Small Business Consulting EP4408

Final Report

Client: FEED founder, Shane Ryan

Lecturer/Tutor: Niamh Keely/Grainne Carey

Date: 15th April 2016

Consulting Team (Group 9): Barry Ward 12045322

John Browne 12131083

Ben Sparling 12149616

Jonathan Mulroy 11113189

Stephen Fitzgerald 10117334

Brian Fannon 12128759

Neha Chandra 15055264

i

Disclaimer This report represents an attempt to assist “FEED” by identifying and assessing the internal

and external factors that will affect the company, as it moves from the current business model

to the retail sector.

Every reasonable attempt has been made to present reliable and accurate information and

advice. Much of the analysis is subjective to group interpretation of this case.

No warranties or promises are made by the writers, faculty or staff of the University of

Limerick. Furthermore neither the group, nor the faculty of the Kemmy Business School

assumes any responsibility or liability for the reliance by any party upon the information and

advice contained in this report.

While no responsibility can be accepted by the group for the actions taken on the basis of the

information contained in this report, we would hope that it would provide an accurate and

reliable basis for actions that “FEED” might take as a result of reading this report.

ii

Acknowledgements The consulting team would like to express its sincere thanks to Niamh Keely and Grainne

Carey for all their guidance and support throughout the project through lectures and tutorials.

We would also like to thank all the students who took the time to fill out our survey, and

particularly those who donated so much time to participating in our focus groups. Your input

has been invaluable to this project.

The consultant team would also like to thank Shane Ryan, Founder & Director of FEED for

opening the doors of his business to the group and giving the group the opportunity to

broaden their skill set as consultants. The participation of real businesses in this project has

really encouraged participants to bring out the best of their abilities and hopefully because of

this, the businesses can take away some valuable insights as well.

We wish Shane and FEED all the best for the future, and look forward to trying FEED for

ourselves as soon as it hits the shelves.

iii

The Consultancy Team Barry Ward

Barry has ten years’ experience in the construction industry, working as a plasterer from 2002

until 2012. He spent the majority of 2015 working for FMC Biopolymer in Co. Cork on Co-

operative education. He is currently undertaking his fourth year of study in Industrial

Biochemistry in the University of Limerick.

John Browne

John has worked in a pharmacy in Co. Limerick allowing him to have knowledge of the

regulations involved in the health and wellbeing sector. John spent eight months working in

the R&D department in BioMarin, Co. Cork as part of his co-operative education program.

He is currently undertaking his fourth year of study in Industrial Biochemistry in the

University of Limerick.

Jonathan Mulroy

Jonathon has previous experience within the hospitality sector in an established hotel in

Westport, Co. Mayo. As well that, Jonathan spent six months working in a R&D department

in Teagasc, the agriculture and food development authority. Here he developed his analytical,

leadership, industry and organizational skills. Mr.Mulroy also has relevant experience in the

agriculture sector, coming from a farming back-round and also because of his time spent in

Teagasc he has developed numerous contacts within the agricultural sector.

Ben Sparling

Ben has experience in quality control due to a six-month stent in Argos and eight months

Chemifloc, Shannon, Co. Clare as part of his co-operative education program. This

experience at Argos and Chemifloc provided Ben with knowledge of the retail sector,

working with teams and customer service. Ben is currently undertaking his fourth year of

study in Industrial Biochemistry in the University of Limerick.

Stephen Fitzgerald

Stephen has previously worked in a busy local café for nine years managing it for five years,

the premises is located in Westport, Co. Mayo. Along with this Stephen has worked for a

major supermarket chain within Ireland. Steven has also completed a six-month contract in

Bristol Myers Squibb, a pharmaceutical firm, working within their production team as part of

co-operative education program. He is currently undertaking his fourth year of study in

Industrial Biochemistry in the University of Limerick.

iv

Brian Fannon

Brian is currently a fourth year business student in the Kemmy Business School at the

University of Limerick.

Neha Chandra

Neha is currently a postgraduate student in the Kemmy Business School at the University of

Limerick.

v

Table of Contents Disclaimer................................................................................................................................................. i

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. ii

The Consultancy Team ........................................................................................................................... iii

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3

1.1. Aims and Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 3

1.2. Client Background and USP .......................................................................................................... 3

1.3. Expected Outcomes ..................................................................................................................... 4

1.4. Methodology ................................................................................................................................ 4

2. Industry and Market Analysis ............................................................................................................. 7

2.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 7

2.2. Industry Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 7

2.3. Environmental Analysis .............................................................................................................. 11

2.4. Market Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 13

2.5. Company Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 17

3. Research Findings ............................................................................................................................. 22

3.1. Demographics of Respondents .................................................................................................. 22

3.2. Primary Research Questions ...................................................................................................... 22

3.2.1 Focus Group ......................................................................................................................... 22

3.2.2 Survey ................................................................................................................................... 25

4. Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 28

5. Recommendations: ........................................................................................................................... 30

6. Bibliography ...................................................................................................................................... 32

7. Appendices: ....................................................................................................................................... 34

7.1. Further Information ................................................................................................................... 34

7.2. Project Initiation Document ....................................................................................................... 37

7.3. Focus Group Discussion ............................................................................................................. 39

7.4. Focus Group Charts .................................................................................................................... 43

7.5. Survey Results ............................................................................................................................ 45

7.6. Competitor Lunch Options ......................................................................................................... 54

1

Executive Summary The main objectives of the consultancy project were to investigate the main factors that will

affect FEED, as the company moves from delivering meals locally around Dublin City, to

supplying Musgraves with meals to be sold in retail outlets throughout the country.

The group initially investigated the current product, and proposed product for sale within

Musgraves, and have come up with what we feel are the unique selling points of the product.

With the product being aimed at young, urban professionals, we feel that the healthy food and

convenience of the meals are a main selling point. We also feel FEED as a brand and product

will appeal to those who are socially conscious, with the biodegradable packaging and

particularly the charitable donations to Marys Meals being very appealing aspects of the

product. With this in mind the group set out to investigate these factors and how prospective

customers feel about them.

Secondary research consisted of a brief investigation into where Musgraves stores such as

Centra, SuperValu and Mace are located, and what competition FEED would have, within

these stores. The purpose of this was to establish an approximate figure for the amount of

people in the target market that would be exposed to FEED. Trends within the convenience

food sector in Ireland were examined in order to gain insight into what factors influence

consumers when purchasing lunch. A PESTLE analysis was used to examine some of the

external factors that may affect FEED such as tax relief incentives, regulatory authorities and

guidelines, the economy, social awareness and the use of technology as a means of

advertising and selling products. SWOT analysis was carried out to investigate some

strengths and weaknesses of FEED as well as some possible opportunities and threats.

Primary research was carried out based on some of the findings of the secondary research.

Focus groups were carried out with students of the University of Limerick, who are expected

to become the key target market for FEED in the coming years. The focus group results lead

to the development of a survey, which was again delivered to UL students, in order to get

further information from this demographic.

Many conclusions may be drawn from the research. Firstly, it is clear that consumers are

quite happy to pay up to €7 for lunch on a regular basis. This is through research carried out

on University students, so it is expected that this will be even more so for professionals who

have more disposable income than the average student. The quality of the food is of great

importance to the consumer as would be expected, and a product that is of a higher standard

than the average generic salad or sandwich in a shop would be desirable. The protein content

of a meal raised some issues during the primary research with people stating a preference for

meals containing a meat source, or at least a good source of protein.

Convenience plays a major role in the choice of lunch people go for, as time is very limited.

This often rules out restaurants and cafes, so convenient retail stores are ideal for selling

lunch items. The brand awareness of a product is crucial as there are many competitors in this

area with a wide variety of products, therefore it will be important to stand out from the

crowd. The charitable donations made by FEED are a real asset to the company and it was

found that this is a real advantage in terms of gaining customer support.

Although the link between a healthy, active lifestyle and healthy eating is obvious and well

established, it has been emphasized again in the primary and secondary research. We feel that

this may be crucial to FEED in growing its potential market in the future.

2

We feel that the adoption of a business model which would see FEED take bulk orders

online, from gyms/fitness clubs and sports clubs and deliver the orders once or twice a week

may be of benefit to FEED in the future. It would greatly increase the number of potential

customers for FEED as well as greatly improving convenience for many customers.

In order to increase public awareness of the FEED brand, it may be useful to recruit a brand

ambassador such as a local sports star or personality to attract interest in the product. This

strategy has been shown to work very well for many Irish brands in the past.

As for the product itself, the inclusion of a protein source is of importance to many

consumers, and this becomes even more important if the company decides to target sports

people as potential customers as high protein diets are crucial for sustaining athletic

performance. The group is aware of the clients’ preference to not include meat in the product

due to logistical reasons, so this may be overcome by the use of plant based protein sources

such as lentils, chia seeds and quinoa, which are becoming increasingly popular and are

generally regarded as superfoods. This, we feel will increase product desirability among

health conscious individuals.

Maintaining pricing under €7 is advised as this seems to be an acceptable price people are

willing to pay for a good lunch. The packaging should be biodegradable and environmentally

friendly and display all nutritional information, as well as branding and details regarding the

donation to Marys Meals, as these issues were also important according to our primary and

secondary research.

These issues are discussed further within the main body of this document.

3

1. Introduction

1.1. Aims and Objectives

The overall aim of the project is to provide detailed information on factors that may affect

FEED. (See project initiation document, Appendix 2)

Secondary research has been carried out in order to identify industry factors that may affect

FEED, such as:

Competitor analysis

Geographical analysis of store locations

Industry trends

Health trends

Economic factors

Industry regulations, tax reliefs and exemptions

Primary research has been carried out to gain an insight into the factors that influence the

lunch time eating and spending habits of potential FEED customers. In particular:

What customers want

What customers generally purchase

What is currently available

How much a customer is willing to spend

Opinions on charitable contributions

1.2. Client Background and USP FEED is a vibrant start-up company founded by CEO Shane Ryan. It is currently a healthy

lunch delivery service that prepares fresh meals daily and delivers them to businesses

throughout Dublin City. There is, at present a pre-determined menu with a different lunch for

each day of the week with the menu changing seasonally to cater for the availability of fresh,

quality ingredients that go into the meals. The company places great emphasis on corporate

responsibility, both environmentally and socially and so for every 100% compostable and

biodegradable lunchbox that is sold, FEED has pledged to provide one meal for starving

children, through Mary’s Meals a charitable organization feeding children in 12 countries

across Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Caribbean.

FEED wishes to examine the viability of a new range of health conscious ready-made lunch

options, tailored to young professionals in the 25-40 year old age bracket, potentially being

sold by Musgraves in some of its retail outlets throughout the country. The current business

model FEED employs, delivering similar meals to businesses around Dublin City daily is to

be phased out once the transition into a retail chain has been completed. The product being

developed for Musgraves is not dissimilar to the current product. The product is projected to

be on the shelves in June 2016, and will have a shelf life of up to three days, achieved by

using airtight packaging and careful selection of product ingredients, for example there will

be no leafy greens or lettuce in the product as these ingredients would wilt and affect shelf

life. It will retail at approximately €6.50. FEED is also exploring the possibility of

outsourcing its production to a third party. The company is eager to exploit the convenience

food sector within these outlets in order to establish its brand as a major competitor in the

lunch market within the demographic mentioned previously.

4

USP:

FEED provides healthy and nutritious meals that are convenient, while being much more

filling and nutritious than a salad, and also provides a meal (Marys Meals) for a child in the

developing world for every FEED meal that is sold. “Lunch with a Conscience”.

FEED meals differ from the majority of competitors in that that they do not contain any

artificial colours or preservatives, only fresh and in-season ingredients are used, packaging is

biodegradable and all nutritional information relating to FEED will be clearly stated on the

website and packaging. The fact that the company provides a free meal to children living in

poverty, for every FEED meal that is sold, is also a feature that is unique among competitors

and may be an incentive for socially conscious consumers to favour FEED over other brands.

1.3. Expected Outcomes To have a good understanding of the type of product that customers want, what products are

currently available to customers and an understanding of what type of stores and store

locations would best suit a FEED product (see appendix one).

1.4. Methodology

Secondary Research:

Secondary research will be gathered from multiple sources including journal articles,

competitor retail websites, government sources such as the Central Statistics Office (CSO),

An Bord Bia and other relevant, reliable websites.

Primary Research:

Focus Group Methodology:

The purpose of the focus group is to get detailed information and gain an insight into the

thoughts and opinions of a selection of students with regards to their lunchtime eating

preferences. Asking people a general question like what they like to eat for lunch, or what

kind of food they would consider to be healthy will result in a wide variety of responses and

many people will not know how to answer the question when quickly filling out a survey.

The focus group will create an environment where participants are comfortable to participate

and discuss openly questions put to them. This group setting will help to gain information on

a wide variety of opinions regarding different aspects of the FEED product such as the type

of food people want to eat for lunch, how much they are willing to spend on their lunch and

also if a certain type of person is more likely to buy the product than others.

Two groups of 8 people were chosen to participate in the focus groups as it was felt that this

sized group would be sufficient to generate good discussion when questions were asked but

not be so large that participants would be left out of the discussion. Random students were

asked to participate in the focus groups, until 8 people who did not know each other and were

comfortable to have a discussion with strangers agreed to participate. The first group

consisted of five female and three male participants, all aged between 20 and 30 years old.

The second group consisted of four female and four male participants. All participants were

5

University of Limerick students, with fourteen being undergraduates and two postgraduates.

(See appendix three for focus group discussion)

A team member was allocated to be a moderator and another to be assistant moderator for the

focus groups. The moderators’ main aim was to put questions to the group in an open and

relaxed fashion and participated in a discussion about the questions in order to maximise the

maximum number of opinions from the group. The assistant moderator participated in the

discussion and took notes of the discussion.

The questions were designed to be worded simply and left open-ended, to ensure all

participants understand the question and to initiate discussion from the group, rather than

having the questions answered with a “yes” or “no” answer.

The questions asked were broken into three types;

Engagement questions, to introduce the participants to the discussion and get them

thinking about lunches and their eating habits, in a relaxed fashion.

Exploration questions, to get as much information as possible from the participants.

Exit questions, to make sure nothing relevant was missed from the discussion.

No time limit for the focus groups was set, ten questions were chosen in advance and each

question was asked and discussed until all participants were happy with their input and a

number of different views were expressed, before moving on to the next question. The groups

each lasted for approximately 40 minutes.

Through the feedback from the focus groups, the team prepared a survey with more focused

questions to get more specific information relating to FEED.

Focus Group 1. Participant Information

1. 22-year-old female, studying Industrial Biochemistry (4th year)

2. 21-year-old female, studying Environmental Science (2nd year)

3. 21-year-old male studying Mechanical Engineering (4th year)

4. 26-year-old male, studying Industrial Biochemistry (1st year)

5. 29-year-old female studying Health Informatics (Postgraduate)

6. 22-year-old male studying Politics (Postgraduate)

7. 22-year-old female studying New Media and English (4th year)

8. 20-year-old female, studying Financial Mathematics (2nd year)

Focus group 2. Participant Information:

1. 20 year – old female, studying Pharmaceutical & Industrial chemistry (4th year)

2. 22 year – old female, studying Industrial Biochemistry (4th year)

3. 21 year – old male, studying Food Science (3rd year)

4. 22 year – old female, studying General Nursing (4th year)

5. 22 year – old male, studying Industrial Biochemistry (4th year)

6. 21 year – old male, studying Law Plus (4th year)

7. 22 year – old male, studying Business Studies (4th year)

6

8. 22 year – old female, studying History & Sociology (4th year)

Survey Methodology:

Using the feedback and discussion from the focus groups, we were able to construct valuable

questions for the survey. By using the feedback we were able to pinpoint key areas to explore

within the survey which would give us better understanding of the market. Key areas like

price and locally sourced produce appeared often in the focus group discussion, these were

areas which were of high importance to explore again in the survey allowing more

information to be gathered on these areas.

The survey was sent to students in the University of Limerick, as has been mentioned

previously, these students will become busy, young professionals over the coming years and

will then become the target demographic for FEED.

7

2. Industry and Market Analysis

2.1. Introduction In order to analyse the potential of the FEED product in the market, an industry and market

analysis was carried out. Factors such as potential retail outlets, population size and target

market were taken into account.

In order to assess the potential of the Musgraves chain, the amount of Centra stores and the

location of these stores were taken into account. Urban stores were particularly desirable

locations, due to the demographic of FEED’s target market.

The target market of young, urban professionals primarily ages 25 – 35 was also assessed, in

order to analyse the viability of this market as the primary target. Population and employment

statistics were used in order to analyse these factors.

2.2. Industry Analysis

Characteristics and Size of Musgraves retail chains:

Musgrave’s operate over 1450 stores across Ireland, Northern Ireland and Spain with the

majority operating in partnership and offering Musgrave brands, (Musgravegroup.com, 2016)

Table 1: Distribution of Musgrave retailers, (Musgravegroup.com, 2016).

Republic Of

Ireland

Northern Ireland Great Britain Spain

SuperValu 222 37 - -

Centra 463 78 - -

Mace - 119 - -

DayToday 144 95 - -

DayBreak 216 - - -

DialPrix - - - 95

Ideally in Ireland, FEED has an opportunity to sell its product across 1045 stores nationwide.

With a further 329 potential shelves if the opportunity occurs to spread into the Northern

Ireland market.

8

Chart 1: Quantity of outlets in Biggest Urban regions. (Centra, 2016)

Musgraves has established itself over the years as Ireland’s leading convenience retail group,

with 541 locations throughout Ireland, 463 located in the Republic Of Ireland. For Centra, the

Dublin urban region is by far the densest area of Centra shops in Ireland with greater than 60

outlets followed on by the Cork urban region with 15 stores. These are then followed by

Galway and Limerick urban regions which both have 9 stores, with 6 in the Waterford urban

region and 3 in Sligo urban region.

Population of the target market demographic:

Table no.2: Population of the target market demographic in selected urban areas- Limerick and Dublin.

Age group Area Percentage

employed

25-34: Dublin 86.5%

Dublin city 85.1%

Limerick 85.4%

Limerick city 80.1%

Above is an example of high employment in the target age group in urban areas. As is shown,

upwards of 80% of the target age group of “young, urban professionals” are in employment

in urban centres.

The fact that the target age group is young, urban professionals is a benefit for FEED. The

25-34 age groups comprised of 755,000 people, approximately, in the 2011 census. This

equates to 16.48% of the total population as of the 2011 census. This age group also has a

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

No

. of

Ou

tle

tsCentra Outlets

Centra Outlets

9

very high participation in the labour force, with the average rate nationwide being 86.4%

(CSO, 2011).

This is even higher in some urban areas. In Dublin County and city, 86.5% and 85.1%

respectively of this age group was employed. In Limerick, similarly high figures are seen,

with 80.1% employed in the city and 85.4% in the county. This shows that a large percentage

of FEED’s target age group are also in employment, increasing the chance of being

consumers of FEED’s product. The large amount of this target market in employment also

provides a very large customer pool which to draw from, meaning even if FEED could tap

into a small percentage of this market and develop a loyal customer base, their products

would prove successful. This should be possible, due to the high concentration of Centra

stores in urban areas, particularly in Dublin city (ISC, 2013).

Food-to-go Market:

The overall food-to-go market accounts for 122 million euro of the food Industry consumer

spending. This figure is expected to grow 3.5% annually through to 2018 (Technomic, 2015).

This market segment is expanding and growing all the time for many reasons; improved

quality as well as increasing options are two big factors, while another is the remodelling and

relocation of certain convenience stores to best suit the needs of the consumer. Location of

such convenience stores with sit-down areas is really important should specific products, like

FEED, look to excel within the Industry. This is because consumers will not travel for lunch

due to time constraints etc. Therefore, it is significantly important that products satisfy what

the consumer wants rather than what is cheapest to achieve. There are numerous trends in the

food Industry that appeared during 2015 and others that have been spurring from previous

years.

What do people look for in a product?

Figure 1: Representing the characteristics that most appeal to the consumer when purchasing food in a

convenience store or restaurant.

10

1. Origin and local sourcing of products are two main aspects consumers are conscious

about when purchasing certain products.

Moreover, the public expect a healthier more natural product but with no effect on taste

and flavours.

The public are also becoming more health conscious and therefore look for better-for-

you ingredients (see figure 2 below).

This statement is backed up by the recent rolling out of the “live well “incentive by

Centra (Centra, 2015). They recognised the needs of busy customers who were still

looking for a healthy on-the-go meal, and this move led to spikes in sales (increase of

€1.5 million) of nutritional products.

Sales in salads bowls increased by 200,000 units while an extra half a million pieces of

fruit were sold as a result of this programme.

The director of this initiative recently stated that Centra look to expand the Live Well

plan greatly in 2016, thus creating massive potential for the FEED product to fill a major

gap.

FEED is an aesthetically pleasing and nutritional meal, that is packed with goodness and

will help consumers meet their required daily vegetable intake while also fulfilling their

taste demands.

The SuperValu food academy initiative looks to give “small producers a big chance”

(SuperValu, 2014). Locally sourced and produced stock within the shops is a real live

trend at the moment. A SuperValu representative stated that just over half of the food

academy participants projected their sales to increase by over 50% after twelve months of

participation in the programme.

2. Convenience is probably the biggest influence on the food-to-go market as a whole.

The study mentioned above, carried out by Technomic, showed the importance of

convenience, times that most consumers are purchasing, what they tend to buy and why

they buy at such times.

It showed that 79% of the sample population were in a convenience store every day of the

week. 60% of these visited between the hours of 12 p.m. and 4p.m. (Technomic, 2015).

These hours are the busiest for lunches and this should be the prime target for FEED. The

fact these times are the busiest means that the product needs to stand out, from competing

products, to the consumer at first sight; this comes back to convenience and saving time.

It is important that there is adequate stock available in all store locations for these times.

Therefore, stock should be delivered and on shelves in shops before ten o' clock.

Looking at why people visited the stores shows that 34% were getting a routine meal and

37% were impulse buying (Technomic, 2015).

This shows that 71% of the population that enter a convenience store between 12 and 4

o’clock can be targeted as potential lunch customers for the FEED product.

11

The median a person spends during this time period is €6. However, the team plan to

investigate, through primary research, would people pay extra for a more nutritional and

healthier lunch meal.

2. Another aspect consumers found important on their decision making process was

transparency in terms of preparation of the product.

More importantly the age group between 25 and 40 found this one of the most important

aspects (Consumer insight team, 2015).

This is particularly interesting as the main target market for the FEED product is young

urban professionals who definitely fall into this age category, as seen in table 3 the

population of young urban professionals is approximately 770,000.

This means it is a good option to explore a route of transparency to appeal towards

possible consumers.

3. Customers are also expressing an increased concern in a products story.

For example, Supermac’s are running an advertising campaign for their 5oz burger (King,

2014). The ad contains a caption stating “Always fresh- never frozen- cooked to order”

and also “100% Irish beef”.

These captions are playing on the concept that the Irish consumer is becoming more

appealed to using fresh, locally sourced ingredients while also telling a short product

story.

The buyer feels on terms with the product and an effort is being made by the

manufacturers to satisfy the consumer.

What this means for FEED, is that a comprehensive catchphrase or slogan must be

designed to create a product story- " FEED yourself ".

Perhaps, FEED can brand their product behind the product story. For example, how the idea

came about, how the product was designed and what inspired the founder to keep going.

2.3. Environmental Analysis

PESTLE Analysis

Political & Legal:

There is a tax relief incentive scheme in Ireland, Start-up Refunds for Entrepreneurs (SURE),

which allows an income tax refund of up to 41% of capital invested. Refund may be paid on

income tax paid up to 6 years prior to investment. This is a significant help to start-up

companies looking to bring a product such as FEED to the market (Revenue; Irish Tax and

Customs, 2016).

There is also a tax relief system in place for charitable donations which will see 12.5% of a

charitable will be returned to the company. If the company donates €1000 to a charity, the

charity gets the benefit of the full €1000 but it only costs the company €875 (€1000-12%)

(Revenue; Irish Tax and Customs, 2016). This scheme may be of benefit to FEED as the

company is committed to donating one meal to charity for every FEED meal that is

purchased.

12

The Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) is authorized to ensure all food consumed,

produced, distributed and marketed in Ireland meets the highest standard of food safety,

hygiene and quality. It enforces legal requirements and good practices of the food industry to

achieve this. (Food Safety Authority of Ireland, 2016)

As of 13th of December 2016, it will be mandatory to declare nutritional information on all

pre-packaged foods, under EU Regulation No. 1169/2011 (Food Safety Authority of Ireland,

2015). FEED already declares its nutritional content voluntarily. Information present must be;

energy value, amount of fat, saturates, carbohydrates, sugars, protein and salt. This

legislation, when enforced will make it clear to customers what is in each product, giving

FEED a clear advantage over less healthy competitors.

Economic:

Ireland’s economy is one of the fastest growing in Europe at the moment and is expected to

grow by approximately 4.8% in 2016 according to the Central Bank (Beesley, 2016). Along

with this recovery, it is expected that the incoming Government will reduce taxes on middle

and low income earners in Ireland, who are expected to be the target market of FEED. This

means that consumers in Ireland will have a little extra disposable income as well as

confidence in the economy to go out and spend money slightly more than in the recent past.

Social & Environmental:

The industry analysis and SWOT analysis sections of this report have outlined that the

amount of people in Ireland who are healthy conscious and active is growing, with Irish

people now spending over €2.4 billion on sports and fitness related activities each year. (Irish

Franchise Magazine, 2015) These figures can only be of benefit to FEED as this growing

demographic contains FEEDs specific target market.

Individuals with the highest level of education in Ireland have the highest level of disposable

income (Central Statistics Office, 2015), these are also the people who are most likely to buy

FEED products as they are also likely to be the most educated in regards to health and

nutrition.

The charitable nature of FEED as a company may also entice people to buy FEED products

over its competitors, as Ireland are one of the most charitable nations in the world (9th in

2015) according to the CAF world giving index 2015 (Charities Aid Foundation, 2015). It

may be an option for FEED to follow suit with French authorities and decide that no food

should go to waste, and donate any unsold meals to homeless people.

FEED packaging is currently 100% biodegradable and it is planned that all future packaging

will also be biodegradable. The packaging of the product will need to be changed when the

business model switches from being produced and consumed on the same day, to being sold

in retail stores, in order to provide a 2-3 day shelf-life.

13

Technological:

The use of the internet, social media and mobile technology for product marketing and

creating brand awareness is ideal as it reaches a large audience, and is low cost. The target

market of 20-30 somethings are easily reached through these media and it also provides a

platform to connect and interact with consumers. This is the ideal way for a brand such as

FEED to increase its profile. The current method of selling FEED products is through an

online mobile app and e-mail ordering service. This method of sale is hassle free for

consumers and may be incorporated into future FEED business models, such as delivering

orders to customers, which will be discussed further in the conclusions and recommendations

section of this document.

2.4. Market Analysis

Competitor Analysis

Competitor Salad Description Cal per 100g

Price Brand

SuperValu Spinach and Pinenut

Pasta and Spinach salad with Pinenut, 300g

193k €2.99 Own Brand

SuperValu Tri Pack salad Potato, mayonnaise, Spring onion,Chives, Parsley, 300g

215k €2.49 Own Brand

SuperValu Housebowl Mixed leaves, Cherry Tomato, Carrot, Mixed Peppers, Red onion

25k €2.99 Own Brand

Centra Prawn and Noodle Prawns, soy noodles, Peppers 112k €3.00 Own Brand

Centra Chargrilled Chicken Pasta

Chargrilled Chicken, Pasta,Tomato,Leaves 351k €3.00 Own Brand

Centra Cheese layered €3.00 Own Brand

Sandwiches

Spar Lunch Deal Cooked slow brisket of beef in a Blaa + 500ml of water

€5.00 Deli/Own Brand

Mace Chicken bap Cajan chicken, bap,lettuce, tomato, cheese +bottle of water

€4.00 Own Brand

Centra Italian Style Meatball sub

Mozzarella, Mixed Leaves, Caesar Dressing, Tomato & Herb Sauce

500k €4.00 Own Brand

Centra Southern Fried Chicken Ciabatta

Brie, Roast Red Peppers, Mixed Leaves & Sweet Tomato Relish

420k €4.00 Own Brand

Centra Sweet Chilli Chicken Ciabatta

Red Onion, Roast Red Peppers, Mixed Leaves, Garlic Mayo & Sweet Chilli Sauce

€4.00 Own Brand

Centra Chicken Fajita Wrap Mozzarella, Red Onion, Mixed Peppers, Sour Cream, Pineapple Glaze & Fajita

Seasoning

200k €4.00 Own Brand

Centra Pulled pork bap Crispy Onions, Mixed Leaves, Mayo & Sweet Tomato Relish

€4.00 Own Brand

Centra Chilli and lime Chorizo, Brie, Red Onion, Mixed Leaves, €4.00 Own Brand

14

Figure 2: Competitor analysis grid.

chicken wrap Sour Cream with Chilli & Lime Seasoning

Centra Roast beef Ciabatta Roast Red Peppers, Mixed Leaves, Mayo & American Mustard

€4.00 Own Brand

Centra Roast pepper, Mozzarella and pesto Wrap

Fresh Tomato & Mixed Leaves €4.00 Own Brand

Centra Chorizo & Mozzarella Ciabatta

Mixed Leaves, Italian Dressing & Mayo €4.00 Own Brand

Centra Chicken Brie & Roast Pepper Diamond Roll

Red Onion, Mixed Leaves, Mayo, Sweet Tomato Relish with Wasabi & Sesame

Seasoning

€4.00 Own Brand

Other

SuperValu Cool Beans Cannellini beans, tomatoes, Onions, 82K €3.49 Cool Beans

SuperValu Chicken slices Cajan chicken slices 120g 111k €2.99 2for€5

Green Farm

Centra Chicken slices Roast/Tikka 150g 2 for €4 Own Brand

Centra Pasta snack pot range (3)

Carbonara Pasta / Tomato and cheese Pasta / Char Grilled Chicken 275g

€2 Own Brand

FEED F#1 Curried Freekah; Curly Kale; Sweet Potato; Tomato; Raisins; Cashew Nuts

with a Creamy Coriander and Tahini Dressing

556k €6.50 Own Brand

FEED F#2 Wholegrain Rice; Little Gem; Smashed Paprika Sautéed Kidney Beans;

Sweetcorn; Flaked Almonds with a Chipotle and Smoked Paprika Dressing

434K €6.50 Own Brand

FEED F#3 Pearl Barley; Baby Spinach; Beetroot; Shredded Carrot; Pumpkin Seeds; White

Sesame Seeds; Pomegranate Seeds with a Cucumber and Mint Dressing

326K €6.50 Own Brand

FEED F#4 Soy and Ginger Marinated Buckwheat; Rocket Leaves; Portobello Mushrooms; Cucumber; Walnuts; Mungo Murphy’s

Seaweed with Hummus

576K €6.50 Own Brand

FEED F#5 Cinnamon, Cumin and Paprika Spiced Chickpeas; Baby Spinach; Roasted

Cauliflower; Cranberries; Red Onion; Pistachios with a Whipped Feta and

Natural Yoghurt Dressing

364K €6.50 Own Brand

15

Competitor Analysis

SuperValu

Centra

Mace

Spar

FEED

Salad Option X X

Ranking of Variety

2 3 - - 5

Ranking of Price 3 3 - - 3

USP Variety of options, relatively

cheap.

Fresh and convenient pre-

packed salad.

Fresh healthy ingredients, donate to

world’s poorest children

Sandwich Option (meat)

X X

Ranking of Variety

- 4 2 2 -

Price Range €2.49 - €3.50 €3.00 - €4.00 €4 €5 €6.50

Special offers/ Deals

Chicken slices 2for€5

Provide a wide range of sandwich

options for €4

Deal varies fortnightly

for €4

Deal varies fortnightly for

€5.

Different meal for each day of

the week

Other Lunch options

X X

Ranking of Variety

2 4 - - 4

Figure 3: Competitor Analysis grid part 2.

*Ranking; 1=Poor; 2= Ok; 3=Good; 4= Very Good; 5= Excellent

FEED

FEED offers customers a different; fresh, nutrient rich product made from locally sourced

seasonal products, free from artificial flavours and preservatives, every day of the week. For

example, on Monday you get F#1 which includes Curried Freekah; Curly Kale; Sweet Potato;

Tomato; Raisins; Cashew Nuts with a Creamy Coriander and Tahini Dressing. It clearly

states what is in each meal along with the nutritional value of the meal.

Although it is priced slightly higher than its competitors, it does provide them with a

delicious healthy meal with more nutritional value than any of its competitors.

16

SuperValu

SuperValu offers a range of 3 pre-packed salads. One of these three is the Housebowl which

includes; Mixed leaves, Cherry Tomato, Carrot, Mixed Peppers, and Red onion. This is their

healthies option with just 25cal per 100g serving. The Housebowl is priced at €3.00. They

also offer a Tri-Pack salad which includes; Potato, mayonnaise, Spring onion, Chives and

Parsley. This salad has a good variety of ingredients and is priced at just €2.49. It does

however have nearly 200cal more than the Housebowl with 215cal per 100g serving.

SuperValu also has other lunch options including Cool Beans, Cannellini beans, tomatoes and

Onions. This again has a low calorie count of just 82cal per 100g serving but is priced

slightly above the salads at €3.49. They have also Cajan chicken slices 120g 2 for €5 or €2.99

each. They do not offer any lunch deals on pre-made sandwiches which could provide a niche

in the market in which FEED could fill.

Centra Similar to SuperValu, Centra too offer a range of 3 salads. The one with the lowest calorie

count (112k) is the Prawn and Noodle salad which includes; Prawns, soy noodles, Peppers.

The chargrilled Chicken pasta, Chargrilled Chicken, Pasta, Tomato and Leaves, although has

considerably more calories per serving (351k) does act as a healthy lunch for those who

train/gym during their lunch break and need those extra calories.

Centra do off a wide range of sandwiches ranging from Ciabattas, baps and wraps. Again

these range in calorie count from as high as 500cal per 100g serving back down to 200cal.

Priced at €4, it is not the best value but with the variety it offers there is something for

everyone. Centra also offer a range of 275g Pasta snack pots. With a price of just €2, they

offer the consumer with convenient healthy option on the move.

Mace

Mace has only one main lunch deal available. They offer a deal which includes a sandwich

and a 500ml bottle of water. The type of sandwich varies, changing every 2/3 weeks. For

example, for this period the deal includes a Cajan chicken bap with a 500ml bottle of water.

This deal is relatively good value with a price of €4.

Although the type of sandwich does vary, overall there is very little available in pre-made

lunches. There is defiantly an opportunity for FEED to introduce a new lunch option as there

are limited options available to the consumer at present.

Spar

Similar to Mace, Spar also offers a Lunch deal which includes a 500ml bottle of water. This

deal is priced slightly higher than Mace at €5. Again, like Mace, the options for this deal vary

every 2/3 weeks. For this period they are offering a cooked slow brisket of beef in a Blaa +

500ml of water.

As they do not offer anything in the way of salads or premade lunches, Spar would also be an

ideal outlet for which FEED could launch their new product.

Gasta

Gasta is a restaurant in Limerick City which provides healthy meals, similar to those

produced by FEED. Although the meals are similar, we do not see Gasta as a direct

competitor, as the price point is much higher than FEED, averaging at €9.10 per lunch and

17

the convenience of FEED cannot be matched by Gasta, as they are limited to one location in

the city centre, although they do deliver meals within a limited area.

2.5. Company Analysis

SWOT Analysis

Figure 4: Image of the SWOT analysis carried out as part of the secondary research.

Leading brands will anticipate consumer problems and provide a solution to the problem

before the consumer realises a decision needs to be made. Consumers will feel a connection

with brands that cut-through and make the right decisions feel really simple. Right-place,

right-time, right-product is crucial for food and drink brands (Bord Bia, 2015).

FEED provides healthy and nutritional meals which are ideal for busy people who realise the

importance of a good diet. According to Bord Bias; Consumer Lifestyle Trends, the pace of

life is increasing and becoming more complicated with ever changing technology. Customers

now want and expect brands to be where and when they are desired. For FEED to be a

convenient and desirable option (right-place, right-time, right-product) for its target

consumer, the busy urban professional, it would ideally be made available in retail outlets in

urban centres. Centra stores around Ireland appear to be the best option to achieve this

according to secondary research carried out and discussed previously. The current business

model employed by FEED which takes online orders from customers and delivers the meals

to the customers workplace in Dublin, is very convenient for customers, however the

Strengths

Healthy and Nutritious meals.

Convenient,

Charitable donation of 1 meal to a child in a third world country for every FEED meal

purchased.

Weaknesses

Small and young company with low brand awareness.

Premium price of €6.50 may put some consumers off.

Reluctance of consumers to change to new products.

Opportunities

Growing number of people in Ireland who are health conscious and actively seek to

eat healthy and nutritious food.

Lack of healthy food options available.

No established brands providing healthy, nutritious and convenient meals.

Threats

Established brands within the foodindustry could easily move into thissector and provide similar products for alower price.

Possibility of companies similar to FEEDentering the market.

18

company feels this is an unsustainable business model in the long term and plans to phase out

this area of the business once the product is made available in retail outlets.

Strengths:

FEED as a brand and product aims to do something very similar by letting the consumer

know that they are getting a fresh, nutrient rich product made from locally sourced seasonal

products, free from artificial flavours and preservatives. FEED lunches aim to provide an

exciting and delicious lunch option from seasonal ingredients while also providing the

convenience offered by stores such as Subway. An example of a current FEED lunch option

can be seen in Figure 5.

Presentation, description of ingredients and the nutritional value must also be considered a

strength as this makes it very clear that FEED is far superior in terms of quality than current

healthy alternatives.

Figure 5: Image of current FEED packaging (FEED, 2016)

Figure 6: Image of a typical “Bento Box” style meal

19

Currently FEED lunches are packed in a box as shown in Figure: 5. The product under

development to be sold in retail stores will be sealed in an airtight biodegradable container, to

provide a shelf life of two to three days and will be displayed as an attractive Bento Box style

product (see figure 6 above).

Figure 7: Image of a current FEED meal with nutritional information displayed. (FEED, 2016)

“Lunch with a Conscience” is a tagline used in marketing FEED products. This refers to the

donation of 1 meal to a hungry child in the developing world for every FEED meal that is

purchased. This simple message is important as it is a generous and socially responsible

offering from FEED and also may serve as a good marketing tool to both increase brand

awareness due to its generosity and also increase sales as Ireland is one of the most charitable

nations in the world (9th in 2015) according to the CAF world giving index 2015 (Charities

Aid Foundation, 2015).

Weaknesses:

The pricing of the FEED products at €6.50 places the products at the premium end of the

market, in a similar price range to Subway sandwiches, which are already a well-known

established brand. The average price of competing convenience products is approximately

€3.70 (see competitor analysis). This premium pricing may not be an issue, as the target

market may be willing to pay premium prices for a quality product, however FEED as a

20

brand is relatively new and at the moment confined to Dublin, therefore brand awareness is

minimal outside of Dublin. Although the pricing may be seen to be a weakness of the

product, it remains to be seen if this will actually be the case as FEED meals compare

favourable to restaurant prices. GASTA is a restaurant in Limerick City providing a range of

meals that are healthy, similar to FEED however their salad and lunch menu prices average at

over nine euro. (€9.10 (Gasta, 2016)).

Lack of brand awareness may also be an issue that will inhibit sales of FEED products

initially. Brand awareness and consumer confidence in the brand may be achieved through its

presence in Musgraves owned convenience stores among other locally produced quality food

products, and through an extensive social media marketing campaign which has already been

used to promote the product in its current form. The power of celebrity endorsement can

never be under estimated. Using celebrities as brand ambassadors to promote products is a

popular advertising strategy. Down through the years’ popular actors, sports people and

artists have endorsed products with varying degrees of success. Modern day athletes

representing Irish companies include Jackie Tyrell representing the Avonmore milk brand.

Opportunities:

The number of people in Ireland who are health conscious and try to maintain a healthy

lifestyle is rising (Irish Franchise Magazine, 2015), as is evident through the growing number

of gym memberships, marathon/half marathon, 10k runners, tri-athletes etc., as well as the

popularity of shows such as Operation Transformation in response to the growing obesity

crisis in large parts of the developed world (Central Statistics Office, 2015). These trends not

only encourage and motivate people to eat healthy meals but they also educate people on the

correct foods to eat in order to live a healthy lifestyle, lose weight and/or fuel athletic

performance, thus turning people away from traditional bread based lunches towards nutrient

dense meals like FEED will provide.

Current healthy food options in shops are limited, with salads and wraps being the most

common options, most of which are either boring, bland or not likely to satisfy much of an

appetite, nor would they provide sufficient energy for an active individual for a sustained

period of time (see competitor analysis). This gives FEED the opportunity to establish itself

as the one of the few brands providing nutritious healthy meals to consumers, saving the

hassle of preparing and cooking the meal themselves. This will lead to FEED being seen as

the standard bearer in terms of quality when competitors begin to market similar products.

Threats:

It will be very easy for competitors with big established brands to bring products similar to

FEED to the market. Established brands would be capable of producing and selling products

at a cheaper price as well as having much greater marketing power. Competitors such as

Subway already have outlets throughout the country in busy urban areas, providing

convenient lunch options to consumers, at a similar price to FEED. These threats could be

21

minimised by FEED gaining a foothold in the market and establishing a regular customer

base, and building a strong well-known brand. This may be achieved through a strong social

media marketing campaign which the client has already planned and also through placement

of the product among other locally produced quality food items in Musgraves owned stores.

22

3. Research Findings

3.1. Demographics of Respondents The survey was carried out online and delivered to four classes of current University of

Limerick students. Three of the classes were fourth year students and the age profile is

expected to be on average 20-23 years old. One postgraduate class was surveyed, with the

age profile expected to be slightly older.

The focus group participants were University of Limerick students from a variety of courses,

with an average age of 22.

It is expected that FEED will primarily be aimed at young professionals in urban areas, who

are looking for a convenient and healthy lunch-time meal. Although the focus group and

survey participants do not currently fit into this category, all of the participants are expected

to become professionals in a variety of industries over the coming years, so they were

deemed to be suitable candidates.

3.2. Primary Research Questions

3.2.1 Focus Group

A brief summary of the discussion during the focus group was recorded and this can be seen

in appendix three.

What kind of food first comes to mind when you think about your lunch time meals?

The first question of the focus group was to stimulate the participants opinions about lunch

time meals. A wide variety of options were revelaed during this question and it was more the

participants ideal food rather than their actually lunch time meals. Because of this, we

decided not much analysis would be relevant from this question.

What do you generally eat for lunch and why?

This question found that 81% of the participants bought a lunch rather than pre-preparing a

meal at home, while approximately 19% of these made a lunch before work. Of this 81%;

56% tended to choose deli foods, while 12.5% preferred vegetarian styled lunches and the

other 12.5% liked an alternative lunch. It was then decided to ask a question in the survey to

delve into what people wanted in their lunches more to reinforce this (see appendix four, pie

chart one).

23

Do you make a conscious effort to buy healthy food even if it costs more?

From the results of the graph, there can be some correlation made with current spending

habits and the willingness to spend more on healthier options. Statistically people spending

less than five euro from the selected group were less likely to spend more on expensive

healthier options. As opposed to people that spent more than five euro usually at lunch who

statistically were more likely to spend more on a healthier option. This point is favourable for

FEED as its product is priced in the higher range of the lunch meals (see appendix four,

scatter plot one).

Would you have a preference between hot and cold food? Why?

When analysing the note taking from this discussion we noticed that quite a lot of the

participants that answered certain options were of a certain sex. Although the sample size is

quite small and cannot be representative of the true population it can be clearly seen that each

sex have a light bias towards certain food type. The men have a clear bias towards hot food

meals, while women slightly favour cold food meals at lunch. From this analysis it would be

possible to form a theory that maybe women are more favourable towards cold food meals

than males, this can be linked to the fact that most males prefer a portion of meat with these

cold meals (see appendix four, plots two and three).

Are you generally an active person and/or participate in sports, expand on your answer?

This question addressed the issue of being an active person and having a regular exercise

regime. 10 of the 16 participants (62.5%) said that they are physically active or participating

in sports regularly, as much as 4-5 hours a week. 25% said they were not as active as they

should be or as they would like to be, citing busy schedules as a reason. The question was

designed to investigate a link between the eating habits of individuals depending on

awareness of health and wellbeing. A link was noticed, in that; those who are active and

participating in sports generally had a better diet and were more conscious of the food they

eat. The high percentage of this sample is another positive for FEED as these people who are

health conscious and active are again prime customers. There is a recommendation for FEED

surrounding this question which can be seen below in the recommendation section.

Would you buy a vegetarian meal and explain your answer?

56.25% said that they would prefer meat in a meal/not buy a vegetarian meal as a first

preference. This is not an encouraging statistic for FEED, as their current products are all

vegetarian. However, 5 of these respondents said that they would be willing to try vegetarian

meals should they provide a meal which is just as tasty as a meat – containing meal. 25% of

people also stated that the issue of meat processing could encourage them to add more

vegetarian foods to their diet. The issue of vegetarian food becoming monotonous was also

raised, as some individuals felt that there was less of a choice of meals available without

meat. FEED offers a different meal every day currently, and plan to have several options

24

available when released onto the convenience store market. See below for group’s

recommendation surrounding this point.

Would you be more inclined to buy a product if it had a charitable donation, why?

FEED promise to donate a meal to poverty – stricken children in the 3rd world for every meal

purchased. The overwhelming majority of people, 87.5%, agreed that this would make them

more inclined to purchase the product instead of a competitor. Many of the people thought

the particular method of being charitable was a good one, as they felt unsure about giving

money to charities via a direct debit, as they were concerned as to what percentage of the

money was actually helping the children. A small percentage (12.5%) of people felt that the

idea of a charitable donation did not influence their decision of purchasing a FEED product.

They also expressed concern that this would cause the price of the product to increase.

What sort of ingredients would you prefer in your meals?

This is a particularly important question, as FEED want to provide a product which they

know will be something the public want. A total of 62.5% of people said that they wanted a

food high in protein, with chicken and dairy products such as eggs being specified by some.

The vast majority also said that they expected to see some type of greens, such as rocket or

spinach and vegetables. This question is investigated further in question nine of the survey

which will be discussed later in this section.

How much would you usually spend at lunch?

See Question three’s answer as this question ties into that.

Ideally, in your opinion, what are the most important things to be involved with a healthy

meal? Have you any other opinions on lunch meal selections or healthy alternatives that

you haven’t previously shared?

From the results, it is clear to see that freshness, taste and where the ingredients are sourced

are some of the top concerns for the participants. Also points were made about freshness of

the produce without or with minimal use of preservatives. With the majority of people

concerned about over use of preservatives in foods. Price was also another key issue which

arose, with people concerned about whether the food quality was worth the price, further

investigation on qualitative and quantitative food analysis of products would be an interesting

and useful investigation further down the line.

25

3.2.2 Survey

Question 1: Would you be more inclined to buy a lunch if it was locally sourced &

produced, Irish-owned product?

The first question highlights the fact that the majority of people are more inclined to buy a

local product as opposed to an international product. 64.71% of respondents said they would

prefer a locally produced product as opposed to only 11.76% answering “no” to this question.

This is a useful response for FEED, as they are currently entirely situated in Ireland, from

production to sales (see appendix 5, figure 8). This would, as the survey suggests, be a benefit

in terms of sales and public perception, and could perhaps be used in any marketing strategy

to acquire a strong customer base. The public tend to prefer when a product from a local

business helps to support other local firms, and this resonates in the results of this survey, and

could potentially be used to FEED’s advantage. This point is backed up by the secondary

research where locally produced goods are really excelling in today’s markets.

Question 2: Would transparency in terms of preparation of a product make you more

willing to purchase it?

70% of respondents agreed that should a product be more transparent in terms of preparation,

they would be more likely to purchase it, whereas only 8.8% of people said no (see figure 2

above). FEED have complete transparency of their products on their website. They list all

ingredients on their website, as well as calories, Carbohydrates, proteins and fats (see

appendix 5, figure 9). They also state that they use no preservatives in their products, and that

all food is fresh, and that nothing is frozen. This was a major factor in presenting this

question to respondents. According to the results of this survey, this will greatly benefit the

FEED brand, as it will entice customers to choose their products over rival competitor’s

products. Moreover, in the secondary research it states that consumers expect product

transparency and that this is a new and upcoming trend.

Question 3: How often would you choose an established brand over an own-brand product

in a shop?

Question 3 was asked in order to see would FEED have an advantage in developing a level of

brand loyalty should it become a more established name on the market. Only 3% of people

stated that they always buy established brands over own-brand products, with 53% of people

stating that they only “sometimes” do this (see appendix 5, figure 10). Ideally, a higher

percentage in the “always” category would be desirable, as it would provide FEED products

with an edge over the store’s own products. However, 41% of people say that they do this

most of the time, so this still provides FEED with the potential to use this brand distinction as

a selling point. The fact that less than 3% of people said “almost never”, or “no” also helps

FEED, as this shows the strength of an established brand in the marketplace. This point is

briefly discussed in the conclusion and recommendation sections below.

26

Question 4: Would you consider yourself to be a health-conscious individual?

It is thought that the FEED product appeals more to consumers that think and eat healthy.

The rationale behind asking this question was to assess the percentage of the sample

population that consider themselves to be health conscious individuals. 45% of thirty three

respondents considered themselves truly health conscious (see appendix 5, figure 11).

Moreover, close to 40% then stated that they are sometimes health conscious. This figure

together with the 45%, for health conscious individuals, totals to 85% of the population. This

is a very positive number for the FEED product in terms of accessing this market. A series of

questions that follow were designed with the main focus surrounding; assessing what these

health conscious individuals prefer to eat for their lunches, whether they would spend more

on a healthier lunch and if so what food items would they have preference for in these lunch

products

Question 5: Do you purchase your lunch at work on a daily basis?

This question was targeted at no particular age group as it has been covered earlier on in the

survey (see appendix 5, figure 12). However, as FEED is targeting young urban

professionals; it was decided to specify this question to the working class rather than a

general lunch question. There are a certain number of people that purchase their lunches out

every day while at work, 15 out of 34 (44.12%). These are the individuals FEED must target

for lunch meal sales. To reinforce that, another 11 respondents mentioned they purchase

lunch sometimes. These are more potential customers but these figures are variable. As

mentioned in assignment 1, there are approximately 770,000 young urban professionals (aged

between 25-45) in Ireland. Roughly 76% of these (585,000 people) will buy their lunches on

a daily basis while at work. The following two questions delve into this that 76% more;

analysing specifically what lunch items and the price range people expect.

Question 6: If you were to buy your lunch, what type of food would you usually buy?

This question is an extension to question five above; used to gain an understanding to what

food items people generally consume as part of their daily lunch routine. Part of this question

ties back into question four above (see appendix 5, figure 13). Just classing a sandwich/wrap

and a salad as healthy options this accumulates to 48% of the sample population which is

very similar to the fourth question where a total of 45% considered themselves health

conscious. Although the FEED product is not classed as a salad rather a healthy nutritious

meal option, it is related to the salad section in this question. 12% of the respondents said

they would choose a salad for lunch usually. Looking at the approximate value of 585,000

people who buy lunches daily in Ireland; 12% of this is 70,200 people. If FEED were to

target 0.5% of this figure, this would leave a possible 350 units sold per day or 1750 units per

week (working week of five days). These figures tie in closely to that of the focus group

where it was found that a lower percentage of people preferred cold foodstuffs. However, this

still provides a very substantial target market for FEED.

27

Question 7: Would you spend more on a lunch if you considered it to be a healthier

alternative?

The one major negative point about the FEED product is it price tag of €6.50 compared to the

other products on the market, which can be seen in the competitor analysis section of the first

assignment. The answers to this question are very appealing for FEED; as 54% of the

population said they would pay extra for a healthier lunch alternative. A FEED meal with a

drink will exceed €7.50 at least (see appendix 5, figure 14). According to the next survey

question results, for a whole lunch including a drink and other foodstuffs 76% of the

population tend to spend between 3 and 7 euro. It is alluring that 54% of these will take that

extra step in costs when purchasing a healthier lunch option like FEED. However, the price is

very close to limiting most people from purchasing this product daily so it is important €6.50

is the products price cap. Also below in the recommendations section the group thought of a

possible opportunity for FEED and Musgraves to optimize their products sales.

Question 8: How much would you regularly spend on lunch when at work? (on average)

Only 5.88% of people said they do not spend money on their lunch. This may be due to

dietary requirements or simply prefer to bring packed lunch from home. This is the case in

nearly every business but as it is such a small percentage it should not affect the need for

FEEDs new product (see appendix 5, figure 15). Nobody chose the next option which was €0

- €3 as it is an unrealistic amount to pay for lunch. The next option of €3 - €7 was the most

popular answer scoring 76.47% of the sample. This is a more realistic amount to pay for

lunch as you can see from our competitor analysis; the average price for a lunch deal is

roughly €4-€5. With FEED aiming to set their price at €6.50, although slightly above its

competitors, other primary research described above shows a high percentage of people will

take that extra step in costs for a healthier lunch alternative. The third choice was €7 - €10.

With a score of 17.65% of the sample, this was the 2nd most popular choice. With FEEDs

prepacked nutritional meal it provides the consumer with everything they need to get through

the rest of their day for a cheaper price. The last option which was €10+ was not chosen by

anybody in our sample. This is not to say people do not spend over €10 on lunch but, on

average people do not.

Question 9: What food items would your ideal healthy lunch consist of? (Please specify)

For this question we got a mixed response from our sample which was to be expected as

everyone has different preferences on what they like to eat for lunch. However due to the

minute size of our sample there were certain preferences that appeared frequently in the

responses. As expected when asked what is healthy to eat for lunch, fruit and veg were in

over 30% of our samples responses (see appendix 5, figure 16 and 17). It was thought this

figure would be higher considering the nutritional value of fruit and veg. However, there may

be slight skewness in the responses due to the size of our sample .Similarly; salads were in

over 30% of the sample responses. Although for the majority of those responses they

included other food items. This shows that salads do not provide sufficient nutritional value

on their own and must be accompanied with other food items. FEEDs meals contains

28

sufficient nutritional value without having to be accompanied with anything else. This not

only reduces the amount of food the consumer must intake but also reduces the cost for the

consumer. With most of FEEDs competitors’ main option for lunch being sandwiches/rolls,

FEED can offer consumers with healthy, high protein, nutritional meals. This is exactly what

workers need for lunch in order to have sufficient energy to get the through the rest of their

day. There is a recommendation mentioned below regarding the input of certain food options

into the FEED product.

Question 10: If you were to buy a pre-made meal, would you expect eating utensils (knife

and fork) to be provided?

The final question in the survey asked our sample if they would expect eating utensils with

their pre-made lunch. Although some consumers may have a place to sit and eat their lunch at

the office, over 55% said they would expect eating utensils (see appendix 5, figure 18). This

is important as consumers may not have a place to get utensils and eat at work. With less than

18% of the sample choosing no, and less than 30% selecting maybe, it is clear that

consumer’s expectations for a premade lunch include utensils. Providing eating utensils

makes life easier for the consumer as they can enjoy their meal wherever they want. Further

discussion is to follow on this topic under the conclusion and recommendation sections.

4. Conclusions In terms of pleasing the potential target consumers; the content of the product must be of the

highest quality. However and more importantly the contents must be to the satisfaction of the

consumer. According to the focus group carried out, 63% of respondents wanted a meal high

in protein; some mentioned inclusion of chicken and eggs for example. Additionally, the vast

majority of participants felt greens are a must in a lunch meal, for example some wished for

spinach and other vegetables. Analysing the survey results showed 30% desired the addition

of vegetables. While FEED does not necessarily provide the standard vegetables in great

quantities, what it does do is provides more exotic, nutritious and tasteful vegetables. These

create a meal with a very high protein count while remaining with a low calorific value. One

of the main points to note regarding the product from an outsiders opinion is the emitting of

any meats. This is interesting as 56% of respondents expected/wanted a meat to be added into

this meal. For the company this is not appealing, however, 5 out of 16 from the focus group

said they would try a vegetarian meal should they be just as tasty and fulfilling as a meal

containing meats.

As shown in the primary research, the majority of people within the FEED target

demographic are happy to pay up to €7 for lunch. While this would suit the FEED expected

price of €6.50, it should also be noted that the primary research respondents are all students,

so would have considerably less disposable income than professionals. This allows us to

conclude that a price of €6.50 for a FEED meal would be acceptable for the target market.

When compared to similar healthy lunch meals; such as those provided by GASTA in

29

Limerick City. FEED pricing compares favourably to GASTAs average lunch options which

average at €9.10. In addition to this, GASTA cannot provide the same level of convenience as

FEED, due to being tied to one location for in-house dining, and deliveries limited to a small

local area.

Due to the busy, fast paced nature of many urban professions today, many are forced to

shorten lunch breaks due to work demands. This enhances the opportunity for convenient on-

the-go products, such as FEED. However, a meal which FEED offers will require eating

utensils such as a knife and fork, as opposed to other available options such as a sandwich

from a deli counter. Due to the lack of availability of these items in many work places, it was

considered possible to include a disposable knife and fork with every FEED meal.

Respondents of the survey were asked whether they would expect eating utensils to be

provided with the purchase of a pre-made meal, with 55% saying they would expect utensils.

A “maybe” option was provided also, so it’s safe to assume that this 55% felt strongly about

this issue. This is an area where FEED could potentially gain or lose potential customers,

based on survey feedback. FEED also currently have 100% biodegradable packaging for all

meals, and plan to maintain this trait in the future. This “socially conscious” attribute of

FEED could also appeal to consumers.

As mentioned in the weaknesses of the SWOT analysis brand awareness is minimal for

FEED outside of Dublin. This showing that celebrity endorsement can have quite a positive

effect on your brand however the type of celebrity you choose has an important role to play.

It is majorly important to choose an ambassador based on their previous undertakings, public

perspective and their well-known personality. This will bring confidence to the consumer

about the FEED product.

In recent years in particular, Irish people have become more knowledgeable and aware of the

benefits of healthy eating, and as such, it has become more popular. The participation of Irish

people in fitness and exercise has been on the rise in recent years also. The primary and

secondary research reinforces these claims. In the survey, the results showed that 56% of

individuals would be willing to pay more for their lunch, if it was healthier than an

alternative. This displays a positive attitude towards healthy eating, and shows that people

have a willingness to pass up the cheaper option in favour of the health benefits of more

nutritious foods. The health and fitness industry is booming in Ireland. People are

increasingly active in sport, and 32% of people are meeting the National Physical Activity

Guidelines (Irish sports council). 62.45 of the focus group said they were participating in

sport up to 4-5 hours per week, and 58.6% of people aged 25-34 participate in sport also,

further showing that people are becoming more and more health conscious.

The link between healthy eating and being physically active and fit is an obvious one and is

further backed up by the primary research carried out in this project. It is clear that those who

eat healthy food more often are generally more active and vice versa. Although this is already

a well-known fact, there seems to be a lack of companies targeting these active people

regarding meals in gyms. In recent years in particular, Irish people have become more

30

knowledgeable and aware of the benefits of healthy eating, and as such, it has become more

popular. The participation of Irish people in fitness and exercise has been on the rise in recent

years also. The primary and secondary research reinforces these claims. In the survey, the

results showed that 56% of individuals would be willing to pay more for their lunch, if it was

healthier than an alternative. This displays a positive attitude towards healthy eating, and

shows that people have a willingness to pass up the cheaper option in favour of the health

benefits of more nutritious foods. The health and fitness industry is booming in Ireland.

People are increasingly active in sport, and 32% of people are meeting the National Physical

Activity Guidelines (Irish sports council). 62.5% of the focus group said they were

participating in sport up to 4-5 hours per week, and 58.6% of people aged 25-34 participate in

sport also, further showing that people are becoming more and more health conscious.

5. Recommendations: As discussed previously, primary research found that the majority of people wanted a meat of

some sort in their ideal lunch meal. Although some did mention they would try the vegetarian

meal at first, we believe that it is advisable to add a meat into the FEED product. Otherwise,

excluding meats cuts the potential market substantially and eliminated possible FEED

candidates. The team is aware that addition of meat items increases the amount of legislation

surrounding product preparation, however the advantages out weight the disadvantages in this

case according to the primary research carried out.

With the link between being health conscious, active and participating in sports being well

defined, and the growing number of people in this category in Ireland outlined previously in

the SWOT analysis section of the secondary research, we feel that FEED would benefit from

targeting this demographic, as well as the young, urban professional. This may be done in a

manner similar to the current FEED business model. At the moment there are a number of

new, small businesses providing healthy and convenient meals for delivery throughout the

country. The idea is for gyms and fitness clubs to take orders from their members, place a

bulk order with the meal provider and deliver twice a week. The meals are then refrigerated

in the gym/fitness club for the customers for the following days. We feel this would be a

lucrative market for FEED as it would greatly increase the market available to FEED while

providing added convenience to customers. There may be a few logistical issues that would

need to be addressed such as deliveries and storage in the gyms/fitness clubs but these may be

offset when sales are high enough. The fact that FEED meals will be available in Musgraves

outlets will serve to increase brand awareness ahead of those competitors who solely supply

to gyms and fitness clubs, allowing FEED to gain an advantage in this market.

“NutriQuick” is a company in Dublin supplying a range of healthy foods to a number

of fitness clubs and gyms throughout Ireland, in areas such as Dublin, Kildare, Meath,

Limerick, Cork, Sligo, Donegal and Wicklow.

“Paleo Meal Deliveries” are a company based in Dublin who supply healthy “paleo”

meals via courier throughout the country to individual homes and workplaces

31

In terms of FEED, finding a celebrity endorser that could portray the fresh elegant ingredients

and importance of the dish to the public could, as shown above, improve brand promotion

and brand equity. Considering the proposed deal with Musgraves and the stores underneath

this group, FEED has a perfect opportunity of finding a suitable celebrity match to endorse

the product. Most of the stores run by Musgraves already have celebrity endorsement on

many of their products as well as store promotion. One great example of this is Kevin

Dundon an Irish celebrity chef. Kevin is known in Ireland as the Good Food Ambassador for

Musgraves food retailer SuperValu and internationally is often selected as the Face of Irish

Food by Tourism Ireland. A celebrity like this would be perfect for FEED as he represents

the area that FEED wants to be renowned for, ‘fresh nutritious and wholesome food’.

The team would recommend that due to the fast paced lifestyle previously mentioned, as well

as the uncertainty of eating utensils being provided, in an office staff room for instance, it

would be a benefit to FEED to provide these utensils with meals. It could help to build a loyal

customer base, and the fact that the “complete” meal is provided could also be a selling point

in the future.

During our primary research we discovered that 88% of potential customers would be more

likely to purchase a product if there was a charitable donation involved. As of yet the only

manner in which the public can learn about FEED’s donations to charity is through the FEED

website or by word of mouth. Herein lies the problem, as the majority of consumers would

not typically visit the website of a product they see in a store. It is our recommendation that

the FEED packaging include the Mary’s Meals logo and a few sentences about FEED’s

association with it, in order to highlight FEED’s corporate social responsibility and make it

stand out from its competitors.

32

6. Bibliography Beesley, A. (2016, January 27). The Irish Times. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from The Irish Times:

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/irish-economy-to-grow-4-8-in-2016-says-

central-bank-1.2511541

Bord Bia. (2015, June 1). Bord Bia Consumer Lifestyle Trends; Busy Lives. Retrieved February 25,

2016, from Bord Bia:

http://www.bordbia.ie/industry/manufacturers/insight/publications/pages/PublicationDetai

ls.aspx?PublicationID=http://www.bordbia.ie/industry/manufacturers/insight/publications/

bbreports/ConsumerLifestyleTrends2015/Consumer-Lifestyle-Trends-Busy-lives.pdf

Centra. (2015, July). Live Well. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from Centra: https://centra.ie/live-well

Central Statistics Office. (2015, February 26). Ireland Active. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from

Ireland Active: http://www.irelandactive.ie/viewNews/id/111/

Charities Aid Foundation. (2015). World Giving Index 2015. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from

Charities Aid Foundation: https://www.cafonline.org/about-us/publications/2015-

publications/world-giving-index-2015

Consumer insight team. (2015, July). Irish Consumer 2015. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from

BordBia:

http://www.bordbia.ie/industry/manufacturers/insight/publications/bbreports/RecentMark

etingReports/Irish%20Cultural%20Insight%202015.pdf

CSO. (2011, November). Census 2011. Retrieved April 01, 2016, from www.cso.ie:

http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/census/documents/thisisirelandpart2census2011/This,is

,Ireland,Highlights,,P2,Full,doc.pdf

FEED. (2016). eatFEED The Menu. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from eatFEED:

http://eatfeed.ie/portfolio/f2-tuesday-lumcbox/

Food Safety Authority of Ireland. (2015). Nutritional Labelling. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from

Food Safety Authority of Ireland:

https://www.fsai.ie/legislation/food_legislation/food_information_fic/nutrition_labelling.ht

ml

Food Safety Authority of Ireland. (2016). Retrieved February 25, 2016, from Food Safety Authority of

Ireland: https://www.fsai.ie/home.html

Gasta. (2016). Menu. Retrieved 03 29, 2016, from Gasta Good 'N Healthy:

https://www.gastafood.ie/restaurant/?v=d2cb7bbc0d23

Irish Franchise Magazine. (2015). Retrieved 03 29, 2016, from Irish Franchise Magazine:

http://www.irishfranchisemagazine.net/page/health-and-fitness-in-irish-franchise-industry-

2015.php

33

ISC. (2013). Irish Sports Monitor. Retrieved March 30, 2016, from www.irishsportscouncil.ie:

http://www.irishsportscouncil.ie/Research/The_Irish_Sports_Monitor/Irish-Sports-Monitor-

2013.pdf

King, H. (2014, November). Marketing Reports. Retrieved February 22, 2016, from www.bordbia.ie:

http://www.bordbia.ie/industry/manufacturers/insight/publications/bbreports/RecentMark

etingReports/Helen%20King%20-%20Deep%20Dive%20Cultural%20Change%202014.pdf

Revenue; Irish Tax and Customs. (2016). Revenue.ie Startup Refunds for Entrepreneurs (SURE).

Retrieved February 25, 2016, from Revenue.ie:

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/it15.html#section1

Subway. (2016). Retrieved from Subway: www.subway.ie/media/news.aspx

SuperValu. (2014). Food Academy. Retrieved February 24, 2016, from www.SuperValu.ie:

https://supervalu.ie/real-people/food-academy-programme

Technomic. (2015, November). Marketing Reports. Retrieved February 23, 2016, from BordBia:

http://www.bordbia.ie/industry/manufacturers/insight/publications/bbreports/RecentFood

serviceReports/2015QuickServiceAndFood-to-GoInsights.pdf

34

7. Appendices:

7.1. Further Information

This consists of details about the company, its background, and the objectives of the

consultancy team.

Research Brief

FEED is a vibrant start-up company founded by CEO Shane Ryan. It is currently a healthy

lunch delivery service that prepares fresh meals daily and delivers them to businesses

throughout Dublin City. There is at present a predetermined menu with a different lunch for

each day of the week with the menu changing seasonally to cater for the availability of fresh,

quality ingredients that go into the meals. The company places great emphasis on corporate

responsibility, both environmentally and socially and so for every 100% compostable and

biodegradable lunchbox that is sold, FEED has pledged to provide one meal for starving

children through Mary’s Meals a charitable organisation feeding children in 12 countries

across Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Caribbean.

FEED wishes to examine the viability of a new range of health conscious ready-made lunch

options, tailored to young professionals in the 25-40 year old age bracket, potentially being

sold by Musgraves in some of its retail outlets throughout the country. The current business

model FEED employs, delivering similar meals to businesses around Dublin City daily is to

be phased out once the transition into a retail chain has been completed. The product being

developed for Musgraves is not dissimilar to the current product which is a high protein,

nutrient rich lunch. The product is projected to be on the shelves in June and will have a shelf

life of up to three days, achieved by using airtight packaging and careful selection of product

ingredients for example there will be no leafy greens or lettuce in the product as these

ingredients would wilt and affect shelf life. It will retail at a price of €6.50. FEED is also

exploring the possibility of outsourcing its production to a third party. The company is eager

to exploit the convenience food sector within these outlets in order to establish its brand as a

major competitor in the lunch market within the age demographic mentioned previously.

Sub Objectives

Conduct primary research to carry out profiling of the customer demographic.

To gain insight into the range of ingredients the customer wants.

To gain insight into what customers are currently purchasing for lunch.

How much customers are willing to spend.

Conduct secondary research in order to identify the factors shaping the future of the

industry.

To carry out an analysis of competitors.

Who are the competitors? Direct/Indirect.

How do issues such as economic factors and health trends and regulations influence

the food industry?

Food Regulatory Authorities.

Industry trends.

Tax reliefs and exemptions.

To conduct a geographical analysis of store locations.

35

Carry out analysis of stores to determine stores which are best suited to the product.

Research Methodology:

In order to achieve the aforementioned objectives, primary and secondary research will take

place.

Primary Research:

Primary research will take place by way of internet surveys and focus groups aimed towards

young professionals in the 25-40 age bracket which will be FEEDs main target market. The

surveys are designed to identify potential customers and to gain insight into their lunchtime

eating habits for example how much do they spend on lunch each day and what do they buy?

Other questions identifying the participants age and occupation along with more detailed

questions about the product will also be asked, and gauge interest in a healthy, nutritious

alternative. The focus groups will take place inside the University of Limerick. This will

create a dialogue between potential customers and give a more detailed understanding of how

consumers view the product and allows more flexibility for the subjects in the focus group in

their answer as opposed to a survey in which the style of questioning is quite rigid.

Secondary Research:

Secondary research will be gathered from multiple sources including journal articles,

competitor retail websites, government sources such as the C.S.O and An Bord Bia and

relevant, reliable internet websites.

Schedule of Activities

Progress will be documented in a weekly log; Shane Ryan, FEED CEO is our point of contact

within FEED.

Week No.

2 Meet with client to discuss the company and the project objectives.

3 Write Project Initiation Document (PID) and forward to Grainne and Shane.

4 Begin research on the customer profile, store profile and competitor analysis.

5 Finalise research on the aforementioned topics and draft survey. First assignment due

date.

6 Conduct surveys on the age demographic targeted. Continue collecting secondary

research data.

7 Analyse and interpret survey results. Formulate graphs and tables of information

8 Drawing of conclusions from analysed data provided by accumulated research.

Second assignment due date.

36

9 Amalgamation of both assignments into the final finished report that is to

be presented.

10 Report to be revised by each group member and any changes required are to be made.

11 Final report due date.

12 Presentation of finished report to client.

37

7.2. Project Initiation Document This document is used to list all of the members of the team, and summarizes the duties & the

overall objective of the project

PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT (PID) On behalf of:

Title of Project: FEED and its Competitor Analysis

Group Members: Barry Ward Jonathan Mulroy Ben Sparling John Browne Stephen Fitzgearld Brian Fannon Neha Chandra

Contact Person Barry Ward

Contact Details: 0863005387 12045322@studentmail.ul.ie

Date: 22/02/16

Background to the Project

FEED plans to produce a new product to be sold by Musgraves in its retail outlets. Current model of

delivering meals around Dublin daily to be phased out.

Research into competitors, customers and market opportunities is required.

Overall aim of the project

To provide quality analysis of store profiles, competitor analysis and potential target customer and their

profiles.

Objectives of the Research (incorporating a detailed description of secondary and primary research

requirements)

Secondary Research Objectives

Store Profiles

Competitor Analysis

Customer Profiles

Primary Research Objectives

What do customers want?

What are customers currently purchasing? (What is

available)

Store locations

How much are people willing to spend?

Outline of the Project Plan (incorporating all deliverables for successful completion of the project and

timeframe for the completion of each. Please note this should be set out over a daily basis)

Deliverables

Analysis of customer, store and competitor profiles.

Estimated Completion Date (Day No)

Week 12 (April 15th)

38

Assumptions of the Project (if applicable)

Assuming current market conditions remain the same.

Personnel Involved- Roles and Responsibilities

John Browne, Jonathan Mulroy and Neha Chandra: Store profiles, primary and secondary research

Ben Sparling and Stephen Fitzgearld: Customer profiles, primary and secondary research

Brian Fannon and Barry Ward: Competitor analysis, primary and secondary research

Expected Outcome of Project

- To have a good understanding of the type of product that customers want

- what products are currently available to customers and

- an understanding of what type of stores and store locations would best suitable for a FEED product so that

its customer is aware of an alternate healthy food option and FEED creates a niche through its gourmet

products.

39

7.3. Focus Group Discussion Half of the primary research involved carrying out two focus groups, which gathered

information on the public’s opinions regarding topics such as;

The ingredients

Pricing

Social conscience of the business

Focus Group Discussion:

1. The group located a variety of images of their first thoughts of lunch meals. There

was a wide variety of answers and quite an enthusiastic approach to the question. The

majority of the group recalled hot dinners of spaghetti Bolognese, bacon and cabbage

and fresh haddock meals. Others recited bap meals made fresh with a variety of

fillings including strips of chicken, crispy bacon with fresh salads and tomatoes, along

with deli sandwiches, BLT’S, rolls with fresh ingredients including but not limited to

protein based food like chicken and bacon as well as fresh veg and greens. We think

the most overriding feeling from the whole group was freshness in the hot or cold

food ranges.

2. A small proportion of the group prepared meals the night before, usually packaged

soup with sandwiches with what ingredients could be salvaged from the refrigerator

or else an alternative meal made from what extras may be left over from that

evening’s dinner. This falls into the category of homemade food for the purposes of

the pie chart to follow. The rest found it difficult to balance meal preparation and

work and found it easier to buy food that was convenient.

This majority were split between deli dinners, Baps, rolls, sandwiches and alternative

meals. Also two members of the group mentioned Subway if they were on the go and

stuck for time, there may have been some bias in this as there was a subway around

the corner from the focus group, which may have swayed opinion. Alternative meals

included but not limited to salad bowels, yoghurt and fruit mixes etc.

It was quite clear here that homemade food preparation was very minimal and that

buying food on the go was now just as useful, convenient, fresh and transparent in

terms of ingredients. Also as most of the group were mainly on campus they had

access to convenient stores, restaurants, bars etc., which meant that they were in a

position to avail of these services.

40

3. Healthier options are always on the mind of individuals and that due to current

scrutiny of products and new regimes introduced with nutritional information labels

that a wider knowledge and awareness is now registered when buying products.

All the group responded in agreement that people are now more health conscious than

ever and not only was care taken when buying foods, but also people confessed to

feeling guilty for choosing unhealthy options in the past year.

4. Here there was nearly a straight divide between males and females for the options of

hot and cold foods. Women favouring cold food options, and men favouring hot food

options. This was an interesting observation and one which could be probed a bit

more with direct questions in the survey and with more analysis of more focus groups.

5. Here five of the group were in their opinion leading a healthy lifestyle, with 3/5

participating in sporting activities keeping them occupied for more than four hours a

week. And the other two exercising regularly up to four hours a week. Three of the

group admitted they aren’t as active as they would have wanted in the last year and

admitted to not exercising regularly mostly down to busy schedules. This sort of

discussion may have seemed off point but when combining these answers with the

participant’s willingness to choose healthy options we can draw correlations between

the two, or whether they have any correlation at all.

6. The majority of the group (5/8) indicated that they would prefer to buy a meal with

some type of meat in it however there was a willingness to consider vegetarian meals

as an option as long as it provided a fresh, tasty alternative. Despite this half of the

group said that they were concerned with the processing of meat and for that reason

would be more willing to add more vegetarian options to their diet. Others in the

group indicated that they would be open to a vegetarian lunch option however they

would only purchase such an option once or twice a week unless another variation of

the vegetarian meal was available as they would not consider purchasing the same

product every day of the week as lunchtime would become “boring” and

“monotonous”.

7. The vast majority (6/8) of the focus group agreed that the promise of a charitable

donation would make them more inclined to purchase a product over a competitor. It

was thought that donating to charity being as easy as going to a convenience store to

buy your lunch was an interesting concept. Many felt that they should contribute to

charities more often than they do however they feel uneasy about giving it out through

direct debits in the bank and they feel that this would be an interesting alternative to

doing that. An interesting question was introduced into the discussion on whether the

donation was monetary based or product based with many in the group sceptical of

how much of the donation would actually be available to the charity were it monetary

based. The group felt that the fact if the purchase of the product guarantees a meal for

a child was more effective than just donating money to charity.

41

8. 5/8 in the focus group indicated that they would prefer chicken or some form of

protein in their meal. Everyone in the group agreed that they would expect to see

some greens and vegetables in their meals with six of the eight expecting that the

ingredients would be locally sourced.

9. All eight participants usually spend less than €10 at lunch time with five of the eight

spending between five and six euro, two spending between seven and ten euro and

one spending less than five euro. All but one participant agreed that their ideal lunch

time spend would be between five and six euro.

10. The most important factor in a healthy meal according to the group was the freshness

of the produce with an emphasis on less preservatives being used with all agreeing

that this was the top priority. The third most important feature of a healthy meal

according to the group is that it is nutritionally balanced and tasty with 6 of 8 putting

it as number two. The third most important trait in a healthy meal was that it was

locally sourced again with 6 of 8 however the group agreed that although important it

was less important than the taste of the meal.

Second focus group

1. Once again we were greeted with enthusiastic responses from our participants with a

variety of meals presented once again. One participant recalled the M&S Food advert

from 2014 were it showed fresh food being cooked up. Again enforcing the

perspective that freshness is high on the agenda of the consumer.

2. The majority of the group would generally alternate between rolls, wraps and deli

dinners and agreed the convenience was a big factor in their decision when it comes

to lunch time meals. However, two of the group who identified themselves as

vegetarians generally made their own lunch at home and brought that in with them to

work as they feel that there are no real vegetarian options in shops that appeal to them

and so they are left with no other alternative.

3. Five of eight participants would pay more for a healthy meal over a less nutritious

alternative indicating that they would pay 1-2 euro more for such a healthy meal. The

other three participants felt that they would not spend more than what they are already

prepared to spend at lunch believing the price increase outweighs the benefit of such a

meal.

4. Four of eight participants have no preference between hot and cold food stipulating

that taste is a more important factor. The other four participants indicated that

although they do eat cold food they feel more satisfied after a hot meal than a cold

one.

42

5. Five of eight participants were either participating in sports or considered themselves

to be an active person exercising up to five hours a week or more. Another two

considered themselves less active exercising two to three hours a week, while one did

not consider themselves an active person. Interestingly of the five considered active,

four were those who had no preference between hot and cold food.

6. Three of the group felt that they would choose a vegetarian meal more than once a

week while one felt that they would select a vegetarian option at least once a week.

The other four members said that it was not their preference to buy vegetarian meals

and one of these four said they never have vegetarian meals.

7. Here, the majority of the group (5/8) were in favour of charitable donations being

included in product price. They expressed it as a good indication of the company

producing the product being more transparent and truthful in their ingredients and

claims. This charitable inclusion had in their opinion a cascading effect on what the

company was supplying and believe in their ingredients. Two of the group said that

they didn’t feel charitable donations made a difference in their opinion of the product

and showed concern at the price being excessive because of the donation.

8. Here again the majority of the group (5/8) wanted fresh produce but they didn’t mind

too much whether it was locally sourced or not. A good mix of protein and

vegetables, with eggs, salads, rocket, spinach, onions, cheeses, and chicken and bacon

meats. A minority said that they didn’t mind to much if the produce was not fresh

locally sourced food as long as it was value for money.

9. Here five of the group said they would spend on average between six and nine euro at

lunch, buying two or three items including a drink. Two of the participants said they

spend between five and six euro, while one participant said he usually spent less than

five euro but that they usually prepared homemade food the night before.

The majority of the group here shared an opinion of freshness, taste and where the ingredients

are sourced as being some of top concerns with food produce as of now. Two of the group

said that taste and a good price is what would most concern them. Four participants explained

how they would prefer a mixed healthy meal of protein and veg rather than a vegetarian meal.

One point that was raised was that even though there is quite a lot of healthy meal options on

market at the moment the value of ingredient and weighted aren’t reflected in the price,

which they felt is a concern for the market.

43

7.4. Focus Group Charts These graphs provide a visual representation of Q . 1, Q. 4 and a combination of Q. 3 and Q.

9 results.

Focus group results

Pie Chart 1: Analysis of lunch meals.

Scatter plot 1: Correlation between lunch expenditure and willingness to spend more on

healthy foods.

18.75%

12.50%

56.25%

12.50%

Lunch meals

Homemade

Vegetarian

Deli food

Alternative meals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Euro

/will

ingn

ess

Participants

Expenditure vs Expectation

buy healthy food

lunch expenditure

44

Pie chart 2: Female hot or cold food preference.

Pie chart 3: Male hot or cold food preference.

71.43%

28.57%

Hot or Cold

Male hotfood

Male coldfood

45

7.5. Survey Results This section again provides a graphical representation of all the survey questions, to which

the results are provided in chronological order.

Survey results—mention which survey question these represent.

46

Figure 8: Representation if people would be more inclined to but a product if its raw materials were

locally sourced and produced. All of the participants answered this question.

Figure 9: Results of question 2 from the primary research survey carried out. This question analysed if

customers would be more interested in a transparent product.

47

Figure 10: Representation of the sample population’s opinion if a brand name appeals more than an

own-brand name. Again there was a full response to this question in the survey.

Figure 11: Representations of the results for question four of the survey. This survey was primary

research carried out by the group to gain a understanding on what the customer expects from a product.

48

Figure 12: Representation of the amount of people that buy their lunches on a daily basis while at work.

Figure 13: Graphical indication of foodstuffs purchased regularly by urban professionals for lunch.

49

Figure 14: This graph shows the percentage of people that would spend more on a lunch item if it

claimed to be a healthier alternative.

Figure 15: Representation of question 8 survey results; investigating approximately one spends on lunch

while at work.

50

Figure 16: Image showing sample responses from survey.

Figure 17: Image showing sample responses from survey.

Figure 18: Graphical representation of question 10 which served to identify if the population expect

utensils with a pre-made meal, like FEED.

51

This shows all possible multiple choice answers to the survey questions. All questions are

listed in chronological order

Survey Question with list of possible answers

52

53

Figure 19: List of all the survey questions asked as part of the primary research. All possible answers are

also displayed in this image.

54

7.6. Competitor Lunch Options Images of Competitor Lunch options

55

56

57

58