Consumer Protection and Smoothie Brand Innocent
INNOCENT ASSIGNMENT
Question 1
Political: * Trading Standards ensure “consumer safety and that fair trading and quality standards are maintained” (Brassington & Pettitt, 2006, p. 83). * Legislations enforced by Office of Fair Trading (OFT). * Pressure groups e.g. Advertising Standards Agency (ASA). Pepsi complained to ASA about Innocent. * Rulings – Department of Health ruled that smoothies can count as two of the RDA of fruit and vegetables.
Economic: * UK economy situation and trends affect company’s costs e.g. energy costs and cost of ingredients * Taxation - A capital tax gain encouraged investor Maurice Pinto to fund the company. * Inflation affects price of product. * Industry factors - Innocent had to find manufacturers willing to forego the more logistically difficult and expensive process of making their drinks without added ingredients. * Consumer confidence index * Import/export ratios * Market routes and distribution trends * Production level
Socio-cultural: * Business ethics - 10 percent of profits goes to the Innocent Foundation which carries out good causes such as post-tsunami regeneration. Innocent also ensures its fruits are ethically grown in acceptable work conditions for fruit pickers. * Health awareness had risen in the UK through NPO advertisements making consumers more health conscious. Innocent capitalised on this by highlighting key health benefits to their products like their contributions to consumer’s Recommended Daily Amount intake and that they were 100 percent fruit. * Consumer attitudes became significantly more health-conscious. Innocent recognised this and created their unique smoothies made of 100 percent fruit to meet consumer demands. * Consumer buying patterns - Innocent realised consumers would be willing to pay premium prices for their products because they contained nothing but high quality fruit (sourced under regulation by Rainforest
Question 1
Political: * Trading Standards ensure “consumer safety and that fair trading and quality standards are maintained” (Brassington & Pettitt, 2006, p. 83). * Legislations enforced by Office of Fair Trading (OFT). * Pressure groups e.g. Advertising Standards Agency (ASA). Pepsi complained to ASA about Innocent. * Rulings – Department of Health ruled that smoothies can count as two of the RDA of fruit and vegetables.
Economic: * UK economy situation and trends affect company’s costs e.g. energy costs and cost of ingredients * Taxation - A capital tax gain encouraged investor Maurice Pinto to fund the company. * Inflation affects price of product. * Industry factors - Innocent had to find manufacturers willing to forego the more logistically difficult and expensive process of making their drinks without added ingredients. * Consumer confidence index * Import/export ratios * Market routes and distribution trends * Production level
Socio-cultural: * Business ethics - 10 percent of profits goes to the Innocent Foundation which carries out good causes such as post-tsunami regeneration. Innocent also ensures its fruits are ethically grown in acceptable work conditions for fruit pickers. * Health awareness had risen in the UK through NPO advertisements making consumers more health conscious. Innocent capitalised on this by highlighting key health benefits to their products like their contributions to consumer’s Recommended Daily Amount intake and that they were 100 percent fruit. * Consumer attitudes became significantly more health-conscious. Innocent recognised this and created their unique smoothies made of 100 percent fruit to meet consumer demands. * Consumer buying patterns - Innocent realised consumers would be willing to pay premium prices for their products because they contained nothing but high quality fruit (sourced under regulation by Rainforest
References: Brassington, F., & Pettitt, S. (2006). Principles of marketing, 4th edition. Harlow: Prentice Hall. Simmons, J. (2008). Innocent: Building a brand from nothing but fruit. London: Marshall Cavendish Limited. Innocent. (2010) Cheatsheet, http://www.innocentdrinks.co.uk/press/cheatsheet/, accessed on 9th March Phoenix, C. (2009) Richard Reed, Innocent Drinks, http://83.138.128.13/interview/interview-richard-reed-innocent-drinks, accessed on 14th March Beckett, A. (2009) Innocent leads return to form for smoothies, http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/articles.aspx?page=articles&ID=204507, accessed on 16th March Tryhorn, C. and Sweney, M. (2009) Smoothie operators Innocent tread familiar path to lucrative deal, http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/apr/07/innocent-smoothies-coca-cola, accessed on 16th March PepsiCo, UK & Ireland (2010) Tropicana, http://www.pepsico.co.uk/brands/tropicana, accessed on 17th March Food & Drink Innovation Network. (2010) Happy Monkey smoothies buck market trend, http://www.fdin.org.uk/2010/02/happy-monkey-smoothies-buck-market-trend/, accessed on 18th March