Page 3: Developing trading initiatives
In Summer 1999 Bloo did rather better. Sales rose by 27% over the previous year and its share of the sector increased from 23.7% to 25.2%. Some of this growth resulted from the launch of a brand extension, Bloo & Bleach, but was mainly due to lower prices and to sales promotions.
In early 1999, twin packs for both the original Bloo and Citrus Bloo products had been launched. This move accounted for many new sales, but reduced the profit margin. In Summer 1999, a ‘3 for 2’ sales promotion produced a further 15p price reduction. It was the lower prices that accounted for most of Bloo’s increased sales.
Clearly, these kinds of trading initiatives were not in Jeyes’ long term interests. Retailers, rather than the brand, were dictating changing trends in the market and the overall value of Bloo, as well as the product’s margins, were being undermined.
The challenge for Bloo
Early in 2000, qualitative research confirmed what Jeyes already suspected. For many younger consumers in particular, Bloo’s water colouring properties were seen as dated. They did not see it as competing with newer, fragranced products as a deliverer of freshness. Only older, more traditionally-minded housewives were staying loyal to Bloo and the signs were that even this group was being drawn to own-label equivalents. The brand appeared to be failing on two counts:
- it was not fostering loyalty
- it was not connecting with newer potential consumers.
The research also indicated that:
- there was a need to communicate a new sense of life and vigour behind the Bloo brand
- the message needed to be delivered through a variety of means
- the creation of new product lines that were easily identifiable
- appealing, innovative TV advertising that added warmth and interest to the products.
Faced with a range of updated competitive products, the challenge for Bloo was daunting.