Juxtconsult Ad Connect Study

JuxtConsult AdConnect Study A quarterly monitor of the most effective ads in a product category

Study Overview ¾ The study tells you if your ad is generating sufficient ‘consumer mass’ for the brand in the category ¾ ‘Live-test’ based ratings of ads by category audience using 12 distinct parameters that determine ‘effectiveness’ of an ad ¾ Measuring ‘Ad Effectiveness’ comprehensively ¾ Noticeability and memorability (recall) ¾ Appeal and likeability ¾ Relevance and persuasiveness ¾ Brand differentiation and brand preference building

¾ Eventually measures the ‘consumer mass’ that the ad is generating is favor of the brand in the category (category mindshare)

Methodology • ‘Live’ ratings of ads by category users and intended users in next 6 months • Sample of 120-150 category respondents for each surveyed ad in the category • Online survey conducted using a leading portal in India as well as Google search ads. Data made representative of the urban Indian population by using appropriate ‘demographic multipliers’ • Multipliers derived using authentic Govt. of India population data • Findings and demographic profile of respondents are highly representative of current and intended urban users of the product category covering almost all SEC, age, income and town classes

Study Methodology ¾ All recall based answers collected ‘unprompted’ in blank text boxes ¾ All category level ratings collected using a ‘5 point qualitative scale’ dropdown options E.g. How much do you ‘identify’ with the ad? Its just made for me I somewhat relate to what is said in the ad I can’t make out if the ad is meant for me or not I don’t really relate to what is said in the ad It is definitely not for me

¾ Only the most recently run ads in the category are shown, and only to the category users/ intending users

©

The Ad Connect Measurement Model The Ad – Consumer Interaction Points Noticeability

The Ad Effectiveness Criteria

Was the ad noticed?

The Measures

Recall

Originality/Distinctiveness

Connectivity

Did the ad appeal?

Likeability Identification

Relatability

Relevance

Was the ad understood?

Was the message relevant?

Message comprehension Message believability

Message relevance Brand Differentiation Brand Inclination

Brand preference ©

Copyright JuxtConsult

Did it help build brand preference?

Brand Empathy Impact on Brand Image Brand Consideration

Measuring & Rating Schema © Likeability Originality Audience Identification

Ad noticed and appeals

Comprehensibility Relevance Persuasiveness / Believability

Ad is understood, relatable and convinces

Brand Differentiation Brand Inclination Image Impact Brand Empathy Brand Preference

Ad creates brand preference

Ad Appeal

Message Connect

Brand Impact

Ad Appeal Index

Ad Persuasion Index

Brand Impact Index

Qualitative impact created by the ad on the audience

Ad Connect Ad Connect Quotient (adCQ)

TOM Ad Recall

Qualitative impact of the ad

Ad Momentux Total ‘audience mass’ generated by the ad for the brand

©

Copyright JuxtConsult

Quantitative impact of the ad

The Derived Measures Ad Appeal

Ad Appeal Index

How much is the ad noticed and appeals

Message Connect

Ad Persuasion Index

How much is the ad understood, related to and convinces

Brand Impact

Brand Impact Index

How much is the ad contributing in creating brand preference

Ad ConnectTM

Ad Connect Quotient

Total impact created by the ad among the consumers (ad effectiveness)

Ad MomentuxTM

Ad Momentum Index

Consumer mass generated by the ad for the brand (audience mindshare)

Category Level Example

Candy Mouth Fresheners September - October 2007

Ads Tested

Chlormint

Happydent Protex

Minto Blue

Mentos

Happydent White

Parle Xhale

Center Fresh

Wrigley’s Orbit

Chill Pillz

Polo

Center Shook

Top of Mind Ad Recall How much is the ad recalled top of mind for the category Brand Ad

Top of Mind Ad Recall

Chlormint

25%

Orbit

18%

Minto Fresh

16%

Mentos

11%

Center Fresh

9%

Happydent White

9%

Pass Pass

7%

Polo

4%

Halls

1%

The Relative Effectiveness of the Ads Total effectiveness of the ads in connecting with the category consumers Ad Connect Quotient (adCQ)

Relative Index

Center Fresh

3.85

100

Chlormint

3.82

99

Minto Fresh

3.70

96

Mentos

3.22

84

Orbit

3.13

81

Happydent White

1.55

40

Polo

0.94

24

Minto Blue

0.03

1

Happydent Protex

0.02

1

Brand Ad

Current ‘Ad Momentum’ of the Ads Total Audience ‘mindshare’ generated by the ad for the brand in the category Brand Ad

Ad Momentum (Audience Mindshare)

Ad Momentum (Relative Index)

Chlormint

33%

100

Minto Fresh

21%

64

Orbit

15%

47

Mentos

13%

39

Center Fresh

13%

38

Happydent White

4%

13

Polo

1%

4

Happydent Protex

0%

0

Minto Blue

0%

0

Ad Momentum Summary Current Audience Mindshare Brand Ad

Top of Mind Ad Recall

Ad Connect (adCQ) Relative Index

Ad Momentum (Audience Mindshare)

Chlormint

25%

99

33%

Orbit

18%

81

15%

Minto Fresh

16%

96

21%

Mentos

11%

84

13%

Center Fresh

9%

100

13%

Happydent White

9%

40

4%

Pass Pass

7%

-

-

Polo

4%

24

1%

Halls

0.8%

-

-

Minto Blue

0.1%

1

0%

Happydent Protex

0.1%

1

0%

* Lotte Chill Pillz and Parle Xhale got zero top of mind brand recall, so could not be included in ad momentum calculations

Ad Effectiveness Perceptual Map .4 Center Fresh

.3

.2

.1

Brand Impact Chlormint

Mentos

Happydent Protex

0.0

Attribute

Ad Appeal

-.1

Minto Blue Polo Mint Orbit

Happydent White Minto Fresh

-.2 -.3

-.2

Brand

Message Connect

-.1

-.0

.1

.2

.3

.4

Respondent Profile

– Candy Mouth Fresheners

September - October 2007 Demographic Attributes

Gender Age Distribution

Ad Momentux Study Respondent Profile (Sample – 948)

Census 2001 Projected Actual Urban Population

Male

65%

52%

Female

35%

48%

Not included in study

NA

13-18 years

13%

16%

19-24 years

27%

17%

25-35 years

38%

27%

36-45 years

16%

18%

46-55 years

4%

11%

Above 55 years

2%

11%

Below 13 years

City Type

Up to 1 Lakh

27%

31%

(Population Size)

1-5 Lakhs

15%

27%

5-30 Lakhs

23%

25%

Above 30 Lakhs

35%

17%

North

30%

24%

8%

15%

South

29%

29%

West

33%

32%

Region-wise Distribution

East

* Representative of 22 million urban current and intended users of candy mouth fresheners

Respondent Profile

– Candy Mouth Fresheners

September - October 2007 Demographic Attributes

Socio-economic Classification

Economic Status in the Family Monthly Household Income

Most Expensive Vehicle in the HH

Ad Momentux Study Respondent Profile (Sample – 948)

Census 2001 Projected Actual Urban Population

SEC - A

16%

9%

SEC - B

23%

18%

SEC - C

44%

25%

SEC - D

8%

26%

SEC - E

9%

22%

Chief wage earner

28%

Not the chief wage earner

72%

Up to Rs. 10,000

54%

Rs. 10,000 – Rs. 30,000

38%

Rs. 30,000 – Rs. 50,000

3%

Above Rs. 50,000

5%

4-wheeler

13%

2-wheeler

42%

Bi-cycle / others

15%

Don't own any vehicle

30%

Ad Effectiveness Perceptual Map .4 Center Fresh

.3

.2

.1

Brand Impact Chlormint

Mentos

Happydent Protex

0.0

Attribute

Ad Appeal

-.1

Minto Blue Polo Mint Orbit

Happydent White Minto Fresh

-.2 -.3

-.2

Brand

Message Connect

-.1

-.0

.1

.2

.3

.4

A quarterly monitor of the most effective ads in a product category

Deodorants September - October 2007

Ads Tested

Axe

Set Wet Zatak

Rexona

Nivea Aqua

Fa Exotic

Spinz Salsa

Top of Mind Ad Recall How much is the ad recalled top of mind for the category

Brand Ad

Top of Mind Ad Recall

Rexona

36%

Axe

30%

Fa

11%

Set Wet Zatak

9%

Park Avenue

4%

Denim

3%

Nivea Aqua

2%

Adidas

1%

Spinz Salsa

1%

Others

3%

The Relative Effectiveness of the Ads Total effectiveness of the ads in connecting with the category consumers Ad Connect Quotient (adCQ)

Relative Index

Rexona

3.57

100

Axe

3.53

99

Fa

1.40

39

Set Wet Zatak

1.05

29

Nivea Aqua

0.18

5

Spinz Salsa

0.13

4

Brand Ad

Current ‘Ad Momentum’ of the Ads Total Audience ‘mindshare’ generated by the ad for the brand in the category Ad Momentum (Audience Mindshare)

Ad Momentum (Relative Index)

Rexona

49%

100

Axe

41%

84

Fa

6%

12

Set Wet Zatak

4%

7

Nivea Aqua

0%

0

Spinz Salsa

0%

0

Brand Ad

Ad Momentum Summary Current Audience Mindshare Top of Mind Ad Recall

Ad Connect (adCQ) Relative Index

Ad Momentum (Audience Mindshare)

Rexona

36%

100

49%

Axe

30%

99

41%

Fa

11%

39

6%

Set Wet Zatak

9%

29

4%

Park Avenue

4%

-

-

Denim

3%

-

-

Nivea Aqua

2%

5

0%

Adidas

1%

-

-

Spinz Salsa

1%

4

0%

Others

3%

-

-

Brand Ad

Ad Effectiveness Perceptual Map .3 Axe .2

Brand Impact

Attribute

.1

0.0 Nivea Aqua Spinz Salsa

Rexona

Zatak Fa

-.1

Message Connect -.3

-.2

Brand

-.1

-.0

Ad Appeal .1

.2

Respondent Profile – Deodorants September - October 2007 Demographic Attributes

Gender Age Distribution

Ad Momentux Study Respondent Profile (Sample – 957)

Census 2001 Projected Actual Urban Population

Male

50%

52%

Female

50%

48%

Not included in study

NA

13-18 years

13%

16%

19-24 years

29%

17%

25-35 years

38%

27%

36-45 years

11%

18%

46-55 years

5%

11%

Above 55 years

4%

11%

Below 13 years

City Type

Up to 1 Lakh

30%

31%

(Population Size)

1-5 Lakhs

16%

27%

5-30 Lakhs

28%

25%

Above 30 Lakhs

26%

17%

North

19%

24%

East

16%

15%

South

23%

29%

West

42%

32%

Region-wise Distribution

Respondent Profile – Deodorants September - October 2007 Demographic Attributes

Socio-economic Classification

Economic Status in the Family Monthly Household Income

Most Expensive Vehicle in the HH

Ad Momentux Study Respondent Profile (Sample – 957)

Census 2001 Projected Actual Urban Population

SEC - A

19%

9%

SEC - B

28%

18%

SEC - C

32%

25%

SEC - D

10%

26%

SEC - E

12%

22%

Chief wage earner

36%

Not the chief wage earner

64%

Up to Rs. 10,000

49%

Rs. 10,000 – Rs. 30,000

36%

Rs. 30,000 – Rs. 50,000

7%

Above Rs. 50,000

8%

4-wheeler

17%

2-wheeler

42%

Bi-cycle / others Don't own any vehicle

3% 38%

A quarterly monitor of the most effective ads in a product category

Soft Drinks October - November 2007

Ads Tested

Coca Cola Corporate

Thums Up

Coke

Fanta

Pepsi

Mirinda 1

Ads Tested

Mirinda 2

Sprite

Limca

7 Up

Mountain Dew

Slice

Top of Mind Ad Recall How much is the ad recalled top of mind for the category Brand Ad

Top of Mind Ad Recall

Pepsi

33%

Coca Cola

19%

Thums up

16%

Sprite

15%

Mirinda

5%

Fanta

5%

7up

5%

Mountain Dew

2%

Limca

1%

Slice

0.4%

The Relative Effectiveness of the Ads Total effectiveness of the ads in connecting with the category consumers Ad Connect Quotient (adCQ)

Relative Index

Pepsi

12.20

100

Thums up

12.24

99

Fanta

10.04

82

Mirinda

9.06

74

Slice

8.03

66

Coca Cola

7.90

65

Limca

7.86

64

Mountain Dew

7.30

60

Sprite

6.84

56

7up

6.43

53

Brand Ad

Current ‘Ad Momentum’ of the Ads Total Audience ‘mindshare’ generated by the ad for the brand in the category Brand Ad

Ad Momentum (Audience Mindshare)

Ad Momentum (Relative Index)

Pepsi

41%

100

Thums up

20%

48

Coca Cola

15%

38

Sprite

10%

25

Fanta

5%

12

Mirinda

4%

11

7up

3%

7

Mountain Dew

2%

4

Limca

0.4%

1

Slice

0.4%

1

Ad Effectiveness Perceptual Map .3

Thums up

.2

Mountain Dew

Message Connect .1

Ad Appeal Mirinda

Attribute

0.0

7up Fanta

Limca Coca Cola Sprite

-.1

Slice Pepsi

Brand Impact

-.2 -.4

-.3

Brand

-.2

-.1

0.0

.1

.2

.3

Respondent Profile – Soft Drinks October - November 2007 Demographic Attributes

Gender Age Distribution

Ad Momentux Study Respondent Profile (Sample – 1,256)

Census 2001 Projected Actual Urban Population

Male

69%

52%

Female

31%

48%

Not included in study

NA

13-18 years

9%

16%

19-24 years

30%

17%

25-35 years

38%

27%

36-45 years

15%

18%

46-55 years

6%

11%

Above 55 years

2%

11%

Below 13 years

City Type

Up to 1 Lakh

33%

31%

(Population Size)

1-5 Lakhs

20%

27%

5-30 Lakhs

24%

25%

Above 30 Lakhs

23%

17%

North

22%

24%

8%

15%

South

30%

29%

West

41%

32%

Region-wise Distribution

East

Respondent Profile – Soft Drinks October - November 2007 Demographic Attributes

Socio-economic Classification

Economic Status in the Family Monthly Household Income

Most Expensive Vehicle in the HH

Ad Momentux Study Respondent Profile (Sample – 1,256)

Census 2001 Projected Actual Urban Population

SEC - A

20%

9%

SEC - B

28%

18%

SEC - C

28%

25%

SEC - D

15%

26%

SEC - E

9%

22%

Chief wage earner

43%

Not the chief wage earner

57%

Up to Rs. 10,000

56%

Rs. 10,000 – Rs. 30,000

29%

Rs. 30,000 – Rs. 50,000

6%

Above Rs. 50,000

9%

4-wheeler

18%

2-wheeler

32%

Bi-cycle / others

13%

Don't own any vehicle

36%

Ad Momentux Report Content TM

1.

Effectiveness ratings# of the mainline brand ads in the category by current / intended users (minimum 150 live test responses per brand reported)

2.

‘Ad momentum’ with which the ads are building ‘consumer mass’ for their respective brands in the category

3.

Most recalled ads for the category (top of mind and spontaneous)

4.

Sources media of TOM recalls (for each brand reported)

5.

Level of ‘identification’ of ad with the brand (for each brand reported)

6.

Level of ‘identification’ of ad slogan with the brand (for each brand reported)

7.

Rating of each ad on ‘likeability’, with identification of the ad ‘elements’ leading to the likeness

8.

Rating of each ad on key ad measurement attributes: •

Ad Appeal

•

Message Connect

•

Brand Impact

9.

Rating of each reported ad in the category on the balance 10 individual parameters (originality, audience identification, message comprehension, message relevance, persuasiveness, brand differentiation, brand impression, brand image, brand empathy and brand preference)

10.

Rating of ad’s effectiveness in using the celebrity/brand ambassador if used

11.

Media preferences of the category users/intended users (TV channels, Newspapers, Magazines, Radio channels, Generic websites, Emailing websites, News websites)

12.

All ratings and preferences reported by key demographic segments wherever possible* (gender, age, SEC, occupation, marital status, town class, region, income class, vehicle ownership)

#

all category level ratings are provided by respondents on a 5 point qualitative scale, * depending on the sufficiency of sample size of relevant respondents

JuxtConsult Ad Momentux Study Pricing of Reports

Report Ad MomentuxTM Category Level Report

•

Payment Terms

One Time Report*

Annual Subscription*

Nos.

Amount (Rs.)

Nos.

Amount (Rs.)

1

150,000

4

360,000

: 50% advance 50% before the delivery of third quarterly report

•

Delivery Timeline

: Quarterly Reports – By 15th of the relevant month after the quarter

•

Report Delivery Format

: PDF

* 12.36% service tax extra

Contact Details • Address

:

7, Kehar Singh Estate, 1st Floor, Westend Marg, Lane 2, Said-ul-Ajaib, New Delhi – 110030

• Telephone

:

+91-11-29535098, +91-9811256502

• Contact Person

:

Sanjay Tiwari

• Email

:

[email protected]

• Website

:

www.juxtconsult.com

Thank You!