View
0
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
DYNAMIC OF PROMOTIONS AND THEIR IMPORTANCE IN THE CATEGORY MANAGEMENT
Vesela Kalchishkova / Client Service DirectorGfK Consumer panel services
2© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
A trend of increasing household spending for FMCG products
-0,1-0,7
-1,3-1,7 -1,7
-1,9 -2,1-2,4 -2,4
-2,8 -2,9
-1,8
-0,9
-0,1
0,6
2,1 2,12,3 2,4
3,13,5
4,24,5
4,1
-4,0
-3,0
-2,0
-1,0
0,0
1,0
2,0
3,0
4,0
5,0
MA
T Ja
n 20
13
MA
T Fe
b 20
13
MA
T M
ar 2
013
MA
T A
pr 2
013
MA
T M
ay 2
013
MA
T Ju
n 20
13
MA
T Ju
l 201
3
MA
T A
ug 2
013
MA
T S
ep 2
013
MA
T O
ct 2
013
MA
T N
ov 2
013
MA
T D
ec 2
013
MA
T Ja
n 20
14
MA
T Fe
b 20
14
MA
T M
ar 2
014
MA
T A
pr 2
014
MA
T M
ay 2
014
MA
T Ju
n 20
14
MA
T Ju
l 201
4
MA
T A
ug 2
014
MA
T S
ep 2
014
MA
T O
ct 2
014
MA
T N
ov 2
014
MA
T D
ec 2
014
Household expenditures (YOY change in %)
Till roll based
3© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Increased HH expenditures driven by a raise in spent per trip and more often made purchase acts2014 vs 2013
HH spendings Till RollChange rate in %
4,1
Number of HouseholdsChange rate in %
~
Spend per buyer (BGN)Change rate in %
4,1
Purchase trip per buyerChange rate in %
1,5
Spend per trip (BGN)Change rate in %
2,5
Influencing factors for
FMCGdevelopment
9,95 in 20149,71 in 2013 282 in 2014278 in 2013
3 mln in 20143 mln in 20132 803 in 20142 694 in 2013
4© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
-1%
DEFLATION+2,4%
AVERAGE PAID PRICE CHANGE
UP TRADING
+3,5%
Bulgarian households tend to purchase higher price positioned Food and Soft drinks products 2014 vs 2013
5© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
-3% -6%4%
-8%Volume change
3% 1% 5% 2%-4%
4,9% 4,3% 4,0% 3,5%
0,3%-1,3%
-3,9%-5,0% -5,5%
Change in spent money and bought quantities2014 vs 2013
Sweet& Snacks
Personal care
Convenience Fabric& Home care
Diary products
Meat productsEdible fats Frozen foods
Volume change
v.s.Increased value Decreased value
Hot & Coldbeverages
6© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
42%48%
53% 54% 56% 58%
58% 52% 47% 46% 44% 42%
16%21%
26% 28% 31% 32%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Traditional trade
Modern trade
International retailers
FMCG Trade development
Value share %
7© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
2014 Promotion shares in Value2014 vs. 2013
51%
32%
28%29% 11% 17% 8%
Czech Rep.
Austria
HungaryCroatia Serbia Bulgaria Turkey
39%
Slovakia
20%
10%
20%
Poland
Russia
Romania
+3pp
+1pp
+9pp +3pp +7pp
+5pp
+3pp
+3pp
+1pp
+0pp
+1pp
10%
8© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Promotion dynamic in Bulgaria
Share of spent money on promotion2013
10%201417%
20129%
201110%
20107%
20094%
Purchase acts per buyer on promotions 2013
302014
45201231
201130
201024
200916
Share of households buying on promotion2013
92%201492%
201289%
201181%
201078%
200968%
9© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Share of spent money on promotion by type of store
20% Hypermarkets
15% Discounters
6% Minimarkets
2013
2% Small grocery
2014
36% Hypermarkets
28% Discounters
25% Supermarkets
20% Cash&Carry
10% Minimarkets
3% Small grocery
15% Supermarkets
15% Cash&Carry
10© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Share of spent money on promotion by product group
30% Edible Fats
25% Frozen food
2014
17% Dairy products
20% Meat products
20% Hot & Cold Beverages
17% Convenience
18% Personal Care
9% Fabric & home care
4% Sweet & Snacks
11© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Main brands with highest value and promo shares
59
52
35
27
28
33
29
57
48
45
27
38
37
33
Tchibo
Lavazza
Nescafe
Jacobs
Dove
Garnier
Nivea
18% 19%
22% 27%
38% 35%
13% 16%
12% 11%
15
9
4
4
37
18
32
28
31
30
45
28
Madjarov
Parshevitsa
Bony
KFM
Pepsi
Astika
19% 19%
3% 4%
4% 5%
Loyalty value share 2013 2014Promo value share2013
20132014
8% 7%
11% 11%
22% 20%
4% 5%
3% 4%
12© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Promo*Evaluator (PEV)How promotions change the purchase behavior of the brand buyers
3313
11
83966213
1,773
5,4021
5496
27
11
896411,53
5,402 15
4
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017 5
99
15
25
15
45
5
105
349
27
1,533
5,402
1
© GfK 2015 | Source: Consumer panel Services 13
Promotion How sustainable is a promotion?
What is the mid- to long-term impact of promotions on the brand value?
Business questions
What is impact of promotion
What are the effects of different promotion types (overfill, give-away items,…)?
Effect of different type of promotion
How successful are the promotion campaigns in comparison to the competition’s?
Comparison with competitors
Buyer groups Among which buyer groups is a promotion successful?
What profile do the buyers of my promotion have?Buyers profile
Am I educating the buyers of my brand to simply wait for the next promotion, and in the meantime not to buy my brand at the regular price?Behavior change
© GfK 2015 | Source: Consumer panel Services 14
WhatProducts buyers are
buying?
WhenWas the brand purchased - before, during or after
promotion?
WhoIs buying?
?
GfK Promo evaluator (PEV)How promotions change the purchase behavior of the brand buyers
WhereBrand buyers have gone after the
promotion campaign?
© GfK 2015/ Source: Consumer panel services 15
Where is the buyer coming from?
Where is the buyer going to?
Before purchase: After purchase:
Promo*Evaluator (PEV) - Method
Promotion:
Brand
Brand at regular price
Brand on promotion
Competitor brand
Competitor brand
LoyaltyBonus
Brand Investment
Defendedmarketshare
Brand Erosion
Fast Euro
Reward for loyal buyers, waste ofmoney? Purchases would have beenmade also w/o promo
Sustainable win of buyers:they come to the brand on Promotion and keep on buying it
Buyers who buy the brand alwayson promotion – wait for a promo? „bought loyalty“
Brand damage – promos lead to brand erosion in the long-term
Promotions draw market share fromcompetition – short term quick winsPr
omot
ionCompetitor
brand
Brand at regular price
Brand on promotion
Competitor brand
Brand at regular price
16© GfK 2015 | Source: Consumer panel services
Brand X promos defend market share and attack competition but cause brand erosion in the long-run.
Competitive Relevance:= Fast Euro + Defended market share - Loyalty Bonus
30%
9%
34%
12%
16% Brand Investment
Loyalty Bonus
Defended Market Share
Fast Euro
Brand Erosion
Purchase acts %
Short term effect+ 31%
Long term effect- 14%
Brand Value:= Brand Investment - Brand Erosion
17© GfK 2015 | Source: Consumer panel services
Brand X promo health structure at different retailer
24% 29% 25%33% 36%
7%9%
8%2%
8%
52%26%
19%
39%
40%
1%
10%19%
12%
7%17%
27% 30%15% 9%
Brand Investment
Loyalty Bonus
Defended Market Share
Fast Euro
Brand Erosion
Purchase Acts %
Retailer 1 Retailer 2 Retailer 3 Retailer 4 Retailer 5
Brand Erosion at almost all retailers! Worst situation at retailer 4 and 5. Exception is retailer 3 with relative high shareof brand investment and loyalty bonus.
18© GfK 2015 | Source: Consumer panel services
GfK Shopper Insight Monitor (SimIT): Evaluate the performance and potential of Category/brand in different retailers
3313
11
83966213
1,773
5,4021
5496
27
11
896411,53
5,402 15
4
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017 5
99
15
25
15
45
5
105
349
27
1,533
5,402
1
19© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Whydo the retailers not exploit the potential adequate?
Wheredoes not exploited potential
of a retailer go to?
Whatis the potential a category offers to different retailers?
Howdo the retailers exploit this category potential?
Whoаre the loyal/not loyal
buyers?
?
GfK Shopper Insight Monitor (SimIT)Evaluate the performance of category/ brand in different retailers
21© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
503 320
433 524
377 494
294 092
263 042
614 151
Kaufland
Lidl
Billa
Penny
CBA
Traditional trade
Actual turnover in %Value potential exploitation
Hot & Cold Beverages performance within main Key Accounts2014
Potential turnover(000 BGN)
19
8
10
9
13
36
Kaufland
Lidl
Billa
Penny
CBA
Traditional trade
22© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Lidl Hot&Cold bevarege unused potetial has gone to….2014
23© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
23 755
17 620
14 027
11 733
27 491
Kaufland
Billa
Penny
CBA
Traditional trade
Actual turnover in %Value potential exploitation
Potential turnover(000 BGN)
21
8
7
13
45
Kaufland
Billa
Penny
CBA
Traditional trade
Kamenitza performance within main Key Accounts2014
24© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Manufactures and retailers go after the same shoppers2 points of view
Retailer perspectiveHow does my Account perform compared to other retailers for a certain category?For what categories I have still open potential at my Account?Which brands I need to focus on? What Brand has a high potenial but low VPE?
Manufacturer perspectiveAt which Account my category/brand has still open potential? At which Account value potential exploitation (VPE) is low for my category/brand? How is VPE of my brand compared to competitors at one retailer?Show retailers open potential at annual performance reviews.
1
2
25© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
Key Findings & Summary
Modern trade is still growing in Bulgaria and has already reached 58% market share in value. Promotions are
coming more and more important with verysignificant growth in 2014. But we can’t
increase sales only with promotions, because our brand will devaluate.
Good management of promotions is crucial for our success. We have to know the effect of our promotions and clients behavior -before, during and after promotion.
Knowing category and brand potential on the market can help us to build right strategy for turnover increment.
26© GfK 2015 | Source: GfK Consumer panel services
GfK. Growth from Knowledge
Vesela Kalchishkova / Client Service DirectorGfK Consumer panel services
Recommended