Essay on Drypers Corporation

Words: 1042
Pages: 5

Drypers Corporation
National Television Advertising Campaign

1. Problem definition
What are the questions to be decided?
Drypers Corporation’s senior executives were discussing about spending 10 million dollars which will increase 33% in the company’s combined advertising and promotion budget on national television advertising in 1998.

What are the objectives/goals?
1) Increase penetration of grocery outlets
2) Increase grocery penetration will help increase mass merchants see us in a new light and help us break into this all-important retail channel.
3) Move from promotion-driven sales to brand-driven sales.

Is there any secondary concerns?
10 million dollars is huge amount expenditure, so short- and long- term sales
…show more content…
They compete on the basis of product quality, product features and benefits and price. Both companies invest heavily in research and development and also in consumer advertising and marketing support for their brands. For example, in 1997 P&G spent an estimated $69.6 million in measured media advertising for its Pampers brand ($52.8 million of it was Television, i.e. 75.86% of total) and Kimberly- Clark spent $75.6 million for its Huggies brand ($57.2 million of it was Television, i.e. 75.66% of total).The percentages of advertising through television of these two companies are very close. From exhibit 2, we can see that, Kimberly- Clark has the highest market shares through 1994- 1997, and the second place is P&G. Both companies sell their products in stores that account for over 90% of US diapers and training pants sales.
2) Value- priced branded
Drypers Corporation is this category of manufacturer; typically market their products through grocery stores due to their general lack of national brand name recognition and less extensive national production and distribution capabilities necessary to supply large mass- merchant and drugstore chains. So the strategies for this kind of companies are widely, ranging from an emphasis on quality and “good for money” to simply low price.
3) Private- label