Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Compara add(saurabh nigam)

409 views

Published on

Its all about the comparative add done in entertainment

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Compara add(saurabh nigam)

  1. 1. PRESENTED BY-: Saurabh Nigam 2nd Semester Management scholar 14PMM504 Department of Pharmaceutical Management 1
  2. 2. FLOW OF PRESENTATION 2
  3. 3.  Advertising is any paid form of nonpersonal presentation and promotion of ideas, goods, or services by an identified sponsor.  Advertisers include not only business firms but also museums, charitable organizations, and government agencies that advertise to various target publics.  Ads are a cost-effective way to disseminate messages, whether • to build brand preference for Coca-Cola or • to educate a nation's people to avoid hard drugs.  Advertising is expected to tell the truth, and to tell it well.3
  4. 4. 4
  5. 5. POSSIBLE ADVERTISING OBJECTIVES 5
  6. 6. 6
  7. 7. PRODUCT ADVERTISING Nonpersonal selling of a particular good or service. - TV ads - billboards - junk mail 7
  8. 8. PIONEER ADVERTISING “… tries to develop primary demand…” Done in the early stage of the Product Life Cycle. Also called as informative advertising 8
  9. 9. INSTITUTIONAL ADVERTISING Promoting a concept, idea, or philosophy, or the goodwill of an industry, company, or organization. This is closely related to the PR program of the company. Also called Advocacy advertising. 9
  10. 10. COMPETITIVE ADVERTISING Tries to get you to take action now - buy the product now. Immediate Buying Direct Indirect Tries to point out the advantages so if you think about this product later, you will buy our brand 10
  11. 11. Either directly or indirectly comparative, positive or negative, and seeks “to associate or differentiate the two competing brands” The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), United States, defined comparative advertising as “advertisement that compares alternative brands on objectively measurable attributes or price, and identifies the alternative brand by name, illustration or other distinctive information.” COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING 11
  12. 12. 12
  13. 13. ADVERTISEMENT COMPARING COMPLAN WITH HORLICKS To degrade the competitor’s brand on the basis of value proposition the competitive brand is offering 13
  14. 14. 14
  15. 15. Comparative advertisement of Jet Airways, Kingfisher Airlines and Go Air 15
  16. 16. WHY COMPARATIVE ADVERTISEMENT..?? Due to liberalisation and globalisation of economy, and dismantling of “License-permit” system, entry into production and services is no more barrier and so the thrust of competition has shifted to aggressive and vigorous promotion of products and services. In a competitive environment, every representation of a product or service, is based on its comparison with those of the competitors and so is not about “what we are” but “ what others are not”. These practices raise questions about truthfulness and fairness of representation of products and services. 16
  17. 17. Indian courts have traditionally allowed advertisers ample leeway when making puff statements about their products. Even untrue claims about a product are often allowed, with the line being drawn only at disparagement or slander of another producer or its goods. As a result, puff statements regularly feature in comparative advertising and, over time, the courts have developed a set of principles to assess the legitimacy of such claims. EMERGENCE OF REGULATIONS FOR COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING IN INDIA 17
  18. 18. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, (MRTP) was enacted to prevent monopolies and restrictive trade practices in the economy. In 1984, the MRTP Act was amended to add a chapter on Unfair Trade Practices and provided a basis upon which a claim could be made against disparagement of goods. Section 36 A of the Act lists several actions to be an ‘unfair trade practice’. The provision which pertains to comparative representation is contained in Section 36 A(1)(x) EMERGENCE OF REGULATIONS 18
  19. 19. According to Section 36-A(1)(x) 'unfair trade practice' means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provisions of any services, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice including any of the following practices, namely :- the practice of making any statement, whether orally or in writing or by visible representation which, gives false or misleading facts disparaging the goods, services or trade of another person. The MRTP Act created a body called the “DGIR” and a judicial body called the “MRTPC” Then it was repealed by the Competition Act 2002. EMERGENCE OF REGULATIONS 19
  20. 20. In addition to the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, the Trademarks Act 1999 (Section 28(9) –notified with effect from September 15 2003, mandates that the use of a registered trademark by an advertiser results in infringement if it:  takes unfair advantage of the mark’s reputation;  is contrary to honest practice in industrial or commercial matters;  is detrimental to the mark’s distinctive character; or  damages the reputation of the trademark. EMERGENCE OF REGULATIONS 20
  21. 21. The “Advertising Standards Council of India(ASCI)”  specifies that comparative advertisement is permissible if:- The aspects of the products compared are clear The comparisons do not confer artificial advantages on the  advertiser It is factual and substantiable The consumer is unlikely to be mislead There is no unfair denigration of the competing product.  INDIA’S ATTITUDE  TOWARDS COMPARATIVE  ADVERTISEMENT 21
  22. 22. In effect, self-praise is allowed; slander is not. Defamation  of  competitors  and  their  products  is  not  permissible under Indian laws It  is  also  held  that  direct  reference  to  another  product’s  inferiority cannot be carried in an advertisement. INDIA’S  ATTITUDE….. 22
  23. 23. At  the  same  time,  the  courts  have  ruled  that  if  a  competitor  makes  the  consumer  aware  of  his  mistaken  perception  about  a  product,  the  plaintiff  cannot  complain  against such action.  Comparative  advertising  is  allowed  only  if  it  is  done  within  certain  permissible  limits,  along  pre-defined  parameters.  Advertisers must in that case be cautious and careful  before targeting their competitor’s products. INDIA’S ATTITUDE…. 23
  24. 24. 24 Delhi High Court Reckit Benckiser (India) Limited vs Naga Limited And Ors. on 21 April, 2003Equivalent citations: 104 (2003) DLT 490, 2003 (68) DRJ 441, 2003 (26) PTC 535 Del, 2003 45 SCL305 Delhi Author: V Sen Bench: VSen JUDGMENT Vikramajit Sen, J Equivalent citations:104( 2003) DLT 490,2003(68) DRJ 441,2003(26)PTC 535 DEL 2003 45 SCL 305 DELHI Judgement by Vikramjit Sen 1. The Plaintiff has filed this Suit for permanent and mandatory injunction, being aggrieved  by the Defendant's television commercial which depicts a woman in an advanced stage of  pregnancy needing urgent medical assistance during a train journey. The doctor calls for  hot water and is handed a cake of soap which she rejects, stating that an antiseptic soap is  needed. It is not in dispute that the soap which was handed over to the doctor is identifiable  by viewers as the Plaintiff's product, namely, Dettol Soap. The doctor further states in the  commercial that "at a time like this, you do not need just antiseptic, you need a protector".  The Defendant's Ayurvedic soap is then shown and it is concurrently stated that it is a body  'rakshak' soap, the first Ayurvedic soap that completely removes all seven kinds of terms  and protects from infection. The Plaintiff's grievance is that this commercial disparages its  Dettol Soap. It is averred that the intention behind the commercial is malicious, especially  in view of the trade literature which shows that Dettol Brand sales are about 30-35 crores  out of a total sales of Rs. 230 crores. The Plaintiff has vehemently stressed that Dettol is the    leader in brand equity
  25. 25. INADEQUACY OF RULES AND REGULATION S 25
  26. 26. Dispute related to the television commercial of Volini pain  reliever manufactured by Ranbaxy Laboratories.  The  Gujarat  High  Court  held  that  the  advertisement  disparaged  Paras  Pharmaceuticals  Ltd’s  product,  as  the  inferior product depicted in the advertisement, bore uncanny  resemblance to the packaging of moov. MOOV VS VOLINI CASE PARAS PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. VS  RANBAXY LABORATURIES LTD. 26
  27. 27. The Commission elaborated the meaning of the provision: In order to bring home a charge under clause (x) of section  36A(1) it must be established that the disparagement is of the  goods, services or trade of another. The  words  "goods  of  another  person"  have  a  definite  connotation.  It  implies  disparagement  of  the  product  of  an  identifiable manufacturer. REGAUL VS UJALA Regaul Blue India Ltd. v/s Jyothi Laboratories 27
  28. 28.  The MRTPC was of the view that  “Colgate  has  been  in  the  business  of  manufacturing  and  selling toothpaste in India for more than 50 years and the  word  toothpaste  has  become  synonymous  with  Colgate  over the years.”  The Commission in addition noted that the jingle in the  background  was  a  familiar  one  of  Colgate.  The  comparative product in the television commercials could,  thus, be identified as Colgate dental cream.  Thus, it became a case of comparative advertisement and  a  claim  was  made  of  disparagement  of  Colgate’s  products. New Pepsodent v/s Colgate Case Hindustan Unilever Limited v/s Colgate Palmolive  28
  29. 29. As  former Finance Minister and one of the early architects  of liberalization, Chidambaram rightly highlights: “A  world  class  legal  system  is  absolutely  essential  to  support an economy that aims to be world class. India needs  to take a hard look at its commercial laws and the system of  dispensing justice in commercial matters in order to ensure  fair trade.” FM on regulations for comparative  advertisement 29
  30. 30.  No….   To  summarize  the  interpretation  of  the  Commission,  an  advertisement  could  disparage  other  products  and  yet,  it  would  not  be  a  case  of  ‘disparagement’  so  long  as  the  disparaged product is not identifiable.   The conflicting claims would need to be assessed in the  context  of  the  constitutional  provisions  on  the  Fundamental Rights, privileging the freedom to speak. Is the law adequate to prevent unfair trade  practices? 30
  31. 31. The opening up of the economy, on its own, is not going to create and sustain competition. An appropriate law, adequate enforcement, strong infrastructure, and a quick dispute settlement mechanism would be needed to sustain competition. In the absence of it, we would only be regressing from a ‘license permit raj’ to the ‘jungle rule of the marketplace.’ Is the law adequate.....? 31
  32. 32. Do comparative ads help the brand? It is most often seen in markets and categories that are price-sensitive or where a benefit/attitudinal upper hand by brand is the key to winning consumer votes in a crowded me too category. Consumers today need instant, ready-to- consume information on products and services. Comparative advertising helps them make informed choices. This, of course, assumes that comparative advertising does not misrepresent the facts. Rohit Ohri, Managing Partner JWT India. 32
  33. 33. Do comparative ads help the brand? Some brands want to build their images around controversy and ambush in which case, it may still be strategically correct. Still, there is no research that shows consumers like a name-caller anymore than they like a brand that seeks to connect with them in a positive way. Lynn D’souza Chairman and CEO, Lintas Media Group 33
  34. 34. Advantages of Comparative advertising 34
  35. 35.  There is a danger that once undertakings address the merits and inadequacies of competing goods or services, they may be tempted to denigrate them or derive unfair advantages from such inaccurate comparisons.  Commercial relationships may be exposed to the constant threat of unfair practices.  The risk of consumer confusion and deception through Comparative advertising occurs in the following situations, •When advertisers of two or more competing brand make substantiated but irreconcilable product claims. •When there are incomplete comparisons. RISK OF COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING 35
  36. 36. While it is true that comparative advertising is a two-sided tool, with both potential and dangers (if misused). It can develop into a powerful tool for the marketer as well as for consumers if handled with restraint and good judgement. Avoiding any negative references to competitive products and showing both products in a fair and equal manner will ensure that dual mission of comparative advertising is accomplished – that of educating the consumer and selling the product. 36
  37. 37. 37

×