• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Health.drinks.pro
 

Health.drinks.pro

on

  • 2,342 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,342
Views on SlideShare
2,342
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
123
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Health.drinks.pro Health.drinks.pro Presentation Transcript

    • A Study on Consumer Perception of Health drinks & Factors influencing purchase intentions of leading brands Presented by Gopalakrishnan (MBA) 2010-2012
    • INTRODUCTION Energize, nourish & refresh !!! • Health Drinks Market in India: • Market Size: + 10 billion • GSK- Horlicks, Bournvita, Boost, Maltova commands 70% market share. • Used as Nutrition & Energy supplement by children & adults • Complan & Bournvita in chocolate flavors emphasized the significance of taste in the choice of health drinks among masses • Glucon-D, Ensure are the smaller players in the market
    • HEALTH DRINK BRANDS – A COMPARISON  HORLICKS ( GSK) • Comprises 14 vital nutrients(Vitamins & Minerals) • Initially targeted at growing children • Moved towards family nourishment • Junior Horlicks - 10% share  BOURNVITA ( Cadbury ) • Brown MFD makes up for nutritional deficiencies. • Increases the strength of milk • Promotes Mental & Physical fitness • Comprises unique Cadbury Taste.  BOOST (GSK) • Positioned as energy fuel • Strong association with children • Power Booster (Copper & Biotin ) • No 1 position in Brown HFDs. • First HFD to use celebrity Ads  COMPLAN • Positioned as Complete planned food – Leading Brown MFD • Superior to Milk with more nutrients • Commands a price premium as it provides maximum energy. • Target market: Children (4-14yrs )
    • RESEARCH METHODOLOGY • Research Problem: Objectives 1) Factors responsible for choosing a Health Drink Brand 2) Satisfaction level of consumers 3) Attitude of Consumers towards Health Drink Brands 4) Perception of consumers towards Health Drinks • Exploratory Research • Probability Sampling • Survey Method – Primary Data: Consumers Aged ( 25 - 45), healthcare experts. – Secondary Data: e-books, business Newspapers, Magazines etc.
    • SAMPLING DESIGN  Area of Survey: • Chembur, Vashi, Kurla, Ghatkopar etc.  Sample Size: • 100 consumers, 20 consumers online.  Demography of consumers: • Females: Age group (25-45 yrs) • Online respondents: Age group ( 20-50 yrs)
    • SURVEY FINDINGS (1) Factors for choosing a HFD Nutritional Benefits 15% Natural ingridients 8% Clinical Approval 20% Brand Image 7% Flavours 8% Price 12% Availability 2% Packaging 0% Reference groups 8% Celebrities choice 0% Discounts 0% x% of household expenses 0% Suitable alternatives 0% Taste 20% Thus, Clinical Approval, taste, Nutritional Benefits & price are the key factors considered important in Health drink purchase.
    • 2) In case of substantial price rise , would you continue with the same brand? (61%) have said that they would continue with the same brand , despite the price rise. The value generation involves the nutritional benefits, trust & taste which the consumers are not willing to risk by changing brands. Thus, price rise is not a limiting factor for regular users as much as it is for potential consumers. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 No Yes May be
    • 3) Satisfaction Level of Consumers The Satisfaction Matrix reinforces the superiority of Horlicks over other brands. While Boost & Bournvita are competitive with chocolate taste providing the edge. high 75% medium 18% low 7% (Horlicks) high 42% Medium 19% low 39% (Bournvita) high 9% Medium 27% low 64% (Complan) high 46% Medium 18% low 36% (Boost)
    • 4) Factors creating positive attitude towards Horlicks in comparison to other brands. Availability, trust, nutritional benefits, Brand Image generates positive attitude towards Horlicks. However choice of flavors & price does not play a substantial role in choice of Horlicks. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Nutritional Benefits Clinical Approval Price Free gifts Brand Image Natural ingridients Availability
    • 5) Factors creating negative attitude towards Horlicks in comparison to other brands. Availability of substitutes, Lighter taste, Larger share as a % of Household Expenses triggers negative attitude towards Horlicks. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Celebrity appeal substitutes Packaging Taste Flavour % of household expenses
    • PERCEPTUAL MAP Horlicks is superior than the rest in terms of quality & brand image. However, it faces competition from Bournvita which is considered value for money product.. Boost & Complan compete on the taste platform, where the latter provides a complete family solution while boost provides the necessary energy fuel for growing children. Brand Image Quality Taste Price Bournvita Boost Horlicks Complan Maltova Viva Milo
    • RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VARIABLES: Using Rank Fischer Correlation 1) Brand Image & Nutritional Benefits: 0.892 indicates very strong positive correlation 2) Brand Image & Price: 0.5 indicating positive correlation, yet insignificant. 3) Brand Image & Clinical Approval: 0.964 indicating high positive correlation. 4) Brand Image & Taste: 0.2857 indicates absence of correlation.
    • TESTING OF HYPOTHESIS  Null Hypothesis : Taste doesn’t have a substantial effect on customer satisfaction of HFD.  Alt Hypothesis : Taste does have a substantial effect on customer satisfaction of HFD. OBSERVATIONS & CALCULATIONS: From Table, Fcal = 1.264 & Ftab = 6.944 Since Fcal< Ftab, we accept the Null Hypothesis
    • CONCLUSION • Horlicks: Enjoys strong brand equity & acceptance among the consumers, however can improve its consumption by enhancing its usage by its preparation in water & using vending machines ensuring its presence in schools & offices . • Boost: It provides the necessary energy for growing children. However, it ranks low on clinical approval vis-à-vis its competitors. • Complan: It fairs the best in terms of taste, rich variety of flavors & a completely planned solution. It loses market share to Bournvita in terms of pricing. Its claims as being a substitute to food is not accepted well by the consumers. • Bournvita: It has gained considerable preference over its Cadbury Parentage. It is one of the steady performers. It increases the strength of milk. However, it lags behind Horlicks in HFD market . Bournvita needs to expand its product range to target different segments.
    • APPENDIX & BIBLIOGRAPHY  References:  Consumer Behaviour-Sciffman.  Marketing Management-Philip Kotler-edition 12e.  Magazines & Journals:  Business World  Marketing Mastermind  Business Today  Readers Digest  Newspapers:  Times of India  Economic Times  Websites:  www.gskindia.com  www.heinzindia.com  www.cadburyindia.com 
    • THANK YOU