1 july- sept ’07 tracking presentation prepared for mla, nov 7 th 2007. by: sam almutair, trina...
TRANSCRIPT
1
July- Sept ’07 tracking presentation
Prepared for MLA, Nov 7th 2007. By: Sam Almutair, Trina Leigh, Huw Williams
2
What we are covering….
• A first read on ‘Lamb is in the air’ − Response to the advertising− Initial results on the brand
• An overview of the 2nd burst of ‘Beef kids’− Do the diagnostics support the potential for a 3rd burst?
• The evolution of Foundation food− How has the 30’ performed?− Where is red meat currently sitting?
• Benchmark measures on WCRF and cancer association
3
What 100 interviews per week in metro cities
When
Who18-64 year olds who are personally responsible either mainly or equally for the household grocery shopping and cooking. Buyers of meat.People who live in the metro areas of Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide or Perth.
This presentation covers data to 30th September 2007
• WCRF measures include data up to 30th October 2007
• CSIRO measures include data up to 4th November 2007
How Online interviewing via a Lightspeed panel
How the data is collected
Click to edit Master title styleLamb
• How is ‘Lamb is in the air’ working?• What impact does the campaign have on Lamb brand measures to
date?• Has limited ATL (pre- September) impacted Lamb?
• How is ‘Lamb is in the air’ working?• What impact does the campaign have on Lamb brand measures to
date?• Has limited ATL (pre- September) impacted Lamb?
5
Tarps - Total vs Mums
MEAT tarp01Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
TARPS
0
250 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
250 616 440 508
Red Meat- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
250 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
250 540 531 533
Beef- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
250 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
TARPS
0
250 357 333 593
Lamb- Mums w kids
The TARPs behind the current Lamb activity exceed previous campaigns- more TARPs delivered against mums
6
In their own words…..very positive
“A refreshing take on advertising what could be a bland subject. I actually thought- for about 15 secs- that it was a new movie coming out and that’s what held my attention. The the joke dawns on you and you are captivated- waiting for the joke you know is coming”
“Very creative and entertaining. Certainly an ad where many catch phrases will be used
everyday!”
“I think it’s great…. Very amusing and well thought out. Though it did take me to the end to work out is was an
ad for lamb and not a new and bizarre movie coming out!”
“A clever way of attracting people’s attention. And it makes me hungry…
great ad”
“It was very clever that they made it like a mini movie… it was very
amusing and I would love to see it more on television… the meat
puns were funny”
7
The ad treads the line of funny/cheesy, with a small minority not realising the joke (believing the ad to be a movie trailer)
“Not much information on lamb but the movie looks okay”
“It’s a silly ad and I don’t know what it has to do
with lamb”“A bit cheesy but entertaining”
“Clever but I though it was an ad for a movie at first. Rosemary Spriggs and Clive Ovens are really cheesy and so are the
lamb jokes. The “Shanks” bit at the end is the worst!”
“I really thought it was a movie trailer for a movie about to come
out”
8
… But the overwhelming response
If you could talk back to the people who made this ad, what would you say about it?
Tone of feedback to ad makers
NET Positive
63%
Mixed response
4%
NET Negative
13%
7% thought it was a movie trailer
Ad was clever/ creative/
interesting/ funny
45%
Other positive feedback
18%
Ad was clever/ amusing but
initially confusing
4%
Missed the connection
between the idea and
lamb
5%
Silly/ lame/ corny
7%
Base: n=150 feedback verbatims from those seen the streamed ad
9
3140
48
6162
8978
1269
26
513 28
10
%
‘Lâmb’*TV%
‘Lamb is in the air’
TV%
MB AustraliaTV
Norms%
Branding:There are some ads that people remember but never know what they are for. Which one of these phrases applies best to this ad?
I would definitely remember the ad was for Lamb
I wouldn’t be sure which meat the ad was for
I wouldn’t even be sure that it was an ad for meat
Base: (n=63) (128 ads)
Mum’s with kids:
Recognition : ‘Lamb is in the air’ 37% (n=54)‘Australia Day’ 15sec 37% (n=43)‘Lâmb’ 50% (n=143)
(n=297)
Recognition:Have you seen this advert on TV?
‘Lamb is in the air’ yet to hit recognition levels of Lâmb, however, the connection to lamb is strong.
Base (n=202) (n=200) (n=500)
(n=241)
‘Australia Day’ (15 sec)
TV%
‘Lâmb’TV%
‘Lamb is in the air’
TV%
‘Australia Day’ (15 sec)
TV%
434 TARPs
339 TARPs
413 TARPs
*aired previously
10
83
52
42
31
36
34
Based on those that recognise ad
Is different to other food ads
It was clever
It was amusing
Is better than other food ads
I enjoyed watching it a lot
It held my attention more than other food ads
It's the sort of ad I would talk about with friends
I am getting fed up with seeing it
It was confusing
As seen via the verbatims ‘Lamb is in the air’ is perceived as clever, amusing and highly enjoyable- albeit not as novel as Australia Day and Lâmb
69
69
66
60
58
53
39
28
23
Thinking about that advert for lamb, please indicate whether you agree or disagree with each of these statements.
Agree -
CAWI StillsNorms
%
Base: (n=63) (128 ads)
‘Lamb is in the air’
TV%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
51
n/a
27
29
n/a
85
61
58
55
21
10
‘Australia Day’
(15 sec) TV%
‘Lamb’ TV%
(n=297) (n=241)
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
11
Distinctive
Interesting
Soothing
Pleasant
Gentle
Weak
Ordinary
Boring
I rritating
Unpleasant
Disturbing
Involving
Involvement diagnosis
The mock-trailer style of the ad contributes to its distinctiveness and while not to the extent of Australia Day it is a very involving execution
Based on seen ad (Total): ‘Lamb is in the air’ (n=63), ‘Lamb’ (n=241), ‘Australia Day’ (15 sec) (n=297), MB CAWI Norm (n=128 ads)
*Caution: Low base
‘Lamb is in the air’
‘Lâmb’
‘Australia Day’ (15 sec)
MB CAWI Norm
Interesting 48 54 39
Distinctive 66 72 49
Involving 52 71 28
Mean: 6.55 7.706.09
‘Lâmb’TV%
‘Lamb is in the air’
TV%
‘Australia Day’ (15 sec)
TV%
12
… it is delivering clear communication around lamb’s delicious taste, popularity and ability to bring people together, well above Lâmb on deliciousness
How strongly do you think the advertising gave you these impressions?
‘Lamb is in the air’ TV
%
Strongly suggests
Strongly/Slightly suggests
Based on those that recognise ad
Base: (n=63)
91
90
89
87
87
87
86
73
65
67
65
64
64
50
Is delicious to eat
Brings people together
Is popular
Is tender
Is for special moments
Is perfect for spring
Is loved by everyone
Lâmb:
‘Is delicious to eat’ 48% (n=241)
13
54
40
31
15
13
57
40
38
33
26
41
19
21
15
14
It made lamb seem more appealing
The points made in the ad were relevant to me
It made me more likely to eat lamb
It made me think differently about lamb
It contained new information about lamb
…and this communication is contributing to good levels of brand appeal (a weakness of the Lâmb execution, which was polarising)
Thinking about that advert for lamb, please indicate whether you agree or disagree with each of these statements.
Agree -CAWI Stills
Norms%
Base: (n=63) (128 ads)
‘Lamb is in the air’
TV%
Based on those that recognise ad
51
37
35
30
38
‘Australia Day’ (15 sec)
TV%
‘Lâmb’ TV%
(n=297) (n=241)
14
0
20
40
60
80
100
3645
63
2532
Communication Awareness -LambBased on Total Sample Rolling 4 weekly data
MEAT ex0271Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
40% On television
44% Total Communication Aw
TARPS
0
500 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
500 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
500 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
In line with the strong ad response a notable uplift in communication awareness with ‘Lamb is in the air’ – we will see the full impact with October data
Steady decay in communication awareness in the absence of ATL
activity
15
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Ad Awareness
GRPs
5
60
40
20
0250
0
Camp aign A2000 G RPs
Ca mp aign B2000 G RPs
Cam paign C1500 GRPs
Different ad campaigns produce different levels of Ad Awareness….
….but they are supported by varying levels, and patterns, of Media Spend.
Introducing the Awareness Index… what we are trying to understand
16
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Ad Awareness
GRPs
5
60
40
20
0250
0
Camp aign A2000 G RPs
Ca mp aign B2000 G RPs
Cam paign C1500 GRPs
Modelling Ad Awareness is all about how we relate this….
The aim is to disentangle quality from quantity to see how well each campaign has leveraged the media spend.
….to this.
..so we can understand the efficiency of your creative in cutting through
17
= Branded EngagementBranding
Enjoyment +/or
Involvement Creative Stopping Power =
+
What creates ads with high AIs and ensures you cut through the clutter?
3 key elements help you break through the advertising noise
18
Lamb - tvr
Red Meat in general - tvr
Beef - tvr
0 9 018
0 90 9 018
0 9413 339 434
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
11616 681 416
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
0 3 1 00 3 1 0577 560 427
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
%
0
20
40
60
80
%
0
20
40
60
80
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J an Feb Mar Apr May J un J ul Aug Sep2006 2007
BaseModelLamb
AI reported per 100 TARPS
AI reported per 100 TARPS
AI reported per 100 TARPS
The initial read on ‘Lamb is in the air’, suggests an AI in the region of 9 – cutting through efficiently
19
Lamb is also being supported by the recent ‘You’ll love Coles- Lamb’ activity appears to work as a complement to ‘Lamb is in the air’ with high recognition and attribution to lamb
Yes46%
No54%
Base (n=101)
Branding:There are some ads that people remember but never know what they are for. Which one of these phrases applies best to this ad?
I would definitely remember the ad was for Coles
I wouldn’t be sure which supermarket the ad was for
I wouldn’t even be sure that it was an ad for a supermarket
6148
35
18
28
9
%
‘You’ll Love Coles
(Lamb)’%
Base: (n=46) (128 ads)
MB Australia TV
Norms%
Recognition:Have you seen this advert on TV?
*Caution: Low base
44
35
15
6
Coles and Lamb
Base: (n=46)
%
Lamb but not remember if was also for Coles
Coles but not remember it was for Lamb
Would not remember it was for Coles or Lamb
79% brand the ad to lamb
20
10 10
4549
77
197
32
1638
17
%
‘Lâmb’Print
%
‘Lamb is in the air’Print
%
Branding:There are some ads that people remember but never know what they are for. Which one of these phrases applies best to this ad?
I would definitely remember the ad was for Lamb
I wouldn’t be sure which meat the ad was for
I wouldn’t even be sure that it was an ad for meat
Base: (n=131) (57 ads)
Mum’s with kids:
Recognition : ‘Lamb is in the air’ 11% (n=36)‘Lâmb’ 9% (n=143)
Recognition:Have you seen this advert on Print?
Recognition of the print and POS copy is equal to Lâmb- however, branding is far superior
Base: (n=131) (n=500)
(n=500)
‘Lâmb’Print
%
‘Lamb is in the air’Print
%
MB Print Norms
%
21
‘Lamb is in the air’ print is highly intriguing, original and stylish- not limited by some confusion and irritation with ‘Lâmb’. Appeal and relevance of this print also superior to ‘Lâmb’.
Intriguing
Original
Stylish
34
66
50
Straightforward
Informative
Direct
46
14
30
Confusing
Irritating
Unattractive
13
5
8
Dull
Ordinary
Plain
8
15
12
Which one of these words do you think applies most to the advert?
Base:
21
27
31
46
25
30
11
10
12
22
38
27
(n=500)(n=131)
Based on those that recognise ad
MB Print Norms
%
‘Lamb is in the air’
%
‘Lâmb’%
38
50
57
22
7
12
28
18
14
11
25
17
(57 ads)
Eye-catching 7260
Clever 6745
Appeal 3837
Relevance 3320
LIITA Lâmb
22
What has been the brand response to ‘Lamb is in the air’?
23
0
20
40
60
80
100
13
37
55
85
43
5257
7
83
30
90
14
42
83
74
43
Bought in last 7 daysBased on Total Sample Rolling 4 weekly data
MEAT ex0217Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
11% Veal
36% Pork
50% Lamb48% Fish
87% Chicken80% Beef
TARPS
0
500 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
500 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
500 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
Signs of an uplift in recent Lamb purchase in line with TV activity
24
0
20
40
60
80
100
6
28
55
37
4
1025
60
Disposition - LambBased on Total Sample Rolling 4 weekly data
MEAT ex0235Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
8% Very/Somewhat negative
30% Somewhat positive
54% Very positive
TARPS
0
500 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
500 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
500 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
Although yet to see an impact on positive disposition
25
And some (directional) improvement in endorsement of lamb’s irresistable aroma, ease of cooking/preparation and kid’s appeal
62
48
24
4
4
3
On airSept ‘07
%
Diff. toJune-July ‘07
%
Easy to cook and prepare
Has an irresistible aroma
It's a children's favourite
Based on total sample
(n=402)(n=897)
Function of Coles work?
26
Loved by Australians
It's expensive
Encourages sharing and togetherness
Has an irresistible aroma
It's normally juicy and tender
I trust the safety of this meat
Makes an everyday meal occasion special
Is consistently high quality
I'm proud to buy and serve this
I'm willing to pay a bit more for it
It's delicious to eat
Is well liked in our household
It's a children's favourite
Easy to cook and prepare
Contains a range of vitamins and minerals
Are good for a variety of dishes
Makes healthy meals
Is an essential part of a healthy diet
Good in a weight loss diet
18
11
11
13
12
10
5
3
2
2
1
-4
-3
-6
-9
-10
-14
-17
-21
18
12
12
11
10
9
4
3
2
1
0
-4
-4
-6
-7
-9
-12
-15
-20
In the long term, lamb’s imagery perceptions remain stable- however, personality is less old fashioned and slight build in local hero
28
14
4
9
6
-5
-1
-1
-1
-1
-5
-8
-7
-5
Proud Australian
Old fashioned
Local hero
Friendly
Honest
A real bloke
Larrikin
Easy going
Fun
Trend setter
Boring
Larger than life
Confident
Brave
Image profile: Personality profile:
July- Sept ‘06
July- Sept ‘07
26
8
7
6
3
-1
-1
-2
-2
-3
-5
-5
-5
-5
July- Aug ‘07
Sept ‘06
Based on total sample: (n=1200) (n=1299) (n=300) (n=601)
27Based on mums with kids aged 5-17 yrs old
Lamb targets amongst
mums with kids
Q1 July-
Sept ’06
Top of mind awareness 20% 23% 21% 16% 18%
Very positive disposition 56% 53% 51% 52% 57%
Proud to buy (disposition indicators)
I'm proud to buy and serve this 62% 62% 60% 59% 65%
Is well liked in our household 61% 64% 58% 60% 64%
I trust the safety of this meat 58% 59% 58% 58% 60%
Enjoyed and loved (disposition indicators)
It's normally juicy & tender 61% 62% 57% 64% 59%
Is loved by Australians 76% 76% 75% 78% 74%
It's delicious to eat 73% 73% 67% 74% 73%
Mean serves 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.96
Q2 Oct-
Dec ’06
Q3 Jan-
March ’07
Q4 April-
June ’07
Q5 July-
Sept ‘07
Lamb KPI performance: quarter-on-quarter
28
Lamb summary
• Although still early days, the recent ‘Lamb is in the air’ activity is working well− Cut-through measures of branding, involvement and enjoyment are
high (on par with Australia Day and a marked improvement on Lâmb)− Initial indications suggest an efficient execution with a strong AI − The creative idea is well-received (clever and amusing), communicates
on strategy and does a reasonable job of building appeal> Also translates well in print/POS copy
− Brand response to the activity will become more apparent next month
• While difficult to isolate without specific TARP information there is an impact on Lamb from the Coles activity
• In the long term, despite a sustained period off air this year’s activity has maintained lamb’s imagery perceptions− Lamb’s imagery profile remains the same year-on-year, however lamb
has become less old-fashioned
29
Next steps lamb
• Executionally a strong performer, potential to elongate spend through next burst given power of the creative to cut through − Confirm with next month of data when AI becomes clearer
• Coles work is impacting on Lamb as seen by our diagnostics − What potential exists to integrate media lay down? − Increase in kids favourite for lamb is interesting in the context of beef
30
How we can use the AI- A case study
31
What ‘styles’ of ad are there in the lager market ?
Character
Story
Lads
Mood/Style
Event related
Not necessarilyindependent groups
32
Humour
No humourSubtle
humourFunny Silly
33
34
35
Click to edit Master title styleBeef
• Has Beef Kids (Winter Meals) been as successful as the Summer Meals version?
• How has media spend impacted the ad’s performance?• Can the campaign be stretched- re-aired in February?
• Other factors influencing Beef’s performance?
• Has Beef Kids (Winter Meals) been as successful as the Summer Meals version?
• How has media spend impacted the ad’s performance?• Can the campaign be stretched- re-aired in February?
• Other factors influencing Beef’s performance?
37
Tarps - Total vs Mums
MEAT tarp01Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
TARPS
0
250 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
250 616 440 508
Red Meat- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
250 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
250 540 531 533
Beef- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
250 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
TARPS
0
250 357 333 593
Lamb- Mums w kids
Total TARPs behind the second burst of Beef Kids lower than March/April ‘07- however, TARPs against mums have been similar
38
0
20
40
60
80
100
3643 45
51
2328
Communication Awareness -BeefBased on Total Sample Rolling 4 weekly data
MEAT ex0270Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
23% On television
28% Total Communication Aw
TARPS
0
500 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
500 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
500 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
Some uplift in advertising awareness in line with Beef Kids (Winter)- however not reaching the peak achieved in the first burst
39
Beef - tvr
Red Meat in general - tvr
Lamb - tvr
22 21 20
16
22 21 20
16
%
0
20
40
60
%
0
20
40
60
0 2 0 2 00 2 0 2 0413 339 434
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
4 0 4 0 2 04 0 4 0 2 0616 681 416
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
0 3 0 6 0 6 00 3 0 6 0 6 0577 560 427
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J an Feb Mar Apr May J un J ul Aug Sep2006 2007
BaseModelBeef
AI reported per 100 TARPS
AI reported per 100 TARPS
AI reported per 100 TARPS
..However the model suggests equal efficiency of cut through – an AI of 6 in line with the first burst
40
0
20
40
60
80
100
25
38
4740
53
16
Communication Awareness -BeefBased on Mums with kids aged 5-17 yrs
Rolling 4 weekly data
MEAT ex0370Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
17% Supermarkets17% On television
23% Total Communication Aw
TARPS
0
500 616 440 508
Red Meat- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 540 531 533
Beef- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 357 333 593
Lamb- Mums w kids
…but amongst mums there was an uplift from June, outside any specific MLA activity - any thoughts?
Note the strong supermarket presence
in June-Aug
41
3949
Branding:There are some ads that people remember but never know what they are for. Which one of these phrases applies best to this ad?
I would definitely remember the ad was for Beef
I wouldn’t be sure which meat the ad was for
I wouldn’t even be sure that it was an ad for meat
615650
2629
1820
28
10
%
Beef Kids Winter
%
Base: (n=235) (128 ads)
CAWI (Stills)Norms
%
Mum’s with kids:Recognition
Summer: 42% (n=156)Winter: 59% (n=101)
(n=195)
Mum’s with kids:Top box branding
Summer 43% (n=65)Winter 66% (n=59)
Recognition:Have you seen this advert on TV?
Recognition and branding of Beef Kids improved since first aired, particularly amongst Mums (a likely combination of executional tweaks and the association with kids building with a 2nd burst)
Beef Kids Summer
%
Base (n=601) (n=401)
Beef Kids Winter
%
Beef Kids Summer
%
Difference significant at 95% confidence level
427 TARPs
560 TARPs
42
Is different to other food ads
I'm getting fed up with seeing it
62
58
72
31
17
73
64
62
37
28
Agree -
Base: (n=195) (128 ads)
Beef Kids Winter
%
Based on those that recognise ad
It's the sort of ad I would talk about with friends
Diff from Beef Kids Summer
%
Beef Kids Winter(Mums)
%
Diff from Beef Kids
Sumer(Mums)
%
(n=59)
Enjoyment has increased with the 2nd burst, particularly to mums – sign of wear in of campaign
+5
+6
+5
+4
+7
-6
-1
+16
-2
-4
Is better than other food ads
I enjoyed watching it a lot
-
-
-
24
22
CAWI (Stills)Norms
%
Thinking about that advert for beef, please indicate whether you agree or disagree with each of these statements.
43
Beef Kids Winter
%
Interesting
Distinctive
Involving
31
56
52
28
67
56
-3
+15
+7
Pleasant
Soothing
Gentle
53
14
35
64
12
37
+11
0
0
Irritating
Unpleasant
Disturbing
10
4
2
2
2
2
-5
-1
+1
Boring
Ordinary
Weak
6
26
11
5
19
5
-4
-15
-9
Which one of these words do you think applies most to the advert?
Base:
37
46
42
33
10
28
16
6
7
13
37
21
4.96
(128 ads)(n=195)
Based on those that recognise ad
Mean score: 5.12 5.27
Active +
Passive +
Active -
Passive -
Diff. from Beef Kids summer
(Mums)%
Beef Kids Winter(Mums)
%
(n=59)
… and is seen as more distinctive and involving amongst the Mums target
CAWI (stills) Norms
%
44
91
78
76
75
67
51
72
47
How strongly do you think the advertising gave you these impressions?
Base: (n=59)
Beef Kids Winter
%
Strongly suggests:
Based on those that recognise ad
Diff. fromBeef Kids Summer
%
Beef is loved by kids
Beef is a perfect meal for kids
Beef makes healthy meals for kids
Beef is a valuable source of iron that kids need
Beef gives kids energy
Beef is loved by Australians
Shepherds Pie is loved by kids
Mums Roast Beef is loved by kids
The ad continues to communicate beef’s appeal and health qualities- fewer believe kids ‘love’ the winter meal options
+9
0
+4
+5
+5
+6
Meatballs are loved by kids 77%
Spaghetti Bolognese is loved by kids 75%
Mums with kids aged 5-17yrs
(n=65)
45
74
55
67
35 +12
+16
+12
+6
+10
It made me more likely to eat beef
72
51
49
33
How strongly do you think the advertising gave you these impressions?
Agree -CAWI Stills
Norms%
Base: (n=195) (128 ads)
Beef Kids Winter
%
Based on those that recognise ad
49
51
37
35
…and response is improved in the winter version
The points made in the ad were believable
Diff. from Beef Kids Summer
%
Beef Kids Winter (Mums)
%
Diff. from Beef Kids Summer(Mums)
%
(n=59)
The points made in the ad were relevant to me
It made beef seem more appealing +3
+8
+6
(n=235) (n=65)
Hypothesis: The summer meal featured in the ad are already part of Mum’s regular repertoire and she knows her kids love them but the winter meals provide new meal options
46
What has been the brand response to ‘Beef Kids (Winter)’?
•Has this improved on the response to Beef Kids (Summer)?
47
0
20
40
60
80
100
72
23
75
68
19
28
Imagery - Its a childrens favouriteBased on Total sample Rolling 8 weekly data
MEAT ex1059Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
74% Chicken
26% Beef
TARPS
0
500 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
500 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
500 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
…no further build in a childrens favourite, but initial rise has been sustained
48
0
20
40
60
80
100
88
7466
91
8284
Imagery - Is well liked in our householdBased on Mums with kids aged 5-17 yrs old
Rolling 8 weekly data
MEAT ex1038Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
86% Chicken
74% Beef
TARPS
0
500 616 440 508
Red Meat- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 540 531 533
Beef- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 357 333 593
Lamb- Mums w kids
However, ‘Well liked in the HH’ has continued to build from Feb ’07, reaching it’s peak as Beef Kids (Winter) is aired
49
0
20
40
60
80
100
91
7473
93
8784
Imagery - Are good for a variety of dishesBased on Mums with kids aged 5-17 yrs old
Rolling 8 weekly data
MEAT ex1043Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
89% Chicken
76% Beef
TARPS
0
500 616 440 508
Red Meat- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 540 531 533
Beef- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 357 333 593
Lamb- Mums w kids
..And Beef Kids (Winter) working harder to close the gap between chicken and beef in perceived versatility
50
0
1
2
3
2
2.0
2
Mean score Serves per week- BeefBased on Mums with kids aged 5-17 yrs
Rolling 8 weekly data
MEAT ex0324Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
2 Beef
TARPS
0
500 616 440 508
Red Meat- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 540 531 533
Beef- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 357 333 593
Lamb- Mums w kids
Long term build in mean serves amongst Mums target observed up to 2nd burst
51
9
10
9
5
2
4
1
1
5
1
1
2
1
-1
-1
-10
-9
-8
-20
11
10
9
6
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
0
0
-1
-1
-6
-9
-9
-20
The long term impact of Beef activity has been to reduce beef’s perceived blokeyness and lessen the gap (versus chicken) on kid’s appeal
53
22
21
13
13
14
-7
-7
-9
-9
-15
-19
-18
-21
Image profile: Personality profile:
Is loved by Australians
I trust the safety of this meat
It's normally juicy and tender
Are good for a variety of dishes
Encourages sharing and togetherness
Is well liked in our household
Is an essential part of a healthy diet
Has an irresistible aroma
It's expensive
Is consistently high quality
I'm willing to pay a bit more for it
Contains a range of vitamins and minerals
I'm proud to buy and serve this
It's delicious to eat
Easy to cook and prepare
It's a children's favourite
Makes healthy meals
Makes an everyday meal occasion special
Good in a weight loss diet
A real bloke
Brave
Larger than life
Proud Australian
Confident
Local hero
Old fashioned
Honest
Larrikin
Boring
Trend setter
Easy going
Friendly
Fun
48
19
18
10
8
6
-3
-3
-6
-9
-13
-16
-17
-18
Based on total sample: (n=1200) (n=1299) (n=300) (n=601)
July- Sept ‘06
July- Sept ‘07
July- Aug ‘07
Sept ‘06
52
11
2
3
2
9
10
-9
2
0
1
-1
3
-6
-1
0
6
-9
2
-20
18
12
12
11
10
9
4
3
2
1
0
-4
-4
-6
-7
-9
-12
-15
-20
Loved by Australians
It's expensive
Encourages sharing and togetherness
Has an irresistible aroma
It's normally juicy and tender
I trust the safety of this meat
Makes an everyday meal occasion special
Is consistently high quality
I'm proud to buy and serve this
I'm willing to pay a bit more for it
It's delicious to eat
Is well liked in our household
It's a children's favourite
Easy to cook and prepare
Contains a range of vitamins and minerals
Are good for a variety of dishes
Makes healthy meals
Is an essential part of a healthy diet
Good in a weight loss diet
Lamb and beef comparison
Proud Australian
Old fashioned
Local hero
Friendly
Honest
A real bloke
Larrikin
Easy going
Fun
Trend setter
Boring
Larger than life
Confident
Brave
Image profile: Personality profile:Beef
26
8
7
6
3
-1
-1
-2
-2
-3
-5
-5
-5
-5
Based on total sample. Imagery July-Sept ’07 (n=1299). Personality July-Aug ’07 (n=601)
Lamb
10
-3
6
-17
-3
48
-6
-16
-18
-13
-9
18
8
19
BeefLamb
53
Beef summary
• Recognition of beef Kids and branding has improved with the winter version of the ad
• Indication that recognition and branding have been enhanced by the executional tweaks while the campaign has also had increased exposure
• The campaign has gained momentum in communicating beef’s appeal and health attributes and response to the winter version of the ad is overall stronger
• The brand response is more limited, children’s favourite has maintained earlier increase although, ‘well-liked in the HH’ and perceived versatility of beef has built
54
Next steps Beef
• Response to the execution is positive and no areas to address
• Evidence supports the possibility of a 3rd burst dependent on where you are in creative development
55
Evaluation of Foundation Foods campaign 2007:• How has the latest burst of Foundation Foods performed?
• Is the 30 working as hard as the 60”?• How has the second burst of Library fared?
Evaluation of Foundation Foods campaign 2007:• How has the latest burst of Foundation Foods performed?
• Is the 30 working as hard as the 60”?• How has the second burst of Library fared?
Red Meat
Brand response to the campaign:•Impact on the KPIs- in the short and long term
56
Tarps - Total vs Mums
MEAT tarp01Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
TARPS
0
250 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
250 616 440 508
Red Meat- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
250 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
250 540 531 533
Beef- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
250 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
TARPS
0
250 357 333 593
Lamb- Mums w kids
Although overall TARP spend lower than previous bursts of Foundation Foods, the current burst did achieve more tarps against mums with kids
57
3846
605347
Evolution 60”July/Aug ‘06
%
Evolution 60”Feb/March ‘07
%
LibraryJuly/Aug ‘06
%
Recognition
Yes %
(1100) (898) (298) (298)Base:
Evolution 60” & 30”Aug ‘07
%
LibraryAug/Sept ‘07
%
(1100)
Recognition of Evolution and Library consistent across the bursts
58
Definitely remember ad was for Red Meat
Wouldn’t be sure which meat ad was for
Wouldn’t even be sure it was an ad for meat
6178
678176
1621131728
6612
79
%
60” & 30”Aug ‘07
%
Based on seen ad: ‘Evolution’ July/Aug ’06 (n=322); Aug ‘07 (n=158) , ‘Library’ July/Aug ‘06 (n=375); Aug/Sept ‘07 (n=153)
MB CAWI Norm
%
Evolution
60” July/Aug ‘06
%
Library
Aug/Sept ‘07%
July/Aug ‘06%
Branding for the cut-down of Evolution remains strong. Library builds on its attribution to red meat when re-aired.
59
Base: (n=158) (n=46) (n=xx)
Which one of these words do you think applies most to the advert?
Based on those that recognise ad. Time Period:27/8-30/9/07
Active +
Passive +
Active -
Passive -
Seen Evolution Seen Library
MB Australia Online Norms
%
Interesting 49 43 37
Distinctive 68 69 46
Involving 62 64 42
Pleasant 35 35 33
Soothing 4 3 10
Gentle 21 17 28
Irritating 7 11 16
Unpleasant 3 2 6
Disturbing 7 6 7
Boring 9 12 13
Ordinary 24 26 37
Weak 10 13 21
Mean score: 6.54 6.54 5.00
Base: (n=158) (n=153) (128 ads)
Mums with kids
Mean involvement score (Aug/Sept ’07) :
Evolution 6.55 (n=35)
Library 6.43 (n=39)
Evolution remains highly actively engaging. Library involvement is consistent with the first burst.
Difference significant at 95% CL against norms
60
Is different to other food ads
Is better than other food ads
I enjoyed watching it a lot
The sort of ad I’d talk about with friends
I am getting fed up with seeing it
70
52
40
24
27
Thinking about the advert for Red Meat, please indicate if you agree or disagree with each of these statements…
Agree -Evolution
July/Aug ‘06%
Base: (n=322)
Based on those that recognise ad.
68
55
51
30
23
EvolutionFeb/March ‘07
%
(n=96)
77
64
51
24
20
EvolutionAug ‘07
%
(n=158)
Difference from
Feb/March to Aug ‘07
Still no problems with wear out of Evolution
+9
+9
0
-6
-3
61Based on those that recognise ad.
How strongly do you think the advertising (Evolution) gave you these impressions?
Strongly suggests:
Base:
Evolution 60”July/Aug ‘06
%
Evolution 60” & 30”Aug ‘07
%
(n=322) (n=158)
74
74
75
76
69
72
61
64
Is essential for a healthy diet
Is meant to be eaten 3-4 times a week
Is essential for a healthy mind
Is a rich natural source of nutrients
Should be included in the diets of more families
Is natural to eat
Is more important for health than we thought
Played a key role in evolution
78
78
76
76
76
74
70
67
And communication remains consistent
Difference from ‘06 vs ‘07
+4
+4
+1
0
+7
+2
+9
+3
62
65
48
44
19
29
Thinking about the advert for Red Meat, please indicate if you agree or disagree with each of these statements…
Based on those that recognise ad.
Agree -Library
July/Aug ‘06%
Base: (n=375)
Difference from ‘06 vs ‘07
LibraryAug ‘07
%
(n=153)
Is different to other food ads
Is better than other food ads
I enjoyed watching it a lot
The sort of ad I’d talk about with friends
I'm getting fed up with seeing it
79
64
56
31
21
Library claimed to be more enjoyable and differentiating in the second burst
+14
+16
+12
+12
-8
Difference significant at 95% CL between time periods
63
73
57
55
46
37
26
Thinking about the advert for Red Meat, please indicate if you agree or disagree with each of these statements…
Based on those that recognise ad.
Agree -Library
July/Aug ‘06%
Base: (n=375)
Difference from ‘06 vs ‘07
LibraryAug ‘07
%
(n=153)
The points made in the ad were believable
The points made were relevant to me
It made red meat seem more appealing
It contained new information about red meat
It made me more likely to eat red meat
It made me think differently about red meat
79
64
61
52
44
41
And response to the ad also shows improvement year-on-year
+6
+7
+6
+6
+7
+15
Difference significant at 95% CL between time periods
64Based on those that recognise ad.
How strongly do you think the advertising (Library) gave you these impressions?
Strongly suggests:
Base:
Library July Aug ‘07
%
Library Aug ‘07
%
(n=375) (n=153)
75
70
80
76
71
71
64
63
Is essential for a healthy diet
Is meant to be eaten 3-4 times a week
Is essential for a healthy mind
Is a rich natural source of nutrients
Should be included in the diets of more families
Is natural to eat
Is more important for health than we thought
Played a key role in evolution
79
84
80
76
72
73
70
71
Communication take out remains strong- the 3-4 times per week message and red meat’s importance to health appear to resonate more strongly as the Foundation Foods campaign develops
Difference significant at 95% CL between time periods
Difference from ‘06 vs ‘07
+4
+14
0
0
+1
+2
+6
+8
65
Red Meat in general - tvr
Beef - tvr
Lamb - tvr
7 0 7 0 7 0 77 0 7 0 7 0 7616 681 416
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
22577 560 427
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
1 2 11 2 1413 339 434
TA
RP
S
0
250 AI
0
50
%
0
20
40
60
80
%
0
20
40
60
80
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J an Feb Mar Apr May J un J ul Aug Sep2006 2007
BaseModelRed Meat in general
AI reported per 100 TARPS
AI reported per 100 TARPS
AI reported per 100 TARPS
The AI is consistent with the February burst ( an AI of 7)
66
How successful has the Foundation Foods campaign been to date?
1) How has the latest burst (60” and 30”) impacted Red Meat KPIs?
2) What is the long term campaign impact upon:• Red Meat KPIs- amongst total market and
Mums• Red Meat segments- particularly the intended
Resistor target
67
The latest burst of Foundation Foods had a clear positive impact on Red Meat KPIs
48
43
40
39
29
24
14
11
7
Essential part of a healthy diet
Essential for vitality and wellbeing
Meant to eat red meat 3-4 times per week
Essential for a healthy mind
The richest natural source of nutrients
More important for my health than I believed
Good in a weight loss diet
Could cause cholesterol or heart problems
Could cause weight problems
5
6
9
8
5
2
1
2
1
How strongly do you agree/disagree with the following statements about red meat?
On air(Aug-Sept ’07)
%
Strongly agree: Diff from June-July ‘07
%
Based on total sample
(n=898) (n=903)
Difference significant at 95% confidence level
68
68
62
58
57
40
35
20
9
8
8
5
12
11
5
6
0
2
4
43
33
32
33
24
19
11
10
5
8
8
11
12
8
2
3
2
-2
Working particularly hard to appreciators and acceptors
How strongly do you agree/disagree with the following statements about red meat?
Essential part of a healthy diet
Essential for vitality and wellbeing
Essential for a healthy mind
Meant to eat it 3-4 times per week
Richest natural source of nutrients
More important for health than I believed
Good in a weight loss diet
Could cause cholesterol/heart problems
Could cause weight problems
On air%
Diff from pre %
On air%
Diff from pre%
Appreciators Acceptors
On air time period: Aug-Sept ’07. Pre-period: June-July ’07Based on: Appreciators On air (n= 394), Pre (n=425); Acceptors On air (n= 320), Pre (n=298); Resistors On air (n= 135), Pre (n=132).
Strongly agree:
69
0
20
40
60
80
100
25
37
50
21
30
43
25
Impact on key Red Meat KPIsBased on Total Sample Rolling 12 weekly data
MEAT ex0804Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
24% More imp for health
37% Meant to eat 3-4 pw
46% Essential in diet
TARPS
0
500 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
500 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
500 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
In the long term foundation food has built key KPIs through 2007 after decaying from a peak seen after the initial launch and heavy weight support
70
0
20
40
60
80
100
47
41
65
36
56
35
71
45
Impact on key Red Meat KPIs- Resistors [Agree]Based on Total Sample Rolling 12 weekly data
MEAT ex0805Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
40% More imp for health
44% Meant to eat 3-4 pw
68% Essential in diet
TARPS
0
500 616 681 416
Red Meat- TotalTARPS
0
500 577 560 427
Beef- TotalTARPS
0
500 413 339 434
Lamb- Total
Resistors have seen a more exaggerated long term growth in ‘Essential for a healthy diet’
71
0
20
40
60
4
17
36
44
3
19
40
37
8
33
49
12
Attitudes to meats - Red meatBased on Mums with kids aged 5-17 yrs
Rolling 16 weekly data
MEAT ex0313Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
3% Rejectors
12% Resistors
39% Acceptors
46% Appreciators
TARPS
0
500 616 440 508
Red Meat- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 540 531 533
Beef- Mums w kidsTARPS
0
500 357 333 593
Lamb- Mums w kids
..amongst mums we have seen the strongest build in appreciators and decay in resistors through the campaign- the combined resitor/rejector group 15%
72
Red Meat KPI performance: quarter-on-quarter
Foundation Food KPI’samongst mum’s with kids
Based on mums with kids aged 5-17 yrs old
Q1 July-
Sept ’06
Awareness of Red Meat communication
63% 56% 51% 47% 46%
Red Meat serves per week (mean)
3.32 3.35 3.23 3.37 3.42
Lamb mean serves 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.96
Beef mean serves 2.18 2.19 2.04 2.27 2.23
Red Meat Essential part of a healthy diet*
57% 50% 45% 49% 48%
We are meant to eat Red Meat 3-4 times per week*
41% 35% 39% 39% 41%
Essential for a healthy mind*
41% 32% 34% 38% 38%
The richest source of nutrients*
33% 26% 26% 25% 26%
A diet including Red Meat is more important for my health than I previously thought
27% 25% 26% 22% 22%
Total Resistors and Rejectors 20% 22% 26% 20% 14%
Q2 Oct-
Dec ’06
Q3 Jan-
March ’07
Q4 April-
June ’07
Q5 July-
Sept ‘07
73
Red Meat summary
• As predicted, no loss in effectiveness of Evolution with the 60”/30” rotation − Cut-through measures of branding, involvement and enjoyment remain
consistent with previous bursts− Communication take out remains strong
• Response to library remains positive when re-aired− Branding and enjoyment have built in the latter burst and response to
the ad is stronger overall − Enhanced take out of the key Foundation Foods messages- ‘meant to
be eaten 3-4 times per week’ and ‘more important for health than previously thought’ reflects the cumulative impact of the campaign
• The latest burst has had a positive impact on appreciators and acceptors, while in the longer term we are seeing a fall in the number of resistors− However, becomes gradually harder to impact the core of resistors left
74
Next steps red meat
• Response to both Evolution and library remains positive, executionally both can continue to work hard for red meat
• With the falling number of resistors it becomes harder to influence them − However, clear role for ‘Chicken’
• 82% of red meat resistors are appreciators or acceptors of chicken
• Ideally Evolution should set up Chicken, however if funds are limited more important to give Chicken sufficient tarp weight, given how established the campaign is
75
WCRF pre-measures
Benchmarking the impact of the WCRF report
76
World Cancer Research Fund ScorecardRed Meat Segments
%
45
34
15
6
Appreciator
s
Acceptors
Resistors
Rejecters
Serves in past week%
3.8 serves
3.32 serves
2.66 serves
1.38 serves
Heard news stories about Red Meat%
10
60
7
31
Yes
Mainly positive
Mainly negative
Neutral
(n=135)(n=1299)
83
77
67
57
46
36
36
23
Agree with statements about red meat
%
Strongly suggests
Strongly/Slightly suggests
Essential part of a healthy diet
Essential for vitality and well being
Meant to eat 3-4 times per week
More important for my health than
previously believed
Healthy Target 2 serves or less 37%3-4 serves 58%5 or more serves 5%(n=1299)
Awareness of WCRF 58% (n=409)
Agree that diet high in red meat linked to cancer35% (n= 599)
Type of Cancer%
52
20
12
6
15
Bowel
Colon
Stomach
All
Don’t know(n=97)
(n=1299)
77
28 30 29 29 28 28 25 25
40 35 33 33 3018 10
2940 374 4
7 7 8
9 16
45 5 5 5
812
44
27 27252220
63
%Base: (n=599)
Strongly agree
Slightly agree
Neutral
Slightly disagree
Strongly disagree
Being very overweight
%Being obese
%
Consuming too much
sugar %
Drinking too much alcohol
%
Not enough exercise
%
Not eating enough fruit
and/or vegetables
%
Not eating enough fibre
%
A diet high in red meat
%
Before the release of the WCRF report, a diet high in red meat had a much association with a greater risk of cancer than other health factors
78
Think so27%
Not aware25%
Definitely48%
28 36 42 42 41 39 41
56 54 5244 48 44
11 151 11 1 1
66
6 15576
%
Base: (n=200)
Definitely agree
Sort of agree
Not really agree
Definitely disagree
Comes from a reputable
organisation %
.. And the meat-rich ‘CSIRO Well Being Diet’ is widely recognised and currently seen as reputable and nutritionally-sound eating plan
Is based on good
nutrition %
Is an eating plan for overall
wellbeing %
Is a healthy way of eating
%
Has scientific credibility
%
Is a long term lifestyle pattern
%
Is an eating plan I can
trust%
Another HH Self member
% %
Currently using diet 4 4
Have used the diet in 11 9the past
Based on those heard of the diet (n=151)
Based on those heard of the diet (n=151)
79
Summary of next steps
Lamb
• Executionally a strong performer, potential to elongate spend through next burst given power of the creative to cut through − Confirm with next month of data when AI becomes clearer
• Coles work is impacting on Lamb as seen by our diagnostics − What potential exists to integrate media lay down? − Increase in kids favourite for lamb is interesting in the context of beef
Beef
• Response to the execution is positive and no areas to address
• Evidence supports the possibility of a 3rd burst dependent on where you are in creative development
80
Summary of next steps
Red Meat
• Response to both Evolution and library remains positive, executionally both can continue to work hard for red meat
• With the falling number of resistors it becomes harder to influence them − However, clear role for ‘Chicken’
• 82% of red meat resistors are appreciators or acceptors of chicken
• Ideally Evolution should set up Chicken, however if funds are limited more important to give Chicken sufficient tarp weight, given how established the campaign is
81
Ensuring tracking meets your needs over the upcoming months
• The MB team will contact you regarding questionnaire changes
• ….But vital to understand your upcoming issues and media plans
• Data is available on a monthly basis− Need a number ( a day)− Need a short summary of a campaign (a week)− Full presentation (4 weeks notice)
• Your team − Sam Almutair 99291127− Huw Williams 99291126− Trina Leigh 99291147
82
July- Sept ’07 tracking presentation
Prepared for MLA, Nov 7th 2007. By: Sam Almutair and Trina Leigh