MARKETING TRENDS COMPARISON BETWEEN P&G

AND HUL

b/w

Presented By :- Dhruvita Mathur

INTRODUCTION This project is about Market research in which I have to analyse and compare the marketing trends of the two major FMCG companies HUL and P&G and consumer behaviour towards them on Indian grounds.

OBJECTIVE

This project was undertaken with a number of objectives listed below:To know the various products of P&G and HUL available in India.Research the marketing trends of HUL and P&G and compare them.To study the current marketing strategy of both companies.To analyse the effectiveness of distribution channels of both the companies. It also looked into the different factors like quality, nominal prices, availability etc that motivate a customer to buy a particular product.

COMPANY PROFILE

Type Public companyBSE:HUL

Industry Fast moving consumer goods(FMCG)

Founded1933

Products Home & Personal Care, Foods, Water Purifier

Key people Harish Manwani (Chairman), Nitin Paranje (CEO and Managing Director)

Headquarters  Mumbai, India

Revenue Rs 20,869.57 crore (US$ 4.57 billion) (2008-2009)

Employees Over 65,000 direct & indirect employees

Parent Unilever Plc

The Proctor and Gamble Company

Type Public NYSE:PG

Industry Fast moving consumer goods (FMCG)

Founded 1837

Headquarters Cincinnati,Ohio,US

Key people Bob McDonald (President and CEO)

Products Home & Personal Care, Foods

Revenue US$ 79.03 billion(2008-2009)

PRODUCTS

FOOD BRANDS   

Home care brands

P&G

Beauty & grooming

Health & well-being

 THE DIRECT MARKETING CASE

Against Tide, but at what cost to Rin? As a part of its marketing strategy an audacious advertisement

campaign for Rin was started by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL), on 26 Feb,2010, by pitching and comparing it with Tide Naturals, a Procter & Gamble (P&G) product.

It became a hot topic of discussion for intellectual property rights (IPR) enthusiasts. The ad is in the eye of a legal storm, and has been described by some as an ego battle between the two FMCG conglomerates.

Part one of this was staged by HUL before the Chennai High Court when it filed a suit alleging that P&G’s claim that its detergent ‘Tide Naturals’ contained lemon and sandalwood was untrue.

Having convinced the court that it was only synthetic compounds that smelled like lemon and sandalwood in ‘Tide Naturals’ and not the real stuff, HUL got the court to direct P&G to insert a disclaimer in all its ads to that effect.

The scene then moved to the television screens across the nation which started airing a new Rin ad by HUL which compared the white school uniforms of two boys, washed in Tide and Rin respectively. While the shirt washed in Rin sparkled, the one washed with Tide was yellowish.

It was P&G who went to the Calcutta High Court this time, alleging disparagement and infringement of its trademark ‘Tide’. It was also pointed out by P&G that the disputed ad used a packet of ‘Tide Naturals’ in its visuals, but used ‘Tide’ in the voice-over.

  The commercial was pulled off air in 8 days after the Calcutta

high Court ordered HUL to stop airing the commercial on various grounds including disparagement.

  The rules in the game of comparative advertisements have been

laid down both by the courts and also prescribed under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 (‘the Act’). While Indian law permits comparative ads, denigration or derogation of competing goods is impermissible.

  The principles for grant of injunction in

such cases were laid down by the Calcutta High Court and have been followed consistently by various courts. Briefly put, these principles state that a tradesman can declare his goods to be the best in the world and better than his competitor’s even if it is untrue and while doing so, he can even compare the advantages of his goods over his competitor’s. However, it is illegal if he says that his competitor’s products are bad.

 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Market Share

Q1. Which of the following laundry products do you use?

HUL(Rin, Wheel, Surf- excel) P&G(Tide, Ariel) Others.

Interpretation: The above chart shows that the HUL’s laundry products hold the major

market share (62%) while P&G holds 35% share in this market.

62

35

3

Laundry Products

HULP&GOthers

 Q2. Which of the following hair care products do you use?

HUL(Sunsilk, Clinic-plus, dove) P&G(Pantene, Head & shoulders) Others

Interpretation: The above chart shows that the HUL’s hair care products holds 50% market share while P&G holds 36% share in this market

Q3. Which of the following oral care products do you use?

HUL(Close-up, Pepsodent) P&G(Oral-B, Crest) Others

 Interpretation: The above chart shows that the HUL’s

oral care products hold the major market share (55%) while P&G holds only 12% share in this market.

55

12

33

Oral-Care

HULP&GOthers

Q5. Which of the following soaps do you use?

HUL(Breeze, Dove, Lifebuoy, Lux, Pears, Rexona, Liril)

P&G(Camay, ivory) Others

Interpretation: The above chart shows that the HUL’s soaps hold the major market share (81%) while P&G holds mere 3% share in this market.

81

316

Soaps

HULP&GOthers

Motivation Factor

Q6.What motivates you to buy the selected products?

Quality Price Both  Products Interpretation: From the above chart we can analyse that large

part of the population buys HUL laundry products because of its product’s nominal price and good quality and although the quality of P&G products is good but they are dearer than HUL products.

HUL P&G0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

134013

7

7453

BothPriceQuality

Distribution Channels

Q7.Are you satisfied with the availability of the selected products?

Yes No Products

Interpretation: The above chart shows that both HUL and P&G have good distribution channels for their laundry products.

HUL

P&G

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

4

15

96

85

NoYes

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Consumers prefer to buy HUL’s products more as compared to P&G products in all product lines.

HUL provides good quality laundry products at nominal price and although the quality of P&G products is good but they are dearer than HUL products.

Both P&G and HUL provide a good range of hair care products for price conscious as well as quality conscious people.

Superior quality motivates consumers to buy P&G skin care products and soaps, while good quality at nominal price motivates consumers to buy HUL products.

Both HUL and P&G oral care products are equally good at price and quality.

Both HUL and P&G have good distribution channels for their laundry products.

Both HUL and P&G have good distribution channels for their products but HUL’s channels are comparatively better.

CONCLUSION

Both HUL and P&G Companies are well establish companies in field of FMCG .

The demand of HUL products is more as compared to P&G and other companies.

The qualities of products provided by the companies are satisfactory.

Hul has lot of variety of the product as compared to other brands in India, means has long product line.

Distribution channels of HUL are better than that of P&G in India.

HUL provides low price products as compared to P&G and thus attract a lot of price conscious consumers.

RECOMMENDATIONS

P&G has a huge opportunity to capture the large Indian market as its quality is trusted by most consumers. It should thus try to launch more of its products in India like that of HUL.

A large number of consumers in India are price conscious while the P&G products are comparatively dearer. P&G should thus try to launch products at cheaper rates.

As a lot of people prefer to buy various products from departmental stores, P&G should make its products easily available there.

THANKS