MxMIndia

Tag: Hindustan Lever

  • Lowe Lintas doesn't allow Ogilvy fifth consecutive 'Agency of the Year' title by 35 points as Hindustan Lever gets past Cadbury by 50 points

    Lowe Lintas, HUL win big at Effie 2013

     

    By Shobhana Nair

     

    It’s a fraternity which loves surprises. And the thousand-and-a-half-odd members of India’s advertising and marketing industry witnessed just that on Friday evening. The large contingent from Ogilvy & Mather India has made a habit out of winning big at the award events it participates in.  But the crew from Lowe Lintas ensured that the adlanders in black (as Ogilvy staffers always turn up at trade events) don’t experience their fifth consecutive win at the Effie, the annual advertising effectiveness awards conducted by the Advertising Club. Lowe won the coveted Effie Agency of the Year 2013 outwitting Ogilvy & Mather by just 35 points in the final tally. “This is one night of fun and party for 2500 bucks. We can’t have a cheaper party than this,” chuckled R Balki, Chairman and Chief Creative Officer at Lowe Lintas while celebrating his team’s victory.

     

    But it’s not that Pandey’s O&M cut a sorry figure. Other than scoring 130 points as compared to Lowe’s 165, Ogilvy also secured the Grand Effie for its Lifebuoy Roti campaign for Hindustan Unilever. Said Pandey who is Executive Chairman and. Creative Director, South Asia of the agency: “We have come first so many times and it feels great that Lowe is enjoying their win. Of course, being second is not a great feeling. You need to try harder.” The Aadat Campaign for Cadbury’s Bournvita and the Ear Muffs activation and Made for You campaign for Vodafone helped Ogilvy win its three golds.

     

    The other three agencies in the Top 5 were McCann Worldgroup, JWT and Publicis Communications at 60, 40 and 35 points respectively. Nakul Chopra, CEO, South Asia at Publicis admitted his agency could have done better but he’s bullish on the year ahead. “I am not happy and I think the kind of work that we will do in 2014 is what I am excited about. I think in the years to come Publicis is going to be a brand which will be known for quality work,” he said.

     

    From the client side, Hindustan Lever bagged the ‘Effie Client of the year’ after the total points came to 95. The campaigns for its brands Kissan and Lifebuoy were clear favourites of both the jury and the crowds at the awards. “Well, I think these awards are for effectiveness and we are quite delighted and proud to have received these awards,” said Hemant Bakshi, Executive Director – Home & Personal Care of Hindustan Unilever (HUL) and Chairman, Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA).

     

    Cadbury India which emerged the Client of the Year in 2011 and 2012 came second with 55 points.  “It is always a joy to win a few awards because it is recognition by the industry of the work that we have done,” said V Chandrmouli, Executive Director, Chocolates and Biscuits, Cadbury India. “Over the last few years, we have been getting recognition which pushes us to do better work,” he continue as Siddhartha Mukherjee, Director – Chocolate Category & Media added: “We have had a long-standing partnership with our agencies like Contract and Ogilvy who have produced excellent work over the years. And to get any award is a great reward to that partnership.”

     

    This year, the number of entries leapfrogged 20 per cent to 419 from 52 agencies participated while 1200 tickets were sold for the awards night.  On his impressions as the curtains came down on Effie 2013, Ajay Kakar, Chief Marketing Officer – Financial Services, Aditya Birla Group who was Chairperson of the Effie 2013 Committee said:  “Effie has grown in participation therefore in stature and respect which is gratifying. This is an awards show which is beyond question and controversy. Both agency and client happily participate at various stages.”

     

    Underscoring the role of the advertising effectiveness awards, K V Sridhar, Chief Creative Officer India subcontinent at Leo Burnett said: “Creativity will not matter without effectiveness and effectiveness doesn’t exist without creativity. The combination is what really works. This is why Effie is the most coveted award in India. Also, the fact is that there are no controversies attached to it.”

     

     

     

    Delighted: Hemant Bakshi

     

    Given the importance of advertising and promotion for its brands, it’s not surprising that Hindustan Unilever was crowned ‘Client of the Year’ at Effie 2013.  A quick Q&A with Hemant Bakshi, Executive Director – Home & Personal Care of Hindustan Unilever (HUL) on the win.

     

    How important are awards like the Effie for an organisation like Hindustan Unilever?

    Well, these awards are for effectiveness and we are quite delighted. We are proud to have received these awards.

     

    There’s this big debate about creativity versus effectiveness? What matters to you more?

    Well, it is good to know that we have created value through what we do in marketing. We acknowledge the external appreciation that we’ve got.

     

    And what are the goals you have set yourself for 2014?

    Clearly, we have to sustain what we achieved in 2013.

     

     

    In advertising, you are supposed to be more creative to be effective: R Balki

     

    If there was joy in breaking the winning run of Ogilvy at the Effie, Lowe Lintas & Partners’ R Balki was understating it.  A quick Q&A with the agency’s celebrated Chairman and Chief Creative Officer.

     

    How important are awards like the Effie you?

    What is important is to do the kind of work that you want do for the clients. Being able to do that right through the year and being satisfied with your own. Award or no award can’t increase or decrease the value of your work. You should know the value of your work before you have won or lost.

     

    There’s this big debate about creativity versus effectiveness? What matters to you more?

    I don’t know the difference between these two. In advertising, you are supposed to be more creative to be effective. Obviously, there’s connect but both are passé words.

     

    Apart from your work, which ads have managed to impress you?

    I love Ogilvy’s work. The Roti activation campaign for Lifebuoy was good. In fact I am a fan of their work.

     

  • Vini Cosmetics' Fogg deodorant topples Hindustan Lever's Axe to assume No 1 spot

    Fogg clouds Axe effect, is new numero uno deo

    By Namrata Singh & Udit Prasanna Mukherji

     

    Where tales of giant killers like Nirma and Ghadi in the detergents space are part of the marketing folklore, a new David vs Goliath story is playing out in the FMCG market. This time it’s in the deodorant space. Fogg, a relatively new brand in the deodorant space from the homegrown Vini Cosmetics’ stable, has toppled Axe, a well-established global brand of Unilever, to become the market leader.

     

    Fogg has garnered an all-India (Nielsen) value share of about 13% as of October this year. The market share of Axe, which was the leader so far, is just about 8% now. A year ago, Axe commanded a higher share of about 18-19 % of this now highly fragmented market. It’s a case study in itself on how in certain fast-growing emerging categories the sweepstakes are so different that a younger brand bears the ability to overtake the market leader in a short span of time. Fogg is owned and marketed by Darshan Patel, the entrepreneur who, prior to setting up Vini Cosmetics, was the former promoter of Paras Pharma which was later acquired by Reckitt Benckiser.

     

    As part of the Paras team, Mr Patel successfully launched brands like Krack cream, Itchguard , Moov, Livon and Dermicool , which created a dissonance in the marketplace. Mr Patel appears to be following a similar strategy with Vini Cosmetics as well. Industry experts said Fogg’s unique proposition more sprays in a bottle – has helped the brand break through the clutter, considering that all brands are priced quite competitively.

     

    While Axe is among the first few brands which created the deodorant category in the country in 1999, Fogg was launched only two years back. Axe could not retain its leadership position in the category despite roping in celebrity Ranbir Kapoor in June this year. When contacted, an HUL spokesperson said: “As a policy we do not comment on market shares.”

     

    Darshan Patel, on the other hand, said Vini Cosmetics wants to increase its distribution reach which should augur well for Fogg and the other brands in its stable such as White Tone face powder, Glam-Up instant glow cream and Jinjola prickly heat powder. It was only recently that Vini Cosmetics raised Rs 110 crore from Sequoia Capital, a venture capital fund, to drive expansion.

     

    Interestingly, ITC’s Engage deodorant brand, which launched a range for both men and women in April this year is one of the youngest brands in the category. It too has managed to grab a chunky piece of the market pie. Engage has garnered a share of about 5-6 % in the Rs 2,100 crore deodorant market as of October this year. “ITC personal care’s entry into the deodorants market with Engage has received an extremely encouraging response ,” said Sandeep Kaul, divisional chief executive of ITC’s personal care products division.

     

    Source:The Economic Times

    Copyright © 2013, Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd. All Rights Reserved

    Licensed to republish

     

  • The former Dabur and Hindustan Lever hand will be head of the consumer products business at Viacom 18

    Saugato Bhowmik is Head, Consumer Products at Viacom18

    By A Correspondent

     

    Saugato Bhowmik

    Viacome18 has announced the appointment of Saugato Bhowmik as Head of Consumer Products Business. The responsibility was held earlier by Sandeep Dahiya who has since joined The Times of India group.

     

    Mr Bhowmik brings to the table experience of 12 years across consumer brands in Dabur India and Hindustan Unilever.  He has led brands in home and personal care categories based in India and Singapore. In Singapore, he led the Unilever Business for toothbrushes for Asia within the Oral Care Category. In most recent role, he was leading the sales strategy development for general trade business of Unilever across all key markets.

     

    Sudhanshu Vats

    Said Sudhanshu Vats, Group CEO, Viacom18, Media Networks: “Saugato brings with him business experience from FMCGs with a good understanding of brands, distribution landscape in India, dealing with large retailers and managing Business P&L.”

     

    Speaking about his appointment, Saugato Bhowmik said, “The dynamic nature of the broadcast industry presents multiple opportunities for marketers to leverage the power of our brands across multiple consumer touchpoints, and I hope to apply my experience and contribute to the rapid growth of consumer products business at Viacom18”.

     

  • Pradyuman Maheshwari on why the TRAI proposal on ad duration and display need to be rubbished and how market forces must decide on what’s right

    MxMIndia Comment: Let market forces decide ad duration

    By Pradyuman Maheshwari

     

    There is no denying that the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has done some splendid work in the world of telecom. It’s also done its homework well on the recommendations for digitized delivery of broadcast signals. The sunset dates (especially for the four metros) are very ambitious, but TRAI is determined to cleanse the system, and this could well help do that.

     

    However, there are some areas where TRAI has failed, and come up with outlandish recommendations. For instance, its advisory that only All India Radio news feeds be used on FM private radios. It’s bizarre. When all and sundry players are allowed to air news on television – via satellite and cable, why not have news on radio? I believe that radiowallahs are also to blame for this delay and somewhere the fact that most of them are also in television and print is impacting pushing this agenda.

     

    Then there’s the issue of cross-ownership. I am aware of the problems that owning various media has, but just following what was implemented in developed nations eons ago is not right. Also, strategic tie-ups between media groups can happen to ensure that they further their collective agenda. An example being of Star and Zee getting together to set up distribution arm MediaPro.

     

    The newest in TRAI’s proposals which has now asked stakeholders to present views is on the duration and display of ads on channels. Surely we knew that the TRAI was working on it, but the timing was interesting. It’s happening at the end of a tough fiscal, but more importantly, the industry bodies have matured in their outlook and are taking necessary steps to get their acts together (like they did on self-regulation). So why not ask the IBF and NBA to get together and deliberate?

     

    [youtube width=”350″ height=”200″]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QGcFHfF6kE[/youtube]

    But the issue here is different, should the government really get into the act of regulating ad durations and displays? Let market forces decide (see video alongside where Sunil Lulla, Times TV Network CEO and VP, IBF and NBA board member, advocates the same to my colleague Shruti Pushkarna on the sidelines of the CASBAA convention yesterday). We have already had several instances when broadcasters have dropped ads to up viewership and ratings. Ad breaks on films have been tweaked much to achieve this. I am sure all sports channels know that they can’t play around with the amount of screenspace ads take because it impacts the viewer experiences. News channels go without a break for hours whenever they are pursuing a huge story.

     

    More than regulations, market forces will help decide all of this. The government must have as much, say, in the matter of ad duration as it has in, say, a Hindustan Lever’s pricing of Dove soap. Tracking the policies in other countries makes for good reading, but is not necessarily a good idea. Broadcasters have appointed top marketing and research talent to think through this. Let them do their jobs… they know what’s good for their channels and their viewers.

     

    The problem is that the Indian public doesn’t like to pay for content. They wouldn’t mind paying a few hundred rupees per head on going to the cinema for the movies, but will hesitate to pay even 1/10th that for a month’s subscription of a pay movie channel. Broadcasters are largely to blame for this, but that doesn’t mean that they need to pay so heavily for their mistakes.

     

    The damage is not done yet. I am certain that all stakeholders will damn the proposals and ensure that these regressive policies don’t come in to being.

     

    MxMIndia opposes them, and recommends a liberal broadcast regime. Let market forces rule.