This is a group assignment planning the idea of a brand extension for Galaxy - popcorn.

1. Introduction
Brands can be defined as ‘a name, term, sign, symbol, or design, or combination of these,
which is intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and to
differentiate them from their competitors (Kotler,2013). Galaxy chocolate is a fast moving
consumer good (FCMG) (Brassington and Pettitt, 2005) that originated in the UK in the year
1960 and has seen strong growth that continues year on year (Galaxy, no date). This report
will analyse both Galaxy’s position within the market, including its financial status and market
share, to provide a creative brand extension which would strategically benefit the parent
brand, Mars Limited.
Key UK Consumer Segments
The chocolate industry has remained constant since 2015, with 9 out of 10 people eating
chocolate, demonstrating the enduring appeal (Mintel, 2016). With a high amount of people
consuming chocolate, dividing the population into segments helps the brands message
become much more targeted (Blythe, 2016). A market segment is a group of customers with
similar requirements which can be satisfied by a distinct marketing mix (Chernatony, 2001).
Galaxy use demographic segmentation to focus on 45-54 year-old women (Mintel, 2016), a
logical choice as small chocolate bars are consumed by over 45’s the most, with 35% of
women eating chocolate bars four or more times a week compared to 24% of men (Mintel,
2016).
Although segmentation can reach consumers more effectively (Armstrong, 2016), it can also
have a drawback. Consumers aged 16-24 are the driving force of the snack market (Mintel,
2016), with 79% of the age group eating snacks at least once a day. This age group are also
the most likely to interact with brands on social media (Mintel, 2016); Galaxy are neglecting
a huge consumer segment as well as the critical need to utilise social media in a digital age
as they have less online mentions than brands who have less sales (Mintel, 2014).
Trends Within the Market
Palmers ‘brandsphere’ theory is an external scanning model which notes factors that can
have an affect on the brand that cannot be controlled (Palmer, 2009). Trends within a market
lie under the Macro environment.
The key trend for FCMG’s between 2015 and 2016 was the attention sugar received in the
media. Alongside 48% of consumers claiming to be trying to lose weight (Mintel, 2015), this
has resulted in 40% of consumers choosing to buy healthier snacks instead of chocolate
(Mintel, 2016). Positively, the emotional benefits of chocolate seem to outweigh health

2. concerns for 4 in 10 users, which has helped the market stagnate in the face of the sugar
epidemic (Mintel, 2016).
Galaxy will have to adapt to the UK’s ageing population; over 55’s are projected to increase
by 10%, with only 24% of them eating chocolate (Mintel, 2016). Over-55s show the most
concern for health issues like cholesterol and heart health, which various ingredients in
Galaxy have been proven to contribute to (Mintel, 2015).
Analysis of Galaxy’s Market Share
Market Share 2015 2014 2013 2012
Value (%) 8 (2015) 6 (2014) 7 (2014) 7 (2013)
Volume (%) 8 6 7 7
2015 2014 2013 2012
Total Sales (M) 241 261 280 271
- Figure 1: Galaxy’s market share and
sales (Mintel, 2016) (Mintel, 2014) (Mintel, 2013) -
FCMG’s compare market share (MS) frequently as it is the measure of the consumer’s
preference for a product over other very similar products (Economic Times, no date). MS
can be defined by the proportion of the total amount of products sold within a specific
product market measured by both value and volume (Habel, 2009). Galaxy is the second
leading brand in chocolate confectionary 2015, owning 8% volume and value market share
(Mintel, 2016)
.
Galaxy increased their market share by 2% between 2014/15 (Mintel, 2016). Laverty’s study
showed that share may be a significant predictor of product return (Laverty, 2001); this is
apparent as Mars profits dropped between 2013 and 2014 Mars’ by £904,994 (Fame, 2016)
which resulted in a 1% dip in market value whilst previously maintaining their status (Mintel,
2013). Drummond (2010) argues that brands are intentionally accepting lower financial
returns with their products in order to develop their market position; this appears to be the
case as between 2014/2015, sales drop by £20M yet the MS increases by 2%, whereas
between the years 2012/13 where MS remains at 7%, the total sales increase by £10M.
Galaxy’s Financial Performance

3. - Figure 2: Mars UK Limited Revenue/Turnover and Profit (Fame, 2016). -
Mars’ profit and revenue increases yearly apart from the years 2013-2014 where there is a
large decrease (Fame, 2016). Between 2013/14 Galaxy lost 1% MS due to sales falling by
7% (Mintel, 2014). Due to a three-year streak in positive turnover, Mars invested into Galaxy
advertisement with £2.5M spent on TV alone (Mintel, 2014). This appears to be ineffective
as their profit decreased by £4994 and their turnover decreased by £5879. A Mintel report
states that 79% of 16-24 year-olds are eating snacks once a day or more (Mintel, 2016); not
targeting this focal segment within their advertising could potentially be causing the decline.
When the market share rose to 8% in 2015, Mars’ had an increase of £23,634 revenue and
£7593 in profit due to the launch of the Galaxy Duet sub-brand and Galaxy Salted Caramel
in 2015.
Galaxy’s Competitors
Galaxy’s main competitor is Dairy Milk (DM) who own 16% of the industries MS with the rest
of the market owning only 1-5% out of 100 (Mintel, 2016). DM excel in regards to sales
selling £507M worth of product whereas Galaxy only sold £241M in 2015. However, Galaxy
grew in sales by £10M compared to 2014 whereas DM only increased by £7M; this is due to
two new line extensions.
-Figure3: An adaptation of Kotler’s Price Matrix -
Dairy Milk is overall preferred in the UK; however, when totaling the sales from 2015 from
each chocolate bar owned by both parent brands, Mars earned earned £3663.9M whereas
Mondelez only earned 90.8M (Mintel, 2016). Drummond (2010) argues that brands are
intentionally accepting lower financial returns with their products in order to develop their
market position, which may be the reason Galaxy is so far behind in it’s market share and
profitability compared to Dairy Milk.
FMCG’s like chocolate will have an elastic demand, a small percentage increase in price will
produce a decrease in demand as consumers will opt for a cheaper product that offers the
same qualities (Blythe, 2016). Kotler’s price matrix can be used to compare Galaxy’s pricing
(Kotler,2013). Galaxy is trusted by consumers, offering high quality products at a medium
price (Mintel, 2016), which would put Galaxy in the ‘High value’. However, Kotler’s matrix
can be criticized as consumers actually believe Galaxy to be ‘not as good value as Cadbury
or Kit Kat’ and is only favourite brand to 13% of consumers compared to Cadburys 20%
(Mintel, 2016).
HIGH
QUALITY
LOW
QUALITY
High valueUnderpriced Premium
offering
Good value Overpriced
LOW
PRICE
Very cheap
products Low value Underpriced
HIGH
QUALITY

4. Brand Positioning
Brand positioning (BP) is the design of a company’s image and what it offers so that it
occupies a distinct and valued place in consumers’ minds (Keller, 2013). Galaxy position
themselves as a ‘treat’, as the ‘perfect partner for chocolate indulgence, why have cotton
when you can have silk?’ (Galaxy, no date).
- Figure 4: Evaluating effectiveness of Brand Positioning -
Figure 4 is a matrix used to evaluate the effectiveness of a BP (Chernatony, 2001).
Research by Mintel states the biggest reason for buying chocolate is to ‘treat oneself’
(Mintel, 2016), which show’s Galaxy’s position as an indulgent treat has high relevance to
consumer’s. Galaxy heavily advertising itself as a ‘me-time’ (Mintel, 2016) supports Galaxy
having a high score on the extent to which Galaxy emphasizes it’s unique selling point,
resulting in Galaxy having a ‘market orientated’ position.
Alexander (1996) states that semiotics/symbols can be helpful to exploit a cultural myth,
which for Galaxy, is that their product is unhealthy; one in five consumers worry about the
saturated fat content of chocolate (Mintel, 2014). Semiotics can help position a brand by
identifying the opposite of the myth and then using this cultural contradiction to overcome it
and satisfy a customers need. The stronger the opposition, the stronger a brands position
(Chernatony et al, 1992). Galaxy plays on the perceived female need of ‘me time’ against
the unhealthy stigma chocolate has and positions itself as a ‘self reward’ (Figure 5) (Carter,
2010).
HIGH
Extent to which the
organisation
emphasizes the UCP
LOW
LOW
FIRM CENTRERED MARKET ORIENTATED
MISSED OPPORTUNITY
MISUNDERSTOOD
CONSUMER AND
BADLY
COMMUNICATED
Relevance to
customer
HIGH

5. .
- Figure 5: An adaptation of Alexander’s myth concept (Chernatony, 2001)-
Marketing and Communications Approach
The promotional mix can be used to dissect the direct way in which an organisation
communicates with target audiences (Brassington and Pettitt, 2005).
INDULGENT TREAT
UNAPPETISING FOOD
HEALTHY FOOD UNHEALTHY FOOD
Cultural
norms
Cultural
contradictions
Cultural
contradictions
Cultural
norms

6. - Figure 6 (top), Figure 7 (bottom)
- Figure 8 -
With more than 40 pence in every pound made being spent on advertising, figure 6 shows
that Mars has been the biggest spender on advertising since 2012 (Mintel, 2016). Galaxy
had the highest ad spend in 2013 (Mintel, 2014) due to the Audrey Hepburn TV advert;
Audrey represent classiness and elegance which is a perfect mirror to their ‘silk, not cotton’
strapline and is relevant to the consumer age group (McGee, 2014). The drop in sales and
profit that year may be due to the choice of communication as, since 2010, there have been
yearly declines in TV viewings (Mintel, 2016). Galaxy’s outgoings on promotion is huge
compared to it’s profits in figure 2; a solution could be to attract new demographic via social
media, especially 16-24 year-olds who are very active on SM according to figure 8. SM is a
way to reach customers at minimal cost (Brassington and Pettitt, 2005). Galaxy have not
posted on their Facebook since February; an increased level of use could be a way to cut
costs and create customer service and gain exposure (Brassington and Pettitt, 2005).
Creative Analysis of Galaxy’s Intangible Values:
Brand equity is the differential effect that brand knowledge
has on consumer response to the marketing of that brand,
which will hopefully create loyal customers (Keller, 2013). To
differentiate themselves from competitor’s a brand must focus
on intangible values as consumers are less concerned
with attributes, but more focused on emotional benefits
(Chernatony, 2001). Using Chernatony’s brand
pyramid in Figure 9 (Chernatony, 2001) it is clear
Galaxy have a logical foundation to have high
brand equity.
- Figure 9: An adaptation of Chernatony’s brand pyramid -
The brand pyramid, if portrayed within marketing techniques, creates a brand essence
understanding; the benefits lead to an emotional reward for the consumer (Chernatony,
2001). VanAuken (2010) states a brand’s essence can be described in a three-word phrase
Indulgence
Galaxy Chocolate
Smooth, creamy and delicious
Reduces hunger
Treating yourself,
havinga luxury treat

7. to quickly describe a company. However, Blackett and Broad contradict this with their
‘Interbrand’s Brand Blueprint’ which is a detailed proposition of values made from customer
research (Chernatony, 2001).
Whilst consistent advertising and mass-market appeal help Galaxy to be seen as accessible,
they still hold an element of luxury and indulgence that encourages consumers to consider
buying it for special occasions (Mintel, 2014); Galaxy is seen as ‘treat’ as intended. Galaxy is
seen as having a family image, consistent high quality and trust; being seen as family
orientated will benefit Galaxy as the second highest reason to buy chocolate after ‘indulging’
is for an evening at home and trust will ensure brand loyalty when extending (Mintel, 2016).
Ethical qualities are lacking from Galaxy’s brand essence. 16-24 year-olds are the only
demographic to see the brand as ethical due to it’s collaboration with the rainforest alliance
(Mintel, 2016); including this age-group within marketing techniques may lead to a brand
essence extension.
- Figure 10: an adapted version of the Interbrands Brand Blueprint model
(Chernatony, 2001) -
8% Market
share
1960
A treat
Origin: UK
FACTS AND SYMBOLS
BRAND PERSONALITY
WHAT THE PRODUCT
DOES FOR ME
HOW THE BRAND
MAKES ME LOOK
HOW THE BRAND
MAKES ME FEEL
HOW WOULD I
DESCRIBE THE
PRODUCTSatisfies
hunger
Releases
endorphins
luxury velvety
creamy
delicious
smooth
richCORE
Indulged
Naughty
Happy
Luxurious
Upper-class
Proud to be
associated with
Trustworthy
Good value
accessible
Comforting
traditional
wholesome
authentic
Family orientated
Why have cotton when
you can have silk?
- Luxurious
- Indulgent
- High quality

8. BP is defined as ‘the set of human characteristics associated with a brand’; a distinctive
personality can help create
a set of unique and
favorable associations in
consumer memory (Keller,
1993). Aaker’s theory
(Aaker, 1997)
shows five branches of
personality (figure 11).
Galaxy come under the
sincerity category as
consumers describe the
brand to be honest,
wholesome and comforting
(Mintel, 2016). A critique of
this theory to assess a
brand’s personality is that
the categories do not include
any negative qualities or
consider brand’s being in multiple categories (Avis, 2012); this is apparent as Galaxy score
high in consistency with consumers, so is compatible with the competence category (Mintel,
2014).
Brand extension
A brand extension is when a firm uses an existing brand name to introduce a completely
new product (Keller, 2013).
- Figure 12 –
Figure 12 (Mintel, 2016) shows that new product launches within the chocolate industry
declined to 26% in 2015; there is a gap within the market to be innovative, a quality that
consumers do not perceive Galaxy to be (Mintel, 2014).
- Figure 11: The brand personality framework -

9. According to figure 2 Galaxy’s profit is increasing each year; Galaxy have the financial
comfort to extend. Failure rates of brand extensions within FCMG’s industries have risen to
80% (Hem, L.E. et al, 2003), it important to assess key trends within the market beforehand.
The chocolate industry as a whole has stagnated in volume sales over the last two years
due to seven in 10 consumers cutting down on snacks to reduce calorie intake (Mintel,
2016) and 4 in 10 consumers choosing healthier snacks (Mintel, 2015). 16-24 year olds are
the main consumer of both chocolate and snacks (Mintel, 2014); Galaxy choosing against
targeting this market may be the reason behind sales decline.
A probable brand extension could be chocolate covered popcorn, as it combines the current
market’s need for a healthier snack whilst potentially attracting a younger demographic as
16-24 year olds show a bias towards favouring healthy snacks (Mintel, 2015). Ansoff’s
growth matrix (figure 13) can be used to deduce that the extension would be using a
diversification strategy by targeting new consumers with a new product (Keller, 2013).
- Figure 13: Ansoff’s Growth Matrix -
Popcorn is the star growth performer in the UK market, doubling from 2010 to 2015
(Mintel, 2016). Propercorn, a brand known for it’s low calorie flavours, has seen
126% value growth in the past year (the Grocer, 2016). Popcorn has high health
credentials with one in four people stating the flavours are healthy (The Telegraph,
2016). Cadbury’s released a toffee and chocolate covered popcorn in 2012
(Reynolds, 2012) which is no longer for sale. This may be due to the high sugar and
fat content in the product.
Galaxy could use their high brand equity status to apply price skimming, setting a high price
to attract consumers who seek status and see high price as an exclusive product
(Brassington and Pettitt, 2005), corresponding with current consumer opinion that Galaxy
are a brand proud to be associated with (Mintel, 2014). Popcorn bags will accommodate
portion control, a factor which limits the amount of calories consumed; women, Galaxy’s
current demographic, look for portion controlled snacks as 57% of them are trying to lose
weight (Mintel, 2016). Galaxy have a lack of online presence from Galaxy; social media
could be utilised as discussion online has led to a fifth of chocolate buyers to try a new
product (Mintel, 2016). Using online advertising will decrease costs, creating an increase of
profit and a positive cash flow.
Market
Development
PRODUCTS
NewExisting
Market
Penetration
Product
Development
Market
NewExisting
Diversification

10. A disadvantage of this brand extension is a healthier alternative to the popular chocolate bar
may have damaging effects on sales. Choosing to target a further consumer segmentation
may weaken the brand’s image which Keller (2013) states is especially evident in high-
quality brands, a quality which consumers believe Galaxy to be (Mintel, 2014). However, the
product would be the perfect portrayal of Galaxy overcoming the cultural contradiction
mentioned in Alexander’s myth diagram (Alexander, 1996); Galaxy could position the
popcorn as an ‘innocent indulgence’, staying true to it’s brand essence whilst attracting both
existing and new consumers.