Advertising Forum

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Eliska Dobson — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:19:30 GMT

The only way to keep their market share is to keep focusing on the brand rather the product. After all, even though the cocoa contents in their chocolate is low, it does taste good and consumers like it. Therefore, I do not think that they are in a big danger.

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Andy Knell — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:58:02 GMT

So what do you think CDM's point of difference will be apart from heritage, to help them maintain their market share over the next few years?

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Eliska Dobson — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:17:44 GMT

Fair enough. I've already seen how much you know about chocolate so I won't doubt anything you say :).

I bought some chocolate last night - decided to go with galaxy. When I looked at the ingredients I was proven that you were right, not much cocoa but still more than in Milk Dairy ones ;)

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Andy Knell — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:12:04 GMT

Supposition based on our discussion ;) (subtle quip)

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Eliska Dobson — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:00:43 GMT

Where di you see that? I would like to have a look myself.

Thanks

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Andy Knell — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:38:30 GMT

I've just seen a further decline in CDM sales

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Eliska Dobson — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:19:14 GMT

I think you do :). However, I am impressed how much you know about chocolate. After all the information you gave us here, I don't think that I will eat as much chocolate as I used to ... :)

Might get some chocolate from Europe!

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Andy Knell — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:12:10 GMT

Yes I think they have sufficient levels of cocoa to be classed as legitimate chocolate, that or they are not called chocolate and given some random name.

I didnt realise I knew so much about something that I rarely eat...! I need to get out more

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Eliska Dobson — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:04:19 GMT

Definitely, such legislation would put a lot of strain on some UK chocolate producers. How is it then in the rest of Europe. Are European chocolates more chocolaty then?

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Andy Knell — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:27:24 GMT

I am sure there are many worse things that could pass your lips - I was more referring to the inaccurate label of most high street chocolate products as 'chocolate' when they contain such little cocoa solid. A while back there was an EU resolution proposed which requested most UK chocolate be re-labelled with the rather catchy title of 'Milk Solids'. If this ever comes to pass, Cadbury's may need more than a Gorilla to sell product.

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Eliska Dobson — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 12:32:14 GMT

You made a very good point. To be honest I did not Cadbury's chocolate to be of poor quality. I knew that it was not a luxury chocolate but would never think of it like this. I suppose I need to admit that their marketing strategies work!!

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Rod Meborn-Hubbard — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 12:02:31 GMT

Andy Knell hits the nail. It is impossible to say without knowing the objectives of the campaign, but such fun to speculate. So my guess is that it was increasing sale of CDM as a flagship brand. Therefore, based on the TNS data at face value, it had limited success. But then Charlie Robertson is very right in pointing out the other variables. So who knows? Cadbury and Fallon do.

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Andy Knell — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 10:23:59 GMT

Without knowing the true business objective of the campaign it is an impossible question to answer - if we talk about brand awareness then fair enough the ad stood out (whether for the right or wrong reasons) and therefore awareness of the product would have increased. If the objective was to sell more chocolate bars then perhaps the ad was not as successful as it could have been.

Cadbury's 'chocolate' is a combination of milk solids and sugar with very little cocoa in the mix, therefore the product should never really hero in the ad because the product is of poor quality. Added to that, Cadbury's is a household brand, therefore there is a need to do something very different to take penetration levels to a new high. In that respect the Gorilla did a decent job.

If we look at weekly spikes and troughs on sales figures around the time of start and end to the campaign this could be more interesting. But bottom line, advertising is only ever part of the marketing mix so a rise or full in sales cannot over a considerable period of months cannot be wholly attributed to an ad campaign.

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Eliska Dobson — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 08:36:25 GMT

I think that I mentioned this earlier. In my opinion the sluggish grow of Cadbury's could be a result of indirect marketing and positioning. Furthermore, the packaging and promoting of the product is better in case of Galaxy as they promote the product as well as the brand. Galaxy uses brown shades typical for chocolate and actually shows the chocolate in their adverts.

Re: Did Gorilla Ad Work?

Peter Martin — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:47:43 GMT

On this basis: 'I saw the report from TNS that showed Dairy Milk sales have been growing at less than 2%, while sales of Galaxy are growing at 12%.' I'd say... not so much. Shame. I liked it. But if you get just the right mood in the room, you might get away with... 'depends on what you mean by 'work'. Using the 'quotes' action with the fingers of each hand will defo help in this.