MICAH FLORESCAITLIN BRADLEYRACHEL FURLONG

ASHTON WACKERMANCODY WINTER

Meet The Brands

Purpose & Methodology

Primary Target Market

Demographics and Psychographics

Findings

Analysis of Data

Recommendations

Overview

High School Graduate

Lower to Middle Class

Male

Confidence in who you are

High School GraduateLower to Middle ClassMale

Refreshing and fun

High School Graduate

Middle Class

MaleFun, Bonding, Celebration

College

Middle to Upper Class

Male

Fun, Environmental, Creative

College

Upper Middle Class

Male

I Deserve the best, I earned it

Cost

Flavor

Convenience

Calories

Alcohol Content

Attributes

To assess the current attitudes of consumers towards specific brands of beer in the marketplace.

To choose one brand to change and improve the attitude of, based on the data collected from the distributed survey

Purpose

Distributed Survey via email, Facebook and twitter 57 Respondents

Scenario: Assume you are planning a backyard BBQ with your friends and family. You have been put in charge of purchasing all of the beer for this event.

Likert Scale [Very unlikely, Unlikely, Somewhat Unlikely, undecided, Somewhat Likely, Likely, Very Likely]

Open Ended Questions, Demographics & Psychographics

Methodology

Demographics – Gender, Age, Annual Household Income

Psychographics – Favorite Activities of Consumers, Events Consumers Participate in, What they value in the beer they choose to consume

Survey Results

39%

61%

Male Female

Gender

27%

41%

11%

9%9% 4%

18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74

AGE

Household Income14%

9%

11%

29%

18%

20%

$0 to $15,000 $15,001 to $35,000 $35,001 to $50,000$50,001 to $75,000 $75,001 to $100,000 $100,000+

Activities of Consumers 39%

20%11%

30%

Outdoor Indoor Playing Sports Working

Enjoy Going to Sporting Events with Friends

30%

30%

11%

9%

4%4% 13%

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat DisagreeDisagree Strongly Disagree

Quality over Price in Choice of Beer

36%

34%

16%

4% 7% 4%

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree NeutralSomewhat Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Primary Target Market

18-34

Female

Income less than $75,000

Primary Target Market

23%

46%

8%

8% 8%8%

Choose Quality over Price(Females, Ages 18-34)

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Neutral Somewhat Disagree Disagree

Primary Target Market

46%

31%

15% 8%Enjoy Going to Sporting Events with Friends

(Females, Ages 18-34)

Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Strongly Disagree

Analysis of Data – Choice of Benchmark and Our Brand

Due to the fact that Miller Light, Coors Light, and Bud Light are in a similar category of “Light Beer” (as opposed to Sam Adams and New Belgium which can be classified as “Craft Beers”) We chose to compare two brands that fell within the same category. We decided to choose our benchmark brand and our brand from data provided by the global measure.

Global Measure – Entire Population

New Belg

ium

Coors

Light

Miller L

ite

Bud Light

Sam Adam

s

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Global Measure – Entire Population30%

20%11%

5%

34%

New Belgium Sam Adams Miller Lite Coors Light Bud Light

Global Measure – Target Market

33%

33%

13% 13%

7%

New Belgium Bud Light Miller Lite Sam Adams Coors Light

Table of Grand MeansAttribute Importanc

eCoors Light

Bud Light Gap Strength Weakness

esEi Bi EiBi Bi EiBi Coors Light–Bud

LightCost -0.2 2.0 -0.4 2.2 -0.4 0.0 StrengthFlavor -0.5 -1.8 0.9 -1.8 0.9 0.0 StrengthLocational Convenience

0.6 2.6 1.6 2.4 1.4 0.1 Strength

Calories -1.7 0.6 -1.0 0.7 -1.2 0.2 StrengthAlcohol Content -0.3 -1.0 0.3 -1.2 0.4 -0.1 Weakness

Total Attitude 1.3 1.1

Table of Grand MeansAttribute Importanc

eMiller Lite New Belgium Samuel Adams

Ei Bi EiBi Bi EiBi Bi EiBiCost -0.2 2.2 -0.4 -0.9 0.2 -1.1 0.2Flavor -0.5 -1.7 0.9 0.1 -0.1 0.6 -0.3Locational Convenience

0.6 2.5 1.5 1.0 0.6 1.9 1.1

Calories -1.7 0.9 -1.5 -1.1 1.9 -1.2 2.0Alcohol Content -0.3 -1.2 0.4 0.8 -0.2 0.7 -0.2

Total Attitude 0.7 2.4 2.9

Attribute Importance

Series1

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

-0.2-0.5

0.6

-1.7

-0.3

Cost Flavor ConvenienceCalories Alcohol Content

Brand Belief Weighted by Importance ~ EiBi

Cost Flavor Convenience Calories Alcohol Content

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

-0.4

0.91.6

-1

0.3

-0.4

0.91.4

-1.2

0.4

Coors Light Bud Light

Total Attitude

Total Attitude0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0.7

2.4

1.11.3

2.9

Miller Light New Belgium Bud Lite Coors Light Samuel Adams

Analysis of Data

Strengths• Cost• Flavor• Convenience• Calories

Weaknesses• Alcohol Content

Due to the fact that our brands are so similar, and that the situation was not very high risk, it can be noted that there are not very many weaknesses because all of the brands are perceived as possessing the same attributes

Due to this, we chose to change a weakness (alcohol content) but also promote the strengths of Coors Light

Importance Vs Coor’s Score-0.3 0.3

Improve Coors Light’s Weakness of the belief of low alcohol content

Creating a new version of Coors Light with a higher alcohol content

Ex. Bud light offers higher alcohol content choices such as “Bud Light Platinum” and “Bud Light Ritas”

Change Attitude of Coors Light Beer by Adding Alcohol Content

By Adding an Attribute

Importance Vs Coor’s Score-0.5 -1.8

Along with alcohol content we have decided to capitalize on the flavor aspect of Coors Light

We had many open ended responses looking for more and different flavors

“Variety for a party”, “Fruity taste”, “Taste. Seasonal beers.”

Ex. Bud Light “Ritas”

Change Attitude of Coors Light Beer by Adding FlavorBy Adding an Attribute

New Positioning for Coors LightNew Position Target Segment Reasons for New Position

FriendshipFlavorFeminine

Demographics:Age: 21-34FemaleIncome: Under $75,000Education: High school GraduatedSocio-Economic Status: Lower to Middle Class

Psychographics:

Activities: BBQ’s, Gathering with friends, College and pool Parties

Interests: Light inexpensive beer, variety of flavor, Watching/Attending Sporting Events

Opinions: Values friendship

1. Target Market expressed interest in participating in activities that involved hanging out with friends (92%)

2. Increase in flavor and variety – flavor was the third highest attribute of importance (-0.5), and Coors Light was ranking the same as the benchmark brand (0.9). We would like to exceed the the benchmark brand when it comes to flavor.

3. From our target segment, we found that Coors Light was not a beer that Females, ages 18-34 chose. They are missing out on a large population and we believe that by promoting a fruity and flavorful beer we will capture this demographic.

Affiliation – a psychological need that is similar to a social need and reflects ones desire for friendship, acceptance and belonging

From our data we found that the target market enjoys going to sporting events with friends

Ad portrays a group of friends hanging out together, laughing and having a good time

Advertisement Strategy - Theory

Trio of Needs

Superego – individuals internal expression of society’s moral and ethical codes of conduct

Our ad portrays people hanging out and enjoying drinks with one another which is an socially acceptable way to pass the time in our society

Advertisement Strategy

Freudian Theory

Classical Conditioning – the process of using an established relationship between one known stimulus and a response to bring about the learning of the same response to a different stimulus

Advertisement Strategy

Classical Conditioning

Unconditioned Stimulus-Raspberries & LimesConditioned Stimulus-Coors Light

Conditioned Stimulus-Coors Light

Unconditioned Response-Fruity, Fresh, Flavorful

Conditioned Response-Fruity, Fresh, Flavorful