These slides are created by Abhinav Singh, MIT Manipal during Marketing Internship by Prof. Sameer Mathur (IIM Lucknow).

1. Harvard Business School Case Study
By Abhinav Singh

2. Growth Margin climbed from 39% to 45% in
1985.
Sales of $6.06 billion in 1991& gross profit of
$2.76 billion.
In 1991, CP held 43% of the world toothpaste
market and 16% of the world toothbrush
market.

3. PRECISION PRODUCT MANAGER
Susan Steinberg
GENERAL MANAGER
Nigel Burton
COLGATE PLUS PRODUCT MANAGER
John Philips

4. 1
• Launched Colgate precision in 1991.
• Faced competitive market.
2
• Positioning, branding and communication to
be created for Colgate precision
3
• Budget needs to be decided for advertising
and marketing.

5. To analyze U.S.Toothbrush market based
on Competition, Advertisement and
Promotion
To use quantitative analysis to make
suitable decisions.
To design strategies with help of
research analysis.

6. 46%
24%
15%
15%
SALES
Toothpaste Mouth Rinses Toothbrush Others

8. 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Value Professional Super Premium
Chart Title
Unit Volume
Dollar Sales

9. Baby boom more concerned
about Gum health than Oral
Cavity.
Willing to pay premium price

10. What Consumer expects from a toothbrush?
Remove Food Particles
Removal of Plague
Gum Stimulation

12. 22%
28%
20%
19%
5%
5%1%
Sales
Colgate
Others
Oral - B
J&J
AquaFesh Flex
Lever
Crest

14. 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
CREST (P&G) ORAL - B J&J
15
10
8
Amount Spent in Product Launch (in $M)

19. Three different lengths and
orientation.
Longer outer bristle cleaned around
Gum Line.
Shorter bristle cleaned the teeth
surface.

20. 35% increase in plaque
removal compared to other
brand
Product more effective at gum
line and between the teeth.

22. Targeting specific customers
concerned about Gum
disease.
Expected to be carried mainly
by Food and Drug stores

23. Targeting consumers with product
as best features in lower price.
Expected to be carried mainly by
mass merchandiser and club
stores.

24. Total $28MM $85.9MM

27. The current production levels cannot
sustain Precision as a Mainstream
product at least in theYear 1992 so it
should be Niche Product.
By choosing Niche we can prevent
cannibalization of Colgate plus.

29. Alternative names were
suggested for Colgate Precision.
Colgate Precision was most
suitable as deemed appropriate
by 49% of concept acceptors.
Hence it was the recommended
brand name.

31. Consumers exposed to various product
claims in prototype print ads.
Maximum purchase intent from toothpaste
that prevents gum disease.
Four concept tests were conducted in
which 400 adults from age 18 to 54 years
participated.

33. During year 1, company should target the marketing for
precision as a toothbrush for gum diseases while spreading
awareness about Oral Health Equally
By year 2, the company will be ready for mainstream
positioning by production capacity and there will be a wide
appraisal for the Product line
Retail Prices
Year1: $2.90 (Niche)
Year2: $2.47 (Mainstream)

34. These slides are created by Abhinav Singh, MIT Manipal
during Marketing Internship by Prof. Sameer Mathur (IIM
Lucknow).