While taking a class on consumer behavior, I and two other team members worked with Rudog Nutrition to analyze the consumer markets and the company's potential competition. The end goal was to condense our report into a comprehensive presentation.

1. Rudog: Attack Nutrition
Madeline Bell, Youssra Maazia, Eric Schlossman

2. What is Rudog?
 Dietitian-inspired multivitamin supplements
 Nutritional planning services
 Independently-owned business
 Incorporates athleticism and good eating habits to
develop an overall healthy lifestyle

3. The Product:
Rudog Right
• Simple, daily supplement
• Gluten free and offers vital nutrients to support
• Bone, cardiovascular, and metabolic
health
• Antioxidant support
• Support fast metabolism

4. Consumer
Analysis
Niches and best target market

5. Research Methods
 Surveys ; design, distribution
 Market info: Gallop; SEC reports
 Interview with Russ Pond and Mary Cabral

6. Research Results
 Survey showed that half of respondents take
supplements
 Same as 2013 Gallup poll results for America
 Data suggested that supplement usage increases with
athleticism and age
 Older people take more to supplement deficiencies in diet
 Half said they have gym membership and consider
exercise very important to extremely important
 These same people said they take supplements

7. Consumer Profiles

8. Buying Processes
 Casual Users
 Look to satisfy long term needs
 Get information from readily available sources
 Price is a motivating factor
 Serious Users
 Always looking for the “edge”
 Read articles and follow developments in nutrition world
 Values opinions of like minded individuals
 Wealthier
 Older Users
 Do not do much voluntary research
 Supplements often prescribed by physician
 Less tech savvy, more trusting of face to face communication

9. Conclusion: Serious Users
 Fit the game plan for Rudog
 Likely to be interested in product as well as Rudog’s
other services
 Would not appeal to Older Users due to association
with highly athletic people
 Casual Users are likely to be committed to a
multivitamin already and not looking to try a new one

10. Competitor
Analysis
Direct and Indirect

11. Competitors
 USANA
 Big brand multivitamin
producer
 Offers incentives for
consumers to push products
 CVS/Walgreens
 Pharmacy brand
 Trusted because of expert
advice
 Lower cost than big brands
 Kirkland Signature
 Owned by Costco
 Generic/Wholesale brand
 Aimed at families
 Most mileage for your dollar

12. Competitor Profile

13. Competitors’ Strengths &
Weaknesses
 USANA
 Strengths
Worldwide shipping
Wide product range
High degree of potency
 Weaknesses
Doubts over effectiveness
Low perceived value
 CVS/Walgreens
 Strengths
Expert Advice
Brand loyalty
Highly rated customer service
 Weaknesses
No aggressive marketing campaign
Higher cost than wholesale brands
 Kirkland Signature
 Strengths
Nation wide distribution
Competitive Pricing
Reward program
 Weaknesses
Questions on manufacturing
processes
Perceptions of low quality

14. Indirect Competition
 Herbal Supplements
 Often used for same purpose
 Not FDA certified
 They make outlandish claims about effectiveness
 Fitness Programs/Gym Memberships
 People are likely to use other methods to stay healthy
 Gym attendance is perceived as more effective than
multivitamins

15. Environmental analysis
 Demographic Trends
 Younger to middle aged
consumers opting out of
supplements
 Doctors will recommend
against taking supplements
 Regulatory Trends
 Labelling regulations
 Manufacturers are regulated
more than private labels
 Economic Trends
 Significant growth
 People are still wary of
private label supplements

16. Market Strategy
 Product
 Rudog should describe product as a true supplement, not a magic “cure-
all” pill
 Mention that product is best when in conjunction with other provided
products
 Placement
 Push product in gyms
 Try to get more of a physical presence
 Promotion
 Strong social media campaign – partner with athletes
 Word of mouth = tabling and getting the name out into the community
 Price
 Serious Users are not as concerned with price as perceived quality
 Premium Pricing in order to attract these consumers