Marketing Strategy Final Case Study P&G Term Paper

Marketing Strategy Final Case Study P&G - Term Paper Example The most important concern is the deliberation about utilizing the new opportunity of an emerging market for pre-brushing rinse, which other Scope’s rivals are touting to their customers (P & G 258). Other basic problems include but are not restricted to what appropriate marketing strategy to adopt—should Scope be positioned as a â€Å"better tasting pre-brushing dental rinse† against its previous recognitions as a â€Å"better tasting and breath freshener† (P& G 259); manufacturing issue concerning how to produce product that will match the standardizations required by 2 Canadian Health Protection Branch, The Canadian Dental Association and Saccharin/Cyclamate Sweeteners requirements (P& G 257-258); finding alternatives to funding the marketing of Scope since the product has so far received its highest finances in years, and that funding another line of product might be helpful to reduce cost competitively (P& G 260); recognizing the significance of spend ing more on advertising another line of product to shore up customers’ interest in Scope (P & G 260); and discovering the best approach as far as Procter and Gamble’s operations and purchasing are concerned ( & G 260). Step 2: Justification for Problem Definition & Analyzing the Case Data: The cause of this important analysis of Procter and Gamble’s operations in Canada is based on the fact that other rivals in the same niche of health care product like Plax, Colgate, Listerine, Listermint and Cepacol which brandish their comparative quality of pre-brushing rinse has captured the market from Scope. This is because these other products offer consumers the opportunity to fight their plaque—â€Å"which is the soft, sticky film that coats teeth hours after brushing them† (P& G 253; P& G 262). The Canadian Mouthwash Market Shares below justifies the fact that Plax has made significant gain against Scope, having started with a mere 1% of the market share in 1988 to commanding an appreciable 10% of the same market in 1990; while Scope’s grasp of the market slipped considerably from 33% to 32.3% within the same periods. 3 Figure 1: The Canadian Mouthwash Market Shares 1988 (Units) 1989 (Units) 1990 (Units) Scope 33.0% 33.0% 32.3% Listerine 15.2 16.1 16.6 Listermint 15.2 9.8 10.6 Cepacol 13.6 10.6 10.3 Colgate Oral Rinse 1.4 1.2 0.5 Plax 1.0 10.0 10.0 Store Brands 16.0 15.4 16.0 Miscellaneous Others 4.6 15.4 16.0 Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% The data demonstrates that other mouthwash products like Plax, Listerine and Store Brands make significant improvements against Scope, which sales began to dwindle towards its sales peak in 1990 (P & G 250). It is believable that strategic marketing may have helped other brands to outperform Scope in the amount of market size they command; their marketing proposition has largely 4 concentrated on the abilities of their brands to help users fight their plaque, a slogan that Procter and Gamble has not adopted because of its current product which lacks the plaque-fighting ingredients (P & G 253). What Procter and Gamble thinks appropriate is to re-position Scope in a way that it would keep the product’s loyal consumers and cut back the lead Plax is currently enjoying in the market (P & G 260). This plan is achievable within the three-year period the company hopes to revamp its operational activities. Comparing the expenditures