1. BACKGROUND
A Market Launch clinic is required to confirm the appeal, pricing, product
positioning and imagery for a future off-road vehicle under development
by Troller. This research is required to provide voice of customer feedback
on the final exterior and interior design (including market specifications
and pricing).
To align the timing of the research results with Market Equation input, this
Market Launch clinic has to run immediately after the conclusion of SUV
Market Launch fieldwork (Project 13BRA404).
Markets: Brazil only This Market Launch project will be locally bid out and
managed by FSAO GCI office (Fernando Pfeiffer and Fabio Barile).
OBJECTIVES
The overall aims of the Market Launch clinic were:
Test overall product appeal to confirm Market Equation to support
the Program Approval <PA> Gateway.
Test price elasticity, Imagery and (qualitatively) communication
positioning opportunities.
Test Build-a-vehicle within series, feature bundles and take rates.
More specifically:
Evaluate the final Vehicle competitiveness (exterior/interior styling,
features and pricing) relative to key competition.
Evaluate proposed price points relative to competition in order to
provide guidance for final pricing.
Conduct pricing elasticity research to validate pricing assumptions
and for input into final vehicle pricing.
Understand consumer perception of the Vehicle strengths and
weaknesses to support communications strategy development and
product improvements.
Explore customer perceived product position and capability of the
Vehicle relative to competition. That is, spontaneous associations,
brand imagery and perceptions and vehicle image personification
(using respondent generated image collages to represent the new
vehicle).
São Paulo – Brazil
MAY 2013
CONFIDENTIAL
RESEARCH BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

2. METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW
Stage 1: Quantitative Face-To-Face Interviews:
Quantitative face-to-face 3 hours interviews based on a structured
questionnaire using electronic data collection method (CAPI).
Vehicle Assessment: Initial impression ratings of all vehicles in the
main vehicle hall. Initial choice asked based on initial impression of
exterior appearance.
Evaluation of vehicle exterior: Overall appearance from fixed
views around the vehicle, proportions, imagery. Overall
exterior preference.
Evaluation of vehicle interior: Initial impression, overall interior
appearance, evaluation of 1st
and 2nd row seating positions
including cargo area. Ingress, egress and harmony of interior
to exterior design.
Overall vehicle evaluation: Overall vehicle assessment
(exterior + interior), overall vehicle suitability for needs, vehicle
purchase interest, estimated price.
Choice preference: Ranking of vehicles, in order of preference
based on exterior and interior designs (considering suitability for
needs). Choice preference then asked based on reveal of (1)
specification features, (2) Primary brand and finally (3) price.
Price sensitivity analysis: Exploring demand at varying price points
and assessing any brand premiums / discounts.
Final Build-A-Vehicle exercise testing features and options.
Post clinic questions and clinic check-out.
Invite back for qualitative stages.
Qualitative Stage 2: 4 x Re-Invite Mini Focus Group Discussions:

3. 1,5 hour group duration (90 minutes)
Additional Focus Group respondent requirements were:
Respondents for focus group discussions re-invited back from Stage 1
Quantitative
Each group should had different age representation
Recruitment should quota model ownership to ensure each group
structure is representative
A balanced mix of brands and models within each group was
required
'Accepters' put the new TR-X as first preference (overall after brand
and price)
'Rejecters' put a competitor as first preference (overall after brand
and price)
Troller brand rejecters were excluded from the focus group discussions
SAMPLE SIZE
Total sample size N=75
Owners (bought in last 2 years) 53
Instenders *(will buy 4x4 vehicle within 12 months) 22
Target Customer Definition (sub sample) Minimum 35
* Ownership and intention to be qualified by specific model. Target customer quota to be
within the owner and intender sample

4. The distribution of focus groups was as follows:
SAMPLE SIZE BRAZIL
Accepter Focus Groups
(TR-X is 1st
choice)
2 groups
(Mixed gender)
Rejecter Focus Groups
(Competitor 1st
choice)
1 group
(Mixed gender)
Current owners
1 group
(Mixed gender)
Total Groups 4
Additional Focus Group respondent requirements were:
-Respondents for focus group discussions re-invited back from
Stage 1 Quantitative
-Each group should had different age representation
- Recruitment should quota model ownership to ensure each group
structure is representative
- A balanced mix of brands and models within each group was
required
-'Accepters' put the new TR-X as first preference (overall after brand
and price)
-'Rejecters' put a competitor as first preference (overall after brand
and price)
- Troller brand rejecters were excluded from the focus group
discussions

5. The Competitor Vehicles were:
Jeep Wrangler Sport 3.6 I Gas
Mitsubishi Pajero Dakar HPE 3.2 Diesel
Mitsubishi Pajero TR4 4x4 AT 2.0
Key Research Hypotheses
TR-X will:
• Lead in overall final choice (with specifications, brand and
price revealed)
• Lead in overall exterior appearance
• Be among the leaders for overall interior appearance
• Be among the leaders for overall package.
Team Actions
•Provide insights into the Market Equation and expected sales
volumes.
•Determine design elements, if any, that require further
development (for mid-cycle product actions).
•Confirm design leadership & package targets.
•Test choice preference and design theme competitiveness.
•Confirm vehicle imagery.
•Customer input into the communication/launch planning

6. Mini Focus Group Discussions: - HIGHLIGHTS
1) Composition of Groups
Group 1- Acceptors
Participants: 2 women and 4 men
Age: 40/50 y.o.
Family composition: married with children
Activity: civil servant, liberal professional, small business, retired
Hobbies: sports, cycling, hiking
Group 2 - Rejecters
Participants: 2 women and 4 men
Age: 40/50 y.o.
Family composition: married with children
Activity: free Lancer, a civil servant, small business
Hobbies: travel, sports, dance, trails
Group 3 - Troller Owners
Participants: 6 men
Age: 30/40 y.o.
Family composition: married with children, unmarried, widower
Activity: liberal professional, small business
Hobbies: hiking, aeromodelling, travel, trails
Group 4 - Rejecters
Participants: 1 woman and 5 men
Age: 20/40 y.o.
Family composition: married with children, unmarried, separated
Activity: liberal professional, small business
Hobbies: travel, sports, hiking, trails
2) Current Vehicle
Why have a 4 x 4?
For those who do track or travel "off road":
- comfort, speed, performance, security, stability
For urban use:
- Safety, design
Why have a Troller?
- performance, easy to maneuver, small, economical, "second
wife", reliable (doesn't wrap), different in style

7. 3) General preference in the clinic
Group 1- Acceptors
4 participants prefer the B (T4 model): by design, draws more
attention, is new, charming, compact, diesel engine
Only 1 participant put the (B) in last place: "as prototype, had glue”
Group 2 - Rejecters
The overall preference is for the vehicle (B): gives more status, by
design
References to the vehicle (B): aggressive, strong, different, modern,
a jeep to quagmire.
Negative mentions: bad finish, internal discomfort, it seems Chinese
car.
Group 3- Troller Owners
The preference falls on the vehicle (B): different, novelty in the
market, advanced design, rugged, has the face of Troller, as the
diesel, remtravel.
Group 4- Rejecters
Three participants manifest themselves positively in relation to the
vehicle (B): meets my needs, is unheard of.
The criticisms are: the lack of internal comfort and the difficulty of
access to the interior of the vehicle.
4) Evaluation of the vehicle (B) - Troller
Group 1- Acceptors
Front
Shows power, strength, robustness
Side
Positive mentions: harmonious, appropriate height from the ground
Negative mentions: fragility of the stirrup, design "too square"
Rear

8. This part is the most critical for the participants of the Group: "come
to the front and back is gone ...", we just see the tire, it seems that
you are missing a piece of the bumper.
Interior
The major criticisms fall on the interior of the vehicle: lack height
adjustment of the driver's seat, the dashboard is analog, gear shift
too far away from the driver, the Panel is in very high position, the
visibility is bad, the second row of seats is too tight (car for 2 people
only).
Group 2- Rejecters
Front
Shows strength, sturdiness, advanced design
Side
Negative mentions: front and rear have harmony but on the side
does not have
Rear
Positive mention: is in harmony with the front
Negative mention: steppe hinders visibility, rear lantern is very small,
the exhaust pipe should be higher in order to be able to walk in ´
water.
Interior
The major criticisms fall on the interior of the vehicle: gear shift too
far away from the driver, the Panel is in very high position, the
visibility is bad, the second row of seats is too tight (car for 2 people
only), you cannot carry luggage.
Group 3- Troller Owners
Front
Shows aggression, is different.
Side
Positive mentions: harmonious, the design of the stapes, the rear
side windows
Rear
Positive mentions: is in harmony with the front, opening the trunk got
better
Negative mentions: lost the aggressiveness of the front, steppe
hinders visibility, the taillight is very small.

9. Interior
Positive mentions: is more beautiful, more robust, the Panel of dials is
well evaluated.
Negative mentions: the windshield was too narrow, missing holder
object, the visibility deteriorated, lack an autopilot.
Group 4- Rejecters
Front
Shows aggression, is a Troller, vehicle for track design, more friendly
design, modern.
Side
Excellent height from the ground
Rear
Externally is futuristic.
Interior
The major criticisms fall on the interior of the vehicle: poor inside,
there was no improvement in comparison with the current model,
manual gearbox, the second row of seats is too tight (car for 2
people only).
5) Vehicle Image B-Troller
Group 1- Acceptors
Vehicle sports, recalls adventure, faces everything, is a Troller.
Group 2- Rejecters
Positive mentions: robust vehicle, different, draws attention.
Negative mentions: does not have comfort, difficult access, barely
finished, no trunk.
Group 3- Troller Owners
Positive mentions: makes you want to have, draws attention,
innovated enough.
Negative mentions: it is more an urban vehicle, lost the features of
off road.

10. Group 4- Rejecters
Externally pleases, is futuristic, is a breakthrough, but internally it
does not please.
6) Specifications
Group 1- Acceptors
Valued/desirable: six-speed, dual air conditioning, traction control,
washable interior.
Not valued/expendable: audio control on the steering wheel.
Group 2- Rejecters
Valuable/desirable: air bag, traction control, rear wiper, sunroof,
digital air conditioning, snorkel, washable interior, version with
automatic gear.
Group 3- Troller Owners
Valued/desirable: automatic gear, dvd player, motor and battery
indicators, missing place to store the sunroof.
Group 4- Rejecters
Valued/desirable: six-speed, washable interior, traction control, air
bag on-off button, ABS brakes.
7) Choice of versions
Group 1- Acceptors
XLT: flashy, the colors are beautiful
REX: is a sports car both internally and externally, modifications in
the bumper are positive, good value for money.
Group 2- Rejecters
XLT: the colors are beautiful, the look is better.
REX: aggressive and sporty, good value for money.
Group 3- Troller Owners
Limited: better cost-benefit ratio, buy for wife
REX: good value for money
Group 4- Rejecters
Limited: were interested by the visual
REX: composition of colors, the interior is more beautiful, it is more
suitable for off road use.

11. 8) Option of flex versus diesel vehicle
Group 1- Acceptors
Diesel advantages: increased engine durability, greater autonomy.
Part of the participants considers it interesting to have both versions.
Group 2- Rejecters
Diesel advantages: stronger engine, loyal customers
Advantages of flex: less noisy, less polluting, larger potential
audience with the reduction in price.
Group 3- Troller Owners
The preference is for diesel: more autonomy, flex option
mischaracterizes the Troller, is how changing woman.
Group 4- Rejecters
Diesel advantages: stronger engine with higher torque.
Advantages of flex: for urban use, largest potential audience with
the reduction in price.
9) Option of Troller with five doors and trunk greater
Group 1- Acceptors
Positive reaction: expands the audience, maintains the Troller
identity
Group 2- Rejecters
Positive reaction: extends the target audience
Negative reaction: have strong competitors in the current market –
Pajero, Mitsubishi, Wrangler
Group 3- Troller Owners
Positive reaction: expands the audience, maintains the Troller
identity
Negative reaction: have strong competitor in today's market-
Wrangler

12. Group 4- Rejecters
Positive reaction: extends the target audience
Negative reaction: have strong competitors in the current market-
Wrangler, Dakar
10) Pick-up Troller option
Group 1- Acceptors
Positive reaction: extends the target audience
Group 2- Rejecters
Positive reaction: enlarges the audience, brings greater reliability
Group 3- Troller Owners
The participants are divided: for some it is a good thing because it
widens the range of options. For others it is negative because
mischaracterizes the brand.
Group 4- Rejecters
Positive reaction: widen the audience and bring benefit to the
brand.