JuxtConsult AdConnect Study
A quarterly monitor of the most effective ads in a product category

Study Overview
The study tells you if your ad is generating sufficient ‘consumer mass’ for
the brand in the category
‘Live-test’ based ratings of ads by category audience using 12 distinct
parameters that determine ‘effectiveness’ of an ad
Measuring ‘Ad Effectiveness’ comprehensively
Noticeability and memorability (recall)
Appeal and likeability
Relevance and persuasiveness
Brand differentiation and brand preference building
Eventually measures the ‘consumer mass’ that the ad is generating is favor
of the brand in the category (category mindshare)

Methodology
• ‘Live’ ratings of ads by category users and intended users in next 6 months
• Sample of 120-150 category respondents for each surveyed ad in the category
• Online survey conducted using a leading portal in India as well as Google
search ads. Data made representative of the urban Indian population by using
appropriate ‘demographic multipliers’
• Multipliers derived using authentic Govt. of India population data
• Findings and demographic profile of respondents are highly representative of
current and intended urban users of the product category covering almost all
SEC, age, income and town classes

Study Methodology
All recall based answers collected ‘unprompted’ in blank text boxes
All category level ratings collected using a ‘5 point qualitative scale’
dropdown options
E.g. How much do you ‘identify’ with the ad?
Its just made for me
I somewhat relate to what is said in the ad
I can’t make out if the ad is meant for me or not
I don’t really relate to what is said in the ad
It is definitely not for me
Only the most recently run ads in the category are shown, and only to the
category users/ intending users

©
The Ad Connect Measurement Model
The Ad Effectiveness Criteria
The Ad – Consumer The Measures
Interaction Points
Noticeability Recall
Was the ad noticed?
Originality/Distinctiveness
Connectivity Likeability
Did the ad appeal?
Identification
Message comprehension
Relatability Was the ad understood?
Message believability
Relevance Message relevance
Was the message relevant?
Brand Differentiation
Brand Inclination
Brand preference Brand Empathy
Did it help build brand preference?
Impact on Brand Image
Brand Consideration
© Copyright JuxtConsult

Measuring & Rating Schema ©
Likeability Comprehensibility Brand Differentiation
Originality Relevance Brand Inclination
Audience Identification Persuasiveness / Believability Image Impact
Brand Empathy
Brand Preference
Ad noticed and appeals Ad is understood, relatable and convinces Ad creates brand preference
Ad Appeal Message Connect Brand Impact
Ad Persuasion Index Brand Impact Index
Ad Appeal Index
Qualitative impact created by the ad on the audience
Ad Connect
Ad Connect Quotient (adCQ)
Qualitative impact
of the ad
TOM Ad Recall
Ad Momentux
Quantitative impact
Total ‘audience mass’ generated by the ad for the brand
of the ad
© Copyright JuxtConsult

The Derived Measures
Ad Appeal Ad Appeal Index How much is the ad noticed and appeals
Message Connect Ad Persuasion Index How much is the ad understood, related to and convinces
Brand Impact Brand Impact Index How much is the ad contributing in creating brand preference
Total impact created by the ad among the consumers
Ad ConnectTM Ad Connect Quotient
(ad effectiveness)
Consumer mass generated by the ad for the brand
Ad MomentuxTM Ad Momentum Index
(audience mindshare)

Category Level Example
Candy Mouth Fresheners
September - October 2007

Ads Tested
Wrigley’s Orbit
Chlormint Mentos Center Fresh
Happydent Protex Happydent White Chill Pillz Polo
Center Shook
Minto Blue Parle Xhale

Top of Mind Ad Recall
How much is the ad recalled top of mind for the category
Top of Mind Ad
Brand Ad
Recall
Chlormint 25%
Orbit 18%
Minto Fresh 16%
Mentos 11%
Center Fresh 9%
Happydent White 9%
Pass Pass 7%
Polo 4%
Halls 1%

The Relative Effectiveness of the Ads
Total effectiveness of the ads in connecting with the category consumers
Ad Connect Relative
Brand Ad
Quotient (adCQ) Index
Center Fresh 3.85 100
Chlormint 3.82 99
Minto Fresh 3.70 96
Mentos 3.22 84
Orbit 3.13 81
Happydent White 1.55 40
Polo 0.94 24
Minto Blue 0.03 1
Happydent Protex 0.02 1

Current ‘Ad Momentum’ of the Ads
Total Audience ‘mindshare’ generated by the ad for the brand in the category
Brand Ad Ad Momentum Ad Momentum
(Audience Mindshare) (Relative Index)
Chlormint 33% 100
Minto Fresh 21% 64
Orbit 15% 47
Mentos 13% 39
Center Fresh 13% 38
Happydent White 4% 13
Polo 1% 4
Happydent Protex 0% 0
Minto Blue 0% 0

Ad Momentum Summary
Current Audience Mindshare
Top of Mind Ad Ad Connect (adCQ) Ad Momentum
Brand Ad
Recall Relative Index (Audience Mindshare)
Chlormint 25% 99 33%
Orbit 18% 81 15%
Minto Fresh 16% 96 21%
Mentos 11% 84 13%
Center Fresh 9% 100 13%
Happydent White 9% 40 4%
Pass Pass 7% - -
Polo 4% 24 1%
Halls 0.8% - -
Minto Blue 0.1% 1 0%
Happydent Protex 0.1% 1 0%
* Lotte Chill Pillz and Parle Xhale got zero top of mind brand recall, so could not be included in ad momentum calculations

Ad Effectiveness Perceptual Map
.4
Center Fresh
.3
.2
Brand Impact Ad Appeal
.1
Chlormint Mentos
Minto Blue
Happydent Protex
0.0
Polo Mint
Attribute
Orbit
-.1
Happydent White
Message Connect
Minto Fresh
-.2
-.3 -.2 -.1 -.0 .1 .2 .3 .4
Brand

Respondent Profile – Candy Mouth Fresheners
September - October 2007
Demographic Attributes Ad Momentux Study Census 2001 Projected
Respondent Profile Actual Urban
(Sample – 948) Population
Gender Male 65% 52%
Female 35% 48%
Age Distribution Below 13 years Not included in study NA
16%
13-18 years 13%
19-24 years 27% 17%
25-35 years 38% 27%
36-45 years 16% 18%
46-55 years 4% 11%
Above 55 years 2% 11%
City Type Up to 1 Lakh 27% 31%
(Population Size) 1-5 Lakhs 15% 27%
5-30 Lakhs 23% 25%
Above 30 Lakhs 35% 17%
Region-wise Distribution North 30% 24%
East 8% 15%
South 29% 29%
West 33% 32%
* Representative of 22 million urban current and intended users of candy mouth fresheners

Respondent Profile – Candy Mouth Fresheners
September - October 2007
Demographic Attributes Ad Momentux Study Census 2001 Projected
Respondent Profile Actual Urban
Population
(Sample – 948)
Socio-economic Classification SEC - A 16% 9%
SEC - B 23% 18%
SEC - C 44% 25%
SEC - D 8% 26%
SEC - E 9% 22%
Economic Status in the Family Chief wage earner 28%
Not the chief wage earner 72%
Monthly Household Income Up to Rs. 10,000 54%
Rs. 10,000 – Rs. 30,000 38%
Rs. 30,000 – Rs. 50,000 3%
Above Rs. 50,000 5%
Most Expensive Vehicle in the HH 4-wheeler 13%
2-wheeler 42%
Bi-cycle / others 15%
Don't own any vehicle 30%

Ad Effectiveness Perceptual Map
.4
Center Fresh
.3
.2
Brand Impact Ad Appeal
.1
Chlormint Mentos
Minto Blue
Happydent Protex
0.0
Polo Mint
Attribute
Orbit
-.1
Happydent White
Message Connect
Minto Fresh
-.2
-.3 -.2 -.1 -.0 .1 .2 .3 .4
Brand

A quarterly monitor of the most effective ads in a product category
Deodorants
September - October 2007

Ads Tested
Axe Rexona Fa Exotic
Spinz Salsa
Set Wet Zatak Nivea Aqua

Top of Mind Ad Recall
How much is the ad recalled top of mind for the category
Top of Mind Ad
Brand Ad Recall
Rexona 36%
Axe 30%
Fa 11%
Set Wet Zatak 9%
Park Avenue 4%
Denim 3%
Nivea Aqua 2%
Adidas 1%
Spinz Salsa 1%
Others 3%

The Relative Effectiveness of the Ads
Total effectiveness of the ads in connecting with the category consumers
Ad Connect Relative
Brand Ad Quotient (adCQ) Index
Rexona 3.57 100
Axe 3.53 99
Fa 1.40 39
Set Wet Zatak 1.05 29
Nivea Aqua 0.18 5
Spinz Salsa 0.13 4

Current ‘Ad Momentum’ of the Ads
Total Audience ‘mindshare’ generated by the ad for the brand in the category
Ad Momentum Ad Momentum
(Audience Mindshare) (Relative Index)
Brand Ad
Rexona 49% 100
Axe 41% 84
Fa 6% 12
Set Wet Zatak 4% 7
Nivea Aqua 0% 0
Spinz Salsa 0% 0

Ad Momentum Summary
Current Audience Mindshare
Top of Mind Ad Ad Connect (adCQ) Ad Momentum
Brand Ad Recall Relative Index (Audience Mindshare)
Rexona 36% 100 49%
Axe 30% 99 41%
Fa 11% 39 6%
Set Wet Zatak 9% 29 4%
Park Avenue 4% - -
Denim 3% - -
Nivea Aqua 2% 5 0%
Adidas 1% - -
Spinz Salsa 1% 4 0%
Others 3% - -

Ad Effectiveness Perceptual Map
.3
Axe
.2
Brand Impact
.1
Attribute
0.0
Nivea Aqua
Rexona Spinz Salsa Zatak
Fa
-.1
Message Connect Ad Appeal
-.3 -.2 -.1 -.0 .1 .2
Brand

Respondent Profile – Deodorants
September - October 2007
Demographic Attributes Ad Momentux Study Census 2001 Projected
Respondent Profile Actual Urban
(Sample – 957) Population
Gender Male 50% 52%
Female 50% 48%
Age Distribution Below 13 years Not included in study NA
16%
13-18 years 13%
19-24 years 29% 17%
25-35 years 38% 27%
36-45 years 11% 18%
46-55 years 5% 11%
Above 55 years 4% 11%
City Type Up to 1 Lakh 30% 31%
(Population Size) 1-5 Lakhs 16% 27%
5-30 Lakhs 28% 25%
Above 30 Lakhs 26% 17%
Region-wise Distribution North 19% 24%
East 16% 15%
South 23% 29%
West 42% 32%

Respondent Profile – Deodorants
September - October 2007
Demographic Attributes Ad Momentux Study Census 2001 Projected
Respondent Profile Actual Urban
Population
(Sample – 957)
Socio-economic Classification SEC - A 19% 9%
SEC - B 28% 18%
SEC - C 32% 25%
SEC - D 10% 26%
SEC - E 12% 22%
Economic Status in the Family Chief wage earner 36%
Not the chief wage earner 64%
Monthly Household Income Up to Rs. 10,000 49%
Rs. 10,000 – Rs. 30,000 36%
Rs. 30,000 – Rs. 50,000 7%
Above Rs. 50,000 8%
Most Expensive Vehicle in the HH 4-wheeler 17%
2-wheeler 42%
Bi-cycle / others 3%
Don't own any vehicle 38%

A quarterly monitor of the most effective ads in a product category
Soft Drinks
October - November 2007

Ads Tested
Coca Cola Corporate Pepsi
Coke
Thums Up Fanta Mirinda 1

Ads Tested
Mirinda 2 Limca Mountain Dew
Slice
Sprite 7 Up

Top of Mind Ad Recall
How much is the ad recalled top of mind for the category
Top of Mind Ad
Brand Ad
Recall
Pepsi 33%
Coca Cola 19%
Thums up 16%
Sprite 15%
Mirinda 5%
Fanta 5%
7up 5%
Mountain Dew 2%
Limca 1%
Slice 0.4%

The Relative Effectiveness of the Ads
Total effectiveness of the ads in connecting with the category consumers
Ad Connect Relative
Brand Ad
Quotient (adCQ) Index
Pepsi 12.20 100
Thums up 12.24 99
Fanta 10.04 82
Mirinda 9.06 74
Slice 8.03 66
Coca Cola 7.90 65
Limca 7.86 64
Mountain Dew 7.30 60
Sprite 6.84 56
7up 6.43 53

Current ‘Ad Momentum’ of the Ads
Total Audience ‘mindshare’ generated by the ad for the brand in the category
Brand Ad Ad Momentum Ad Momentum
(Audience Mindshare) (Relative Index)
Pepsi 41% 100
Thums up 20% 48
Coca Cola 15% 38
Sprite 10% 25
Fanta 5% 12
Mirinda 4% 11
7up 3% 7
Mountain Dew 2% 4
Limca 0.4% 1
Slice 0.4% 1

Ad Effectiveness Perceptual Map
.3
Thums up
.2
Mountain Dew
Message Connect
.1
Ad Appeal
7up
Mirinda Fanta
0.0
Limca
Coca Cola
Attribute
Sprite
-.1
Slice
Pepsi
Brand Impact
-.2
-.4 -.3 -.2 -.1 0.0 .1 .2 .3
Brand

Respondent Profile – Soft Drinks
October - November 2007
Demographic Attributes Ad Momentux Study Census 2001 Projected
Respondent Profile Actual Urban
(Sample – 1,256) Population
Gender Male 69% 52%
Female 31% 48%
Age Distribution Below 13 years Not included in study NA
16%
13-18 years 9%
19-24 years 30% 17%
25-35 years 38% 27%
36-45 years 15% 18%
46-55 years 6% 11%
Above 55 years 2% 11%
City Type Up to 1 Lakh 33% 31%
(Population Size) 1-5 Lakhs 20% 27%
5-30 Lakhs 24% 25%
Above 30 Lakhs 23% 17%
Region-wise Distribution North 22% 24%
East 8% 15%
South 30% 29%
West 41% 32%

Respondent Profile – Soft Drinks
October - November 2007
Demographic Attributes Ad Momentux Study Census 2001 Projected
Respondent Profile Actual Urban
Population
(Sample – 1,256)
Socio-economic Classification SEC - A 20% 9%
SEC - B 28% 18%
SEC - C 28% 25%
SEC - D 15% 26%
SEC - E 9% 22%
Economic Status in the Family Chief wage earner 43%
Not the chief wage earner 57%
Monthly Household Income Up to Rs. 10,000 56%
Rs. 10,000 – Rs. 30,000 29%
Rs. 30,000 – Rs. 50,000 6%
Above Rs. 50,000 9%
Most Expensive Vehicle in the HH 4-wheeler 18%
2-wheeler 32%
Bi-cycle / others 13%
Don't own any vehicle 36%

Ad Momentux Report Content TM
Effectiveness ratings# of the mainline brand ads in the category by current / intended users (minimum 150 live
1.
test responses per brand reported)
2. ‘Ad momentum’ with which the ads are building ‘consumer mass’ for their respective brands in the category
3. Most recalled ads for the category (top of mind and spontaneous)
4. Sources media of TOM recalls (for each brand reported)
5. Level of ‘identification’ of ad with the brand (for each brand reported)
6. Level of ‘identification’ of ad slogan with the brand (for each brand reported)
7. Rating of each ad on ‘likeability’, with identification of the ad ‘elements’ leading to the likeness
8. Rating of each ad on key ad measurement attributes:
• Ad Appeal
• Message Connect
• Brand Impact
9. Rating of each reported ad in the category on the balance 10 individual parameters (originality, audience
identification, message comprehension, message relevance, persuasiveness, brand differentiation, brand
impression, brand image, brand empathy and brand preference)
10. Rating of ad’s effectiveness in using the celebrity/brand ambassador if used
11. Media preferences of the category users/intended users (TV channels, Newspapers, Magazines, Radio
channels, Generic websites, Emailing websites, News websites)
12. All ratings and preferences reported by key demographic segments wherever possible* (gender, age, SEC,
occupation, marital status, town class, region, income class, vehicle ownership)
# all category level ratings are provided by respondents on a 5 point qualitative scale, * depending on the sufficiency of sample size of relevant respondents

JuxtConsult Ad Momentux Study
Pricing of Reports
Report One Time Report* Annual Subscription*
Nos. Amount (Rs.) Nos. Amount (Rs.)
Ad MomentuxTM Category Level Report 1 150,000 4 360,000
• Payment Terms : 50% advance
50% before the delivery of third quarterly report
• Delivery Timeline : Quarterly Reports – By 15th of the relevant month after
the quarter
• Report Delivery Format : PDF
* 12.36% service tax extra

Contact Details
• Address : 7, Kehar Singh Estate, 1st Floor, Westend
Marg, Lane 2, Said-ul-Ajaib, New Delhi – 110030
• Telephone : +91-11-29535098, +91-9811256502
• Contact Person : Sanjay Tiwari
• Email : sanjay@juxtconsult.com
• Website : www.juxtconsult.com

Thank You!