sandwich shop retailing, market intelligence, january...

Sandwich Shop Retailing, Market Intelligence,

January 2010

P U B L I S H E D B Y : Mintel International Group Ltd 18-19 Long Lane London EC1A 9PL www.mintel.com tel: 020 7606 4533 fax: 020 7606 5932 email: [email protected] © Mintel International Group Limited Statistics in this report are the latest available at the time of research Research enquiries: Harry Foster +44 (0)20 7606 4533 Sales Hotline: +44 (0)20 7606 6000 NOTE: This publication is issued as a series of reports. Each report is a complete work in itself, which is available separately or as part of a subscription Samples Samples of products, brochures or advertising mentioned in this report (or elsewhere) can be obtained through the Mintel Services division. Contact Wendy Smith with your requirements on the numbers above.

I M P O R T A N T W A R N I N G 1. Mintel International Group Limited ("Mintel") is the legal owner of the copyright subsisting in this report. Any use and/or copying of such documents and materials which is not in accordance with Mintel's standard Terms and Conditions (available on www.mintel.com) or these Conditions of Use is unauthorised. Any unauthorised use ma y give rise to Mintel bringing proceedings for copyright infringement against you claiming an injunction, damages and costs. 2. Unless otherwise agreed in writing in advance by Mintel, this document may not be sold, passed on, communicated or disseminated in any form (including within its original covers), nor access granted, to any third party or to any subsidiary, associated or holding company (whether direct or indirect) of the original subscriber/licensee/purchaser and its user(s) (together, the "Licensee"). 3. The Licensee acknowledges that all information and materials contained in this report are the copyright property and confidential information of Mintel, and are protected, inter alia, by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and other intellectual property rights and by these Terms and Conditions, and that no rights in any of the materials are transferred to the Licensee. The Licensee undertakes that it will not copy, reproduce, print or store in any manner (electronic or otherwise), extract or transmit in any form or otherwise deal with in any way the whole or part of the data, materials or information contained in this report. 4. The Licensee (or any subsequent user, whether licensed or unlicensed who reads this report) agrees it will not place financial reliance upon any figure, statement or inference contained within this or any other Mintel report, or invite investment from others, without first obtaining the written consent of Mintel's Company Secretary so to do. In the event that the Licensee (or any subsequent user, whether licensed or unlicensed) does not follow this procedure, it (or any subsequent user) agrees fully and effectually to indemnify Mintel against any claims, howsoever arising, and to draw specific attention to the fact that this consent has not been obtained. 5. All rights are reserved.

Table of contents Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010

© Reproduction or photocopying prohibited without express permission i www.mintel.com

ISSUES IN THE MARKET ...................................................................................................................... 1 Key themes ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Definitions ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................. 2

FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES.................................................................................................................... 3 Local empowerment........................................................................................................................ 3 The new dimensions of convenience.............................................................................................. 3 Leveraging experience.................................................................................................................... 4

MARKET IN BRIEF ................................................................................................................................. 5 Slowing but impressive growth ahead ............................................................................................ 5 Bread a diet staple, nutrition gaining prominence in sandwiches................................................... 5 The impact of changing demographics and consumer confidence ................................................ 5 Intense competition in the recession .............................................................................................. 5 Range extensions dominate product launches............................................................................... 6 Greggs + Subway = 61%................................................................................................................ 6 Three in four adults buy sandwiches .............................................................................................. 6 Price perception an issue................................................................................................................ 6 Consumers divided over prepacked vs. fresh................................................................................. 7

INTERNAL MARKET ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................. 9 Key points ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Convenience steady, natural loses ground..................................................................................... 9

Figure 1: Attitudes towards various food considerations, 2004-09 .................................................................... 10 Calorie considerations .................................................................................................................. 10

Figure 2: Agreement that ‘I always think of the calories in what I eat ‘, by gender, age and socio-economic group, 2009 ...................................................................................................................................................... 11

FSA pushes for healthier food on the go ...................................................................................... 12 School lunches get healthy ........................................................................................................... 12 Bread still a staple......................................................................................................................... 13

Figure 3: Consumption of bread in the last 12 months, 2005-09....................................................................... 14 Figure 4: Types of bread eaten, 2005-09.......................................................................................................... 15

Producer prices moderate in 2009................................................................................................ 15 Figure 5: UK producer price of bread-making wheat, January 2004-September 2009...................................... 16

The disappearing lunch break....................................................................................................... 16 BROADER MARKET ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................ 17

Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 17 Ageing population a challenge...................................................................................................... 17

Figure 6: Trends in the age structure of the UK population, 2009-14................................................................ 18 More 25-34s = good news ............................................................................................................ 18 ABs forecast to grow..................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 7: Forecast changes in adult population trends, by socio-economic group, 2004-09 and 2009-14 ........ 19 Consumer confidence ................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 8: UK: Nationwide Consumer Confidence Index, 2004-09 ..................................................................... 20 Figure 9: How respondents describe their financial situation, September 2009 ................................................ 21 Figure 10: Change in how respondents describe their financial situation, February-September 2009 .............. 22 Figure 11: Proportion of consumers concerned about their finances, February 2008-December 2009............. 22 Figure 12: Index of consumer expenditure, current prices, 2004-14 ................................................................. 23

Unemployment .............................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 13: UK unemployment rate: aged 16+, monthly (seasonally adjusted), January 2008-July 2009........... 24

Eating out vs. eating in.................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 14: Eating out at lunchtime on weekdays at least once a week, by gender, age and socio-economic group, 2008 ...................................................................................................................................................... 25

COMPETITIVE CONTEXT .................................................................................................................... 27 Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 27


© Reproduction or photocopying prohibited without express permission ii www.mintel.com

Figure 15: Performance of competing markets, market sizes, 2005-09 ............................................................ 27 Figure 16: Performance of competing markets, index, 2005-09........................................................................ 28

Coffee shops ................................................................................................................................. 28 Fast food outlets ........................................................................................................................... 29 Pubs .............................................................................................................................................. 29 Convenience stores ...................................................................................................................... 30

Figure 17: Leading convenience store retailers’ outlets, 2008/09 ..................................................................... 30 Competition from the homemade sandwiches.............................................................................. 31

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES ..................................................................................................... 33 Strengths....................................................................................................................................... 33 Weaknesses.................................................................................................................................. 33

WHO’S INNOVATING?......................................................................................................................... 35 Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 35 Range extensions dominate in 2009 ............................................................................................ 35

Figure 18: NPD activity, by launch type within the UK sandwich market, 2007-09............................................ 35 Leveraging provenance ................................................................................................................ 36 No additives – fresh promises....................................................................................................... 36 The health issue............................................................................................................................ 37 Hot from the shop ......................................................................................................................... 37 Limited editions ............................................................................................................................. 38

Figure 19: NPD activity, top 12 claims within the UK sandwich market, 2007-09.............................................. 39 Going mobile ................................................................................................................................. 39

SECTOR SIZE AND FORECAST ......................................................................................................... 41 Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 41 Growth of 43% forecast over 2009-14 .......................................................................................... 41

Figure 20: UK sales of sandwich shops, at current prices, and index of growth, 2005-14................................. 41 Figure 21: UK sales of sandwich shops, at current and constant prices, 2005-14 ............................................ 42 Figure 22: UK sales of sandwich shops and total UK retail sales of sandwiches, index of growth at current prices, 2005-14................................................................................................................................................. 42

Store expansion fuels sandwich sector ........................................................................................ 42 Demographics in favour of sandwiches ........................................................................................ 43 More stores ahead ........................................................................................................................ 43 Factors used in the forecast.......................................................................................................... 44

COMPETITOR ANALYSIS AND MARKET SHARES .......................................................................... 45 Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 45 Two operators dominate ............................................................................................................... 45

Figure 23: Sandwich specialist retailers: market shares, 2006-08 .................................................................... 46 Greggs .......................................................................................................................................... 46 Subway ......................................................................................................................................... 46 Pret A Manger ............................................................................................................................... 47 Leading sandwich shops’ retail sales and outlet numbers ........................................................... 48

Figure 24: Sandwich specialist retailers: Sales, 2006-08 .................................................................................. 48 Figure 25: Sandwich specialist retailers: Stores, 2006-09................................................................................. 48

COMPANIES AND PRODUCTS........................................................................................................... 49 MAJOR PLAYERS.................................................................................................................................. 49

Bagel Factory ................................................................................................................................ 49 Baguette Express.......................................................................................................................... 49 EAT ............................................................................................................................................... 50 Greggs Plc .................................................................................................................................... 51 O'Briens Irish Sandwich Bars ....................................................................................................... 52 Pret A Manger ............................................................................................................................... 53 Subway UK ................................................................................................................................... 54 Treats Sandwich Bar..................................................................................................................... 55 Upper Crust................................................................................................................................... 55


© Reproduction or photocopying prohibited without express permission iii www.mintel.com

BAKERY CHAINS................................................................................................................................... 56 Cooks the Bakery.......................................................................................................................... 56 Sayers the Bakers......................................................................................................................... 57

CONSUMER – PURCHASE PATTERNS AND LOCATIONS.............................................................. 59 Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 59 Who buys sandwiches? ................................................................................................................ 59

Figure 26: Buying sandwiches, by gender, age and household income, November 2009 ................................ 59 Where do they buy sandwiches?.................................................................................................. 60

Figure 27: Where people buy sandwiches, November 2009............................................................................. 60 Stores drive usage ........................................................................................................................ 61 Who shops where? ....................................................................................................................... 61

Figure 28: Most popular outlets for buying sandwiches, by age, November 2009 ............................................ 61 Figure 29: Buying sandwiches at Greggs, Subway and Tesco, by income group, November 2009.................. 62 Figure 30: Buying sandwiches at M&S, independent sandwich shops, other grocers, coffee shops and Boots, by income group, November 2009......................................................................................................... 62

CONSUMER – ATTITUDES TOWARDS PURCHASING SANDWICHES........................................... 63 Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 63 Topline attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches ....................................................................... 63

Figure 31: Attitudes towards buying sandwiches, November 2009................................................................... 64 Poor price perception.................................................................................................................... 64 The attraction of DIY ..................................................................................................................... 65 A price-led market ......................................................................................................................... 66 Cutbacks ....................................................................................................................................... 66 Meal deals and small treats for the young .................................................................................... 67

CONSUMER – ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY, FRESHNESS AND HEALTH WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES ...................................................................................................................................... 69

Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 69 Quality, nutrition and freshness .................................................................................................... 69

Figure 32: Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness when buying sandwiches, November 2009 ........ 70 Prepacked vs. made for me .......................................................................................................... 70 A healthy image, but room for improvement................................................................................. 71 Variety and convenience............................................................................................................... 71

Figure 33: Attitudes towards variety and convenience when buying sandwiches, November 2009 .................. 72 Convenience, time, trust ............................................................................................................... 72 Demand for variety........................................................................................................................ 73

CONSUMER – TARGET GROUPS ...................................................................................................... 75 Key points ..................................................................................................................................... 75 Five target groups ......................................................................................................................... 75

Figure 34: Target groups for sandwich shops, November 2009........................................................................ 75 Variety seekers ............................................................................................................................. 76 Convenience-driven ...................................................................................................................... 77 How I like it.................................................................................................................................... 78 Bored............................................................................................................................................. 78 Unengaged.................................................................................................................................... 79

APPENDIX – INTERNAL AND BROADER MARKET ENVIRONMENT AND COMPETITIVE CONTEXT.............................................................................................................................................. 81

Figure 35: Attitudes towards various food considerations, 2004-09 .................................................................. 81 Figure 36: Attitudes towards various food considerations, by demographics, 2009 .......................................... 81 Figure 37: Consumption of bread in the last 12 months, 2005-09..................................................................... 83 Figure 38: Consumption of bread in the last 12 months, by demographics, 2009............................................. 83 Figure 39: Types of bread eaten, 2005-09........................................................................................................ 85 Figure 40: Trends in the age structure of the UK population, by gender, 2004-14 ............................................ 85 Figure 41: Forecast adult population trends, by socio-economic group, 2004-14 ............................................. 86 Figure 42: Frequency of eating out at lunchtime on weekdays in the last month, 2004-08 ............................... 86 Figure 43: Frequency of eating out at lunchtime on weekdays in the last month, by demographics, 2008........ 87


© Reproduction or photocopying prohibited without express permission iv www.mintel.com

Figure 44: Consumer expenditure, at current and constant prices, 2004-14..................................................... 88 Figure 45: UK unemployment rate: aged 16+: monthly (seasonally adjusted), January 2008-July 2009........... 89 Figure 46: Trends in eating more homemade sandwiches, June-December 2009............................................ 89

APPENDIX – CONSUMER: PURCHASE PATTERNS AND LOCATIONS ......................................... 91 Figure 47: Outlets used for buying sandwiches, November 2009 ..................................................................... 91 Figure 48: Most popular outlets used for buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009.................... 91 Figure 49: Next most popular outlets used for buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009 ........... 94 Figure 50: Other outlets used for buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009 ............................... 96 Figure 51: Repertoire of outlets used for buying sandwiches, November 2009 ................................................ 98 Figure 52: Outlets used for buying sandwiches, by repertoire of outlets used, November 2009 ....................... 99 Figure 53: Repertoire of outlets used for buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009.................. 100

APPENDIX – CONSUMER: ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES .............................. 103 Figure 54: Attitudes towards buying sandwiches, November 2009................................................................. 103 Figure 55: Most popular attitudes towards buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009 ............... 103 Figure 56: Next most popular attitudes towards buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009....... 106 Figure 57: Attitudes towards buying sandwiches, by outlets bought at, November 2009 ................................ 108 Figure 58: Attitudes towards buying sandwiches, by outlets bought at, November 2009 (continued) ............. 108 Figure 59: Attitudes towards buying sandwiches, by outlets bought at, November 2009 (continued) ............. 109

APPENDIX – CONSUMER: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY, FRESHNESS AND HEALTH

WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES ......................................................................................................... 111 Figure 60: Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness when buying sandwiches, November 2009 ...... 111 Figure 61: Most popular attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness when buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009...................................................................................................................... 111 Figure 62: Next most popular attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness when buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009...................................................................................................................... 114 Figure 63: Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness when buying sandwiches, by outlet bought at, November 2009.............................................................................................................................................. 116 Figure 64: Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness when buying sandwiches, by outlet bought at, November 2009 (continued) ........................................................................................................................... 117 Figure 65: Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness when buying sandwiches, by outlet bought at, November 2009 (continued) ........................................................................................................................... 117 Figure 66: Attitudes towards variety and convenience when buying sandwiches, November 2009 ................ 118 Figure 67: Most popular attitudes towards variety and convenience when buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009...................................................................................................................... 118 Figure 68: Next most popular attitudes towards variety and convenience when buying sandwiches, by demographics, November 2009...................................................................................................................... 120 Figure 69: Attitudes towards variety and convenience when buying sandwiches, by outlet bought at, November 2009.............................................................................................................................................. 122 Figure 70: Attitudes towards variety and convenience when buying sandwiches, by outlet bought at, November 2009 (continued) ........................................................................................................................... 123 Figure 71: Attitudes towards variety and convenience when buying sandwiches, by outlet bought at, November 2009 (continued) ........................................................................................................................... 123

APPENDIX – CONSUMER: TARGET GROUPS ............................................................................... 125 Figure 72: Statements on eating habits, by target groups, November 2009.................................................... 125 Figure 73: Outlets used for buying sandwiches, by target groups, November 2009........................................ 125 Figure 74: Attitudes towards buying sandwiches, by target groups, November 2009 ..................................... 126 Figure 75: Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness when buying sandwiches, by target groups, November 2009.............................................................................................................................................. 126 Figure 76: Attitudes towards variety and convenience when buying sandwiches, by target groups, November 2009.............................................................................................................................................. 127 Figure 77: Target groups, by demographics, November 2009 ........................................................................ 127

APPENDIX: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................... 133

Issues in the Market Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010

© Reproduction or photocopying prohibited without express permission 1 www.mintel.com

Issues in the Market Estimated to have reached £1.85 billion in 2009, sandwich shops’ sales grew by 8% against 2008 and by 66% since 2005. The impressive growth comes on the back of rapid expansion by the leading operators. Their combined store numbers increased by around 1,100, or by nearly half, over the period.

The sector appears to have held its ground relatively well in the recession despite intense competition from non-specialists, such as coffee shops and grocery stores. However, it is the homemade sandwich that represents the main challenge for sandwich shops, with two in five adults saying it’s pointless to buy one that could be made at home, and an equal number seeing bought sandwiches as over-priced.

The two leading players – Greggs and Subway – are in a league of their own, estimated to capture more than half of sector sales. Greggs has lost market share in recent years, but still holds a sizeable lead in the sector. Subway has been catching up, now taking nearly a quarter of sector sales, thanks to some 450 new stores over 2006-08. The remainder of the sector, apart from Pret, is highly fragmented.

Key themes • How has the sandwich shop sector performed in the recession?

• How has the competitive landscape changed?

• Who buys sandwiches and which channels are most popular?

• What role do price, nutrition and variety play in consumer purchases of sandwiches?

Definitions This report focuses on the specialised sandwich shops in the UK market. This includes a variety of different types of outlets that are all predominantly engaged in the retail of sandwiches, filled wraps, baguettes, rolls, paninis, bagels and the like, irrespective of whether they are registered as caterers, restaurants, retailers or other.

Greggs the Bakers is included as a sandwich shop, as the group now reports that on-the-go food accounts for around two thirds of the business.

This report excludes quick-service hamburger restaurants.

Value figures throughout this report are at retail selling prices (rsp) unless otherwise stated. Market sizes at constant 2009 prices have been calculated using Mintel's food deflator. Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland.

Issues in the Market Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Abbreviations BBPA British Beer and Pub Association BSA British Sandwich Association CASH Consensus Action on Salt and Health CPI Consumer Prices Index DEFRA Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs DoH Department of Health FSA Food Standards Agency GAD Government Actuary's Department GDP Gross Domestic Product GNPD Mintel’s Global New Product Database Nielsen Media Research

For further information, please contact [email protected]

NPD New Product Development PDI Personal Disposable Income SFT School Food Trust SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences TGI Target Group Index. For further details concerning this information,

including data on readership patterns of users/purchasers and details of brands, please contact Julian Tooke (020 8433 4085 [email protected]) at BMRB International

USP Unique Selling Point VII Volume Importance Index. The index indicates those groups of consumers

that contribute most highly to volume sales.

Future Opportunities Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Future Opportunities Local empowerment Recent times have seen sandwich shops face growing competition from various operators. The leading grocers have built up their presence in the convenience store sector, boosting their influence in the lunch/sandwich/snack market, while coffee shops have expanded their product offer from drinks to foods. Quick service restaurants have cut prices, taking their price points down to sandwich shop territory.

Faced with competition from such conglomerates, and the leading sandwich shop chains, the smaller operators could look to leverage their local credentials as a point of difference, along the lines seen in the Mintel Inspire trend Carnivore, Herbivore ... Locavore.

The trend looks at the growing demand for local foods as a reaction to concerns over food miles, the farming industry and the ‘corporatisation’ of food. Various underlying trends are driving this demand, like the interest in authenticity; the longing for nostalgia, the need for traceability and trust, and the feeling of losing connection to our food. With such strong forces at play, the more brands can provide links to – and proofs of – provenance, the stronger will be the competitive positioning of their brand.

Tapping into this trend, Tiffin Sandwiches, a Bradford-based convenience food group, launched the ‘Born ‘n’ Bread’ range of sandwiches in autumn 2009, made entirely with products local to Yorkshire.

For the local sandwich shops, leveraging ‘localness’ as a point of difference could mean highlighting their independence of larger groups and building on this by offering regional specialities. Sourcing ingredients locally, perhaps by joining forces with local manufacturers, farmers, butchers or bakers and – equally importantly – spelling out such local credentials, could help them attract not just ‘locavores’, but also the one in six adults that visit different shops for variety.

The new dimensions of convenience Sandwiches were, according to legend, born as a convenience food, one that could be eaten in the midst of a card game. And in the same tradition, sandwich shops are among the oldest convenience food outlets.

However, convenience today holds a much broader meaning, beyond mere ease and portability, as discussed in the Mintel Inspire Trend Simplicity and Convenience. Today, convenience means simple preparation, simple ingredients, a simple story, and clear communication of the product’s attributes.

Some of the leading sandwich shop operators have tapped into this new definition of convenience, underlining the simplicity and purity of their products and processes. The smaller operators could leverage these qualities more, particularly in competition with the likes of quick service restaurants.

Meanwhile, there are opportunities to mine the new dimensions of convenience deeper, such as looking for ways to help consumers cut through the clutter of the choices they face. Barry Schwartz, the author of The Paradox of Choice argues that as consumers are faced with more and more data, more and more options, more and more choice, they become less able to make a decision and end up frustrated.

Helping them cut through this clutter can potentially boost revenues.

Future Opportunities Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


One area of development could be healthy choices, with healthier sandwiches more clearly marked, or even providing a calorie-controlled range, in the style of 100 calorie snacks.

This could extend to tailoring and labeling products for specific nutritional requirements (low-fat, high in fibre), occasion (light lunch, main meal) or even moods (comfort, indulgence, good for me).

Even price cuts, lists of most popular sandwiches or suggestions of the form ‘people who like A, also often buy B’ often seen online, could help a small number of products stand out from the mass, streamlining the pool of alternatives.

What other tools – labeling, segmenting or suggestions – could sandwich shops use to help their customers navigate the product offer?

Leveraging experience The home-made sandwich is the single most powerful competitor that sandwich shops face, two in five people deeming it pointless to buy a sandwich they could make at home. A nearly equal number see shop-bought sandwiches as over-priced.

The Mintel Inspire trend Experience is All looks at how brands can differentiate themselves by leveraging the power of experiences. In the coffee shop sector for example, Starbucks has taken the experience of drinking coffee and mined the levels of meaning attached to it.

In the sandwich shop sector, the focus of the store visit has typically been on a speedy transaction, with little concern or effort afforded to other aspects of the experience. However, our consumer research shows that just 8% of sandwich buyers frequent their nearest shop for lack of time, highlighting the importance of other choice factors.

Building the store visit into a positive experience could potentially transform it from fulfilling a basic need to a pleasant break in a hectic day, as well as helping to justify the price premium over the homemade sandwich.

Could sandwich shops learn from pizza parlours and sushi restaurants that turn food preparation into theatre, to transform the compiling of a sandwich from a mechanical act of mass-production to a piece of artisanal artistry?

Small touches to the store environment can contribute to an image of quality and freshness, such as the scent of fresh bread, chopping of vegetables in view of the customer or laying out the ingredients in smaller quantities and less ‘industrial’ dishes. How can choosing a filling for sandwich be made as appealing as picking an ice cream flavour?

Where Starbucks differentiates itself from coffee at home with the coffee machines, steamed or foamed milk and syrups, can the sandwich shops too look to offer specialist processes or ingredients unavailable at home?

Market in Brief Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Market in Brief Slowing but impressive growth ahead • Estimated to have reached £1.85 billion in 2009, the sandwich specialist sector grew by 8%

against 2008 and by an impressive 66% since 2005.

• Rapid store expansion by the leading operators has been the main driver of growth, adding in total around 1,100 net new stores to their combined portfolio over the 2005-09 period.

• Growth of 43% is forecast for the sandwich shops’ sales over 2009-14, to reach £2.6 billion in 2014, the growth set to benefit from large scale store expansion by leading players.

Bread a diet staple, nutrition gaining prominence in sandwiches • Health and nutrition issues are slowly gaining prominence in the sandwich market, partly driven

by the FSA. These issues are also of interest to a sizeable minority of sandwich-buying adults.

• Sandwiches are recommended for packed lunches under the School Food Trust 2008 guidelines. As just under half of all schoolchildren always have a packed lunch, this translates into a sizeable potential market.

• While bread remains a diet staple, eaten by 98% of the population, daily usage is in rapid decline under rising competition from other products, a potential challenge for the sandwich sector.

• The price of bread-making wheat started to rise rapidly in the second half of 2007, moderating over summer 2008. Together with rising prices of meat and energy, these put pressure on sandwich shops.

The impact of changing demographics and consumer confidence • The expected rise in the number of 25-34-year-olds over 2009-14 is good news for the sandwich

shops, as they are keen buyers. The growth of over-55s poses a challenge, as only a minority of them buy sandwiches.

• The AB population is projected to expand by nearly 1 million people over 2009-14, more than any other. Their keenness on tailor-made sandwiches is good news for the sandwich shops.

• Consumer confidence began to fall in late 2007, but has improved from early 2009. Mintel’s expectations of another challenging year for the consumers throw the continuance of the up trend in 2010 in doubt.

• More than half of adults (54%) have cut back on their spending on eating out and 30% on spending on lunch, creating demand for variants at lower price points.

Intense competition in the recession • Sandwich shops compete with a wide range of outlets from the foodservice and retail sectors, as

well as homemade sandwiches.



• The rapidly expanding coffee shop sector is in closer competition with the sandwich shops as the former have broadened their food offer and the latter have begun to offer specialist coffees.

• Chicken and burger bars and some pubs have lowered their price points to drive footfall in the recession, putting them in the same territory as the sandwich shop.

• The recession has seen homemade sandwiches gain ground, with one in four adults eating more homemade sandwiches at October, the share falling since then.

Range extensions dominate product launches • Range extensions dominated product launch activity in 2009, taking over from new products that

held the lead in 2008.

• Subway and Pret introduced nutrition information in their stores in 2009, with potential to attract the 29% of sandwich buyers seeking healthy options. However, healthier products remain in the minority in NPD.

• Local and British products made their mark among new product launches in 2009, reflecting the interest in authenticity and provenance in the recession.

Greggs + Subway = 61% • The two leading players – Greggs and Subway – are in a league of their own, estimated to capture

more than half of sector sales. The remainder of the sector, apart from Pret, is highly fragmented.

• Greggs holds the lead in the sector. It has lost market share in recent years, largely due to a slower-than-average store expansion.

• Subway has been rapidly gaining share, now taking nearly a quarter of sector sales, thanks to some 450 new stores opened over 2006-08.

Three in four adults buy sandwiches • Almost three quarters (73%) of adults buy sandwiches, with purchases declining with age and

rising with household income. Students come across as top sandwich buyers, at 90%.

• Sandwich chains are the top channel for purchases, used by 52% of adults, ahead of grocery stores, used by 45%.

• Greggs and Subway hold the lead in usage levels. With more than 1,400 stores each, they are the only sandwich chains with a national presence.

Price perception an issue • Two in five adults think sandwiches are over-priced and a nearly equal number deem it pointless

to buy one that could be made at home, signalling the tangible competition from homemade sandwiches.



• The market appears price-focused, as just one in four people think that low price doesn’t automatically equal good value and only one in six see good quality ingredients as worth paying more for.

• Three in ten adults (30%) have cut back on spending on lunch, but only 7% have switched to a less expensive outlet.

Consumers divided over prepacked vs. fresh • The prepacked and tailor-made variants are almost equally popular among sandwich buyers, with

46% preferring the latter, though only one in four say they would pay more for it.

• Sandwiches enjoy a surprisingly wholesome image; only 26% of the population and 30% of sandwich buyers say they aren’t healthy eaten every day.

• Healthy sandwiches are being sought out by 29% of buyers, while 17% would like more guidance on which sandwiches are healthy, making for a sizeable minority.

• Only one in three sandwich buyers think it’s boring to eat sandwiches regularly, suggesting that for most, the sandwich is an accepted diet staple. One in five seek variety by visiting different shops.

• One in eleven (9%) sandwich-buying adults report lacking the time for a sit-down lunch, while just 8% frequent their nearest shop for lack of time, underlining other choice factors despite the 'time squeeze'.

Internal Market Environment Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Internal Market Environment Key points • Health and nutrition issues are slowly gaining prominence in the sandwich market, partly

driven by the FSA. They are also of interest to a sizeable minority of sandwich-buying adults.

• Bread remains a diet staple, eaten by 98% of the population. However, under rising competition from other products, daily usage is in rapid decline, from 75% of bread eaters to 67% between 2005 and 2009.

• The price of wheat started to rise rapidly in the second half of 2007, moderating over summer 2008. Together with rising prices of meat and energy, these have put pressure on sandwich shops.

• Sandwiches are recommended for packed lunches under the School Food Trust 2008 guidelines. As just under half of all schoolchildren always have a packed lunch, this translates into a sizeable potential market.

Convenience steady, natural loses ground • Nearly half of adults (44%) often take convenience into account in purchase decisions, a broadly

steady share since 2006.

• The absence of artificial additives continues to appeal to 37% of adults, or nearly 19 million people.

• A sudden drop in 2008 and 2009 in those willing to pay more for foods without artificial additives seems to reflect the onset of the economic downturn and changing priorities. As people look for tangible value for money, naturalness appears to have limited ability to justify a premium.

• Those aged 25-34, ABC1s, full-time workers and one-person households are particularly likely to give weight to convenience and naturalness when making purchases. This seems to signal that these groups are generally more willing and able to judge value by factors other than price.

• Key analysis: For sandwich shops this underlines the importance of attributes other than price, including, but not limited to, convenience and naturalness, in attracting key sandwich buyers.

• The findings suggest that excessive dumbing down of the product range in the name of cutting prices or protecting margins carries the risk of alienating heavy users.



FIGURE 1: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIOUS FOOD CONSIDERATIONS, 2004-09 Base: adults aged 15+

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

%

Convenience often plays apart in my purchase decisions

I am prepared to pay more forfoods that don't containartificial additives

I always think of the calories inwhat I eat

I always look for the light/dietversions of food and drink

Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2004-09 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL

Calorie considerations • Obesity has become a major health issue for the nation. Department of Health (DoH) statistics

reveal that one in four adults are obese and nearly two in five (38%) are overweight.

• On current trends the proportion of people that are obese will rise to 36% among men and to 28% among women by 2015, according to the Government Office of Science projections.



FIGURE 2: AGREEMENT THAT ‘I ALWAYS THINK OF THE CALORIES IN WHAT I EAT ‘, BY GENDER, AGE AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUP, 2009 Base: adults aged 15+

Men

15-24

25-34

Women

45-54 C2

ABC1

D

E

55-64

+6535-44All

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32%

of d

emog

raph

ic g

roup

Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2009 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL

• Nearly one in four adults (24%) claim to always think of calories in their food, while 26% always look for the light/diet version in food.

• Reflecting this, 29% of adults who buy sandwiches seek out healthy variants and 26% say it's important to see the nutritional information, falling to 24% and 22% respectively for the overall population.

• The upward trend in the share of calorie counters in the population turned to moderate decline in 2009, the downturn in diet food demand appearing already in 2008. This seems to reflect a shift towards economising and comfort food in the economic downturn.

• The calorie-counting minority of one in four adults equates to 12 million people, a sizeable niche that sandwich shops could attract with more health-oriented products and point-of-sale information.

• Groups particularly likely to keep an eye on calories and look for diet foods include women, over-55s, ABC1s and overweight.

• Key analysis: Providing nutritional information and ensuring the availability and visibility of healthier sandwich options can be the key to attracting these groups to sandwich shops, as well as providing a competitive point of difference against other foodservice outlets.



FSA pushes for healthier food on the go • Sandwiches hit the headlines in April 2009 when the consumer magazine Which? published

research suggesting that the salt, sugar and fat levels in various prepared sandwiches were very high, a single sandwich providing more than half of an adult’s guideline daily intake of these.

• Consensus Action on Salt and Health (CASH) voiced similar criticisms concerning the high salt levels in seasonal sandwiches and sweet treats offered by various grocers and coffee and sandwich chains in the run-up to Christmas 2009.

• Meanwhile, a number of the largest sandwich shop chains, including Greggs, Pret, Subway and EAT, have committed to working with the Food Standards Agency (FSA) to encourage and enable healthier eating out of home, the commitment helping to promote their public health image.

• Initiatives vary by chain, and include steps to cut the levels of salt, sugar and saturated fat in their products and to include fruit and salads and accessibly priced smaller portions in their product offer.

• Pret A Manger and Subway have also committed to developing a voluntary calorie-labelling scheme, together with 19 other foodservice operators, where they display calorie information on the majority of their products in-store, at the point of choice.

• Sandwiches made in the shop that sells them are currently not tied to the same labelling rules as prepacked foods. Notably, they don't have to be labelled with a full ingredients list. Non-prepacked food sold at a catering establishment does not need to carry any nutrition labelling.

• The FSA is looking to develop recommendations for displaying nutrition information at foodservice outlets based on these trials. However, the BSA has highlighted this as challenging to smaller sandwich shops, potentially lacking the technical know-how and resources needed to provide detailed data, particularly for a handmade product where a small discrepancy on certain ingredients can have a marked effect on the nutritional values.

• Key analysis: Only a minority of adults keep an eye on calories or the nutritional details of sandwiches. However, the ongoing media focus on and government push for healthy eating is likely to see this minority grow over time.

• Developing and highlighting healthier options would help sandwich shops to capture this minority, but experience from established shops suggests it is unlikely to alienate core shoppers.

• A stronger image as offering a fresh and healthy meal option would provide sandwich shops with a point of difference in competition with quick-service restaurants and other on-the-go food outlets.

School lunches get healthy • Just under half of all schoolchildren always have a packed lunch, with an estimated 1.52 billion

lunches eaten at school in 2008 (see Children’s Packed Lunches – UK, December 2008).

• New nutritional standards for food provided in all maintained schools in England were published in May 2006 by the School Food Trust (SFT), to be adopted in phases. These effectively ban confectionery products and snacks with added salt and sugar.



• The introduction of Packed Lunch Policies in schools to support healthier eating was recommended by SFT in early 2008. The new guidelines require head teachers to draw up healthy lunchbox policies to highlight what makes a nutritional packed lunch and encourage monitoring by staff.

• A number of different sandwiches, bagels and wraps have made it onto the list of foods recommended for a packed lunch, combining a portion of starchy food, low-fat protein and salad (eg by the Food Standards Agency and British Nutrition Foundation).

• Subway was in talks in autumn 2008 with East Renfrewshire Council in Scotland to open an outlet in one of the area’s state-run secondary schools. The group described this as part of a wider move into schools and hospitals it hopes to undertake in Scotland, in line with a similar strategy in the US.

• While the council suggested that the Subway could offer a healthier alternative to pupils buying lunch from a burger shop or ordering pizzas, various politicians voiced concerns over the plan, and there has been no news of the plan materialising.

• The stricter regulations and support from official bodies for sandwiches as a potentially healthy food create opportunities for sandwich shops within the school dinners context.

• The challenge is for the shops to credibly position their product as a healthy alternative to other quick-service foods and to maintain competitive price points.

• There could be more opportunities for sandwich shops to collaborate with schools to promote their offer as a healthier alternative.

Bread still a staple • Bread is one of the most commonly eaten foods, enjoyed by 98% of the population. This share has

remained broadly steady for years, reflecting the role of bread as a staple food.

• Daily usage is in rapid decline, from three in four (75%) bread eaters to two in three (67%) between 2005 and 2009, on the back of rising competition from other products, such as other bakery products, cereals and other snacks, a potential expansion area for sandwich shops.

• The groups most likely to eat bread daily include men (70%), over-65s (76%) and DEs (more than 72%). As heavy users of bread, these consumers may look for a particularly strong value proposition in bought sandwiches, whether through price or a departure from the at-home experience.

• 'Light' users – eating bread once a week or less – are most likely to be women (8%), ABC1s (7%) and one-person households (9%). Health considerations may play a role that sandwich shops should be aware of, broadening their appeal eg with wraps or bread varieties high in fibre.

• Meanwhile, 18% of adults report eating less bread than a year ago, according to Mintel’s proprietary research. This rises to 22% of women, 21% of 35-44s and 24% of one-person households.



FIGURE 3: CONSUMPTION OF BREAD IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS, 2005-09 Base: users aged 15+

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

%Once a day or more

2 or 3 times a week

Once a week or less*

* Includes not stated Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults NB. As share of all adults that eat bread SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2004-09 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL

• White bread remains the most popular variant, but it lost ground slightly over the 2005-07 period, as consumers were becoming more health-conscious. It regained ground as consumer confidence weakened in 2008, most likely thanks to its comfort factor.

• Wholemeal appears to be the main alternative, gaining popularity as more fibre-rich and eaten by nearly half the population (47%). Brown bread has won users even faster, but is still chosen only by a minority.

• Coeliac disease, an allergy to gluten, a protein fraction found in wheat, rye and barley, affects one in 100 people in the UK, according to Coeliac UK. Mintel’s consumer research shows that 4% of adults eat specialist or gluten-free bread (see Bread and Morning Goods – UK, February 2009).



FIGURE 4: TYPES OF BREAD EATEN, 2005-09 Base: adults aged 15+ who ate bread in the last 12 months

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

%

Brow n

Granary

White

Wholemeal

Other types

Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2004-09 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL

Key analysis: Heavy users of bread, notably men, over-65s and DEs, may look for a particularly strong differentiation in bought sandwiches from the at-home experience.

Health or diet considerations may play a role in the choices of 'light' users, eg women and ABC1s. Wraps or bread varieties high in fibre could help sandwich shops broaden their appeal among these groups.

Producer prices moderate in 2009 • The producer price of bread-making wheat leaped ahead in the second half of 2007, continuing to

rise rapidly also in early 2008. Prices moderated rapidly over summer 2008 and again in autumn 2009.

• More moderate price rises were seen in the producer prices of cattle, pigs and poultry in late 2007 and early 2008. These price rises have fed into rising costs for sandwich manufacturers and shops, exacerbated by rising costs of energy and leases earlier, forcing them to look for ways to manage costs, pass on some of the cost to customers or accept lower margins.



FIGURE 5: UK PRODUCER PRICE OF BREAD-MAKING WHEAT, JANUARY 2004-SEPTEMBER 2009

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Jan-04 Jul-04 Jan-05 Jul-05 Jan-06 Jul-06 Jan-07 Jul-07 Jan-08 Jul-08 Jan-09 Jul-09

Inde

x (J

an 2

004=

100)

SOURCE: DEFRA

The disappearing lunch break • Three in five (57%) adults say there are not enough hours in the day to do everything they would

like (see Eating Out Meal Occasions – UK, October 2009), a tangible measure of today’s 'time-squeezed' society where time has become a scarce commodity.

• Longer working hours, thought to have been exacerbated by the recession, have often been blamed for this. The lunch hour appears to have become one of the casualties of the pressure on time.

• British workers take just 3.3 lunch breaks per week, lasting 29 minutes, on average. One in 14 people admit to not stopping for lunch, preferring to eat at their desk, according to Eurest Services’ Eating at Work 2008 report, for the Compass Group.

• However, only 8% of adults say they haven't got time for a sit-down lunch, and 6% say they have a short lunch break so buy sandwiches at nearest shop, according to our consumer research.

Key analysis: Where the 'time squeeze' is affecting the lunch break, sandwich shops can win favour by offering convenient solutions, such as stocking snacks and drinks and managing queuing times. Notably, however, very few people are willing to choose their sandwich outlet based solely on distance.

Broader Market Environment Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Broader Market Environment Key points • The expected rise in the number of 25-34-year-olds over 2009-14 is good news for the

sandwich shops, as they are keen sandwich buyers. The growth of over-55s poses a challenge, as only a minority of them buy sandwiches.

• The AB population is projected to expand by nearly 1 million people over 2009-14, more than any other. Their keenness on tailor-made sandwiches is good news for the sandwich shops.

• Consumer confidence began to fall in late 2007, dampening spending. However, it has steadily recovered since early 2009. It now remains to be seen whether the up trend continues in 2010, despite Mintel’s expectations of another challenging year for the consumers.

• More than half of adults (54%) have cut back on their spending on eating out and 30% on spending on lunch, creating demand for variants at lower price points.

Ageing population a challenge • The 25-34s and over-55s are the two age groups expected to grow the most over 2009-14, their

numbers forecast to rise by 1 million and 1.2 million people respectively.

• The rising numbers of over-55s pose a challenge for sandwich shops, as two in five (41%) have not bought sandwiches in the last three months. Just 36% had visited a sandwich shop chain and 12% an independent sandwich shop.

• More than half (53%) of over-55s feel that there's no point in buying a sandwich they could make at home, underlining the importance for sandwich shops to differentiate their product from the homemade competitor, for example through innovation and ingredients.

• Sandwich shops are largely geared towards the working lunch, of little relevance for the over-65s. Formats such as Local Pret, translating the on-the-go concept into a sit-in format, have more to offer to this age group.

• The over-55s come across as particularly likely to keep an eye on calories and look for diet foods, and could be attracted to sandwich shops as a healthier or lighter alternative to for instance a pub meal.

• Offering sandwiches using healthier bread, such as with oats, claimed to help reduce cholesterol or with linseeds which are high in omega 3, could help raise sandwich shops’ health credentials further.



FIGURE 6: TRENDS IN THE AGE STRUCTURE OF THE UK POPULATION, 2009-14

5.7

11.1

-5.5

-7.2

0.1

12.1

8.4

-0.8

12.9

3.6

-9.1

-15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0

0-4

5-9

10-14

15-19

20-24

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65+

All

% change, 2009-14

SOURCE: OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS/GAD/MINTEL

More 25-34s = good news • The growing number of 25-34-year-olds is good news for the sandwich shops. Four in five of them

(81%) had bought sandwiches, including three in five (59%) at a sandwich chain and one in five (18%) at a sandwich shop.

• The 25-34-year-olds are the most likely age group to give weight to convenience and naturalness when making purchases. This age group is also drawn to variety, being above-average likely to enjoy trying new flavours and to visit different shops for variety.

• These findings underline the importance of new product development and changing menus to attract this core user group. They also suggest that sandwich shops could leverage their inherent convenience and naturalness as competitive strengths.

ABs forecast to grow • The AB population is projected to expand faster and more than any other over 2009-14, by nearly

1 million people, despite the economic downturn.

• Three in four of them had bought sandwiches, 52% at a sandwich shop chain and 17% at an independent sandwich shop.

• The ABs are the most likely of the socio-economic groups to give weight to convenience and naturalness when making purchases, as well as keeping an eye on calories and looking for light variants.



• This signals a general willingness and ability to take into account choice factors other than price. For example, 22% of ABs agree that good-quality ingredients are worth paying more for, underlining the risk of alienating these consumers through a fierce price focus.

• Almost half (48%) of ABs say they prefer sandwiches made for them to prepacked ones, the most likely group to think so. While specialist sandwich shops are best placed to cater for this demand, they must also live up to ABs’ expectations in areas like healthy and natural credentials.

FIGURE 7: FORECAST CHANGES IN ADULT POPULATION TRENDS, BY SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUP, 2004-09 AND 2009-14

10.0

3.1

0.8

-0.8

4.8

2.4

0.3

4.3

3.8

3.6

7.4

-3.4

-6.0 -4.0 -2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

AB

C1

C2

D

E

All

% change

% change 2009-14

% change 2004-09


Consumer confidence Recognised as a key driver of consumer spending, consumer confidence has been on a downtrend since late 2007. However, having hit a low point after the financial crisis, it has steadily recovered since early 2009.



FIGURE 8: UK: NATIONWIDE CONSUMER CONFIDENCE INDEX, 2004-09

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Northern Rock

Housing market peaks

Lehmans

SOURCE: NATIONWIDE/MINTEL

This recovery is also apparent in Mintel's consumer research.

• Nearly three in four consumers now see their financial situation as healthy or okay.

• The ‘healthy’ responses have leaped ahead from 21% in February 2009 to 30% in September, boding well for discretionary spending, including bought sandwiches.

• Meanwhile, just making ends meet has fallen from 28% to 21% of responses.



FIGURE 9: HOW RESPONDENTS DESCRIBE THEIR FINANCIAL SITUATION, SEPTEMBER 2009 Base: internet users aged 16+

Healthy – I have money left at the

end of the month for a few luxuries or to add to my savings

30%

Tight – I’m making ends meet, but only

just21%

Struggling – I’m in danger of falling

behind w ith bills or loan repayments

6%

OK – I get by, but there’s not a lot left

by the time the basics are taken

care of41%

In trouble – I’ve missed loan

repayments or household bills

2%

SOURCE: GMI/MINTEL



FIGURE 10: CHANGE IN HOW RESPONDENTS DESCRIBE THEIR FINANCIAL SITUATION, FEBRUARY-SEPTEMBER 2009 Base: internet users aged 16+

8.8

0

-6.8

-1.9

-0.2

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10

Healthy – I have money left at the end of the month fora few luxuries or to add to my savings

OK – I get by, but there’s not a lot left by the time thebasics are taken care of

Tight – I’m making ends meet, but only just

Struggling – I’m in danger of falling behind w ith bills orloan repayments

In trouble – I’ve missed loan repayments or householdbills

% point change Feb-Sep 09

SOURCE: GMI/MINTEL

The proportion of consumers concerned about their finances shows an upward trend to October 2009, however, a slight downward trend is apparent in the last few months.

It now remains to be seen whether consumer sentiment continues to improve in 2010, despite Mintel’s expectations of another challenging year for the consumers. FIGURE 11: PROPORTION OF CONSUMERS CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR FINANCES, FEBRUARY 2008-DECEMBER 2009

34

4441

5349

54 52

5856

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Feb-08 Nov-08 Jan-09 Mar-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09

%

SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



Against this background, we forecast a return to growth in consumer expenditure in 2010, gaining momentum in later years. FIGURE 12: INDEX OF CONSUMER EXPENDITURE, CURRENT PRICES, 2004-14

100

105

110

115

120

125

130

135

140

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009(est)

2010(fore)

2011(proj)

2012(proj)

2013(proj)

2014(proj)

Inde

x (2

004=

100)


Unemployment • The UK has faced rising unemployment since spring 2008. The increases moderated over summer

2009, the rate broadly stabilising at 7.8% in August 2009.

• Consumer incomes have been impacted on a national level, thus putting pressure on spending. This has been exacerbated by the news of redundancies dampening consumer confidence.

• Youth unemployment reached a record high of 19.8% in autumn 2009, and this is expected to impact youth spending which until now has remained robust during the recession.

• The lower level of consumer confidence feeds into cuts on discretionary spending, with 30% of adults reporting cutting back on spending on lunch in our consumer research, including 37% of sandwich buyers.

• Meanwhile, those at home during the day are less likely to need to buy lunch on the go, including sandwiches. Two in five retired and one in three of those not working had not bought sandwiches in the last three months, according to our consumer research.



FIGURE 13: UK UNEMPLOYMENT RATE: AGED 16+, MONTHLY (SEASONALLY ADJUSTED), JANUARY 2008-JULY 2009

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Jan-08

Mar-08

May-08

Jul-08

Sep-08

Nov-08

Jan-09

Mar-09

May-09

Jul-09

%

SOURCE: OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS/MINTEL

Eating out vs. eating in • More than half of adults (54%) have cut back on their spending on eating out; 46% have cut back

on the frequency of eating out, particularly the 35-44-year-olds (54%) and households with children (53%, see Eating Out Review – UK, July 2009).

• Three in ten people have cut back on spending on lunch, including around two in five 16-44-year-olds, full-time employed, C1C2s and parents of children aged under 10, as well as 46% of students, according to our consumer research.

• Two in five (42%) 16-24-year-olds are spending less than £5 for an everyday meal when eating out (see Eating Out Review – UK, July 2009), underlining the importance of competitive price points or meal deals for sandwich shops like Subway.

• The overall popularity of eating out at lunchtime declined in 2007 and 2008, from 41% of adults in 2006 to 37% in 2008. However, the share of those eating out at least three times a month rose from 33% to 38% over 2006-08.

• The most likely 'heavy users' – people eating lunch out at least once a week – are men, 15-34-year-olds, C2DEs, parents of children under 1 and singles.



FIGURE 14: EATING OUT AT LUNCHTIME ON WEEKDAYS AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK, BY GENDER, AGE AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUP, 2008 Base: users aged 15+

Women

55-64

+65

All

E

15-24

45-54

35-44

D

C2

AB

C1

25-34Men

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

% o

f dem

ogra

phic

gro

up

Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2008 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL

Key analysis: Such economising has created demand for outlets at lower price points, such as takeaway and ready meals. Sandwich shops are well positioned to take advantage of cutting back on the lunch occasion, but have done little thus far to position themselves as an alternative to takeaway meals.

There are considerable overlaps between groups likely to have cut back on lunch and those eating out at lunchtime at least once a week. Promotions geared at regular users such as loyalty cards could help sandwich shops to retain their custom.

Competitive Context Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Competitive Context Key points • Sandwich shops compete with a wide range of outlets from the foodservice and retail sectors,

as well as the homemade variant.

• The rapidly expanding coffee shops are in closer competition with sandwich shops as the former have broadened their food offer and the latter have begun to offer specialist coffees.

• Chicken and burger bars have held their ground in the recession, thanks to their low price points and value positioning, which also puts them in competition with the sandwich shops.

• Many pubs have focused on their food offering since the smoking ban. With value meals priced as low as £2.99, pubs too are encroaching on the sandwich shops' territory.

• Two in five adults think there's no point buying a sandwich they could make at home. The recession has seen homemade sandwiches gain ground. One in four adults were eating more homemade sandwiches as of October 2009, though the share has fallen since then.

FIGURE 15: PERFORMANCE OF COMPETING MARKETS, MARKET SIZES, 2005-09 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (est) % change

2005-09 £m £m £m £m £m Coffee shops 665 834 1,035 1,155 1,195 +79.7 Pub catering 6,036 6,808 7,250 7,577 7,808 +29.4 Chicken and burger bars 3,278 3,454 3,603 3,707 3,726 +13.7 Convenience stores 30,100 29,900 30,900 30,400 30,600 +1.7 Sandwich shops 1,115 1,290 1,488 1,709 1,851 +66.0 SOURCE: MINTEL



FIGURE 16: PERFORMANCE OF COMPETING MARKETS, INDEX, 2005-09

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (e)

Inde

x (2

005=

100)

Coffee shops Pub catering Chicken and burger bars

Convenience stores Sandw ich shops

SOURCE: MINTEL

Coffee shops • An estimated 80% sales growth in the coffee shop market over the five years to 2009 was driven

by store expansion and strong underlying sales at existing stores.

• Growth in the coffee shop market slowed in 2008, with most major operators reporting slowing, even negative, like-for-like growth, hit by weakening consumer confidence and spending. Impacted severely by the downturn, the Coffee Republic chain collapsed in summer 2009.

• The major operators have in total around 2,000 stores in the UK, Costa having over 1,000 stores, Starbucks around 750 in the UK and Ireland and Caffè Nero reporting over 400 stores in the UK, at end 2009.

• Expansion of the coffee shops' food ranges has helped to drive up transaction values, with food gaining share in overall sales, and reaching 31% of total sales at Costa UK in 2007/08, the latest year for which it has reported this ratio.

• The coffee shops have also looked to boost their appeal with offers such as a lunchtime meal deal at Costa, eg a panini and cappuccino for £4.95.

• Key analysis: The broadening food offer and expansion into catering for various meal occasions has put coffee shops in more direct competition with the sandwich shops, while the latter now increasingly offer high-margin specialist coffees, further blurring the line between the two.

• This underlines the need for sandwich shops to differentiate themselves through their major USPs, ie sandwiches made to order and new product development.



Fast food outlets • The low price points and value positioning of the chicken and burger bars have helped the sector

to hold its ground in the recession, in contrast to much of the eating out market.

• The major chains have reacted to falling consumer spending by reinforcing their value positioning. KFC introduced a mini variety box for 99p in July 2009, McDonald's advertised a range of products at 99p and Burger King launched the King Deal of burger, drink and fries at £1.99.

• The wider variety of meal occasions catered for by the outlets, from snacking to meal replacement and breakfast, has also helped to protect them from the downturn. Meanwhile most have continued to drive excitement through time-limited new product launches.

• The three major operators had around 2,500 branches in total in the UK in 2009, McDonald's taking the lead with 1,200 stores, KFC following with more than 700 stores in the UK and Ireland and Burger King with around 650 in the UK.

• McDonald's in particular has been moving into the coffee/sandwich shop territory. The outlets have been revamped in coffeehouse style, and products such as 'deli sandwiches', salads, breakfast muffins/porridge and specialist coffees have appeared on the menu aimed at broadening its appeal.

• The low price points have put the fast food operators in competition with the sandwich shops, the £1.99 meal deal undercutting those offered by many grocers and specialist sandwich chains. However, sandwich shops are well positioned to underline their offer as healthier, fresh and natural.

Pubs • Worth around £7.5 million in 2008, the pub food market accounted for 28% of pub trade, with

four in five pubs estimated to have offered food in 2007 (see Pub Catering – UK, July 2008).

• Estimated to have grown by just shy of 30% over the 2005-09 period, the market's strong performance has benefited from many pubs focusing on their food offering since the introduction of the smoking ban.

• The pub sector has been hit by rising costs and taxes and the regulatory burden on the one hand, and weaker consumer confidence and cutbacks on spending on the other, with 52 pubs closing weekly in the first half of 2009, according to the British Beer & Pub Association (BBPA).

• Data from the BBPA suggest that pubs serving food are doing better in the downturn (closing at a rate of one a week) than their counterparts focused mostly on selling drinks (closing at a rate of 51 a week), as reported in summer 2009.

• Many pubs are using special offers on food to drive footfall. JD Wetherspoon for example has introduced a range of value meals at £2.99 and £3.99 each, such as spicy tomato pasta and steak and kidney pudding, as well as an 'afternoon deal' of fish and chips at £3.20.

• Key analysis: At such price points, the pub meal is entering the same price territory as the shop/café-bought sandwich, while offering a hot, sit-down meal. Could independent sandwich shops join forces with pubs struggling to provide a food offering for the benefit of both?



Convenience stores • Mintel defines a convenience store as “any store which is complementary to a superstore, which is

geared to top-up shopping and which gains only a small part of its business from primary shoppers”.

• The c-stores are the grocers’ main channel into the lunch/sandwich/snack market, far outnumbering sandwich shops in terms of store numbers.

FIGURE 17: LEADING CONVENIENCE STORE RETAILERS’ OUTLETS, 2008/09 Retailer Number of outlets Tesco 3,492 Of which: Express 961 One Stop 512 Co-operative Group 3,320 Spar UK Ltd 2,544 Musgrave 2,531 Premier 2,100 Budgens/Londis 2,044 Londis 1,861 Lifestyle Express 1,800 Costcutter 1,564 Mace (GB) 720 M&S 668 Best-One 633* Nisa 600 Bargain Booze 600 Northern Ireland 487 McColls 300 KeyStore 300 Sainsbury’s 290 Budgens 183 Select & Save 112 * Includes food departments in stores SOURCE: MINTEL

• Sales through convenience stores are estimated to have grown by 2% over the period 2005-09, to £30.6 billion, seeing them lose share of all food retailers’ sales.

• The relatively low growth reflects the c-stores’ focus on food, a mature and generally low growth area, and their weakness in the highest-growth areas of grocery retailing like non-food and premium foods.

• A number of the grocers are heating up competition with new promotions; M&S and Tesco introducing £2 meal deals in early 2009, Poundland rolling out its £1 sandwich offer in late 2009 and Morrisons planning to add prepared hot sandwiches to its Market Street stores from September 2010.

• With 46% of the sandwich-eating population preferring the tailor-made variant, only one in four (26%) are willing to pay more for the bespoke option, the competition from the grocers poses a growing challenge for the sandwich shops.



Competition from the homemade sandwiches • The shop-bought sandwich is under increasing competitive pressure from homemade sandwiches,

particularly during the recession, as one in three adults (34%) report cooking from scratch more than they did a year ago (October 2009).

• One in five adults (19%) are eating more homemade sandwiches, this share rising to nearly a quarter among 25-44-year-olds, part-time workers and households earning less than £15,500.

• Sandwich suppliers marked in autumn 2009 a revival in sales of prepacked sandwiches, attributed to 'recession fatigue', and a greater focus by sandwich manufacturers on better value options. The expectation was for a shift towards more varied and less price-focused diet choices.

• A similar trend is apparent in Mintel's consumer research, where the share of adults eating more homemade sandwiches was rising from June 2009 (15%) to October (23%), before dipping to 19% in November.

• Two in five adults (39%) agree that there's no point buying a sandwich they could make at home, rising to 44% among DEs and more than half (53%) among the over-55s. Meanwhile, just 3% say it's expensive to make shop-style sandwiches at home.

• Key analysis: This underlines the importance of not dumbing down the range at sandwich shops in the quest to cut prices. While convenience is a key driver for all food on the go, sandwiches in particular must justify their value, including through qualities difficult to replicate at home, such as ingredient quality and innovation.

Strengths and Weaknesses Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Strengths and Weaknesses Strengths • Almost three quarters (73%) of adults buy sandwiches, signalling the lasting popularity of this

lunchtime staple and on-the-go classic.

• Sandwiches enjoy a surprisingly wholesome image, with only one in four people saying they aren’t healthy eaten every day.

• Only one in three sandwich buyers think it’s boring to eat sandwiches regularly, underlining the role of the ‘sarnie’ as a popular favourite.

• Despite the competitive pressure from the ever-expanding grocery stores, sandwich shops have held the lead in popularity, used by 52% of adults to buy sandwiches, compared to 45% using grocery stores despite their much more comprehensive store coverage.

• The leading sandwich shop chains' store numbers rose by 60% over 2006-09. A number of operators have announced plans for expansion, set to drive specialists' sales going forward.

Weaknesses • Two in five adults deem it pointless to buy a sandwich they could make at home. Competition

from the homemade sandwich has been particularly pronounced during the recession.

• Shop-bought sandwiches are seen as over-priced by nearly half of all sandwich buyers. Only one in three feel that low price doesn’t automatically equal good value, putting the market under ongoing price pressure.

• The prepacked and tailor-made sandwich are almost equally popular among sandwich buyers, but only one in four would pay more for the latter. This makes it harder for specialist sandwich shops to compete with other outlets.

• The recession and limited availability of credit are particularly hard on smaller businesses, with independent sandwich shops and chains in the danger zone, often with little or no funds to tide them over.

• The popularity of buying sandwiches falls with age. This could see sandwich shops lose out as the number of over-65s is expected to grow by over a million over 2009-14.

Strengths and Weaknesses Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Who’s Innovating? Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Who’s Innovating? Key points • Range extensions dominated launch activity in 2009, taking over from new products that

held the lead in 2008.

• Subway and Pret introduced nutrition information in their stores in 2009, with potential to attract the 29% of sandwich buyers seeking healthy options.

• ‘No additives/preservatives’ remains the top claim in sandwiches in nearly half of new launches. Limited edition variants have held a steady share, while ‘microwaveables’ leaped ahead in 2009.

• Local and British products made their mark among new product launches in 2009, reflecting the interest in authenticity and provenance during the recession.

Range extensions dominate in 2009 • Range extensions dominated launch activity in 2009, taking over from new products that held the

lead in 2008. Uncertain times often spark a level of cautiousness among brands and a preference for range extensions over the higher risk and investment involved in launching new products.

• The new product count was pushed up in 2008 by the launch of Heinz's short-lived sandwich range and by M&S Gourmet to Go premium range. Waitrose trialled more exotic flavours like the Mango Chilli and Lime Wrap with Soy-Honey Dip and Greek Feta Salad Sandwich.

• Sandwich shop chains contribute to keeping up the levels of new product launches, Pret and EAT for example are committed to offering weekly specials and regularly updating menus.

• Key analysis: One in three adults (31%) think it is boring to eat sandwiches or wraps regularly, rising to two in five 16-24s. Variety and newness are key factors in encouraging higher usage among these customers.

FIGURE 18: NPD ACTIVITY, BY LAUNCH TYPE WITHIN THE UK SANDWICH MARKET, 2007-09 Launch type 2007 2008 2009 % of all launches % of all launches % of all launches New variety/range extension 47.1 31.5 50.9 New product 29.3 50.5 34.5 New formulation 2.1 14.4 14.5 New packaging 1.4 2.7 0.0 Relaunch 20.0 0.9 0.0 Total 100 100 100 NB: Data are for January-December SOURCE: GNPD



Leveraging provenance • The uncertainty in the economy saw provenance, transparency and authenticity become some of

the key consumer trends in 2009, reflected also in some sandwich launches.

• Among the rare new product launches in 2009 was M&S' 'nation's favourites' sandwich range. The packaging features the Union Jack, while the range includes classic flavours such as British Beef and Mustard Roll and Cheese, Chive and Cucumber.

• Tiffin Sandwiches, a Bradford-based convenience food group, launched in autumn 2009 the 'Born 'n' Bread' range of sandwiches. Sourced entirely from products local to Yorkshire, it aimed to support local businesses in the downturn.

• Along similar lines, Sainsbury's announced in July 2009 that its in-store bakeries had switched to 100% British flours, while Hovis announced in November 2009 plans to switch to 100% domestically grown wheat across its range.

Key analysis: Sandwich shops could do more to tap into the interest in and goodwill towards local and British produce, notably by highlighting these credentials where relevant. Independent shops and local chains in particular could look to leverage local origins as a point of difference.

No additives – fresh promises • No additives/preservatives has held its position as the most popular claim in ready-made

sandwiches, jumping ahead in 2009 to nearly half of new launches.

• This ties in with the rising awareness of the issue across the food sector in recent years, brands increasingly highlighting this information as standard.

• However, ready-made sandwiches are an area where perceived freshness continues to play an important role, challenged by the traditional sandwich shops' just-made product. Nearly half (46%) of all adults who buy sandwiches prefer one made on the spot to a prepacked one.

• Looking to disassociate themselves from the negative perceptions of prepacked sandwiches, and to challenge the freshly made variant, sandwich shop chains employ freshness 'guarantees' for their ready-made products, from Pret's same-day pledge to Upper Crust's three-hour promise.

“I rarely buy sandwiches from supermarkets as they do not taste fresh.” – 25-34-year-old ABC1 female



The health issue • Lower-calorie and lower-fat products are in the minority among new product launches. Low-

calorie launches fell outside the top 12 claims in 2009, reflecting a broader shift away from dieting.

• Meanwhile, Subway and Pret were the first sandwich shop chains to introduce nutrition information in their stores in 2009, as part of their collaboration with FSA to provide healthier meals.

• Key analysis: The low share of low-calorie and low-fat launches ties in with the finding that only a minority of sandwich-buying adults seek out healthy options. However, at 29% of adults this translates into a sizeable market.

Hot from the shop • Paninis, hot bagels and wraps made their mark at sandwich shops and cafés some time ago, the hot

product appealing in cold weather, a closer competitor to a hot meal and offering a comfort factor in the recession.

• This has provided a point of difference for the sandwich shops in comparison to sandwiches bought at grocery stores and the homemade sandwiches. However, the leap ahead in microwaveables among new product launches in 2009 sees the shop-bought brands aim to tap into this demand.

“I normally get my sandwiches from Tesco Express, as it is close to college and is generally cheaper. However, when I want something hot I go to Greggs.”

– 16-24-year-old ABC1 male

• Examples of recent launches looking to tap into the hot occasion include Feasters Ham & Cheese Melt Baguette, Snacksters Doner Kebab (pitta breads filled with doner meat) and Ugo's Deli Café Four Cheese and Sweet Red Onion Chutney Hot Crispy Panini.



Limited editions • Limited edition variants have held a steady share at around one in seven launches in the past three

years. Recent examples include Tesco Fish Fingers & Ketchup Sandwich and Waitrose Honey-Roasted Butternut Squash and Beetroot Wrap with Feta Cheese.

• Subway leveraged the same tool with the Reggae Reggae chicken sub, using the Jamaican sauce famous from TV series Dragons' Den, while Greggs launched a Chilli Steak Lattice with Tabasco Sauce, also as a limited edition, a number of chains also launching a Christmas variety in 2009.

Key analysis: Limited editions can help to refresh a brand’s offer and spark interest among the existing user base and attract the attention of non-users.

They also enable the brand to experiment outside its and its core shoppers’ comfort zone, and test new products with less risk of alienating devoted users.

Importantly, limited editions bring added variety to the brand, enabling brands to better attract the nearly one in four (22%) sandwich-buying adults who visit different shops for variety.



FIGURE 19: NPD ACTIVITY, TOP 12 CLAIMS WITHIN THE UK SANDWICH MARKET, 2007-09 Claims 2007 2008 2009 % of all

launches % of all

launches % of all

launches No additives/ preservatives

36.0 No additives/ preservatives

33.3 No additives/ preservatives

47.3

Limited edition 15.3 Environmentally friendly package

18.9 Microwaveable 27.3

Premium 13.5 Vegetarian 17.1 Environmentally friendly package

21.8

Ethical – animal 10.8 Limited edition 15.3 Time/speed 18.2 Vegetarian 9.9 Premium 8.1 Limited edition 12.7 Microwaveable 8.1 Low/no/reduced

calorie 8.1 Ease of use 12.7

Time/speed 7.2 Ethical – animal 6.3 Vegetarian 9.1 Organic 6.3 Wholegrain 6.3 Low/no/reduced

trans fat 7.3

Environmentally friendly package

4.5 Low/no/reduced fat

5.4 Low/no/reduced fat 7.3

Low/no/reduced trans fat

4.5 Microwaveable 4.5 Seasonal 5.5

Low/no/reduced glycaemic

4.5 Environmentally friendly product

2.7 Ethical – human 3.6

Low/no/reduced calorie 4.5 Ease of use 1.8 Economy 3.6 SOURCE: GNPD

Going mobile The sandwich van is hardly a new idea, however, some operators are showing a rekindled interest in the format.

M&S introduced 'Food to Go' vans in Milton Keynes and Swindon in August 2009. The pilot project saw specially designed M&S vans service local offices, offering a comprehensive selection of sandwiches and other lunchtime foods as well as fruit, snacks, treats and drinks.

Meanwhile, the Phat Pasty Company, a franchise business established in 2007, gained publicity in 2009 by winning the multiple retailer of the year award at the Lunch! event in 2009. The quirky Volkswagen campervan lookalikes offer a range of Cornish pasties made in Newquay as well as a selection of sandwiches, baguettes, soups, snacks and cakes.

The new sandwich van operations look to tap into the lunchtime demand at business parks, an area that Greggs for example has marked as holding potential for future growth, though well positioned to cater for demand in any less central locations, including university campuses or schools.

Sector Size and Forecast Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Sector Size and Forecast Key points • Estimated to have reached £1.85 billion in 2009, the sandwich specialist sector grew by 8%

against 2008 and by an impressive 66% since 2005.

• Rapid store expansion by the leading operators has been the main driver of growth, adding in total around 1,100 net new stores to their combined portfolio over the 2005-09 period.

• Growth of 43% is forecast for the sandwich shops’ sales over 2009-14, to reach £2.6 billion in 2014, the growth set to benefit from large scale store expansion by leading players.

Growth of 43% forecast over 2009-14 FIGURE 20: UK SALES OF SANDWICH SHOPS, AT CURRENT PRICES, AND INDEX OF GROWTH, 2005-14

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (est) 2010(proj)

2011(proj)

2012(proj)

2013(proj)

2014(proj)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

£m Index

SOURCE: MINTEL



FIGURE 21: UK SALES OF SANDWICH SHOPS, AT CURRENT AND CONSTANT PRICES, 2005-14 Current

prices Annual change

Index At 2009 prices

Annual change

Index

£m % £m % 2005 1,115 na 60 1,327 na 72 2006 1,290 +15.7 70 1,503 +13.3 81 2007 1,488 +15.3 80 1,658 +10.3 90 2008 1,709 +14.9 92 1,743 +5.1 94 2009 (est) 1,851 +8.3 100 1,851 +6.2 100 2010 (proj) 2,013 +8.7 109 1,977 +6.8 107 2011 (proj) 2,142 +6.4 116 2,063 +4.3 111 2012 (proj) 2,300 +7.4 124 2,176 +5.5 118 2013 (proj) 2,462 +7.0 133 2,283 +4.9 123 2014 (proj) 2,642 +7.3 143 2,397 +5.0 130 SOURCE: MINTEL FIGURE 22: UK SALES OF SANDWICH SHOPS AND TOTAL UK RETAIL SALES OF SANDWICHES, INDEX OF GROWTH AT CURRENT PRICES, 2005-14

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 (est) 2010(proj)

2011(proj)

2012(proj)

2013(proj)

2014(proj)

Inde

x (2

009=

100)

Sandw ich shops

Sandw ich market

SOURCE: MINTEL

Store expansion fuels sandwich sector Estimated to have reached £1.85 billion in 2009, the sandwich specialist sector has posted impressive growth of 66% since 2005.

• Rapid store expansion has been the main driver of the recent rapid growth. The leading operators grew their combined store numbers by nearly half over the period, or adding approximately 1,100 net new stores.



• The sector's growth has been considerably faster than seen in the overall sandwich market, the latter growing by an estimated 21% over the same period, to £4.4 billion.

• While sandwich retailers have gained share in the overall sandwich market, thanks largely to expanding presence, their growth ahead of the market stems partly from expansion into other product areas, including high-margin products like hot drinks and treats and snacks.

• However, this has seen them come into closer competition with outlets like coffee shops. Meanwhile, many of the major grocers have been expanding their convenience store operations, heating up the competition and pushing down the opening price points for sandwiches.

• Rapidly rising food inflation, particularly in 2008, has contributed to driving up value growth in the sector, the growth in constant terms at just 40% over 2005-09.

• The onset of the recession and weakening consumer confidence has dampened the demand for sandwiches. However, the share of people making more sandwiches at home has fallen from highs of 24% to just 17% in our latest consumer research, good news for sandwich retailers.

• While sandwich shops have lost some customers in the recession, anecdotal evidence suggests they have also gained some among people switching down from higher-priced meal alternatives.

Demographics in favour of sandwiches • Growth of 43% is forecast for the market over 2009-14 to reach £2.6 billion in 2014, 30% growth

in real terms.

• Despite the strong growth in retail sales over Christmas 2009, Mintel expects 2010 to be another challenging year for consumers, with spending likely to remain constrained. This will keep prices high on the consumer agenda, but will continue to work partly in sandwich shops' favour.

• Considerable uncertainty remains over how consumers will change their purchase behaviour once their confidence eventually returns. Early signs suggest that some measures, like making sandwiches at home, are soon forgotten.

• The recent high food price inflation has moderated rapidly in 2009 and is not expected to reach levels similar to those in 2008, with a dampening effect on value growth in the sector in relative terms.

• Some positive momentum is expected to come from the growing number of 25-34-year-olds and ABs in the population, both groups being keen sandwich buyers, nearly half of the latter preferring tailor-made to prepacked version.

• Meanwhile, the rise in the number of over-55s looks set to pose a challenge for the sandwich shops, as their appeal falls rapidly with age.

More stores ahead The short-term outlook for the sector is dominated by expansion plans of the leading operators:

• Eight new EAT stores opened during 2008/09 and, despite the current economic downturn, the chain has announced plans to double the number of stores to 200 over the next three to five years.



• Baguette Express is looking to double its store count from the current 60 to some 120-130 stores by the end of 2010. The group targets a portfolio of more than 300 franchised stores over the next five years.

• Greggs, currently with more than 1,400 stores, announced plans to open some 600 branches in the medium term, in autumn 2009. The group expects to open 50-60 outlets in 2010 and around 70 a year going forward, also planning to refurbish 120 of its shops every year starting in 2010.

• Subway has also passed the 1,400-store market, but announced plans for a further 600 stores in the UK and Ireland by 2010 in February 2009.

• If these plans materialise, they would add around 1,500 new stores to the sector, pushing up combined store numbers by more than 40%, with potential to drive considerable growth in sales.

• However, this expansion will put mounting pressure on independent sandwich shops, some of the growth likely to come at their expense. We expect to see consolidation take place in the segment in the recession, and as the leading operators expand.

Factors used in the forecast Mintel has used the SPSS time series package to forecast the market to 2014. SPSS correlates historical market size data with key economic and demographic determinants (independent variables), identifying those factors having most influence on the market. Using forward projections of these factors, a market size forecast is produced. The growth of the UK retail value sales of sandwiches was used as the factor to generate the forecast.

Competitor Analysis and Market Shares Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Competitor Analysis and Market Shares Key points • The two leading players – Greggs and Subway – are in a league of their own, estimated to

capture more than half of sector sales. The remainder of the sector, apart from Pret, is highly fragmented.

• Greggs holds the lead by a strong margin. It has lost market share in recent years, largely due to a slower-than-average rate of store expansion.

• Subway has been rapidly gaining share, now taking nearly a quarter of sector sales, thanks to some 450 new stores opened over 2006-08.

Two operators dominate • Greggs and Subway are currently in a league of their own in sales terms, as expected given that

these are the only chains with a national presence.

• Pret has made its mark as the only other operator of size, only a sixth of the size of Subway in terms of store numbers, but enjoying sales at nearly half those estimated at Subway.

• Much of the sector is highly fragmented, dominated by numerous small players, typically with a less than 1% share in the sector.

• We generally expect consolidation to take place in the recession as small operators come under pressure and are forced to leave the market, however, the share of the top five has fallen slightly between 2006 and 2008, reflecting mixed fortunes of the leading players.



FIGURE 23: SANDWICH SPECIALIST RETAILERS: MARKET SHARES, 2006-08 2006 2007 2008 % % % Greggs* 42.7 39.4 36.7 Subway** (est) 15.5 20.2 23.4 Pret 13.7 13.7 13.1 EAT 3.8 4.6 4.4 Upper Crust 3.1 (est) 3.0 (est) 2.9 O'Briens (est) 2.6 2.4 2.3 Benjys*** 2.6 - - Philpotts 0.6 0.6 0.6 Baguette Express 0.1 0.3 0.5 Bagel Factory 0.6 0.4 0.4 Total of above 85.3 84.5 84.5 Other sandwich shops**** (est) 14.7 15.5 15.5 Total sandwich shops 100.0 100.0 100.0 * including sales through stores operating as Bakers Oven ** includes sales generated in the Republic of Ireland *** fell into administration in February 2007 **** includes other outlets that are predominantly engaged in the retailing of sandwiches SOURCE: COMPANY ACCOUNTS & ANNUAL REPORTS/MINTEL

Greggs • Greggs has held its lead in the market, though it has lost market share in recent years. This partly

reflects the low number of store openings compared to its competitors, an increase of just 6% over 2006-08.

• Store expansion contributed to the sales growth of 14% over 2006-08. Sales also benefited from a greater number of stores adopting longer opening hours or Sunday trading in 2007, and the launch of the group’s first ever TV advertising.

• Greggs’ price-led positioning has supported sales during the recession; the group reported 4% growth in like-for-like sales in 2008, partly thanks to its launch of a range of products at 99p during the year.

• Following a strategic review in 2006, the group has pulled out of Belgium and is bringing all its stores under the Greggs’ banner to better leverage the brand. A centralised management structure is also being adopted, with central teams for retail, marketing and supply chain functions.

• Greggs noted in August 2009 plans to open some 600 branches in the medium term. The group expects to open 50-60 outlets in 2010 and around 70 a year going forward, including expansion beyond its traditional high street locations to transport hubs and retail parks.

Subway • Subway posted the fastest sales growth of the established sandwich chains over 2006-09, and is

estimated to have doubled its sales. A franchise-based operation, Subway does not release comprehensive sales data for the chain.



• Rapid store expansion, from 850 outlets in 2006 to 1,300 in 2008, was the main driver of the chain’s sales growth over the period, the group also seeing robust underlying sales.

• Ambitious plans to open another 600 stores in UK and Ireland by 2010, taking the total to more than 2,000, were announced by the group in February 2009.

• Subway remains behind Greggs in terms of usage (35% vs. 26% of adults) and estimated sales, despite having taken over its rival in terms of store numbers. While it is used by half of 16-24-year-olds, this share falls rapidly with age.

• Compared to competitors, Subway franchisees benefit from large-scale advertising campaigns boosting brand visibility. Subway spent £9.5 million on advertising in 2008, declining to £6.2 million in 2009.

• Subway seems to have benefited in the downturn, thanks to its affordable price positioning, sharpened by offers such ‘Sub of the Day’ at £1.99 and the range of snack-sized variants at £1.

• It has also taken the lead in the health stakes, providing nutritional information in stores and forming partnership with Heart Research UK in 2009. This helps Subway to differentiate from the burger restaurants, as well as attracting the sizeable minority of health-aware sandwich buyers.

Pret A Manger • With 232 stores, Pret is only a sixth of the size of its larger competitors, Greggs and Subway, in

terms of store numbers.

• It stands much closer to the two in terms of sales, at £224 million in 2008, signalling considerably higher sales per store, partly reflecting its more upmarket price positioning.

• However, this positioning appears to have made Pret more vulnerable to the recession. A 27% rise in its sales over 2006-08 came on the back of a 30% rise in store numbers, suggesting that underlying sales have been negatively affected by the consumer cutbacks in 2008.

• The group secured substantial liquidity when it was acquired by the private equity firm Bridgepoint Capital in February 2008. Investment in expansion has focused on the US in 2009, as the group is reported to see it as a key growth driver after UK profits have flattened out.

• Future growth in the UK is thus likely to lag behind previous levels, though the group is reported to have seen comparable sales return to growth in its domestic market during 2009.



Leading sandwich shops’ retail sales and outlet numbers FIGURE 24: SANDWICH SPECIALIST RETAILERS: SALES, 2006-08 2006 2007 2008 % change £m £m £m 2006-08 Greggs* 551 587 628 +14.0 Subway** 200 (e) 300 (e) 400 (e) +100.0 Pret 177 204 224 +26.6 EAT 49 68 76 +55.1 Upper Crust 40 (e) 45 (e) 50 +25.0 O'Briens 33 (e) 35 (e) 41(e) +22.7 Benjys*** 33 - - - Philpotts 8 9 11 +37.5 Baguette Express 1 4 8 +700.0 Bagel Factory 8 6 7 -12.5 Total of above 1,100 1,258 1,444 +31.3 Other sandwich shops (est) 190 230 265 +39.5 Total sandwich shops 1,290 1,488 1,709 +32.5 * including sales through stores operating as Bakers Oven ** includes sales generated in the Republic of Ireland *** fell into administration in February 2007 SOURCE: COMPANY ACCOUNTS AND ANNUAL REPORTS/MINTEL FIGURE 25: SANDWICH SPECIALIST RETAILERS: STORES, 2006-09 2006 2007 2008 2009 % change % change 2006-08 2006-09 Greggs* 1,335 1,368 1,409 1,420 +5.5 +12.7 Subway** 850 1,100 1,300 1,480 +52.9 +148.2 Pret*** 167 193 217 232 +29.9 +77.8 Eat 75 90 96 na +28.0 -200.0 O'Briens 140 125 135 90 -3.6 -71.4 Upper Crust na na 57 64 na na Baguette Express 7 28 48 58 +585.7 +1457.1 Bagel Factory na na na 25 na na Philpotts 13 18 20 21 +53.8 +123.1 Quiznos 27 29 17 13 -37.0 -103.7 Benjys**** 46 - - - - - Total of above 2,614 2,951 3,299 3,403 +26.2 +60.4 * including stores operating as Bakers Oven ** includes Republic of Ireland *** includes a small number of international stores **** fell into administration in February 2007 SOURCE: COMPANY ACCOUNTS AND ANNUAL REPORTS/MINTEL

Companies and Products Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Companies and Products

Major players

Bagel Factory www.bagelfactory.co.uk

• Bagel Factory is the trading name of Great American Bagel Factory, established in 1996.

• It had 25 outlets in the UK, including 16 in London, most located at railway or underground stations as at December 2009. A handful of loss-making sites have closed or are under review for closure.

• The business reported a turnover of £7.3 million in the year to September 2008, against £5.5 million in the nine months to the end of September 2007.

• Operating losses of £0.73 million in 2007/08 were said to reflect the enforced closure of its outlet in the Eurostar terminal at Waterloo station and the closure of its outlets at Harrods Dress Circle and Edinburgh Virgin Active when their leases expired.

• Bagel Factory acquired Oi! Bagel Trading Limited with its five delicatessen-style bagel outlets in August 2008, however, these have reportedly performed below expectations and three are under review to be closed.

• A cost-cutting programme launched in September 2008 aimed to reduce the annual support costs by more than £300,000.

Product offer

• The company sells American-style bagels filled on the spot, from the menu or made to order. The breakfast varieties start from £1 (buttered bagel), most selling at £2-2.99, with the lunch range priced at £3-4.

• The product offer also includes speciality coffees and soft drinks, soups, salads and a variety of cakes and sweet snacks. The company’s Bagel Factory Catering Service delivers breakfast and lunch platters for online orders.

Baguette Express www.baguette-express.co.uk

• Scotland-based Baguette Express is one of the recent entrants into the national league of sandwich shop chains, aiming for more than 300 stores in the next five years.

• Brothers Robin and Billy Stenhouse established a baguette outlet in 1999. The launch of a franchise format in 2006 has fuelled rapid expansion, the chain approaching 60 stores at end 2009, with turnover expected to reach £15 million.

Recent activity

• The firm awarded the master franchises for Greater London and Greater Manchester in autumn and winter 2009, as well as signing franchisees for 20 locations.



• On the back of these, the chain is expected to reach some 120-130 stores by the end of 2010. The group targets a portfolio of more than 300 franchised stores over the next five years.

Product offer

• With the strapline ‘fresh, healthier food’, the store concept is based around a made-to-order sandwich or baguette, reminiscent of Subway or the traditional sandwich shop.

• Customers combine their choices from a range of fillings (eg cheese, egg, ham, chicken, lettuce), sauce and breads or bakery goods (eg baguette, roll, sandwich, panini). Alternatively, the fillings and sauce can be ordered as a salad or with a baked potato.

• The pricing aims for transparency, based on the choice of bread (or potato/salad) irrespective of filling. Prices vary depending on location, eg baguettes priced between £2 and £3.

• A range of breakfast products at 99p were highlighted as a January promotion at the time of writing, including a toastie or half a baguette with two fillings or a hot drink.

EAT www.eat.co.uk

• Founded in 1996, EAT is a family-owned sandwich shop chain.

• It opened its 100th store in autumn 2009, more than 80 of these operating in London, with a handful of stores in Manchester and Birmingham and some in smaller cities and at airports.

• Eight new stores opened during 2008/09 and, despite the current economic downturn, the chain has announced plans to double the number of stores to 200 over the next three to five years.

• The company’s founders were considering selling it, but decided against this in 2008 when interested parties proved unwilling to match their £150 million valuation for the company.

• EAT reported sales of £75.5 million in the year to the end of June 2009, up from £68.1 million the previous year. A 3% decline in like-for-like sales was offset by new store openings.

• Operating profits fell from £3.8 million in 2007/08 to £2.7 million in 2008/09, reflecting the combination of rising commodity prices and thus costs, and weakening underlying sales.

Recent activity

• EAT was expected to complete installing contactless payment technology across its stores by mid-November 2009, the rollout following a trial in 24 outlets in London in 2008.

Product range

• A strong range of sandwiches is at the heart of EAT’s product offer. The seasonally changing range includes baguettes, wraps and toasted sandwiches, and vegetarian and wheat-free alternatives.

• The product range spans well beyond sandwiches, to include soups, pies, salads, sushi, desserts, baked goods, breakfast (including porridge), juices, cold drinks and speciality coffees.

• EAT sandwiches, soups and salads are said to be made in their own kitchens, on the day, as the group looks to differentiate itself with freshness and quality.



• It has looked to bring greater variety to the product offer by having a daily rotating soup menu and three sandwiches that change on a weekly basis.

Product developments

• EAT reported launching 125 new products in the year to June 2009, focusing on seasonal products. It sees product innovation as a critical focus area, and is looking to continue to regularly launch new products.

• Reflecting EAT’s focus on freshness, it launched the Pho soup in autumn 2009, where the soup pot with ingredients is picked up from the chilled cabinet and filled with broth by counter staff.

• Another innovative step looking to bring retro foods to the office lunch and on-the-go menu sees EAT serve hot pies in a box that opens out as a plate.

• While maintaining a strong range of classic sandwiches on its menu, EAT has also ventured into the more exotic realm with flavours like Thai citrus chicken, Tuna, ginger and wasabi, and Bombay bhaji.

Greggs Plc www.greggs.co.uk www.greggsthebakers.co.uk

• Established in the 1930s, Greggs is the leading bakery retailer in the UK, with 1,420 outlets nationwide at December 2009. In addition to the Greggs outlets, the group also owns the Bakers Oven chain, currently being rebranded to Greggs.

• Greggs saw sales rise by 7% to £628 million in 2008, like-for-like sales increasing by 4.4%. Operating profits fell by 7% in 2008 despite the rise in sales, excluding one-off and exceptional gains and costs. Operating margin weakened only slightly from 8.1% in 2007 to 7.1%, despite considerable rises in the costs of energy and raw materials.

• Greggs reported a 5% rise in sales for 2009 in its Christmas results. Like-for-like sales grew by 0.8% for the year, suggesting a considerable weakening in the second half, with like-for-like growth in the first half of 1.5%. The operating margin stood at 5% in the first half of 2009.

Recent activities

• The rebranding of the 165 Bakers Oven outlets to Greggs is under way, aimed to leverage synergy benefits by focusing on a single brand nationally. Some 40% of the chain had been converted by the end of June 2009.

• To focus fully on growth opportunities in the UK, the group took the decision to pull out of Belgium, where its ten-store operation was said to have been making losses for the past five years.

• The trial of a new high street concept store aimed to make ‘grab-and-go’ purchases easier was announced in August 2009. The format features more floor space and more impulse products, with two more stores planned by end 2009.

• Greggs has also noted plans to expand beyond its traditional high street locations to for instance transport hubs and retail parks, opening a concession in the Euro Garages' forecourt in Bury in August 2009.



• Plans to open some 600 branches in the medium term were noted by Greggs in August 2009. The group expects to open 50-60 outlets in 2010 and around 70 a year going forward, also planning to refurbish 120 of its shops every year from 2010.

Product range

• On-the-go food like savouries, sandwiches, sweet treats and drinks is now said to account for around two thirds of the business. These categories are also said to have driven recent growth over bakery goods like bread, rolls and cakes.

• The company is looking to harmonise 80% of its product offer on a national basis, as part of the aim to forge a more unified brand experience, while the remaining 20% of the offer will consist of regional and local specialist products.

• The group’s 2008 review highlighted the expansion of the healthy products and hot sandwiches ranges and more new lines. The sandwich range was harmonised and relaunched in the first half of 2009, including up to a quarter of the range becoming mayonnaise-free.

• Greggs is said to plan to roll out nutrition information on packaging and point-of-sale displays for savouries, sandwiches and drinks across its stores in early 2010, as part of its move to enable healthy choices.

• In response to the interest in new products, Greggs launched the chicken fajita pasty in the first half of 2009. In autumn 2009 it introduced a limited edition Chilli Steak Lattice pasty, the collaboration with another brand, Tabasco Sauce, a first for the group.

• The company launched a range of sandwiches priced at up to 99p in 2008, to continue attracting customers in the recession. In response to the intense competition in the lunch foods market, it also offers a £2.99 meal deal including a sandwich, sweet treat and drink.

Promotions

• Greggs launched its first ever TV advertising in 2007, recruiting comedian Paddy McGuinness as the face of the brand. The series of ads, most recently in spring 2009, saw the comedian visit Greggs outlets to highlight the quality, freshness and accessible price points of the products.

• Greggs spent £3.6 million on advertising in 2008, of which £3 million was on TV ads, with smaller investments on radio and press, at £0.3 million and £0.2 million respectively. Adspend appears to have been cut back on heavily in 2009, to just £1.3 million for the eight months to August.

O'Briens Irish Sandwich Bars www.obriensonline.com

Established in the late 1980s, Ireland-based O'Briens had built a chain of more than 100 franchised sandwich stores in the UK by mid-2009. The parent group had more than 220 stores in 13 countries, the majority in the UK and Ireland, with a smaller number further afield in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and North America.

The UK subsidiary was placed into administration in June of the year, having been hit by poor trading as consumer spending and footfall fell. This affected the business severely, as it held the leases for its outlets and sublet them to franchisees, becoming liable for rents on empty units.



However, the subsidiary in administration had on 1 June transferred the UK franchise agreements to a new company, O'Brien's Franchising (UK), and 90 stores were said to be trading in the summer, the group website site listing 86 stores as at December 2009.

The UK subsidiary was in January 2010 bought from administration by a newly formed company, O’Briens Irish Sandwich Bars (Franchising) UK. O’Briens in the UK also reportedly hired a new marketing agency in January, as it is said to prepare for a marketing push in 2010, including improved store branding, advertising and promotions and plans for expansion.

The Irish subsidiary went into liquidation in the autumn, being bought by Abrakebabra Investments Limited, which also controls the Bagel Factory and Gourmet Burger Kitchen chains in Ireland in October.

Pret A Manger www.pret.com

• Established in 1986, Pret A Manger (Pret) is an independent sandwich shop chain with 199 outlets in the UK, nine in Hong Kong and 24 in the US, as at November 2009.

• The chain describes itself as offering “handmade natural food avoiding … obscure chemicals, additives and preservatives”. In line with this positioning, ingredients are delivered and the food prepared daily, with any prepared food left unsold at the end of the day given to charity.

• Private equity firm Bridgepoint Capital acquired a majority stake in the business in February 2008, including the 33% stake previously held by McDonald’s. The founders and management now hold a third of the business, while Goldman Sachs has a minority stake in the operation.

• The takeover was expected to provide capital for the business to accelerate international expansion.

• The company recorded revenues of £224 million in the year to the end of December 2008, up 10% from £204 million the previous year. The growth came on the back 25 net new stores opened during the year, expanding the Pret estate by 13%.

• Operating profits before exceptional items declined slightly from £19.4 million in 2007 to £17.8 million in 2008.

• In addition to its original takeaway restaurants, the group has expanded into the eat-in market. The Local Pret sit-in outlets are located in smaller towns, suburbs and tourist areas. It also offers a delivery service for orders, mainly aimed to cater for larger orders such as platters.

Recent activity

• Pret signed up to the FSA’s initiative to provide healthier meals outside the home in March 2009, among several catering businesses. Areas of focus under the initiative include reducing the amount of salt and saturated fat in its products and offering fresh fruit, salads and healthier snacks.

• Pret rolled out shelf-edge nutritional labelling for its products across its chain in late 2009, having trialled it in 20 stores as part of its commitment to FSA’s healthy eating goals.

• The chain faced negative publicity over its food labelling in autumn 2009. It emerged Pret used chicken sourced from Brazil and fish from Chile, frozen for shipping to UK, for products described as 'fresh'. In both cases, Pret went on to change the wording.



• Pret began the rollout across its store of contactless payment for purchases under £10 in November 2008, aiming to make payment faster and simpler.

• The chain has been rolling out a free Wi-Fi service across its stores, available at 60 outlets in July 2009, with a target of 130 outlets by the end of the year.

• The majority of Pret outlets are now said to offer customer recycling facilities, introduced in 2008.

Product range

• Sandwiches, baguettes and wraps are at the core of Pret’s offer, including a variety of weekly specials. The menu is said to be “updated all the time”.

• The range has expanded beyond sandwiches to include sushi, salads and soups, cakes and desserts, hot and cold beverages, and crisps and snacks.

• The group is reported to have changed its product mix in the US, adding more soups to its offering and focusing on filter coffee, rather than more elaborate, slower to produce drink options.

Product developments

• Looking to appeal to customers during the recession, Pret introduced a range of more affordable sandwiches in October 2008, priced between £1.50 and £2.49, undercutting the prices of its core range, priced up to £3.50.

• Further steps to attract consumers in the recession followed in early 2009, including the launch of various products priced at around £1, including filter coffee, fruit buns and jam tarts.

• Pret announced in June 2009 that it would stop using bluefin and yellowfin tuna and switch to a more sustainable variety in its sandwiches and sushi by August.

• In a step aimed to highlight the natural ingredients in its juice drinks, Pret revamped the design of its Pure Pret range to include the strapline ‘absolutely no nasties' and images created from the ingredients, eg an image of a dog made from ginger root on a white background on Ginger Beer.

Subway UK www.subway.co.uk

• Founded in 1965 in the US, Subway has grown into a sandwich shop franchise with more than 31,000 outlets in 91 countries around the world, as at September 2009.

• Subway launched in the UK in 1996, reaching 500 stores in the UK and Ireland by mid-2005. It passed the 1,250-store mark in summer 2008 and 1,450 outlets were operating as at September 2009, of which 100 in the Republic of Ireland, owned by over 660 franchisees in total.

• Its sales in the UK and Ireland are estimated to have reached £400 million in 2008.

• Plans to open another 600 stores in UK and Ireland by 2010, taking the total to more than 2,000, were announced by the group in February 2009.

Recent activity

• Subway has looked to leverage healthiness as a point of difference for the brand, introducing point-of-order nutrition information across its outlets in the UK and Ireland in November 2008.



• It also entered into a strategic partnership with Heart Research UK in June 2009, said to aim to encourage healthier diets and lifestyles. This sees Heart Research UK promote Subway low-fat subs as part of a balanced diet, while Subway has raised funds across its stores for the charity.

Product range

• The Subway concept is based around 'submarine sandwiches' filled to order in-store, the product offer also including drinks, salads, wraps and sweet treats. A selection of breakfast variants has been added to the offer to better tap into the breakfast occasion.

• Aimed to attract the more health-driven sandwich aficionados, the range includes eight low-fat variants, with less than 3g of fat per 100g, and typically around kcal 250-300 per six-inch sub, compared to up to kcal 500 for the core range.

• A selection of snack-sized variants was introduced in early 2009. Said to offer a reduced portion-size option, the snacks are also priced at around the £1 mark, well positioned for the recession, together with the daily changing £1.99 'sub of the day'.

• In a bid to attract families, the product offer also includes a mini meal for children, consisting of a mini sub with a drink and treat.

• In line with its commitment to the Food Standard Agency's voluntary salt reduction targets, Subway announced a 19% cut in the salt content of its sandwiches in September 2009.

Promotions

• Subway launched a new marketing campaign with the strapline ‘However you feel, whatever you want, we’ve got a Sub for that’ in September 2009. The humouristic campaign aimed to highlight customer choice as a point of difference, above and beyond its established positioning as fresh.

• With an advertising expenditure of £9.5 million in 2008, Subway was one of the leading advertisers among sandwich shops. Television advertising accounted for about 80% of its total spend.

Treats Sandwich Bar www.treatsandsnax.com

• Established in 1978, Treats and Snax Group is a family-owned chain of snack and sandwich bars in Central London with more than 20 stores operating under the banners Treats and Snax.

• A vertically integrated business, the group's stores are supplied by the Snax Food Factory that produces the stores with sandwiches and salads, savoury snacks and bakery products such as pastries. The product offer also includes crisps, cakes and soft drinks.

• The group has noted on plans to acquire further outlets of some 20-200 square meters in high-footfall locations in Central and North West London.

Upper Crust www.foodtravelexperts.com

• Upper Crust is a chain of baguette shops, with 60 outlets in the UK (at May 2009), located mainly at railway stations, and over 500 outlets globally.



• The chain is part of SSP – The Food Travel Experts, a UK-based group specialising in providing food and drink services in travel locations. Present in some 32 countries, the group's portfolio also includes brands like Harry Ramsden's fish and chips restaurants and Caffè Ritazza coffee shops.

Recent activity

• A prefab wheel-in Upper Crust kiosk launched at London Bridge station in May 2009. With no kitchen, the trial outlet is supplied from other Upper Crust units at the station. Such smaller and mobile outlets can help the chain drive penetration in locations where presence is of the essence.

• Upper Crust signed up to FSA’s drive to promote healthier food in May 2009, committing to cut salt in its products to meet FSA targets and look into calorie content and other nutritional labelling.

Product range

• The Upper Crust product offer is aimed specifically at the on-the-go and travel market, with a range of baguettes, salads, cakes, pastries and drinks.

• The group claims that baguettes are on sale for no more than three hours after being made, to guarantee freshness.

• The menu changes during the day to better tap into the different meal occasions, with a breakfast range including soft bake rolls available in the mornings, followed by a lunchtime offer with items like pizza and roast baguettes.

• Seasonal and occasional products are available throughout the year and can reportedly account for up to 20% of sales, the group for example planning to launch a range of baguettes to coincide with the football World Cup in summer 2010.

• A range of baguettes priced at £2 were launched in May 2009, in response to the recession, considerably undercutting the typical price points at around £3.50. The Americano range followed in July 2009, and the Mexican Fiesta range in October 2009.

Bakery chains Cooks the Bakery www.cooksthebakery.com

• Cooks the Bakery (Cooks) was formed in 2006. After the long-established Three Cooks chain went into administration in 2006, a team of former managers bought the business and 122 outlets, renaming it Cooks the Bakery. The new business began trading in November 2006.

• Following a number of earlier closures, and those of 18 outlets in 2008, the chain operates 80 bakery and coffee shop outlets across the UK.

• The business reported a turnover of £13.6 million in the year ended March 2009. For the 18 months to the end of March 2008, the turnover stood at £26 million. However, now free of the loss-making operations, the business reported an operating profit of £0.56 million.

• The product range spans across filled baguettes, sandwiches, rolls, seeded ovals and paninis made on-site, traditional savouries like sausage rolls and pasties, as well as sweet bakes and coffee.



Sayers the Bakers www.sayersthebakers.co.uk

The roots of Sayers the Bakers go back to a Liverpudlian family business established in the early 1900s. Having changed hands a number of times in the last three decades of the century, the bakery and sandwich shop chain ended up as part of the Lyndale Group in 1996.

The group fell into administration in June 2008, said to reflect the rising costs of raw materials and energy. The Sayers and Hampsons chains were acquired the management team, led by chairman Sandy Birnie and chief executive Michael Quinlan.

Some 40 poorly performing stores were closed, the new business, Sayers the Bakers, securing a portfolio of 158 outlets. The Maison Blanc chain owned by Lyndale Group was sold to Kuwait-based Kout Food Group Company in October 2007.

Recent activity

• Following the management buyout in summer 2008, the group reported plans to spend up to £2 million on rebranding and refitting the stores, with further investment on product development on the cards.

• Rebranding of the Hampsons chain to the Sayers banner was launched in early 2008, however, by late 2009 shops continued to operate under both fascias.

Product range

• Despite the chain still carrying the strapline ‘the better bakers’, the product offer is geared heavily towards on-the-go food, with sandwiches, baguettes, rolls, paninis, wraps and pasties at the core of the offer.

• A selection of salads, soups, sweet treats, drinks and snacks is also available, enabling the stores to cater for meal occasions as well as expanding its appeal beyond core sandwich buyers.

• Recent product launches include The Brunchy, a pasty containing all the elements of a full English breakfast priced at £1.75, single portions of apple and rhubarb crumble at £0.65 and a range of cupcakes at £0.69, aiming to tap into the popularity of cupcakes as a pick-me-up in the recession.

Promotion In spring 2009, the chain recruited actor and comedian Paul Barber to be the voice of a series of radio ads, highlighting the range of products at 99p, such as cheese and onion pasty and egg mayo sandwich.

Consumer – Purchase Patterns and Locations Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Consumer – Purchase Patterns and Locations Key points • Almost three quarters (73%) of adults buy sandwiches, purchases declining with age and

rising with household income. Students come across as top sandwich buyers, at 90%.

• Sandwich chains are the top channel for purchases, used by 52% of adults, ahead of grocery stores, used by 45%.

• Greggs and Subway hold the lead in usage levels. With more than 1,400 stores each, they are the only sandwich chains with a national presence.

Who buys sandwiches? Mintel commissioned consumer research for this report to assess points of purchase and attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches. Research was carried out by Toluna among 1,000 internet users aged 16+ in November 2009. Detailed demographics are given in the Appendix. FIGURE 26: BUYING SANDWICHES, BY GENDER, AGE AND HOUSEHOLD INCOME, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+

Women

£50K or above

£25K-50K

25-34

35-44

45-54

16-24

Under £15.5K

£15.5K-25K

+55

Men

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

% o

f dem

ogra

phic

gro

up


The demographic patterns of sandwich buying reflect the dual nature of bought sandwiches. On the one hand they are an expensive alternative to homemade sandwiches, often deemed over-priced or pointless. On the other, they offer a cheap, quick and convenient out-of-home meal alternative.

Almost three quarters (73%) of adults had bought sandwiches in the last three months, sandwich buying declining with age and rising with household income.



Socio-economic groups particularly likely to buy sandwiches include:

• those in employment (79%), students (90%)

• parents (82%), particularly of under-5s (84%)

• households of three or more members (80%-82%)

• singles (82%)

• Co-op (81%) and M&S shoppers (83%).

Where do they buy sandwiches? To assess outlets used to purchase sandwiches, consumers were asked:

“Thinking about buying sandwiches, filled wraps, baguettes, rolls, paninis, bagels or pasties, which of the following, if any, have you bought from in the last three months?”

FIGURE 27: WHERE PEOPLE BUY SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+

1

3

5

6

7

11

12

13

15

20

35

45

52

26

26

26

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

I haven’t bought any in the last threemonths

Don’t know

EAT

Other sandwich chain

Other

Pret A Manger

Boots

A coffee shop

Other grocery store

Independent sandwich shop

M&S

Tesco

Subway

Greggs

Any grocery store

Any sandwich chain

%




Stores drive usage • Three quarters of adults (73%) had bought sandwiches in the last three months, the relatively high

usage levels reflecting the long-established market.

• Sandwich chains and grocery stores are the two main channels for buying sandwiches, used by 52% and 45% of adults, respectively, leaving independent sandwich shops and coffee shops far behind.

• The sandwich shops appear successful in fending off competition from non-specialist, being more popular than grocers despite their dominance in terms of store numbers. The top five grocers by sales operate 6,800 stores in total, compared to some 3,300 stores for the top five sandwich chains.

• Greggs and Subway hold the lead, as the only sandwich chains with a national store presence, with roughly 1,420 and 1,480 outlets respectively at the end of 2009. The next largest sandwich specialist by store numbers, Pret, had 232 stores at June 2009.

• Tesco stands on a par with Subway for sandwich purchases, reflecting its lead in terms of store presence. M&S meanwhile enjoys higher usage for sandwich purchases than implied by its store portfolio, only marginally behind Tesco in usage, despite operating only 670 stores in total, compared to Tesco's portfolio of 2,280 stores at end 2008.

Who shops where? • Greggs is still the top choice among most age groups, though losing it to Subway among the 16-

24s.

• Subway’s ranking falls with age, reflecting its youth-oriented brand positioning. However, as the current young consumers, familiar with the format, age, its popularity among older groups may grow.

• Tesco’s comprehensive store presence and competitive price positioning have helped it secure a positioning as second or third most popular outlet for all age groups.

FIGURE 28: MOST POPULAR OUTLETS FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, BY AGE, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ Age group Most used

outlet 2nd most used

outlet 3rd most used

outlet % of age group

buying sandwiches in 4 or more outlets

16-24 Subway Greggs Tesco 24 25-34 Greggs Subway Tesco 19 35-44 Greggs Tesco Subway 16 45-54 Greggs Tesco Subway 13 55+ Greggs M&S Tesco 9 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL

• M&S, independent sandwich shops and Boots enjoy a customer profile clearly geared towards the top income group, reflecting this group’s strong preference for tailor-made products instead of prepacked ones, and willingness to pay more for sandwiches.



• Greggs and Subway show a more universal appeal, essentially underperforming among the top income group, in relative terms. This likely reflects the absence of a premium range in their offer, a potential development area once the economy and consumer confidence regain strength.

• Tesco has a particularly strong appeal to households earning £25,000-49,999, while other grocery stores’ (excluding M&S) customer bases are clearly biased towards the lowest income groups.

FIGURE 29: BUYING SANDWICHES AT GREGGS, SUBWAY AND TESCO, BY INCOME GROUP, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+

2823

25

35

68 72

2222

353229

38

7782

2532

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Have bought at any Greggs Subw ay Tesco

%

Under £15,499 £15,500-24,999 £25,000-49,999 £50,000 or over

SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 30: BUYING SANDWICHES AT M&S, INDEPENDENT SANDWICH SHOPS, OTHER GROCERS, COFFEE SHOPS AND BOOTS, BY INCOME GROUP, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+

10 1013 12

17

1312 14

9

1713

22

1715 14

17

32

8

25

15

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

M&S Independent sandw ichshop

Other grocery store A coffee shop Boots

%

Under £15,499 £15,500-24,999 £25,000-49,999 £50,000 or over


Consumer – Attitudes towards Purchasing Sandwiches Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Consumer – Attitudes towards Purchasing Sandwiches Key points • Two in five adults think sandwiches are over-priced and a nearly equal number deem it

pointless to buy one that could be made at home, underlining the importance of competition from homemade sandwiches.

• The market appears price-focused as just one in four people agree that low price doesn’t automatically equal good value and only one in six see good-quality ingredients as worth paying more for.

• Three in ten adults have cut back on spending on lunch, but only 7% have switched to a less expensive outlet.

Topline attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches Consumers were asked:

“Thinking about buying sandwiches etc, which, if any, of the following statements do you agree with?”



FIGURE 31: ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+

3

5

17

18

20

30

27

16

2

7

9

39

42

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

None of these

I cut back on my lunch spending for a w hile,but it’s now back to ‘normal’

It’s expensive to make shop-stylesandw iches at home

Sandw iches/w raps aren’t f illing enough forlunch

I have sw itched to a less expensive outlet forlunch

Good quality ingredients are w orth payingmore for

I buy myself small treats even if I’m savingmoney

I only buy sandw iches as a treat

I seek out meal deals

Low price doesn’t equal good value

I have cut back on spending on lunch

There’s no point buying a sandw ich I couldmake at home

Shop-bought sandw iches are over-priced

%


Poor price perception • Two in five adults (42%) see shop-bought sandwiches as overpriced, rising to 47% among those

who buy sandwiches.

“They are pretty expensive for what they are.” – 16-24-year-old ABC1 male

• This view is broadly equally held by all age and income groups, however, a number of groups stand out as particularly likely to agree, including:

• women (47%)

• part-time workers (55%)

• parents of under-5s (48%)



• those buying sandwiches from an independent sandwich shop (60%)

• those buying sandwiches at Boots (57%).

• Only one in three (32%) of those who have not bought sandwiches agree with this, suggesting that price in itself is not a key factor hampering their interest.

Key analysis: The sandwich shops could win goodwill by doing more to justify their prices, as currently nearly half of sandwich shoppers see the product as over-priced. This is a particularly pressing issue for the independent sandwich shops, whose product most closely resembles the homemade variant.

The attraction of DIY • Two in five adults (39%) say there's no point buying a sandwich they could make at home.

• Over a quarter (27%) of sandwiches buyers agree. To attract this group, sandwich shops must offer products differentiated in tangible ways from the homemade variant.

• A staggering three in four (72%) adults that don't buy sandwiches agree, making this one of the most important barriers for sandwich shops to tackle.

• Groups the least likely to agree appear to be those squeezed for time, or with less regular daily routines, appreciating the convenience of quick food on the go. The opposite holds for those most likely to agree.

• Only 3% of people think that it's expensive to make shop-style sandwiches at home, underlining the lack of tangible differentiation between the bought and self-made products. Against this background, it's hardly surprising that sandwiches are seen as a pointless purchase by so many.

“It's cheaper, you get to choose exactly what you want on it and you can make as much or as little as you want.”

– 45-54-year-old C2DE female

“The main problem with the homemade sandwich is storing it so it is still fresh at lunchtime. What starts out as fresh crusty bread is usually a bit soggy by the time you eat it.”

– 45-54-year-old ABC1 male

‘There's no point buying a sandwich I could make at home’ Most likely to agree Least likely to agree

have not bought sandwiches (72%) over-55s (53%) self- and part-time employed (48%, 45%) households with incomes under £15,500 (44%).

have bought sandwiches (27%) men (36%) 16-34s (28%) in full-time work or education (30% and 31%) households earning £50,000+ (30%) parents of under-5s (31%).



Key analysis: A large majority of people not buying sandwiches shun the shop-bought variant where a DIY alternative is possible. One in four sandwich buyers agree. This underlines the importance for sandwich shops of differentiating their offer from the homemade substitute to justify the price premium.

For those disagreeing with this view, convenience comes across as an underlying factor justifying the existence of the shop-made variant even in a familiar form. Sandwich shops could leverage this more in their communication as a valuable benefit of the service they provide.

A price-led market • In line with the previous findings, only 27% of people agree that low price doesn’t automatically

equal good value, signalling a highly price-led market.

• This rises to one in three (32%) among sandwich buyers. Customers who have bought sandwiches at independent sandwich shops, M&S and coffee shops are particularly likely to agree.

• The tendency of consumers to equate price with value explains the launch by many chains of products at lower price points, such as the £1 snack-sized variants at Subway in early 2009, and the 75p jam sandwich at M&S, launched in February and abandoned in August 2009.

• Reflecting the same attitude, only one in six (16%) people see good-quality ingredients as worth paying more for, with this share particularly low among 16-24s, students, those not working and DEs.

• The share of those that agree rises to one in five among ABs and nearly one in three among those who have bought sandwiches at independent sandwich shops and M&S. Dumbing down the sandwich offering too far in the quest to cut prices risks alienating this sizeable minority.

“Buying from Subway for instance is nice because it has a large range…with interesting sauces and nice bread. It’s not only the taste but texture that I like and that’s what I can’t recreate at home. I just can’t be bothered investing the time and effort into trying to reproduce the same experience, especially as it’s just for me.”

– 35-44-year-old C2DE male

Key analysis: There is a heavy focus on price in the market, which most likely stems from bought sandwiches being seen as a substitute for the homemade variant. As noted above, disassociating the two could help sandwich shops to justify the price premium, such as by differentiating the shop-bought product through innovation and unusual ingredients difficult to replicate at home.

Cutbacks • Three in ten adults report having cut back on spending on lunch, rising to 37% among those who

have bought sandwiches.

• Only 2% have cut back on their lunch spending temporarily, signalling that despite the apparent improvement in consumer confidence, a return to previous spending levels is hardly imminent.

• Meanwhile, only 7% of people report having switched to a less expensive outlet for lunch, marginally higher among the sandwich-buying population at 9%.



• People buying sandwiches at Subway, grocery stores (not M&S) and Boots are particularly likely to have switched outlets, suggesting that these chains have won business in the downturn.

‘I have cut back on spending on lunch’ Most likely to agree Least likely to agree

16-44s (39%) in full-time education (46%) in full-time employment (40%) C1C2s (40%) parents of under-10s (40%) households of four or more (42%).

over-55s (16%) retired (10%) ABs (26%) DEs (20%) households with income £50,000+ (25%) two-person households (22%).

Key analysis: The high levels of cutting back, including among the younger age groups, underline the need for ongoing price promotions and accessible price points to continue to attract these heavy users as their incomes come under pressure.

Meal deals and small treats for the young • One in six adults (17%) and one in five sandwich buyers (21%) buy small treats even when saving

money.

• Groups particularly likely to agree include:

• women (20%)

• 16-34s (23%)

• full-time students (26%)

• parents of under-5s (25%)

• households of four or more (20%)

• singles (21%).

Key analysis: This suggests a potential additional income stream for sandwich shops even in the recession, as a large minority of shoppers continue to spend on small pick-me-ups. Products such as the range of cupcakes at £0.69 launched by Sayers the Bakers could be well placed to leverage this demand as small, inexpensive and ‘cheerful’.

• Despite a number of the grocers launching meal deals to attract shoppers in the recession, only one in five adults say they seek out such deals.

• This rises to one in four (26%) among those that buy sandwiches, leaping much higher among the 16-24s (41%) and full-time students (48%).

• Shoppers using certain outlets for purchasing sandwiches come across as particularly likely to seek out meal deals, notably:

• Boots (46%)

• Subway (37%)



• other sandwich chains (34%)

• coffee shops (33%).

Consumer – Attitudes towards Variety, Freshness and Sandwich Shop Retailing Health When Buying Sandwiches Market Intelligence, January 2010


Consumer – Attitudes towards Variety, Freshness and Health When Buying Sandwiches Key points • The prepacked and tailor-made variant are almost equally popular among sandwich buyers,

with 46% preferring the latter, though only one in four say they would pay more for it.

• Sandwiches enjoy a surprisingly wholesome image; only 26% of the population and 30% of sandwich buyers saying they aren’t healthy eaten every day.

• Healthy sandwiches are being sought out by 29% of buyers, while 17% would like more guidance on which sandwiches are healthy, making for a sizeable minority.

• Only one in three sandwich buyers think it’s boring to eat sandwiches regularly, suggesting that for most, the sandwich is an accepted diet staple. One in five seek variety by visiting different shops.

• Only 9% of sandwich-buying adults report lacking the time for a sit-down lunch, while just 8% frequent their nearest shop for lack of time, underlining that other factors dictate choice despite the 'time squeeze'.

Quality, nutrition and freshness Consumers were asked:

“Thinking about the quality of the food, nutrition and freshness, which, if any, of the following statements about buying sandwiches etc, do you agree with?”



FIGURE 32: ATTITUDES TOWARDS QUALITY, NUTRITION AND FRESHNESS WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+

22

26

42

7

16

17

15

25

26

26

29

30

46

24

14

15

15

21

13

22

26

28

0 10 20 30 40 50

None of these

I sw itch betw een healthy and indulgentoptions

I’d like to have more guidance on w hichsandw iches are healthy

Quality ingredients are more important thanhaving the sandw ich made for me

Taste is more important than calories/salt

It is important for me to see the nutritionalinformation

It’s w orth paying more for sandw iches madein front of me

I seek out healthy sandw iches

You can’t know if pre-packed sandw ichesare fresh

Shop-bought sandw iches aren’t healthy eatenevery day

I prefer sandw iches made for me to pre-packed ones

%

All Sandw ich buyers


Prepacked vs. made for me • Sandwich buyers’ preferences are almost equally divided between the prepacked and tailor-made

variant, 46% claiming to prefer the latter.

• However, only one in four (26%) say they would pay more for the hand-made variant, underlining the importance for sandwich shops of remaining price-competitive.

• The tailor-made sandwich comes across as a magnet for the independent sandwich shops, with 40% of people that had bought sandwiches there agreeing that it is worth paying more for.

• Those aged 35-44, retired, ABs and C2s, parents of children aged 10-15 and households earning more than £50,000 are particularly likely to show a willingness to pay more for the tailor-made sandwich, together with Co-op and M&S grocery shoppers.

Key analysis: The tailor-made sandwich is preferred by nearly half the sandwich-eating population, boding well for the expansion of chains like Subway and Baguette Express, among others.



The interest from ABs and top-income households in tailor-made sandwiches could translate into an opportunity for a more top-end or quality-oriented made-to-order sandwich operator.

A healthy image, but room for improvement • Sandwiches enjoy a surprisingly wholesome image, with only 26% of the population and 30% of

sandwich buyers saying they aren’t healthy eaten every day.

“I don't buy from these outlets every day so don't worry too much about how healthy it is.” – 45-54-year-old C2DE female

• In line with this, healthy sandwiches are being sought out by 29% of buyers, while 17% would like more guidance on which sandwiches are healthy.

• Women are more likely than men to see sandwiches as unhealthy, seek healthy options and nutrition details, while students also show top responses in all three areas.

• The groups most likely to see sandwiches as unhealthy in daily consumption include women, 16-24-year-olds, students, top-income households and parents of under-5s. Reassuring them of sandwiches' health credentials could encourage more frequent usage.

• Meanwhile those seeking out healthier sandwiches differ from those wanting more nutritional information, the former biased towards 35-44s and ABC1s, the latter towards households earning less than £25,000 and 16-24s.

• Taste is considered more important than calories or salt by one in four sandwich buyers, signalling a market divided over health issues.

• The choice of taste over calories peaks among men and 16-24-year-olds, declining with age, in line with the general pattern of views on healthy eating.

“These days we eat at Subways or Quiznos if we're out at the weekend rather than a burger.” – 35-44 year-old C2DE male

Key analysis: While sandwiches enjoy quite a healthy image, a sizeable minority are looking for healthy variants and more nutritional information. As health concerns remain high on the media agenda, this interest is likely to grow in the future.

Greater focus on developing and highlighting healthier sandwiches could help the sector hold its ground against other quick-service food suppliers, particularly among younger age groups and women.

Variety and convenience Consumers were asked:

“Still thinking about buying sandwiches, filled wraps, baguettes, bagels etc, which, if any, of the following statements do you agree with?”



FIGURE 33: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY AND CONVENIENCE WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+

5

6

6

8

16

20

20

31

31

7

8

22

26

27

31

35

35

24

24

9

9

13

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

None of these

I tend to buy lunch in advance (eg on thew ay to w ork)

I have a short lunch break so I tend to buysandw iches at the nearest shop

I trust sandw ich chains more thanindependent shops

I haven’t got time for a sit dow n lunch

I visit different shops for variety

I enjoy trying new ingredients/f lavours

I usually buy drinks/snacks/fruit at the sameshop

I like having a menu of ideas to choose from

It's boring to eat sandw iches or w rapsregularly

I prefer to have a sandw ich made preciselyhow I like it

%

All Sandw ich buyers


Convenience, time, trust • Only 9% of sandwich-buying adults report lacking the time for a sit-down lunch, while just 8%

frequent their nearest shop for lack of time.

• Convenience does, however, play a role, as more than one in four sandwich buyers (27%) usually buy drinks or snacks at the same shop.

• Those aged 16-34, students, parents of under-5s and households of four or more people are particularly likely to buy their add-ons in the same shop, underlining convenience as the key factor.

• Only 9% of sandwich-buying adults report trusting sandwich chains more than independent shops, good news for the latter. This may partly reflect news in 2009 of unhealthy sandwiches sold by supermarkets and sandwich chains alike.



Key analysis: While location and speed of service are important, they are secondary factors in choice of where to buy sandwiches, despite the news of a ‘time squeeze’.

However, the convenience of ‘one-stop shopping’ that has benefited supermarkets is proving attractive in the sandwich market too. As only 27% of sandwich buyers go for add-ons, there could be more opportunities for sandwich outlets to develop this high-margin area further.

Demand for variety • One in three sandwich buyers think it’s boring to eat sandwiches regularly. This suggests that for

most sandwich buyers, the sarnie is an accepted diet staple. However, expanding the product offer will help sandwich shops to cater for the sizeable, boredom-inclined minority.

“I tend to eat the same thing most days as I know what I like.” – 25-34-year-old C2DE male

“I tend to vary between sandwiches, pies and pasties on different days.” – 45-54-year-old ABC1 male

• A quarter (26%) of sandwich-buying adults report enjoying trying new flavours and ingredients.

• This rises to 34% among those who have bought sandwiches at independent sandwich shops, standing at 31% for Greggs, Subway and coffee shop customers.

• Those aged 25-34, students and those in employment, households earning more than £25,000 and parents of teenagers are particularly likely to enjoy experimenting with their sandwiches.

• Key analysis: This underlines the importance even for the mass-market operators and traditional sandwich shops of continuously updating their offer and experimenting with new recipes.

• Limited editions or frequently changing specials can provide a safe platform for such trials, encouraging regular visits from the experimenting minority without alienating the majority of three in four sandwich buyers less keen on newness.

• Meanwhile, a sizeable minority of 22% of sandwich-buying adults visit different shops for variety.

• This share rises to one in three or above among customers using independent sandwich shops, coffee shops or sandwich chains other than Greggs.

• Men, 16-44-year-olds, ABC1s, singles and households earning more than £50,000 are particularly prone to such promiscuity.

Key analysis: Frequently changing menus and limited-time or seasonal products can go some way to combating such promiscuity. A broader, more segmented product offer can also cater for demand for variety, such as at Baguette Express, offering all filling and sauces on a jacket potato, in a salad or on various types of breads, potentially making it less dependent on weather.

Consumer – Target Groups Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Consumer – Target Groups Key points • One in nine people take an interest in sandwiches, these Variety seekers being particularly

drawn to new flavours and ingredients and visiting different shops for variety.

• Convenience drives the sandwich purchases of one in ten adults. Also interested in value and health and with some concerns over freshness, they could make a lucrative target for Subway or Greggs.

• Some 15% of adults fall into the lucrative group looking for a sandwich tailor-made for them, willing to spend on quality and on treating themselves.

• One in six adults appear to take little interest in sandwiches, likely to see them as boring to eat regularly, the lack of variety perhaps partly due to their value focus.

• Nearly half of adults come across as Unengaged. They take very little interest in sandwiches, and to put it on their radar may well be an unprofitable exercise.

Five target groups Mintel has identified five key target groups of consumers for marketing purposes, according to their attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches. FIGURE 34: TARGET GROUPS FOR SANDWICH SHOPS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+

How I like it15%

Bored 17%

Unengaged 47%

Convenience-driven10%

Varietyseekers

11%




Variety seekers (11% of adults) These shoppers stand out as the most likely to enjoy trying new flavours and ingredients (88%), and visit different shops for variety (79%). Four in five of them also like having a menu of ideas.

Who are they? Biased towards men, 25-44s, ABs, households earning more than £50,000 and with children aged 10-15, M&S grocery shoppers.

Attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches

Highly engaged in sandwiches, they have the highest number of top responses. This group comes across as looking for good value in their lunch, but not low prices at the expense of quality and taste, being the most likely of the five groups to agree that:

• Low price doesn't equal good value (50%)

• I seek out meal deals (42%)

• Good-quality ingredients are worth paying more for (40%)

• I buy myself small treats even if I'm saving money (34%)

• I have switched to a less expensive outlet for lunch (19%).

Attitudes towards healthiness and quality of sandwiches This group also comes across as the most focused on quality and taste when it comes to freshness and health.

They are the most likely of the five groups to agree that taste is more important than calories (42%), but also that it's important to see the nutritional information (39%), signalling that they look to make educated choices. Indeed, they are also the most likely to switch between healthy and indulgent options (34%).

While they are the most likely to say it's worth paying more for sandwiches made in front of them (46%), they are also the most likely to put quality ingredients ahead of this (29%).

Eating habits

This group comes across as the most health-aware of the five, being the most likely to say they:

• eat fresh fruit/vegetables most days (74%)

• occasionally treat themselves to sweets or chocolate (51%)

• try to make sure they eat a low-fat diet (51%)

• try to include oily fish in their diet (46%)

• eat five portions of fresh fruit/vegetables every day (29%).



Marketing message: Highly engaged in sandwiches, this is a lucrative group. Willing and able to pay more for quality, they are attracted to new products and flavours. Frequently changing products (eg weekly specials) could help to encourage loyalty among this group. Given their high interest in health, sandwiches comprising ‘superfood’ ingredients could appeal to them.

Convenience-driven (10% of adults) These shoppers stand out as focused on convenience, being the most likely to usually buy their drinks, snacks or fruit at the same shop (100%), as well as buying their sandwiches at the nearest shop or in advance.

Who are they? Geared towards 16-34-year-olds, full-time students, parents of children aged under 5 and singles.

Attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches

This group comes across as value-focused, being the most likely to:

• have cut back on spending on lunch (45%)

• seek out meal deals (38%)

• only buy sandwiches as a treat (25%).

Some 46% of them agree that shop-bought sandwiches are over-priced, however, they are the least likely to think there’s no point buying a sandwich they could make (19% v. 39%).

Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness This group come across as the most interested in healthier sandwiches, being the most likely to:

• seek out healthy sandwiches (37%)

• want more guidance on which sandwiches are healthy (27%).

They are the most likely to agree that you can’t know if prepacked sandwiches are fresh (40%), with two in five (43%) also preferring sandwiches made to order to prepacked ones. They are the least likely to see quality ingredients as more important than having the sandwich made for them (4%).

Eating habits Exhibiting a selective attitude towards healthy eating, they are the most likely to often eat sweet foods or fried foods, and the least likely to include oily fish in their diet or meet their 5-A-Day target. Two in five of them try to keep to a low-fat diet.

Marketing message: Convenience comes across as the main driver for the sandwich purchases of this group, most likely reflecting lifestage, which also necessitates a keen interest in value. As such, loyalty schemes could appeal to this group. The greater availability and earmarking of healthy variants could also help win them over, such as seen recently at Subway.



How I like it (15% of adults) This group stands out as the keenest on having sandwiches made as they like them (55%), but also liking to have a menu to choose from (100%). More than half (54%) of them usually buy drinks and snacks at the same shop.

Who are they? Geared towards women, under-35s, students and part-time employed, parents of children aged under 5.

Attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches Price-savvy but not entirely price-led, they are the most likely to think shop-bought sandwiches are over-priced (58%), but also more likely than average to think that low price doesn't equal good value (43% v. 27%) and that good-quality ingredients are worth paying more for (25% v. 16%).

Geared towards economising, they are clearly more likely than average to have cut back on spending on lunch (43% v. 30%) and to seek out meal deals (34% v. 20%), but also to buy little treats even when saving money (32% v. 17%).

Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness

The most likely to:

• prefer sandwiches made to order to prepacked ones (51%)

• think shop-bought sandwiches aren't healthy eaten every day (42%)

• think you can't know if prepacked sandwiches are fresh (40%).

More than one in three also feel it's worth paying more for sandwiches made for them (37%) and see taste as more important than calories or salt (35%).

Eating habits The most likely to eat what they like without worrying, and accordingly the least likely to eat fresh fruit and vegetables daily. The most likely to be eating more homemade sandwiches than a year ago (32%).

Marketing message: This is a lucrative group, given willingness to pay more where deemed justified, and the tendency to treat themselves. Simply reminding this group of more exciting sandwich options or possible extra purchases like snacks or treats could help to drive incremental sales.

Bored (17% of adults) These shoppers stand out as the most likely to think that it's boring to eat sandwiches or wraps regularly. Their responses to all other statements on buying sandwiches are very low, showing a lack of engagement in the category.

Who are they? Biased towards women, over-45s, C1C2s, smaller households and discounter shoppers.



Attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches This group comes across as quite value-driven.

• They are more likely than average to think that shop-bought sandwiches are over-priced (51% v. 42%) and to have cut back on spending on lunch (37% v. 30%).

• They are less likely than average to seek out meal deals, buy small treats when saving money or to think quality ingredients are worth paying more for.

Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness They show an above-average interest in having sandwiches made to order (46% v. 42% average), as well as agreeing that you can't know if prepacked ones are fresh (31% v. 26%). Some 37% agree that shop-bought sandwiches aren't healthy eaten every day, but fewer than one in four (23%) seek out healthy sandwiches.

Eating habits Close to average on most statements related to healthy eating, and slightly more likely than average to eat fresh fruit or vegetables most days, and to rarely eat sweets or meat.

Marketing message: A large minority of the group are highly budget-conscious, while also finding sandwiches boring and unhealthy when eaten often. They could be attracted to sandwiches tailored as nutritionally balanced. Specialised, healthier bread could help to differentiate the product from the homemade variant, while bringing greater variety to the offer.

Unengaged (48% of adults) These shoppers stand out as showing the least interest towards sandwiches, ranking below average on all statements related to buying sandwiches. Three fifths (57%) of them have bought sandwiches in the three months to November 2009.

Who are they? Geared towards men, over-45s and retired.

Attitudes towards purchasing sandwiches The most likely to think there's no point in buying a sandwich they could make at home (47% v. 39% average). The least likely to agree on nearly all other statements, again reflecting lack of interest.

Attitudes towards quality, nutrition and freshness

The least likely to agree on nearly all statements, again signalling a lack of interest in the category. Of all the statements, they most strongly agree on preferring sandwiches made to order to prepacked ones (35%).

Eating habits

The most likely to meet their 5-A-Day target, the least likely to often eat sweets or fried foods. The least likely to be eating more homemade sandwiches.

Marketing message: While more than half of these consumers have bought sandwiches, they take barely any interest in the product. This group may be unprofitable to target, as sandwiches simply aren’t on their radar. They appear most likely to react to practical considerations, such as convenience and may also be attracted to sandwich shops by other foods.

Appendix – Internal and Broader Market Environment and Sandwich Shop Retailing Competitive Context Market Intelligence, January 2010


Appendix – Internal and Broader Market Environment and Competitive Context FIGURE 35: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIOUS FOOD CONSIDERATIONS, 2004-09 Base: adults aged 15+ 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 % point change % % % % % % 2004-09 Convenience often plays a part in my purchase decisions*

na na 43.5 44.0 44.1 44.1 +0.6

I am prepared to pay more for foods that don't contain artificial additives

38.6 42.7 47.3 47.0 43.0 37.3 -1.3

I always think of the calories in what I eat

21.5 23.1 23.4 23.8 24.3 24.1 +2.6

I always look for the light/diet versions of food and drink**

na 26.7 26.6 27.5 26.7 26.0 -0.7

* % point change is for 2006-09 ** % point change is for 2005-09 Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2004-09 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL FIGURE 36: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIOUS FOOD CONSIDERATIONS, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, 2009 Base: adults aged 15+ I eat a lot

of bread Convenience often plays a

part in my purchase decisions

I am prepared to pay more for

foods that don't contain

artificial additives

I always think of the calories in what I eat

I always look for the

light/diet versions of

food and drink

% % % % % All 44.4 44.1 37.3 24.1 26.0 Gender: Men 53.1 46.1 32.7 18.2 17.9 Women 36.1 42.2 41.6 29.8 33.8 Age group: 15-24 54.3 43.4 25.6 21.5 20.3 25-34 52.2 49.3 35.4 22.6 26.9 35-44 45.6 44.5 38.6 24.7 27.5 45-54 40.8 42.7 37.4 24.2 26.0 55-64 41.4 41.6 41.0 26.7 27.8 65+ 34.1 43.2 44.1 25.1 27.4 Socio-economic group: AB 41.2 46.9 48.8 26.8 29.4 C1 43.4 45.8 37.5 24.6 26.4 C2 48.3 42.4 32.1 22.6 25.2 D 45.8 40.3 27.7 21.0 21.6 E 45.9 40.3 29.6 23.3 23.8



Presence of children: Under 1 year 54.1 42.0 27.9 15.8 23.9 1-4 years 51.3 42.0 37.0 23.0 24.4 5-9 years 48.8 44.7 35.8 22.9 26.2 10-15 years 46.4 40.9 34.6 23.4 25.2 No children in household 42.5 44.7 38.0 24.8 26.1 Marital status: Single 51.5 46.2 30.7 23.0 22.9 Married/living as married 43.4 42.7 39.3 24.0 26.6 Separated/divorced/widowed 36.3 46.5 40.2 26.8 29.1 Working status: Full-time 48.8 47.5 34.7 22.0 24.3 Part-time 43.3 42.7 40.9 27.9 29.9 Not working 41.4 42.0 38.0 24.4 26.0 Household size: 1 person 39.9 49.3 39.9 24.5 27.4 2 persons 41.2 42.9 39.0 25.3 26.5 3 persons 47.0 43.3 36.3 23.4 25.9 4 persons 48.9 44.4 35.0 23.1 25.5 5 persons+ 49.3 40.5 33.0 22.9 23.3 Region: Greater London 43.6 46.6 43.8 24.2 23.2 South East/East Anglia 42.4 44.4 38.5 25.4 26.9 South West 40.1 42.0 38.9 24.5 26.3 Wales 47.4 44.3 34.2 25.6 30.2 East and West Midlands 44.5 43.8 33.7 24.4 25.3 North West 45.2 42.3 35.5 24.0 27.5 Yorkshire and Humberside 48.0 45.6 35.3 21.0 22.4 North 46.3 42.6 35.7 24.8 27.8 Scotland 47.5 43.8 36.3 21.8 27.3 Lifestage: Pre-/no family 52.3 47.0 31.0 22.9 23.2 Families 47.7 43.7 37.0 23.1 26.4 Third age 40.4 42.2 38.9 25.9 27.5 Retired 34.1 43.2 44.1 25.1 27.4 Special Groups: ABC1 pre-/no family 50.5 52.0 35.1 25.0 25.1 ABC1 family 46.1 45.2 45.5 25.1 29.1 ABC1 third age 37.6 43.8 44.4 27.7 29.5 ABC1 retired 31.5 43.4 48.1 25.0 27.8 Two full-time earners 46.2 47.5 37.2 23.1 27.5 One-person households under 65

45.0 51.3 35.4 24.0 26.9

Body mass index: Underweight 51.3 38.3 35.7 21.1 17.9 Normal 42.3 44.0 40.1 23.9 23.5 Overweight 44.9 45.5 37.0 23.8 26.0 Obese 48.7 44.1 33.3 26.5 33.4 Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2009 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL



FIGURE 37: CONSUMPTION OF BREAD IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS, 2005-09 Base: users aged 15+ 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 % point change % % % % % 2005-09 Users of all adults (%) 99.1 99.1 99.2 99.1 98.2 -0.8 Of which: Once a day or more 74.5 72.1 69.5 68.2 67.3 -7.2 2 or 3 times a week 21.5 23.1 25.1 25.8 26.5 +5.0 Once a week or less* 4.0 4.8 5.4 6.1 6.3 +2.1 * Includes not stated Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2004-09 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL FIGURE 38: CONSUMPTION OF BREAD IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, 2009 Base: users aged 15+ All

users Once a day or

more 2 or 3 times a

week Once a week

or less* Non-users

VII

% % % % % % All 98.2 67.3 26.5 6.3 1.8 100.0 Gender: Men 98.3 70.2 25.2 4.7 1.7 104.4 Women 98.2 64.5 27.7 7.8 1.8 95.9 Age group: 15-24 98.0 62.0 31.2 6.8 2.0 92.0 25-34 98.8 61.8 31.2 7.0 1.2 92.3 35-44 98.2 64.7 29.4 6.0 1.8 96.1 45-54 98.6 65.2 27.7 7.1 1.4 97.3 55-64 97.9 70.7 23.5 5.8 2.1 104.8 65+ 97.9 77.5 17.3 5.2 2.1 114.8 Socio-economic group: AB 98.5 63.4 29.4 7.2 1.5 94.6 C1 98.3 64.2 28.3 7.5 1.7 95.5 C2 97.9 70.4 24.4 5.2 2.1 104.3 D 98.4 72.2 23.7 4.1 1.6 107.4 E 97.7 73.6 20.7 5.7 2.3 108.7 Presence of children: Children under 1 year 99.1 68.1 27.2 4.7 0.9 102.1 1-4 years 98.9 68.5 26.3 5.2 1.1 102.6 5-9 years 99.1 67.8 27.3 4.9 0.9 101.7 10-15 years 98.2 68.2 26.7 5.0 1.8 101.5 No children In household 98.0 67.4 25.8 6.8 2.0 100.0 Marital status: Single 97.7 61.7 30.7 7.7 2.3 91.1 Married/civil partnership/living as a couple

98.4 68.8 25.7 5.5 1.6 102.5

Separated/divorced/widowed 98.4 70.3 22.4 7.3 1.6 104.7



Working status: Full-time – 30+ hours per week

98.4 63.5 30.0 6.5 1.6 94.5

All part-time 97.7 65.6 27.6 6.9 2.3 96.9 All not working 98.3 70.7 23.4 5.9 1.7 105.2 Household size: 1 person 98.3 67.1 23.9 9.1 1.7 99.7 2 persons 98.0 67.7 26.2 6.1 2.0 100.4 3 persons 98.2 66.2 28.4 5.4 1.8 98.3 4 persons 98.4 66.7 27.8 5.6 1.6 99.3 5 or more persons 98.6 69.8 25.0 5.2 1.4 104.2 Region: Greater London 97.7 55.8 34.4 9.8 2.3 82.5 South East/East Anglia 98.0 65.2 27.7 7.1 2.0 96.6 South West 98.3 67.3 24.2 8.4 1.7 100.1 Wales 98.2 72.7 21.7 5.6 1.8 108.0 East and West Midlands 98.0 70.5 24.2 5.3 2.0 104.6 North West 99.2 68.9 26.5 4.6 0.8 103.4 Yorkshire and Humberside 98.4 71.6 24.0 4.4 1.6 106.7 North 98.4 70.1 24.9 5.0 1.6 104.4 Scotland 98.8 72.1 24.4 3.5 1.2 107.8 Lifestage: Pre-/no family 97.9 59.2 33.1 7.7 2.1 87.6 Families 98.8 67.7 27.1 5.2 1.2 101.3 Third age 98.2 67.5 25.8 6.7 1.8 100.2 Retired 97.9 77.5 17.3 5.2 2.1 114.8 Special Groups: ABC1 pre-/no family 98.8 56.0 35.1 8.9 1.2 83.7 ABC1 family 98.6 65.1 29.4 5.6 1.4 97.1 ABC1 third age 98.2 61.8 29.8 8.4 1.8 91.8 ABC1 retired 97.7 75.9 17.8 6.3 2.3 112.2 Two full-time earners 98.0 61.3 31.9 6.8 2.0 90.9 One-person households under 65

98.1 61.2 28.1 10.7 1.9 90.9

Body mass index: Underweight 98.6 62.9 25.3 11.8 1.4 93.9 Normal 98.4 65.6 27.3 7.1 1.6 97.6 Overweight 98.1 68.1 26.3 5.6 1.9 101.1 Obese 98.5 69.9 25.3 4.8 1.5 104.3 * Includes not stated The volume importance index (VII) has been calculated to indicate those groups of consumers that contribute most highly to volume sales. This is calculated by multiplying the incidence of use with the highest usage percentage and comparing it with the average for all adults. It follows that, where a high proportion of product users use a product frequently, they will produce a high index and these will be relatively important for volume sales. Correspondingly, low usage and low frequency will produce a low index. Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2009 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL



FIGURE 39: TYPES OF BREAD EATEN, 2005-09 Base: adults aged 15+ who ate bread in the last 12 months 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 % point change % % % % % 2005-09 Brown 29.6 31.7 35.7 38.0 38.7 +9.1 Granary 26.0 28.9 31.9 32.2 33.1 +7.1 White 70.8 67.2 66.7 68.9 68.0 -2.9 Wholemeal 40.3 43.0 46.4 47.2 47.1 +6.8 Other types 10.3 11.7 14.0 16.7 15.5 +5.2 Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2004-09 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL FIGURE 40: TRENDS IN THE AGE STRUCTURE OF THE UK POPULATION, BY GENDER, 2004-14 2004 2009 (est) 2014 (proj) % change % change 000 % 000 % 000 % 2004-09 2009-14 Male: 0-4 1,738 2.9 1,923 3.1 2,032 3.2 10.6 5.7 5-9 1,847 3.1 1,742 2.8 1,929 3.0 -5.7 10.7 10-14 1,985 3.3 1,853 3.0 1,752 2.7 -6.6 -5.5 15-19 1,989 3.3 2,054 3.3 1,901 3.0 3.3 -7.4 20-24 1,935 3.2 2,201 3.6 2,216 3.5 13.7 0.7 25-34 3,960 6.6 4,040 6.5 4,572 7.1 2.0 13.2 35-44 4,546 7.6 4,478 7.2 4,071 6.4 -1.5 -9.1 45-54 3,779 6.3 4,113 6.6 4,455 7.0 8.8 8.3 55-64 3,391 5.7 3,577 5.8 3,546 5.5 5.5 -0.9 65+ 4,078 6.8 4,430 7.2 5,142 8.0 8.6 16.1 Total male 29,278 48.9 30,397 49.1 31,615 49.3 3.8 4.0 Female: 0-4 1,653 2.8 1,840 3.0 1,945 3.0 11.3 5.7 5-9 1,761 2.9 1,661 2.7 1,851 2.9 -5.7 11.4 10-14 1,882 3.1 1,758 2.8 1,660 2.6 -6.6 -5.6 15-19 1,903 3.2 1,914 3.1 1,782 2.8 0.6 -6.9 20-24 1,882 3.1 2,094 3.4 2,082 3.2 11.3 -0.6 25-34 3,993 6.7 4,023 6.5 4,470 7.0 0.8 11.1 35-44 4,639 7.8 4,549 7.4 4,137 6.5 -1.9 -9.1 45-54 3,855 6.4 4,223 6.8 4,584 7.2 9.5 8.5 55-64 3,508 5.9 3,723 6.0 3,693 5.8 6.1 -0.8 65+ 5,492 9.2 5,675 9.2 6,271 9.8 3.3 10.5 Total female 30,568 51.1 31,461 50.9 32,476 50.7 2.9 3.2 All 59,846 100 61,858 100 64,091 100 3.4 3.6 SOURCE: OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS/GAD/MINTEL



FIGURE 41: FORECAST ADULT POPULATION TRENDS, BY SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUP, 2004-14 2004 2009 (est) 2014 (proj) % change

2004-09 % change 2009-14

'000 '000 '000 AB 12,221 13,439 14,431 +10.0 +7.4 C1 14,251 14,788 15,502 +3.8 +4.8 C2 10,299 10,618 10,874 +3.1 +2.4 D 7,913 7,977 7,998 +0.8 +0.3 E 4,296 4,260 4,116 -0.8 -3.4 All 48,980 51,081 52,921 +4.3 +3.6 SOURCE: OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS/GAD/MINTEL FIGURE 42: FREQUENCY OF EATING OUT AT LUNCHTIME ON WEEKDAYS IN THE LAST MONTH, 2004-08 Base: users aged 15+ 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 % point change % % % % % 2004-08 Share of all adults who eat out at lunchtime on weekdays

39.8 39.2 40.5 38.9 36.6 -3.2

Of which (%): Once or twice a week or more 19.2 18.7 18.2 18.0 20.7 +1.5 3-4 times in last month 15.2 14.6 14.8 16.2 17.2 +2.0 Once or twice in last month* 65.6 66.7 67.1 65.8 62.1 -3.5 * Includes not stated Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2004-08 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL



FIGURE 43: FREQUENCY OF EATING OUT AT LUNCHTIME ON WEEKDAYS IN THE LAST MONTH, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, 2008 Base: users aged 15+ Yes Once or twice a

week or more 3-4 times in last

month Once or twice in last month*

No

% % % % % All 36.6 20.7 17.2 62.1 63.4 Gender: Men 32.1 24.5 17.2 58.4 67.9 Women 40.9 18.0 17.2 64.8 59.1 Age group: 15-24 38.6 36.5 21.4 42.1 61.4 25-34 37.9 25.0 17.1 57.9 62.1 35-44 33.1 16.4 15.6 68.0 66.9 45-54 32.3 12.8 16.3 70.8 67.7 55-64 35.9 14.5 14.8 70.7 64.1 65+ 41.2 17.8 17.3 64.9 58.8 Socio-economic group: AB 43.4 16.4 18.4 65.2 56.6 C1 40.8 20.3 17.1 62.6 59.2 C2 31.0 23.5 16.6 59.8 69.0 D 28.4 25.0 15.2 59.8 71.6 E 29.4 28.2 16.5 55.3 70.6 Presence of children: Under 1 year 42.2 28.0 23.6 48.4 57.8 1-4 years 36.4 21.8 18.4 59.8 63.6 5-9 years 33.2 22.6 15.8 61.6 66.8 10-15 years 32.7 21.7 17.4 60.9 67.3 No children in household 37.4 20.4 17.0 62.6 62.6 Marital status: Single 36.3 31.8 19.9 48.3 63.7 Married/living as married 36.7 17.4 16.8 65.8 63.3 Separated/divorced/widowed 36.6 17.4 14.4 68.2 63.4 Working status: Full-time 32.4 21.4 17.3 61.3 67.6 Part-time 38.5 17.7 16.1 66.2 61.5 Not working 39.1 21.3 17.5 61.2 60.9 Household size: 1 person 37.0 18.6 15.5 65.9 63.0 2 persons 38.8 19.3 16.5 64.2 61.2 3 persons 36.2 22.1 18.9 59.0 63.8 4 persons 34.4 20.0 17.5 62.4 65.7 5 persons+ 32.9 30.0 18.6 51.3 67.1 Region: Greater London 40.0 29.1 20.9 49.9 60.0 South East/East Anglia 37.8 15.8 14.6 69.6 62.2 South West 37.2 18.2 16.7 65.1 62.8 Wales 38.9 17.9 19.2 62.9 61.1 East and West Midlands 35.5 24.1 15.4 60.6 64.5 North West 36.5 17.2 17.1 65.7 63.5 Yorkshire and Humberside 33.2 19.1 22.6 58.4 66.8 North 35.8 27.8 12.2 60.1 64.2 Scotland 32.2 21.2 19.1 59.7 67.8



Lifestage: Pre-/no family 37.4 30.3 19.0 50.8 62.6 Families 34.6 18.9 16.8 64.3 65.4 Third age 34.2 14.2 15.4 70.5 65.8 Retired 41.3 17.8 17.3 64.9 58.7 Special Groups: ABC1 pre-/no family 41.9 26.3 20.5 53.2 58.1 ABC1 family 38.5 16.1 17.3 66.6 61.5 ABC1 third age 41.3 13.4 14.7 71.9 58.7 ABC1 retired 48.2 16.1 17.9 65.9 51.8 Two full-time earners 34.5 17.4 17.7 64.9 65.5 One-person households under 65 33.3 19.4 15.3 65.3 66.7 Body mass index: Underweight 38.9 24.7 25.6 49.7 61.1 Normal 36.5 22.7 16.3 61.0 63.5 Overweight 36.8 20.1 17.1 62.7 63.2 Obese 37.3 16.2 18.3 65.5 62.7 * Includes not stated Taken from the TGI survey of around 25,000 adults SOURCE: GB TGI, Q3 BMRB 2008 (APR-MAR)/MINTEL FIGURE 44: CONSUMER EXPENDITURE, AT CURRENT AND CONSTANT PRICES, 2004-14 Current prices Constant 2004 prices £bn £bn 2004 776 776 2005 811 792 2006 847 808 2007 895 834 2008 929 846 2009 (est) 912 827 2010 (fore) 927 830 2011 (proj) 956 843 2012 (proj) 991 860 2013 (proj) 1,022 869 2014 (proj) 1,057 884 % change 2004-09 +17.5 +6.6 % change 2009-14 +15.8 +6.9 SOURCE: OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS/GAD/MINTEL



FIGURE 45: UK UNEMPLOYMENT RATE: AGED 16+: MONTHLY (SEASONALLY ADJUSTED), JANUARY 2008-JULY 2009 %

Jan-08 5.2 Feb-08 5.2 Mar-08 5.3 Apr-08 5.2 May-08 5.4 Jun-08 5.5 Jul-08 5.7 Aug-08 5.8 Sep-08 6.0 Oct-08 6.1 Nov-08 6.3 Dec-08 6.5 Jan-09 6.7 Feb-09 7.1 Mar-09 7.2 Apr-09 7.6 May-09 7.8 Jun-09 7.9 Jul-09 7.9

SOURCE: OFFICE FOR NATIONAL STATISTICS/MINTEL FIGURE 46: TRENDS IN EATING MORE HOMEMADE SANDWICHES, JUNE-DECEMBER 2009 Jun-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 % point

change Base: Internet users aged 16+ 1,000 1,000 2,000 1,000 1,000 Jun 09-

Dec 09 % % % % % I find I am eating more homemade sandwiches then I did a year ago

15 19 23 19 18 +3.0

I am eating less bread then I did a year ago 15 20 18 18 16 +1.0 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL

Appendix – Consumer: Purchase Patterns and Locations Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Appendix – Consumer: Purchase Patterns and Locations FIGURE 47: OUTLETS USED FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ % Have bought at any 73 Any sandwich chain 52 Any grocery store 45 Greggs 35 Subway 26 Tesco 26 M&S 20 Independent sandwich shop 15 Other grocery store 13 A coffee shop (eg Starbucks, Caffè Nero, Costa Coffee) 12 Boots 11 Pret A Manger 7 Other sandwich chain (eg Sayers) 5 EAT 3 Other 6 I haven’t bought any in the last three months 26 Don’t know 1 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 48: MOST POPULAR OUTLETS USED FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ Have bought

at any Any sandwich

chain Any grocery

store Greggs

% % % % All 73 52 45 35 Gender: Male 71 56 42 38 Female 75 49 47 32 Age: 16-24 89 73 51 44 25-34 81 59 49 39 35-44 81 59 51 38 45-54 69 51 39 38 55+ 59 36 38 25 Region: Inner and Greater London 82 62 49 30 South East/East Anglia 66 39 48 21 South West and Wales 77 49 46 36 East and West Midlands 72 56 38 41 North West 70 52 37 31 Yorks, Humberside 73 57 42 42 North and Scotland 79 63 49 55



Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week) 79 56 49 38 Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week)

79 56 49 42

Any self-employed* 71 52 40 23 In full-time education* 90 72 48 44 Retired 58 35 37 27 Not working for any other reason 66 48 43 34 Socio-economic group: ABC1 75 52 46 34 AB 73 52 49 32 C1 77 53 43 36 C2DE 69 52 42 37 C2 78 61 44 40 DE 65 47 41 35 Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent)

69 52 38 40

High school education completed (A-level or equivalent)

79 56 47 38

Further qualification (between high school and university)

76 49 51 32

University degree 75 57 47 34 Daily newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 82 62 53 33 Mid-market tabloid readers 76 54 51 37 Popular tabloid readers 81 65 49 50 None of these 63 40 37 25 Sunday newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 80 58 53 30 Mid-market tabloid readers 76 56 55 39 Popular tabloid readers 81 67 50 51 None of these 65 43 36 29 Gross annual household income: Under £15,499 68 49 44 35 £15,500-24,999 72 52 40 35 £25,000-49,999 77 55 51 38 £50,000 or over 82 59 48 32 Don't know/refused 65 45 36 32 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 84 59 53 35 Aged 5-9 77 54 49 39 Aged 10-15 76 61 45 43 Any children 82 63 50 41 No children in household 70 48 43 33 Household size: 1 64 44 40 28 2 68 44 42 31 3 82 60 54 38 4 or more 80 64 45 43 Current marital status: Single 82 63 50 40 Married/civil partnership/living as married 70 49 43 33 Separated, divorced or widowed 67 45 43 31



Car status: Yes 74 53 45 36 No 69 48 43 31 Daily personal internet usage: 0-3 hours 70 47 44 32 4-6 hours 78 60 48 42 7+ hours 73 55 39 30 Supermarket used: Asda 76 59 45 43 Co-op 81 59 50 42 Marks & Spencer 83 57 65 33 Morrisons 75 54 48 41 Sainsbury's 78 57 49 37 Tesco 75 54 50 37 Waitrose 68 42 46 16 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc 69 51 44 36 Other* 66 48 37 27 Personal mobile phone network provider: O2 77 53 47 33 Orange 72 50 44 35 Vodafone 71 53 49 32 T-Mobile 79 59 43 37 Virgin Mobile* 71 52 40 41 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 75 56 46 40 I have digital cable (Virgin Media) 76 54 45 40 Freeview digital box/TV 75 56 44 35 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

67 37 41 21

* small sub-sample (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



FIGURE 49: NEXT MOST POPULAR OUTLETS USED FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ Subway Tesco M&S Independent

sandwich shop Other grocery

store % % % % % All 26 26 20 15 13 Gender: Male 28 25 19 18 14 Female 25 27 21 13 13 Age: 16-24 51 38 18 19 13 25-34 34 29 22 18 14 35-44 27 32 23 16 16 45-54 18 23 16 16 13 55+ 13 16 21 12 11 Region: Inner and Greater London 28 25 27 13 15 South East/East Anglia 22 29 24 14 13 South West and Wales 24 28 17 11 14 East and West Midlands 29 25 14 16 12 North West 29 18 13 19 16 Yorks, Humberside 21 29 19 24 9 North and Scotland 32 24 24 15 14 Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week) 29 29 23 17 14 Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week)

28 34 18 17 15

Any self-employed* 34 22 13 21 13 In full-time education* 48 36 15 20 11 Retired 10 15 22 10 9 Not working for any other reason 21 22 19 11 17 Socio-economic group: ABC1 26 26 24 17 12 AB 24 26 29 18 13 C1 27 26 17 17 12 C2DE 27 26 13 12 15 C2 40 31 15 15 15 DE 20 22 12 10 15 Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent)

24 21 14 10 13


31 28 20 17 15


25 32 23 18 18

University degree 28 27 23 19 11 Daily newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 33 31 30 23 16 Mid-market tabloid readers 28 29 27 14 15 Popular tabloid readers 35 34 19 16 14 None of these 19 19 13 11 12



Sunday newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 30 30 33 22 14 Mid-market tabloid readers 29 32 29 16 15 Popular tabloid readers 36 32 23 16 16 None of these 21 20 11 12 12 Gross annual household income: Under £15,499 25 23 13 12 17 £15,500-24,999 22 22 17 12 14 £25,000-49,999 29 32 22 17 15 £50,000 or over 28 25 32 25 8 Don't know/refused 25 23 21 13 7 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 37 37 21 11 17 Aged 5-9 29 35 18 14 11 Aged 10-15 32 25 19 11 17 Any children 35 33 20 14 16 No children in household 23 23 20 16 12 Household size: 1 17 19 18 14 10 2 18 20 22 16 13 3 35 36 21 16 18 4 or more 39 31 17 15 11 Current marital status: Single 39 33 21 18 13 Married/civil partnership/living as married

22 24 20 15 14

Separated, divorced or widowed 19 19 21 9 12 Car status: Yes 26 27 20 16 14 No 24 22 20 12 11 Daily personal internet usage: 0-3 hours 23 24 22 15 12 4-6 hours 30 28 21 17 16 7+ hours 31 31 9 17 10 Supermarket used: Asda 30 26 18 14 16 Co-op 27 25 25 21 19 Marks & Spencer 28 32 51 22 12 Morrisons 27 29 23 15 16 Sainsbury's 30 26 25 18 17 Tesco 28 37 21 16 11 Waitrose 17 19 35 14 11 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc 27 25 16 15 18 Other* 22 23 12 19 15 Personal mobile phone network provider:

O2 27 27 24 18 14 Orange 27 24 22 13 14 Vodafone 27 28 22 17 10 T-Mobile 36 24 15 18 13 Virgin Mobile* 16 22 17 7 14



TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 29 31 22 16 12 I have digital cable (Virgin Media) 25 24 21 16 15 Freeview digital box/TV 29 24 20 15 13 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

18 24 18 18 10

* small sub-sample (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 50: OTHER OUTLETS USED FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ A coffee shop

(eg Starbucks, Caffè Nero,

Costa Coffee)

Boots EAT/other sandwich chain

(eg Sayers)**

I haven’t bought any in the last three

months % % % % All 12 11 8 26 Gender: Male 11 7 9 27 Female 14 16 7 25 Age: 16-24 22 21 16 6 25-34 12 14 10 18 35-44 14 12 8 19 45-54 9 9 6 31 55+ 9 7 3 41 Region: Inner and Greater London 15 13 15 17 South East/East Anglia 11 13 5 32 South West and Wales 9 9 6 24 East and West Midlands 10 8 6 27 North West 9 8 12 30 Yorks, Humberside 21 18 9 26 North and Scotland 15 10 5 20 Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week) 12 13 10 21 Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week)

14 15 4 21

Any self-employed* 9 9 8 29 In full-time education* 23 21 15 7 Retired 9 7 3 41 Not working for any other reason 10 7 7 33 Socio-economic group: ABC1 13 13 8 24 AB 15 14 7 26 C1 12 12 9 22 C2DE 10 9 7 29 C2 9 9 9 23 DE 11 9 6 33



Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent)

9 9 7 30


17 16 6 21


12 11 9 24

University degree 11 15 9 25 Daily newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 19 14 16 18 Mid-market tabloid readers 12 15 7 24 Popular tabloid readers 10 12 8 18 None of these 11 10 5 35 Sunday newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 18 15 14 20 Mid-market tabloid readers 15 17 8 24 Popular tabloid readers 12 13 9 18 None of these 11 8 5 33 Gross annual household income: Under £15,499 13 10 7 31 £15,500-24,999 9 10 9 27 £25,000-49,999 14 13 7 22 £50,000 or over 15 17 11 19 Don't know/refused 11 8 7 33 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 10 19 9 15 Aged 5-9 15 10 8 21 Aged 10-15 15 13 9 22 Any children 13 15 10 17 No children in household 12 10 7 29 Household size: 1 11 9 6 34 2 10 9 7 32 3 16 15 7 17 4 or more 14 14 11 19 Current marital status: Single 19 14 12 16 Married/civil partnership/living as married

10 10 6 29

Separated, divorced or widowed 10 10 5 33 Car status: Yes 12 12 7 26 No 16 11 10 28 Daily personal internet usage: 0-3 hours 12 11 6 29 4-6 hours 11 15 8 22 7+ hours 17 6 13 25



Supermarket used: Asda 13 10 8 24 Co-op 16 16 6 18 Marks & Spencer 15 20 10 16 Morrisons 16 14 7 24 Sainsbury's 15 14 9 22 Tesco 13 14 9 25 Waitrose 18 12 10 31 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc 12 11 10 31 Other* 12 10 6 31 Personal mobile phone network provider:

O2 14 14 8 23 Orange 13 12 7 27 Vodafone 11 10 9 28 T-Mobile 9 11 11 21 Virgin Mobile* 14 8 7 28 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 16 11 7 25 I have digital cable (Virgin Media) 13 9 9 23 Freeview digital box/TV 12 14 9 24 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

10 11 10 33

* small sub-sample (75-100) ** low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 51: REPERTOIRE OF OUTLETS USED FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ % Sandwiches bought from one place 23 Sandwiches bought from two places 21 Sandwiches bought from three places 15 Sandwiches bought from four or more places 15 I haven’t bought any in the last three months/don’t know 27 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



FIGURE 52: OUTLETS USED FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, BY REPERTOIRE OF OUTLETS USED, NOVEMBER 2009 All Sandwiches

bought from one place

Sandwiches bought from two places

Sandwiches bought from three places

Sandwiches bought from

four or more places

I haven’t bought any in the last

three months/

don’t know Base: internet users aged 16+

1,000 227 208 147 149 269

% % % % % % Have bought at any 73 100 100 100 100 - Any sandwich chain 52 43 75 84 97 - Any grocery store 45 37 51 78 94 - Greggs 35 26 45 57 77 - Subway 26 13 36 37 69 - Tesco 26 16 22 52 67 - M&S 20 12 23 29 56 - Independent sandwich shop

15 4 17 33 42 -

Other grocery store 13 10 14 20 36 - A coffee shop (eg Starbucks, Caffè Nero, Costa Coffee)

12 5 10 21 41 -

Boots 11 3 10 18 40 - EAT/other sandwich chain (eg Sayers)*

8 3 8 12 24 -

I haven’t bought any in the last three months

26 - - - - 97

* low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



FIGURE 53: REPERTOIRE OF OUTLETS USED FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ Sandwiches

bought from one

place

Sandwiches bought from two places

Sandwiches bought from three places

Sandwiches bought from

four or more places


three months/

don’t know % % % % % All: 23 21 15 15 27 Gender: Male 21 19 16 16 29 Female 24 22 14 14 25 Age: 16-24 23 19 24 24 11 25-34 25 23 14 19 19 35-44 22 25 18 16 19 45-54 24 20 12 13 31 55+ 22 19 9 9 41 Region: Inner and Greater London 27 21 19 16 18 South East/East Anglia 19 21 15 12 34 South West and Wales 32 20 12 13 24 East and West Midlands 19 25 17 10 29 North West 26 21 9 14 30 Yorks, Humberside 21 13 18 21 27 North and Scotland 19 25 15 21 21 Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week)

22 22 18 17 21

Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week)

22 23 18 16 21

Any self-employed* 29 17 9 15 29 In full-time education* 25 20 22 22 10 Retired 22 21 10 6 42 Not working for any other reason

21 20 10 14 34

Socio-economic group: ABC1 24 20 16 16 25 AB 22 19 15 19 27 C1 26 21 17 13 23 C2DE 21 23 13 13 31 C2 19 28 16 15 23 DE 23 20 10 11 35 Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent)

23 25 9 12 31


25 20 18 15 21


22 20 17 16 24

University degree 23 17 18 17 25



Daily newspaper readership:

Broadsheet readers 18 21 19 24 18 Mid-market tabloid readers 21 22 17 16 24 Popular tabloid readers 21 25 18 17 19 None of these 27 16 10 10 37 Sunday newspaper readership:

Broadsheet readers 18 20 19 22 20 Mid-market tabloid readers 16 20 19 20 25 Popular tabloid readers 19 24 21 18 19 None of these 27 19 9 10 35 Gross annual household income:

Under £15,499 24 18 13 13 32 £15,500-24,999 23 26 14 10 28 £25,000-49,999 22 19 17 18 23 £50,000 or over 23 24 15 19 19 Don't know/refused 21 18 13 14 35 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 26 26 9 23 16 Aged 5-9 19 30 12 16 23 Aged 10-15 18 31 12 16 24 Any children 22 29 12 20 18 No children in household 23 18 16 13 30 Household size: 1 20 19 13 11 36 2 24 20 13 12 32 3 21 23 14 23 18 4 or more 23 22 20 16 20 Current marital status: Single 22 18 21 20 18 Married/civil partnership/living as married

24 21 13 14 30

Separated, divorced or widowed

19 28 11 9 33

Car status: Yes 23 20 16 15 26 No 20 27 8 13 31 Daily personal internet usage:

0-3 hours 24 19 14 14 30 4-6 hours 21 23 15 19 22 7+ hours 21 21 21 10 27 Supermarket used: Asda 22 21 17 17 24 Co-op 23 21 20 18 19 Marks & Spencer 16 25 17 25 17 Morrisons 20 20 15 20 25 Sainsbury's 20 22 16 19 22 Tesco 21 19 17 19 25 Waitrose 21 20 10 17 32 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc

20 16 15 17 31

Other* 23 15 16 13 34



Personal mobile phone network provider:

O2 24 20 16 16 23 Orange 24 19 13 16 28 Vodafone 19 21 15 16 30 T-Mobile 26 23 13 16 21 Virgin Mobile* 21 26 16 8 30 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 20 20 18 18 25 I have digital cable (virgin media)

22 26 16 13 24

Freeview digital box/TV 23 22 14 16 26 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

27 16 11 13 33


Appendix – Consumer: Attitudes towards Buying Sandwiches Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Appendix – Consumer: Attitudes towards Buying Sandwiches FIGURE 54: ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ % Shop-bought sandwiches are over-priced 42 There’s no point buying a sandwich I could make at home 39 I have cut back on spending on lunch 30 Low price doesn’t equal good value 27 I seek out meal deals 20 I only buy sandwiches as a treat 18 I buy myself small treats even if I’m saving money 17 Good-quality ingredients are worth paying more for 16 I have switched to a less expensive outlet for lunch 7 Sandwiches/wraps aren’t filling enough for lunch 5 It’s expensive to make shop-style sandwiches at home 3 I cut back on my lunch spending for a while, but it’s now back to ‘normal’ 2 None of these 9 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 55: MOST POPULAR ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ Shop-

bought sandwiches

are over-priced

There’s no point buying a sandwich I

could make at home

I have cut back on

spending on lunch


I seek out

meal deals

% % % % % All 42 39 30 27 20 Gender: Male 38 36 29 27 19 Female 47 42 32 27 20 Age: 16-24 41 26 41 26 41 25-34 43 30 38 26 25 35-44 42 33 39 28 17 45-54 42 38 31 26 11 55+ 43 53 16 28 12 Region: Inner and Greater London 31 31 29 26 22 South East/East Anglia 45 43 23 29 19 South West and Wales 40 36 33 25 21 East and West Midlands 43 41 35 25 14 North West 45 45 28 30 17 Yorks, Humberside 52 39 33 20 23 North and Scotland 41 34 37 32 21



Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week) 39 30 40 25 19 Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week)

55 45 37 33 19


42 40 26 27 14


41 37 34 20 32


46 38 30 29 21

University degree 46 38 32 32 18 Daily newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 40 35 31 34 23 Mid-market tabloid readers 45 39 33 30 21 Popular tabloid readers 41 35 34 27 25 None of these 42 43 30 22 17 Sunday newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 43 38 31 35 24 Mid-market tabloid readers 50 38 33 31 25 Popular tabloid readers 44 35 37 29 21 None of these 39 44 28 23 17 Gross annual household income: Under £15,499 44 44 29 27 20 £15,500-24,999 39 43 34 30 19 £25,000-49,999 45 36 32 27 21 £50,000 or over 40 30 25 30 17 Don't know/refused 40 41 28 20 18 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 48 31 39 26 23 Aged 5-9 41 38 41 24 17 Aged 10-15 43 37 37 28 17 Any children 45 35 37 27 22 No children in household 42 40 28 27 19 Household size: 1 47 42 31 30 10 2 39 43 22 27 17 3 47 37 32 26 28 4 or more 42 33 42 25 24 Current marital status: Single 39 31 35 28 29 Married/civil partnership/living as married

43 41 29 26 17

Separated, divorced or widowed 48 50 22 31 12



Car status: Yes 43 38 30 26 20 No 40 41 31 31 19 Daily personal internet usage: 0-3 hours 40 42 29 25 16 4-6 hours 49 36 31 30 24 7+ hours 35 31 32 28 23 Supermarket used: Asda 45 39 38 27 24 Co-op 44 43 32 29 26 Marks & Spencer 39 34 25 36 25 Morrisons 39 35 30 29 24 Sainsbury's 45 39 30 30 23 Tesco 44 37 29 28 23 Waitrose 37 36 21 31 15 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc 44 44 33 28 25 Other* 57 46 28 37 13 Personal mobile phone network provider:

O2 43 38 37 21 22 Orange 41 42 27 26 22 Vodafone 46 36 28 29 20 T-Mobile 40 32 31 29 18 Virgin Mobile* 39 42 28 30 17 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 46 31 30 29 22 I have digital cable (Virgin media) 41 39 31 22 20 Freeview digital box/TV 42 40 30 29 21 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

33 46 30 25 15




FIGURE 56: NEXT MOST POPULAR ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ I only buy

sandwiches as a treat

I buy myself small treats even

if I’m saving money

Good-quality ingredients are worth paying

more for

None of these**

% % % % All 18 17 16 9 Gender: Male 12 13 17 11 Female 24 20 14 7 Age: 16-24 16 25 13 8 25-34 13 21 16 6 35-44 21 18 18 8 45-54 19 14 15 9 55+ 19 11 17 12 Region: Inner and Greater London 11 17 18 8 South East/East Anglia 19 18 18 10 South West and Wales 20 17 11 7 East and West Midlands 21 13 15 9 North West 18 16 13 13 Yorks, Humberside 15 16 16 7 North and Scotland 19 19 19 8 Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week) 12 16 16 9 Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week)

23 20 16 5

Any self-employed* 15 11 19 11 In full-time education* 17 26 13 6 Retired 16 12 19 12 Not working for any other reason 30 17 12 11 Socio-economic group: ABC1 16 16 17 10 AB 15 16 22 9 C1 18 16 11 11 C2DE 21 18 13 8 C2 23 23 17 2 DE 21 16 11 11 Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent)

23 14 10 9


15 21 9 4


17 20 16 10

University degree 16 17 26 9 Daily newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 15 19 25 9 Mid-market tabloid readers 19 18 18 8 Popular tabloid readers 18 18 14 7 None of these 19 14 11 10



Sunday newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 17 18 26 8 Mid-market tabloid readers 20 20 17 9 Popular tabloid readers 17 19 14 5 None of these 19 14 11 10 Gross annual household income: Under £15,499 22 16 13 8 £15,500-24,999 24 19 16 9 £25,000-49,999 16 17 17 8 £50,000 or over 12 15 26 12 Don't know/refused 12 13 8 10 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 16 25 11 9 Aged 5-9 18 16 12 11 Aged 10-15 19 16 18 4 Any children 17 21 15 7 No children in household 18 15 16 10 Household size: 1 21 15 14 12 2 17 15 19 10 3 19 18 14 6 4 or more 17 20 13 8 Current marital status: Single 13 21 14 9 Married/civil partnership/living as married

18 15 17 9

Separated, divorced or widowed 27 13 13 8 Car status: Yes 18 17 17 9 No 18 17 10 12 Daily personal internet usage: 0-3 hours 17 14 16 10 4-6 hours 20 19 17 9 7+ hours 17 22 10 7 Supermarket used: Asda 19 19 15 6 Co-op 22 18 16 6 Marks & Spencer 16 18 31 8 Morrisons 18 17 16 11 Sainsbury's 21 17 20 6 Tesco 19 18 15 8 Waitrose 16 20 32 12 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc 19 18 16 7 Other* 18 24 16 7 Personal mobile phone network provider:

O2 18 16 14 8 Orange 17 16 15 9 Vodafone 14 16 17 12 T-Mobile 17 18 21 9 Virgin Mobile* 32 17 17 7



TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 16 14 14 9 I have digital cable (Virgin media) 19 16 17 7 Freeview digital box/TV 20 20 18 10 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

15 15 16 11

* small sub-sample (75-100) ** low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 57: ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLETS BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 All Have

bought at any

Any sandwich

chain

Any grocery

store

Greggs Subway

Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 731 521 446 349 260 % % % % % % Shop-bought sandwiches are over-priced

42 47 47 48 48 48

There’s no point buying a sandwich I could make at home

39 27 25 27 26 21

I have cut back on spending on lunch 30 37 39 37 39 42 Low price doesn’t equal good value 27 32 33 36 32 34 I seek out meal deals 20 26 29 29 29 37 I only buy sandwiches as a treat 18 22 20 25 22 19 I buy myself small treats even if I’m saving money

17 21 23 22 24 24

Good-quality ingredients are worth paying more for

16 19 20 20 18 20

None of these* 9 7 5 6 5 5 * low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 58: ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLETS BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 (CONTINUED) All Tesco M&S Independent


store Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 258 200 154 132 % % % % % Shop-bought sandwiches are over-priced 42 47 47 60 52 There’s no point buying a sandwich I could make at home

39 24 25 29 29

I have cut back on spending on lunch 30 43 31 37 44 Low price doesn’t equal good value 27 33 42 49 36 I seek out meal deals 20 32 28 29 30 I only buy sandwiches as a treat 18 25 19 16 28 I buy myself small treats even if I’m saving money

17 25 20 29 25


16 17 30 32 19




FIGURE 59: ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLETS BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 (CONTINUED) All A coffee shop


Costa Coffee)

Boots EAT/other sandwich chain

(eg Sayers)*


three months Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 123 114 77 260 % % % % % Shop-bought sandwiches are over-priced

42 48 57 40 32


39 21 20 21 72

I have cut back on spending on lunch 30 35 41 48 12 Low price doesn’t equal good value 27 42 40 33 15 I seek out meal deals 20 33 46 34 2 I only buy sandwiches as a treat 18 15 21 17 7 I buy myself small treats even if I’m saving money

17 29 28 22 5


16 27 25 23 9

None of these** 9 9 4 5 14 * small sub-sample (75-100) ** low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL

Appendix – Consumer: Attitudes towards Variety, Sandwich Shop Retailing Freshness and Health When Buying Sandwiches Market Intelligence, January 2010


Appendix – Consumer: Attitudes towards Variety, Freshness and Health When Buying Sandwiches FIGURE 60: ATTITUDES TOWARDS QUALITY, NUTRITION AND FRESHNESS WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ % I prefer sandwiches made for me to prepacked ones 42 Shop-bought sandwiches aren’t healthy eaten every day 26 You can’t know if prepacked sandwiches are fresh 26 I seek out healthy sandwiches 24 It’s worth paying more for sandwiches made in front of me 22 It is important for me to see the nutritional information 22 Taste is more important than calories/salt 21 Quality ingredients are more important than having the sandwich made for me 15 I’d like to have more guidance on which sandwiches are healthy 14 I switch between healthy and indulgent options 13 None of these 15 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 61: MOST POPULAR ATTITUDES TOWARDS QUALITY, NUTRITION AND FRESHNESS WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ I prefer

sandwiches made for me to prepacked

ones

Shop-bought sandwiches

aren’t healthy eaten every

day

You can’t know if

prepacked sandwiches

are fresh

I seek out healthy

sandwiches

It’s worth paying more

for sandwiches

made in front of me

% % % % % All 42 26 26 24 22 Gender: Male 42 22 21 21 21 Female 42 29 30 26 23 Age: 16-24 43 37 33 23 21 25-34 42 33 25 24 19 35-44 43 28 24 27 26 45-54 39 23 24 23 19 55+ 42 18 24 23 24 Region: Inner and Greater London

34 32 28 31 19

South East/East Anglia 43 23 27 19 24 South West and Wales 43 24 21 28 24 East and West Midlands 40 26 26 20 23 North West 46 26 26 31 25 Yorks, Humberside 47 29 24 18 19 North and Scotland 39 25 28 23 19



Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week)

41 26 21 25 19


38 26 25 26 23

Any self-employed* 54 29 20 26 24 In full-time education* 44 39 39 28 22 Retired 42 19 24 21 28 Not working for any other reason

39 26 32 19 20

Socio-economic group: ABC1 44 28 25 26 23 AB 48 28 29 26 27 C1 40 27 21 27 19 C2DE 37 23 26 19 20 C2 40 26 26 22 26 DE 36 22 27 18 17 Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent)

39 23 25 20 22


41 27 25 25 20


47 26 29 28 23

University degree 44 30 27 27 26 Daily newspaper readership:

Broadsheet readers 47 29 28 31 27 Mid-market tabloid readers

46 24 24 25 25

Popular tabloid readers 42 26 26 21 23 None of these 37 27 27 20 17 Sunday newspaper readership:

Broadsheet readers 45 30 30 31 28 Mid-market tabloid readers

47 27 30 27 27

Popular tabloid readers 44 27 28 21 24 None of these 41 25 25 21 19 Gross annual household income:

Under £15,499 39 24 27 20 18 £15,500-24,999 43 23 24 27 23 £25,000-49,999 42 28 27 26 23 £50,000 or over 54 33 25 25 30 Don't know/refused 34 24 25 17 20 Presence of own children:

Aged 0-4 46 35 34 21 15 Aged 5-9 33 26 19 20 16 Aged 10-15 42 30 28 29 27 Any children 43 31 30 25 22 No children in household 42 24 24 23 23



Household size: 1 37 21 26 20 22 2 43 22 21 23 24 3 43 34 32 29 21 4 or more 42 29 28 23 20 Current marital status: Single 41 33 30 22 20 Married/civil partnership/living as married

44 25 23 24 24


32 18 27 27 22

Car status: Yes 42 26 25 23 23 No 43 26 29 26 20 Daily personal internet usage:

0-3 hours 42 24 25 26 22 4-6 hours 43 31 27 23 23 7+ hours 37 21 28 17 21 Supermarket used: Asda 48 27 27 25 22 Co-op 47 28 27 23 27 Marks & Spencer 46 28 23 31 28 Morrisons 39 26 26 24 22 Sainsbury's 44 28 26 24 25 Tesco 43 28 28 25 23 Waitrose 42 30 28 27 24 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc

44 27 30 28 21

Other* 41 34 36 25 27 Personal mobile phone network provider:

O2 45 29 27 22 22 Orange 39 27 23 24 23 Vodafone 43 26 26 25 19 T-Mobile 47 27 28 33 23 Virgin Mobile* 32 17 22 23 24 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB)

44 27 27 22 24

I have digital cable (virgin media)

43 21 23 21 20

Freeview digital box/TV 42 29 26 27 23 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

32 20 27 23 21




FIGURE 62: NEXT MOST POPULAR ATTITUDES TOWARDS QUALITY, NUTRITION AND FRESHNESS WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ It is

important for me to see the

nutritional information

Taste is more

important than

calories/ salt

Quality ingredients

are more important than

having the sandwich

made for me

I’d like to have more guidance on which

sandwiches are healthy

I switch between healthy

and indulgent options

None of these

% % % % % % All 22 21 15 14 13 15 Gender: Male 19 25 17 11 12 15 Female 25 18 13 17 14 15 Age: 16-24 23 29 12 18 19 12 25-34 26 26 9 16 17 12 35-44 24 23 12 13 18 12 45-54 21 19 17 12 9 17 55+ 19 16 20 12 7 19 Region: Inner and Greater London 27 24 13 14 15 12 South East/East Anglia 25 20 13 13 12 16 South West and Wales 19 20 10 13 11 14 East and West Midlands 19 25 17 14 12 19 North West 24 19 21 17 14 13 Yorks, Humberside 18 23 16 11 9 18 North and Scotland 23 20 17 18 18 14 Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week)

23 24 12 10 16 13


22 20 18 20 16 16

Any self-employed* 24 21 20 11 7 9 In full-time education* 24 26 10 20 23 13 Retired 22 14 21 14 5 19 Not working for any other reason

19 23 14 16 10 18

Socio-economic group: ABC1 24 21 16 14 15 13 AB 26 22 20 13 13 11 C1 21 20 12 15 16 17 C2DE 19 22 13 14 10 18 C2 21 25 15 16 15 10 DE 18 20 11 13 7 23



Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent)

19 18 11 15 8 19


18 30 11 11 18 13


25 25 14 15 16 10

University degree 27 19 21 15 11 15 Daily newspaper readership:

Broadsheet readers 30 24 22 16 16 10 Mid-market tabloid readers 23 24 16 16 14 10 Popular tabloid readers 19 26 13 16 18 12 None of these 20 20 11 13 11 21 Sunday newspaper readership:

Broadsheet readers 32 23 20 17 15 11 Mid-market tabloid readers 26 20 14 17 15 11 Popular tabloid readers 21 27 16 16 21 11 None of these 17 20 12 12 9 19 Gross annual household income:

Under £15,499 19 23 13 16 13 17 £15,500-24,999 24 20 18 16 10 16 £25,000-49,999 24 23 16 11 18 12 £50,000 or over 24 22 17 12 12 11 Don't know/refused 17 18 12 15 7 21 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 23 26 12 18 15 8 Aged 5-9 19 22 11 13 17 19 Aged 10-15 27 18 11 16 10 12 Any children 25 24 12 17 14 12 No children in household 21 21 16 13 13 16 Household size: 1 21 17 13 11 11 20 2 20 21 18 14 11 16 3 25 29 14 14 16 8 4 or more 23 19 12 16 15 17 Current marital status: Single 21 29 12 16 18 14 Married/civil partnership/living as married

23 18 17 13 11 15


20 22 10 14 13 19

Car status: Yes 23 23 16 14 13 14 No 19 15 9 16 14 23 Daily personal internet usage:

0-3 hours 23 18 15 13 13 17 4-6 hours 22 26 16 16 12 13 7+ hours 17 25 12 15 17 16



Supermarket used: Asda 25 22 15 17 15 12 Co-op 25 26 16 11 11 11 Marks & Spencer 34 23 27 15 16 9 Morrisons 23 22 18 15 13 15 Sainsbury's 23 22 20 13 15 11 Tesco 24 25 14 16 14 14 Waitrose 29 23 28 8 15 14 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc

29 20 21 14 13 12

Other* 21 27 19 17 11 21 Personal mobile phone network provider:

O2 26 21 10 13 16 13 Orange 19 21 16 12 14 16 Vodafone 20 22 19 14 9 18 T-Mobile 30 21 17 25 14 8 Virgin Mobile* 23 17 18 19 11 19 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB)

21 27 15 12 14 15

I have digital cable (virgin media)

22 20 13 15 16 13

Freeview digital box/TV 24 21 17 16 13 12 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

21 17 12 13 9 20

* small sub-sample (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 63: ATTITUDES TOWARDS QUALITY, NUTRITION AND FRESHNESS WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLET BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 All Have

bought at any

Any sandwich

chain

Any grocery

store

Greggs Subway

Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 731 521 446 349 260 % % % % % % I prefer sandwiches made for me to prepacked ones

42 46 47 47 48 49

Shop-bought sandwiches aren’t healthy eaten every day

26 30 32 33 33 32

You can’t know if prepacked sandwiches are fresh

26 28 30 31 32 30

I seek out healthy sandwiches 24 29 30 31 28 34 It’s worth paying more for sandwiches made in front of me

22 26 28 27 30 30

It is important for me to see the nutritional information

22 26 24 27 21 24

Taste is more important than calories/salt 21 25 26 29 27 27 Quality ingredients are more important than having the sandwich made for me

15 15 16 16 16 15

I’d like to have more guidance on which sandwiches are healthy

14 17 20 18 20 20

I switch between healthy and indulgent options 13 16 17 18 18 21 None of these 15 7 7 7 7 7 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



FIGURE 64: ATTITUDES TOWARDS QUALITY, NUTRITION AND FRESHNESS WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLET BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 (CONTINUED) All Tesco M&S Independent

sandwich shop Other

grocery store Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 258 200 154 132 % % % % % I prefer sandwiches made for me to prepacked ones

42 45 47 54 52


26 35 31 34 31


26 33 30 32 31

I seek out healthy sandwiches 24 31 33 34 27 It’s worth paying more for sandwiches made in front of me

22 25 30 40 33


22 25 30 28 28

Taste is more important than calories/salt 21 31 31 34 31 Quality ingredients are more important than having the sandwich made for me

15 13 20 20 19


14 21 17 16 19

I switch between healthy and indulgent options

13 21 18 23 21

None of these 15 7 8 3 6 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 65: ATTITUDES TOWARDS QUALITY, NUTRITION AND FRESHNESS WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLET BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 (CONTINUED) All A coffee shop


Costa Coffee)

Boots EAT/other sandwich chain (eg Sayers)


Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 123 114 77 260 % % % % % I prefer sandwiches made for me to prepacked ones

42 53 42 55 32


26 36 39 39 16


26 41 33 21 20

I seek out healthy sandwiches 24 34 36 31 8 It’s worth paying more for sandwiches made in front of me

22 32 25 17 14


22 36 37 33 12


21 29 26 26 13

Quality ingredients are more important than having the sandwich made for me

15 19 14 16 16


14 22 21 25 5


13 20 18 20 4

None of these 15 6 6 5 35 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



FIGURE 66: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY AND CONVENIENCE WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ % I prefer to have a sandwich made precisely how I like it 31 It's boring to eat sandwiches or wraps regularly 31 I like having a menu of ideas to choose from 24 I usually buy drinks/snacks/fruit at the same shop 20 I enjoy trying new ingredients/flavours 20 I visit different shops for variety 16 I haven’t got time for a sit-down lunch 8 I trust sandwich chains more than independent shops 6 I have a short lunch break so I tend to buy sandwiches at the nearest shop 6 I tend to buy lunch in advance (eg on the way to work) 5 None of these 24 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 67: MOST POPULAR ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY AND CONVENIENCE WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ I prefer to

have a sandwich

made precisely

how I like it

It's boring to eat

sandwiches or wraps regularly

I like having a menu of ideas to

choose from

I usually buy

drinks/ snacks/

fruit at the same shop

% % % % All 31 31 24 20 Gender: Male 32 26 22 19 Female 30 35 26 21 Age: 16-24 31 39 38 39 25-34 33 32 33 31 35-44 33 28 27 20 45-54 27 28 18 20 55+ 31 29 14 7 Region: Inner and Greater London 27 43 21 24 South East/East Anglia 31 26 21 18 South West and Wales 35 26 25 23 East and West Midlands 33 31 27 24 North West 37 35 21 15 Yorks, Humberside 27 33 24 15 North and Scotland 27 29 31 25 Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week) 27 31 27 21 Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week) 33 29 26 22 Any self-employed* 34 34 16 9 In full-time education* 34 39 36 44 Retired 35 23 13 7 Not working for any other reason 32 33 25 24



Socio-economic group: ABC1 31 30 25 21 AB 31 27 25 21 C1 31 34 25 20 C2DE 31 32 22 20 C2 31 36 26 25 DE 31 30 20 18 Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent)

33 27 20 16


30 32 22 22


34 34 28 21

University degree 28 29 27 24 Daily newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 32 32 31 24 Mid-market tabloid readers 34 29 27 21 Popular tabloid readers 33 34 29 23 None of these 28 30 19 20 Sunday newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 30 31 30 23 Mid-market tabloid readers 36 33 28 23 Popular tabloid readers 35 32 27 24 None of these 31 31 19 18 Gross annual household income: Under £15,499 31 30 24 21 £15,500-24,999 35 32 21 19 £25,000-49,999 31 32 28 20 £50,000 or over 29 30 25 23 Don't know/refused 27 29 20 19 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 40 36 38 34 Aged 5-9 39 28 21 15 Aged 10-15 30 29 30 25 Any children 35 31 33 26 No children in household 30 31 21 18 Household size: 1 26 34 21 16 2 32 27 18 14 3 34 32 35 29 4 or more 30 33 27 27 Current marital status: Single 31 35 31 33 Married/civil partnership/living as married 32 29 22 15 Separated, divorced or widowed 29 33 21 16 Car status: Yes 31 30 25 20 No 33 34 20 22 Daily personal internet usage: 0-3 hours 28 28 22 18 4-6 hours 36 34 26 22 7+ hours 32 32 32 29



Supermarket used: Asda 35 32 30 23 Co-op 37 31 26 24 Marks & Spencer 35 23 24 19 Morrisons 31 30 27 20 Sainsbury's 32 33 26 21 Tesco 33 29 26 23 Waitrose 26 32 23 19 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc 31 33 24 16 Other* 41 31 25 16 Personal mobile phone network provider: O2 34 32 25 23 Orange 33 29 27 20 Vodafone 30 27 21 19 T-Mobile 31 37 24 24 Virgin Mobile* 23 25 21 13 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 29 30 24 21 I have digital cable (virgin media) 31 27 25 24 Freeview digital box/TV 34 31 25 20 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

32 35 20 23

* small sub-sample (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 68: NEXT MOST POPULAR ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY AND CONVENIENCE WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ I enjoy trying new

ingredients/ flavours

I visit different shops for

variety

None of these

% % % All 20 16 24 Gender: Male 21 18 25 Female 20 15 24 Age: 16-24 21 19 9 25-34 31 23 12 35-44 26 21 22 45-54 19 13 26 55+ 12 11 39 Region: Inner and Greater London 24 25 18 South East/East Anglia 19 14 30 South West and Wales 15 9 22 East and West Midlands 22 16 22 North West 19 12 28 Yorks, Humberside 22 24 23 North and Scotland 24 20 22



Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week) 23 21 19 Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week) 25 16 20 Any self-employed* 17 17 22 In full-time education* 26 19 7 Retired 11 8 43 Not working for any other reason 21 15 27 Socio-economic group: ABC1 20 19 24 AB 21 19 25 C1 20 18 23 C2DE 20 12 24 C2 26 16 17 DE 17 10 29 Education: Secondary education (GCSE/O-level or equivalent) 15 14 24 High school education completed (A-level or equivalent)

18 18 19


27 19 23

University degree 21 19 26 Daily newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 27 26 20 Mid-market tabloid readers 21 19 22 Popular tabloid readers 24 19 15 None of these 15 9 32 Sunday newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 24 26 25 Mid-market tabloid readers 23 23 19 Popular tabloid readers 24 22 14 None of these 17 8 30 Gross annual household income: Under £15,499 19 14 24 £15,500-24,999 17 13 26 £25,000-49,999 23 18 23 £50,000 or over 24 25 20 Don't know/refused 19 14 29 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 21 18 10 Aged 5-9 19 18 19 Aged 10-15 27 17 17 Any children 26 18 15 No children in household 18 16 28 Household size: 1 15 15 31 2 17 14 31 3 30 20 16 4 or more 20 18 16 Current marital status: Single 22 20 16 Married/civil partnership/living as married 20 15 27 Separated, divorced or widowed 18 13 29



Car status: Yes 20 17 24 No 20 13 26 Daily personal internet usage: 0-3 hours 20 15 29 4-6 hours 22 19 19 7+ hours 17 18 19 Supermarket used: Asda 23 21 19 Co-op 28 19 18 Marks & Spencer 26 26 20 Morrisons 21 18 26 Sainsbury's 23 21 21 Tesco 21 18 23 Waitrose 24 21 31 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc 22 17 27 Other* 18 13 30 Personal mobile phone network provider: O2 20 18 17 Orange 21 18 23 Vodafone 22 18 26 T-Mobile 20 19 18 Virgin Mobile* 18 13 39 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 21 16 24 I have digital cable (virgin media) 20 18 24 Freeview digital box/TV 22 20 25 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only 17 10 22 * small sub-sample (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 69: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY AND CONVENIENCE WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLET BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 All Have

bought at any

Any sandwich

chain

Any grocery

store

Greggs Subway

Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 731 521 446 349 260 % % % % % % I prefer to have a sandwich made precisely how I like it

31 35 35 33 36 40

It's boring to eat sandwiches or wraps regularly

31 35 36 35 34 36


24 31 34 31 37 41

I usually buy drinks/snacks/fruit at the same shop

20 27 29 29 29 33

I enjoy trying new ingredients/flavours 20 26 29 27 31 31 I visit different shops for variety 16 22 27 26 27 34 I haven’t got time for a sit-down lunch* 8 9 9 9 10 9 None of these 24 13 9 14 10 5 * low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



FIGURE 70: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY AND CONVENIENCE WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLET BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 (CONTINUED) All Tesco M&S Independent


store Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 258 200 154 132 % % % % % I prefer to have a sandwich made precisely how I like it

31 34 35 40 34


31 35 31 44 38

I like having a menu of ideas to choose from 24 35 29 46 42 I usually buy drinks/snacks/fruit at the same shop

20 33 29 34 27

I enjoy trying new ingredients/flavours 20 26 29 34 29 I visit different shops for variety 16 24 32 35 32 I haven’t got time for a sit-down lunch* 8 9 12 10 10 None of these 24 11 15 7 13 * low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 71: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY AND CONVENIENCE WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY OUTLET BOUGHT AT, NOVEMBER 2009 (CONTINUED) All A coffee shop


Costa Coffee)

Boots EAT/Other sandwich chain (eg Sayers)*


three months

Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 123 114 77 260 % % % % % I prefer to have a sandwich made precisely how I like it

31 35 33 35 23


31 43 36 42 20

I like having a menu of ideas to choose from 24 42 34 40 6 I usually buy drinks/snacks/fruit at the same shop

20 37 39 33 4

I enjoy trying new ingredients/flavours 20 31 30 29 6 I visit different shops for variety 16 34 30 39 1 I haven’t got time for a sit-down lunch** 8 10 10 8 5 None of these 24 7 6 7 55 * small sub-sample (75-100) ** low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL

Appendix – Consumer: Target Groups Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Appendix – Consumer: Target Groups FIGURE 72: STATEMENTS ON EATING HABITS, BY TARGET GROUPS, NOVEMBER 2009 All Variety

seekers Bored Convenience-

driven Unengaged How I

like it Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 105 173 101 475 146 % % % % % % I eat fresh fruit/vegetables most days

65 74 71 58 65 54

I occasionally treat myself to sweets or chocolate

47 51 49 46 47 43

I try to make sure I eat a low-fat diet 40 51 39 41 38 38 I try to include oily fish in my diet 38 46 36 22 40 38 I eat 5 portions of fresh fruit/vegetables every day

26 29 21 18 31 20

I often eat sweets, chocolate or sugary food

26 29 25 38 20 34

I eat little or no red meat 22 27 27 21 20 24 I rarely eat sweets, chocolate or sugary food

21 15 24 14 24 17

I often eat foods such as chips and other fried food

20 30 17 31 15 25

I find I am eating more homemade sandwiches then I did a year ago

19 31 15 29 11 32

I am eating less bread then I did a year ago

18 19 23 18 16 18

I eat what I like and don't worry too much about how healthy my diet is

15 12 15 18 12 22

I eat very little fresh fruit and vegetables

11 11 13 16 7 18

SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 73: OUTLETS USED FOR BUYING SANDWICHES, BY TARGET GROUPS, NOVEMBER 2009 All Variety



like it Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 105 173 101 475 146 % % % % % % Have bought at any 73 99 74 94 57 90 Any sandwich chain 52 87 51 66 37 69 Any grocery store 45 70 42 61 34 53 Greggs 35 63 31 44 24 49 Subway 26 50 23 34 16 40 Tesco 26 35 22 39 19 38 M&S 20 36 15 27 17 21 Independent sandwich shop 15 32 17 20 7 26 Other grocery store 13 31 13 15 8 17 A coffee shop (eg Starbucks, Caffè Nero, Costa Coffee)

12 28 12 17 6 19

Boots 11 18 9 22 7 16 EAT/other sandwich chain (eg Sayers)*

8 16 8 9 4 14


26 1 25 6 41 10

* low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



FIGURE 74: ATTITUDES TOWARDS BUYING SANDWICHES, BY TARGET GROUPS, NOVEMBER 2009 All Variety



like it Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 105 173 101 475 146 % % % % % % Shop-bought sandwiches are over-priced

42 57 51 46 31 58


39 27 42 19 47 31

I have cut back on spending on lunch

30 39 37 45 19 43


27 50 32 27 15 43

I seek out meal deals 20 42 15 38 8 34 I only buy sandwiches as a treat 18 20 21 25 14 21 I buy myself small treats even if I’m saving money

17 34 15 24 7 32


16 40 12 13 10 25

None of these* 9 4 4 6 15 3 * low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 75: ATTITUDES TOWARDS QUALITY, NUTRITION AND FRESHNESS WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY TARGET GROUPS, NOVEMBER 2009 All Variety



like it Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 105 173 101 475 146 % % % % % % I prefer sandwiches made for me to prepacked ones

42 51 46 43 35 51


26 38 37 34 13 42


26 31 31 40 15 40

I seek out healthy sandwiches 24 36 23 37 17 28 It’s worth paying more for sandwiches made in front of me

22 46 20 22 13 37


22 39 23 32 14 29


21 42 19 33 11 35

Quality ingredients are more important than having the sandwich made for me

15 29 16 4 14 16


14 24 16 27 7 20


13 34 15 17 4 21

None of these 15 1 9 5 27 1 SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL



FIGURE 76: ATTITUDES TOWARDS VARIETY AND CONVENIENCE WHEN BUYING SANDWICHES, BY TARGET GROUPS, NOVEMBER 2009 All Variety



like it Base: internet users aged 16+ 1,000 105 173 101 475 146 % % % % % % I prefer to have a sandwich made precisely how I like it

31 30 21 37 27 55


31 40 100 40 - 36


24 79 6 - - 100

I usually buy drinks/snacks/fruit at the same shop

20 23 - 100 - 54

I enjoy trying new ingredients/flavours

20 88 8 9 11 26

I visit different shops for variety 16 79 9 9 8 14 I haven’t got time for a sit-down lunch*

8 15 10 9 5 9

None of these 24 - - - 51 - * low response rate (75-100) SOURCE: TOLUNA/MINTEL FIGURE 77: TARGET GROUPS, BY DEMOGRAPHICS, NOVEMBER 2009 Base: 1,000 internet users aged 16+ Variety



like it % % % % % All 11 17 10 48 15 Gender: Male 12 14 10 52 13 Female 9 20 11 44 17 Age: 16-24 10 16 20 28 26 25-34 16 14 14 35 21 35-44 14 14 8 48 16 45-54 9 19 11 51 10 55+ 7 21 4 61 8 Region: Inner and Greater London 13 22 13 38 13 South East/East Anglia 10 13 9 56 12 South West and Wales 5 16 12 46 20 East and West Midlands 10 18 11 46 15 North West 9 23 9 46 13 Yorks, Humberside 15 18 8 48 13 North and Scotland 14 17 9 44 17



Working status: Employee full-time (30+ hours/week) 13 18 9 45 16 Employee part-time (less than 30 hours/week)

10 17 11 43 19


6 16 12 54 13


12 16 13 47 12


14 18 9 42 18

University degree 12 16 9 46 17 Daily newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 16 15 9 42 18 Mid-market tabloid readers 12 14 10 48 15 Popular tabloid readers 13 19 11 40 17 None of these 7 19 13 50 11 Sunday newspaper readership: Broadsheet readers 14 15 8 44 18 Mid-market tabloid readers 13 15 12 44 15 Popular tabloid readers 13 18 12 40 18 None of these 7 19 11 51 12 Gross annual household income: Under £15,499 9 17 12 46 16 £15,500-24,999 8 17 11 51 13 £25,000-49,999 11 18 9 46 16 £50,000 or over 15 17 9 45 14 Don't know/refused 10 16 10 51 13 Presence of own children: Aged 0-4 10 15 16 30 28 Aged 5-9 10 17 10 51 14 Aged 10-15 13 14 12 43 18 Any children 14 15 13 38 20 No children in household 9 18 9 51 13 Household size: 1 13 19 10 51 8 2 7 19 6 55 12 3 17 14 12 36 21 4 or more 9 16 15 42 18 Current marital status: Single 12 14 17 37 19 Married/civil partnership/living as married 9 18 7 52 14 Separated, divorced or widowed 12 20 8 51 10



Car status: Yes 11 16 10 48 15 No 8 22 13 45 13 Daily personal internet usage: 0-3 hours 9 18 8 52 12 4-6 hours 13 17 12 42 16 7+ hours 9 13 14 41 23 Supermarket used: Asda 14 16 11 43 18 Co-op 12 16 14 43 16 Marks & Spencer 18 12 11 50 9 Morrisons 12 14 8 49 17 Sainsbury's 14 17 11 45 14 Tesco 11 15 11 47 16 Waitrose 14 16 6 51 13 Discounter eg Aldi, Lidl, Netto etc 10 21 6 48 15 Other* 10 19 7 48 16 Personal mobile phone network provider:

O2 11 16 14 45 15 Orange 13 16 8 46 17 Vodafone 11 18 7 52 12 T-Mobile 9 21 15 42 14 Virgin Mobile* 10 13 6 59 13 TV reception: I have digital satellite (BSkyB) 11 18 10 47 15 I have digital cable (virgin media) 11 16 12 46 16 Freeview digital box/TV 12 17 9 48 13 Other digital TV/analogue cable/terrestrial TV only

4 17 15 48 17


Appendix: Research methodology

Appendix: Research Methodology Sandwich Shop Retailing Market Intelligence, January 2010


Appendix: Research Methodology Mintel International Group Ltd is an independent market analysis company that prides itself on supplying objective information on a whole range of markets and marketing issues. There are three main sources of information and research stages used in the compilation of Mintel reports: • consumer research, where exclusive research – both quantitative and qualitative – is

conducted for individual reports as well as drawing upon non-exclusive large scale surveys • interviews (usually conducted by telephone), both formal and informal, with relevant

members of the trade • Mintel Information Consultancy and market size and economic database. Reports are written and managed by analysts with experience in the relevant markets. Consumer research Exclusive and original quantitative consumer research is commissioned for almost all Mintel reports. In addition, qualitative research is also undertaken for a large proportion of reports in the form of online focus groups. Mintel invests a considerable sum each year in consumer research, and the purchaser of a Mintel report benefits, as the price of an individual report is less than the cost of the original research alone. The research brings an up-to-date and unique insight into topical issues of importance. Consumer research is conducted among a nationally representative sample of either adults or internet users and is generally carried out by BMRB (including BMRB Online), Ipsos Mori, GMI or Toluna. Other suppliers are used on an ad hoc basis as required. The results are only available in Mintel reports. Sampling and weighting BMRB OMNIBUS Face to Face Surveys BMRB Face to Face Omnibus samples 2,000 adults weekly using a random location sampling technique. This is a single-stage sample design, taking as its universe Sample Units, a bespoke amalgamation of Output Areas (OAs - the basic building block used for output from the 2001 Census) in Great Britain. Sample units have an average size of 300 households. OAs are grouped into Sample Units by CACI within ward and taking account of their ACORN characteristics. This sampling system is as current as it could be in terms of the characteristics of the areas selected and the people within them. There are additional quota controls on age - 15-34, 35-54, 55+ - on men - working full-time, not working full time – on women - working full or part time, not working full or part time. Interviewing is in home, face-to-face using CAPI (laptop computers). Data are weighted to the correct population proportions to match both the TGI survey and the National Readership Survey. A rim weighting technique is used in which target profiles are set for eight separate demographic variables.



Online Surveys The sample is drawn from the Lightspeed Research (a sister company of BMRB) online access panel that has over 180 000 members in Great Britain. The online panels are recruited and maintained according to rigorous standards to ensure quality and representative sampling thus allows for 1000 nationally representative online adults aged 16-64 to answer weekly online questionnaires. . A section of the Lightspeed panel can be drawn and invited by email to complete the weekly survey. Quota controls are placed on the survey to ensure that there is no demographic skew in the sample. Quotas are set to achieve a sample that represents the population of GB. Smaller sub-samples within the overall sample can be achieved. A variety of recruitment methods are used to build the Lightspeed panel. Panel recruitment is achieved through multiple sources, although online is the main vehicle for acquiring panellists. Lightspeed Research uses a variety of web portals and sites to ensure a balanced panel. The panellists are incentivised by receiving Lightspeed Points every time they participate in surveys. Once a panellist has earned 500 Lightspeed Points they can redeem them for £5 gift certificates. Panellists can also allow their Lightspeed Points to build up and redeem them for bigger prizes. Careful panel management is undertaken to ensure a responsive panel with 30-50% completion rates being achieved through removal functions for panellists, proactively removing no longer valid e-mail addresses; panel categorisation to identify ‘loyal’ and ‘inactive’ panellists so that panel attrition can be reduced. In addition to this, panellists are not invited to complete surveys more than once a month and not more than one topic per quarter. IPSOS MORI Ipsos MORI Capibus uses a two-stage random location sample design which generates a very high quality sample representative of the Great Britain adult population. Interviews are sampled from 145 Output Areas, randomly selected every week, and MOSAIC is employed to set interlocking quota controls specific to each interviewer location. This ensures consistent accurate representation of the locations interviewed every week. By using this proven sample design, all sub-sectors of the population are represented –at a national and regional level. All information collected on Capibus are then weighted to reflect the known profile of the adult population in Great Britain. Capibus uses a rim weighting system which weights to mid 2007 census and NRS defined profiles for age, social grade, region and working status - within gender. Additional profiles used include tenure and car in household, for example.

Because the sampling process is repeated every week, the Capibus sample is matched wave on wave, making it ideal for taking successive measurements on the same issue.



GMI GMI’s global online panels represent a community of high-quality, highly profiled, double opted-in consumers and specialty panelists who are actively managed to specifically serve the sample needs of the market research industry. GMI has its own proprietary panel, which, combined with the panel of its approved network of vendors, provides reach to 10 million households around the world. For general population research studies, GMI draws a sample from its global consumer panelist base that is in proportion with the general population. Then, GMI sends an invitation to request panelist participation in the survey. For clients with specific criteria, GMI pulls the sample based on the filters set, and then distributes invitations on a random basis. Panelists are typically invited to take part in a survey via an email invitation. At the client’s request, panel members can also be directed to a client portal to complete a study, and then be passed back into the GMI database to ensure Marketpoints are awarded directly to the panel member’s individual account. This transfer is always encrypted to protect the respondent’s personal information. Toluna Toluna has embraced the social media concept and has developed ‘panel communities’, in order to maximise member engagement and overcome the common industry problem of declining survey response rates and multi-panel membership. Today, Toluna’s unique online community consists of over 3.7 million consumer and business-to-business panelists covering 33 countries. All of Toluna’s 33 proprietary panel communities around the world are actively managed panels. Members are recruited from a broad array of online and offline approaches that best represent the online community as a whole in each country. With stringent panel quality policies, Toluna ensures that all its panelists are recruited via a double opt-in email process; daily checks are carried out for hard bounce emails and duplicates; and panelists who provide inconsistent responses are removed from the database. Confidence levels Statistical confidence levels of + or – 2% or 3% can be applied to the data, depending on sample size and percentage of respondents. For example, if 20% of a total sample of 1,000 adults say that they do something, you can be 95% certain that the figure for the population lies between 17% and 23%. For a sample of 2,000 adults, you can be 95% certain that the figure lies between 18% and 22%. Consumer research is stored in a database supervised by Mintel's statisticians. Additional analysis of information too abundant to be included in published reports may be available for an additional charge. Additional quantitative data are taken from BMRB's Target Group Index surveys. The main TGI survey used is a continuous self-completion survey among a representative sample of around 25,000 adults throughout Great Britain.



Unless otherwise stated, consumer research data are presented as penetration, ie as a percentage of demographic sub-groups (usually in rows) such as age, eg 71% of 15-24-year-olds are moisturiser users. Profiles are represented as proportions of the population, eg 8% of moisturiser users are aged 15-24 and, therefore, total 100%. Population profile GB population profile, by demographic group, 2009 Base: adults aged 15+ % Total 100 Men 49 Women 51 Age group: 15-19 8 20-24 8 25-34 16 35-44 18 45-54 16 55-64 14 65+ 20 Socio-economic group: AB 27 C1 29 C2 21 D 15 E 8 Television regions: London 24 South 11 Anglia/Midlands 27 South West/Wales 12 Yorkshire/North East 17 North West 13 Scotland 8 Working status: Working 52 Not working 23 Retired 25 Marital status: Married 61 Not married 39 Presence of children: Children 0-15 33 No children 67 SOURCE: TGI/MINTEL Some reports contain qualitative research, either focus groups or in-depth interviews. Qualitative research normally takes the form of an online focus group. Participants are mainly recruited via Toluna’s online panel, although sometimes other sources are used.



Definitions of the main consumer classification systems used in the report are shown at the end of this appendix. Trade research Informal trade research is undertaken for all reports. This involves contacting relevant players in the trade, not only to gain information concerning their own operations, but also to obtain explanations and views of the strategic issues pertinent to the market being researched. Such is Mintel’s concern with accuracy that draft copies of reports are sent to industry representatives, to get their feedback and avoid any misrepresentation of the market. These comments are incorporated into reports prior to final publication. Formal trade research is conducted in two ways, and are not necessarily mutually exclusive: Internally, the Trade Insights Team undertakes extensive trade interviews with selected key experts in the field for the majority of reports. The purpose of these interviews is to assess key issues in the market place in order to ensure that any research undertaken takes these into account. In addition, using experienced external researchers, trade research is undertaken for some reports. This takes the form of full trade interview questionnaires and direct quotes are included in the report and analysed by experts in the field. This gives a valuable insight into a range of trade views of topical issues. Desk research The Mintel Information Consultancy, which contains virtually all the raw material for desk research work, comprises: government statistics, consumer and trade association statistics, manufacturer sponsored reports, annual company reports and accounts, directories, press articles from around the world and online databases. The latter are extracted from over 280 publications, both British and overseas. All information is cross-referenced for immediate access. Data from other published sources are the latest available at the time of writing the report. This information is supplemented by an extensive library of Mintel’s reports produced since 1972 and added to each year by the 400+ reports which are produced annually. In addition to in-house sources, researchers also occasionally use outside libraries such as the British Library or the Department of Trade and Industry. Other information is also gathered from store and exhibition visits across Europe, as well as using other databases within the Mintel Group, such as the Global New Product Database (GNPD), which monitor new FMCG launches around the globe. All analysts have access to Mintel’s Market Size and Economic Database – a database containing all areas of consumer spend and retail sales as well as macroeconomic and demographic factors which impinge on consumer spending patterns, going back some 20 years. The database is used in conjunction with an SPSS forecasting program which uses weighted historical correlations of market dynamics, with independent variables, to produce future spending scenarios.



Sources Where data are provided by a particular source then this is accredited at the foot of a figure. Often figures are sourced "Mintel". This means that information is derived from a variety of points, such as desk research and trade interviews, with the experience and expertise of a writer filling in any information gaps or interpreting data, so that it gives an accurate representation of the market and ensuring the data are consistent, both with other data in the report and between the whole array of Mintel’s data. With over 400+ reports produced annually, the resources and knowledge at the writers' disposal allow for informed estimations of some market parameters, which are then checked for their validity with the trade. Data which are estimated have this reference because the original source data are only at the estimated stage and are not finalised or, as is often the case, where they refer to updates of government data, "est" denotes that they were not available from the original source at the time of publishing. Definitions

Socio-economic group Socio-economic groups are based on the head of household or chief income earner and are defined as follows: Socio-economic group Occupation of chief income earner A Higher managerial, administrative or professional B Intermediate managerial, administrative or professional C1 Supervisory or clerical, and junior managerial, administrative or professional C2 Skilled manual workers D Semi and unskilled manual workers E All those entirely dependent on the state long term, through sickness,

unemployment, old age or other reasons

Retired persons who have a company pension or private pension, or who have private means are graded on their previous occupation.

Students in higher education living at home are graded on the occupation of the head of the household. Students living away from home are graded C1 (no account is taken of casual or vacation jobs).

Lifestage and Special Groups

In addition to the standard breaks, Mintel also analyses the consumer research in the following manner.

Lifestages are derived from analysis of the exclusive consumer research and are split into four main groups, as follows. The following percentages are nationally representative. Internet representative would differ slightly.

% of population Pre-family/no family aged under 45 who are not parents 26 Family any age with at least one child aged under 16 still at home 29 Third age aged 45-64 with no children aged under 16 26 Retired aged over 65 with no children aged under 16 20



As part of an ongoing policy to find new ways of analysing data, Mintel has created Special Groups of consumers to typify consumer habits in the early years of the 21st Century. Unlike the lifestage groups, these groups represent only sections of the population and do not account for all adults.

% of population ABC1 Pre/no family ABC1 Socio-economic group and in the pre/no family

lifestage 15

ABC1 Families ABC1 Socio-economic group and in the family lifestage 17 ABC1 Third Age ABC1 Socio-economic group and in the third age lifestage 14 ABC1 Retired ABC1 Socio-economic group and in the retired (65+)

lifestage 10

Two full-time earners couples where both partners work full-time 16 One person households under 65

aged under 65 and living alone 10

Internet users all Internet users at home, work or elsewhere 73 Broadsheet readers read Daily Telegraph, Financial Times, Guardian,

Independent or the Times 15

Mid-market tabloid readers

read Daily Express or Daily Mail 16

Popular tabloid readers

read Mirror, Daily Sport, Daily Star or Sun 24

Satellite/digital TV viewers

have satellite/cable/digital TV 82

Mobile phone users have a mobile phone 82 ACORN Some reports also use consumer research analysed by ACORN category. ACORN is a geo-demographic segmentation method, using census data to classify consumers according to the type of residential area in which they live. Each postcode in the country can, therefore, be allocated an ACORN category. The classification is a more powerful differentiator of consumer behaviour than traditional socio-economic and demographic indicators. The categories, and their components, are as follows: ACORN category ACORN group % of population 2009 22.4 Wealthy Achievers – Category 1 A – Wealthy Executives 6.8 B – Affluent Greys 6.8 C – Flourishing Families 8.9 8.9 Urban Prosperity – Category 2 D – Prosperous Professionals 2.2 E – Educated Urbanites 3.1 F – Aspiring Singles 3.5 31.5 Comfortably Off – Category 3 G – Starting Out 4.2 H – Secure Families 18.1 I – Settled Suburbia 6.9 J – Prudent Pensioners 2.2



15.4 Moderate Means – Category 4 K – Asian Communities 0.9 L – Post Industrial Families 5.6 M – Blue Collar Roots 8.9 21.6 Hard Pressed – Category 5 N – Struggling Families 15.2 O – Burdened Singles 3.9 P – High Rise Hardship 1.0 Q – Inner City Adversity 1.5 SOURCE: TGI/MINTEL

Need to know more about Mintel? To view a complete index of Mintel reports, or find out about the latest titles published please go to reports.mintel.com To find out how the whole range of Mintel products can enhance your business, visit the group site at www.mintel.com. To speak with our information team about any aspect of Mintel’s solutions please call +44 (0)20 7606 6000 (UK) or (1) 312 943 5250 (US) Mintel Research Consultancy For further analysis on this report, or to design a tailored report, contact Mintel Research Consultancy on +44 (0)20 7606 4533.

sandwich shop retailing, market intelligence, january...

Documents