Doug Schumacher introduces ideas behind the first of two test phases for the Sugarshots marketing campaign.
| Campaign Details:
Client: Sugarshots, Inc.
Agency: Basement, Inc.
Ad Network: 24/7 Real Media
Ad Serving + Tracking: Atlas DMT
Site Analytics: Think Metrics Useful links:
Ad 1
Taste as primary benefit with granulated sugar reference  Ad 2
Dissolvability as primary benefit with granulated sugar reference  Ad 3
Hybrid message of first two benefits  Ad 4
Taste as sole benefit, no granulated sugar reference  |
Last week, we introduced iMedia Case Studies, presenting a transparent view of an online advertising campaign. This public display of what works and what doesn't will allow audiences to examine performance indicators in detail.
We call this Open Source Marketing -- an unrestricted view of how to utilize the testing capabilities of online advertising to determine the most effective advertising strategies and tactics for a given product.
This week sees the launch of our first test.
Background
As we mentioned in the first article last week, we’ve grouped the series of tests into four phases, with each phase focusing on a different area of insight we hope to gain. This week’s test is:
Phase 1: Strategic Foundation
Test 1: Strategic Relevance
Our goal in Phase One is to address the most primary elements of the communication strategy: The best selling proposition; and which audiences are most responsive. Because of our testing grid, we’ll address these elements simultaneously, as I’ll explain.
Testing Strategy
This first test, Strategic Relevance, is about determining which value proposition will generate the best response rate. Sugarshots is relatively unique, as it’s rare to simultaneously launch a new product and a new category. And as can be expected with such broad, undefined territory, a number of questions have surfaced.
Given that this is a relatively new product category, at least in the U.S. (liquid sugar has been on the shelves in Europe for years), there is a question of how readily viewers will grasp the concept of liquid sugar. Is the term self-explanatory, or does it need to be delivered within the context of granulated sugar? Two things to keep in mind: This is a product that most people in the U.S. have never tried, and online ads have a couple of seconds to make their mark.
As an example of how confusion can pop up in unexpected places, in consumer interviews we conducted, some people thought liquid sugar might be a new soft drink. (Which really isn’t too far from reality for most sodas.)
So one of our questions is, will placing liquid sugar in a context relative to granulated sugar add relevance to the product’s purpose, and by extension, improve the effectiveness of the message? Especially for an unknown brand in a new category, lack of clarity can destroy effectiveness.
In addition to product category comprehension, we’re curious which of Sugarshots’ benefits will generate the greatest interest.
There are 3 primary benefits:
1. Healthier
2. Tastes Better
3. Dissolves better
First, the health story on Sugarshots has some obstacles. The Sugarshots brand has four product varieties, one of which is "Free," as in sugar-free. The benefit of Sugarshots Free is it has a less severe glycemic effect than sucrose. However, seeing as Free is only one of the brand’s products, the health strategy wouldn’t play across the entire line. Furthermore, health statements about food products can open a company to all sorts of legal issues. Sugarshots felt that a health promise had certain holes that could be problematic, and should be avoided. Small startup companies should be using their capital for things like product development and marketing, not fighting legal battles.
But beyond health, there was an interesting relationship between the products’ two other primary benefits: taste and dissolvability.
Taste is pretty obvious for a sweetener. It’s no surprise that artificial sweetener advertising, starting with Sweet ‘n Low in the 60s to Splenda this year, have almost universally focused on the taste attribute, from one angle or another. And of course, sugar advertising emphasize taste (or real taste) as a counterpoint to the sweetener's own claims.
The Sugarshots angle on taste is primarily based in the product’s functionality. Sugarshots makes drinks taste better because liquid sugar mixes more evenly than granulated sugar. It doesn’t leave a clump of sugar at the bottom of the glass. So the drink has a consistently sweet taste, from the first sip to the last.
A revealing piece of research we came across is that some consumers use artificial sweeteners, not for taste, but because they dissolve better than sugar. Those users would seem to be the low-hanging fruit for Sugarshots, as they apparently prefer the taste of real sugar, but consider dissolvability a higher priority.
This presents an interesting dichotomy. The taste angle is the high-road. It’s a true top-shelf benefit, not a functionality statement like dissolvability. It has more emotional appeal, and sets the product up as an indulgence, which would likely be a less price-sensitive position.
Conversely, dissolvability offers a more specific value proposition. In this case, specific could translate to "quick read." Dissolvability, or the lack thereof with granulated sugar, is something that most consumers can instantly relate to through personal experience. It’s a message that’s easy to visualize, both mentally and conceptually. And as the research indicates, it’s a factor some consumers hold above taste.
In addition, while it’s easy to say taste offers more long-term brand potential, Sugarshots is a new product that needs to come out of the blocks quickly and efficiently. To that end, a message most people can instantly relate to could provide the desired traction to successfully launch the brand.
Testing Construct
Our matrix for this test involves four ads, designed to answer the questions surrounding both categorical comprehension and the value proposition.
One key element of any test involves eliminating variables whenever possible. Perhaps the greatest variable ever is creativity. So we’re doing what we can to squelch it here.
We’ve designed the ads to look good, but in rolling out the different headlines for each value proposition, we’ve intentionally avoided creative or poetic phrasings, rather presenting them in the simplest form possible.
Here are the strategic explanations behind the four ads we’ll be testing. Each will run with an equal number of impressions.
Ad 1: Taste as primary benefit with granulated sugar reference.
Ad 2: Dissolvability as primary benefit with granulated sugar reference.
Ad 3: Hybrid message of first two benefits.
Ad 4: Taste as sole benefit, no granulated sugar reference.
We’re also running a null ad for the 3rd concept, to test for variance in the data.
Analysis Outline
Our objective is to be able to gather information about both the categorical issue and the value proposition by analyzing these four ads.
Ads 1 and 2 pit the taste and dissolvability benefits head-to-head. Ad 4 presents taste as the benefit, without the categorical reference in the first two ads. Ad 3 is a hybrid strategy, designed to address a possible further need for benefit strategy, but only if the categorical reference proves unnecessary.
The key performance indicators we’ll be watching are:
1. Response Rates
• Home page visits per 1000 impressions
• Click-thru rate
2. Depth of Visit
• Depth of visit throughout site; Visits to the product and information pages
3. Purchase Intent
• Based on traffic level to the purchase page, the only page with pricing information
4. Actual Sales
5. Product sales
It’s important to state that product launch campaigns are typically months and year-long events running into the millions of dollars. And given the challenges and typical costs involved in launching a new product (and a new category, as well), we have realistic expectations. We’re not expecting to run a few ads and experience runaway sales. Rather, our goal is to establish some primary baseline metrics that clarify the questions we have regarding this product launch, and give us a clearer idea of what marketing strategies and tactics will work best going forward.
As for which ad will perform best, I’m guessing number four. I’m biased, as I hope category comprehension isn’t a problem. It will make all communications much cleaner going forward. Furthermore, I hope taste is the driving benefit, because it offers the broadest and most emotionally-rich territory for the brand to own.
So review the ads and place your bets. The wheel stops this Thursday when we unveil the metrics.