P&G – Scope – Case Analysis

Procter and Gamble, Inc. Scope The problem for Procter & Gamble`s (P&G) “Scope” brand is that their share at mouthwash market is slightly going down while a new brand called “Plax” launched by Pfizer Inc. has gained a %10 market share in a very short time period which created a situation that left “P&G”s management team in dilemma for how to respond Your Assignment Will Be Arranged Simply! – check my blog https://en.gravatar.com/caroljames286  . P&G has some constraints to solve the problem (in fact, the situation is so complex that for some, no problem and threat exist).

First of all, if they introduce a new product in the mouthwash market as a competitor against Plax; they are not sure if it will be really innovative or it will focus on unmet consumer needs. Another limitation is that introducing a new product to the market will cost a lot (even the test production costs $20,000. Capital costs, marketing costs, delivery costs, inventory costs, ingredients costs, packaging costs are other important costs which create concerns) and also will require an effective strategic management.

After that, the new product is very similar to Plax and has no significant advantage except a better taste; on the other hand, sales department thinks that for success, the product must be seen as unique. So, P&G can not be sure about the future success of this product. Next, for the new product to gain reassurance, patience is needed. This can only be achieved in the long period. Following this, the new product will also reduce the sales of Scope. Additionally, P&G is not sure about the name of the product too, will it be sold under Scope`s name or not?

If sold under Scope`s name, P&G thinks the new product can also cause the loyal customers to stop using Scope because of the brand`s new image. Plus, another disadvantage for P&G will be that they will always have to support the new product like Scope. On the opposite side, if P&G doesn`t produce a new product, but tries to emphasize that Scope now fights plaque while also still providing good breath via advertising, it will be very hard to create the two images at the same time. Because P&G thinks consumers only receive one main message at a time.

Also, Scope`s new image can confuse the already existing customers. In fact, I think there are some other hidden constraints. As an example, it`s beneficial that P&G team has many ideas to solve the problem, but at the end, they can`t find the best answer (idea) to solve the problem. In my point of view, the reputation of Plax, especially on health issues of teeth is another important limitation for Scope. Finally, according to me, P&G may have some potential alternatives to solve the problem.

As the initial step, they can think more for the U. S. market than the Canadian market. Because they are already the leader in Canadian market while the U. S. market is still led by Listerine. Then, P&G can implement a much more detailed marketing research to have a better understanding on why their market share is going down while Plax`s is increasing. Next, Plax does not have a good image at reducing bad breath. So, in advertisings (T. V. , newspaper…etc. ), they can focus on Plax`s this weak point.

For instance, on a T. V. commercial, they can show a guy losing his girlfriend because of bad breath. Then, by reading the case carefully, we can see that Plax has other weak points at financials (costs) and retail prices while Scope has advantage on both. So, P&G should use this advantage wisely against Plax. For example, they can try to dominate the low-average income groups (markets) deeper which find the price of Plax high. Focusing more on these groups (markets) can be really smart.