted by the FGDs.
• VCP has no background in targeting consumer market.
▪ Since VCP was known as a manufacturing company that developing new product for industry use, it doesn’t have a strong impression to the consumer market.
• FGDs have difficulties in equating “herbal” as having “no additives”. ▪ Among the FGD, using herbs were perceived as “not natural”.
• Provive is not yet positioned compared with Eskinol and other leading brands. ▪ Since the product is to be launched, it needs a unique selling proposition.
• There is a perception about natural ingredients not effective. ▪ FGD participants believed that it will not enhance the efficacy of the products.
• The idea of the flip-top cap made the participants worried. ▪ They are concern about flip-top which might accidentally open and spill inside their handbags.
3. Product Life Cycle
Since the Provive is a new product to be launched, it is in the introduction stage of the product life cycle. In this stage, VCP expenditures as well as KMC’s are high because of the need for a high level of promotional effort to inform potential consumers of Provive, induce trial of the product and secure distribution in retail outlets.
4. Target Markets
Please join StudyMode to read the full document