Sports and Energy Drinks - UK - B
rand Elements
Key points
●
Long-established
brands rule the roost in sports and energy drinks – in a relatively tight-knit
category of relatively few brands, mindshare is given firmly to those with the
loudest voices.
●
Recent entrants
struggle to make an impact simply due to lower awareness, although advertising
may help over time.
●
Negative PR and
cynicism over product benefits are damaging this sector. When claiming
physiological assistance, ‘health and safety’ are paramount: compromise on this
is problematic.
This
section analyses rational and emotional characteristics of sport and energy
drink brands, from a consumer perspective, within their competitive context.
Mintel also comments on the performance of selected brands that best illustrate
the scope of the market.
We
have drawn insight from an independent survey, conducted by GMI on behalf of
Mintel during April 2009, using a GB internet sample of 1,000 internet users
aged 18+. The survey examines seven main elements of brand evaluation (usage,
consideration, satisfaction, commitment, loyalty, engagement and image).
BRAND MAP
The
Mintel Brand Elements Map below illustrates a three-dimensional brandscape
based on:
●
differentiation: an indication of
vitality and profitability
●
trust: an indication of
brand integrity and stature
●
experience: consumers who
have ever used the brand, an indication of presence in the category.
This
map gives a snapshot of the current strength and quality of selected sport and
energy drink brands, where they are in their growth and how healthy they are.
This
is a sector dominated by two heavily advertised brands, Lucozade (operating in both sport and energy drinks) and Red Bull(only in the latter). Although
both brands are well differentiated, only the long-established Lucozade has any
particular stature. Meanwhile, Red Bull, the subject of some cynicism regarding
its effects on health, especially children’s health, lacks trust relative to
its standout image. Outside of these two names, competing brands are far less
established, recently launched (Gatorade)
or comparatively niche (For Goodness
Shakes!), and lack brand identity.
BRAND QUALITIES OF SPORT AND ENERGY DRINK BRANDS
Lucozade is most refreshing, but Red
Bull still seen as a fad?
FIGURE 25:
Personalities of various sport and energy drink brands, April 2009
Base: internet users aged 18+ who have
heard of the brand
|
|
Lucozade
|
Red Bull
|
Powerade
|
For Goodness Shakes!
|
Gatorade
|
Average
|
|
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boring
|
7
|
3
|
6
|
4
|
2
|
4
|
|
Cool
|
15
|
21
|
8
|
5
|
7
|
11
|
|
Disappointing
|
4
|
6
|
5
|
6
|
4
|
5
|
|
Engaging
|
9
|
7
|
4
|
4
|
3
|
5
|
|
Faddish
|
3
|
19
|
12
|
10
|
11
|
11
|
|
Fun
|
19
|
26
|
9
|
7
|
7
|
14
|
|
Genuine
|
22
|
7
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
7
|
|
Healthy
|
28
|
5
|
10
|
10
|
7
|
12
|
|
Inspiring
|
9
|
7
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
5
|
|
Misleading
|
4
|
10
|
5
|
5
|
4
|
6
|
|
Refreshing
|
37
|
16
|
16
|
6
|
13
|
18
|
|
Reliable
|
22
|
8
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
8
|
|
Stylish
|
8
|
11
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
6
|
|
Tired
|
6
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
|
Unappealing
|
4
|
8
|
7
|
6
|
8
|
7
|
|
Vibrant
|
13
|
11
|
5
|
3
|
5
|
8
|
|
Youthful
|
12
|
25
|
12
|
7
|
10
|
13
|
SOURCE:
GMI/Mintel
●
With
only around three in ten people being sport or energy drink consumers,
according to Mintel’s consumer research, perceptions of brand personality
across the category are unsurprisingly vague.
●
Fun
and refreshment are the two biggest positive drivers in the sector, while
perceptions of faddishness are the most notable negative issue.
●
Though
most brands have no particularly strong association with health, overall
strongest brand Lucozade is well
above the average, seen as such by three in ten.
FIGURE 26: Key personality
aspects of various sport and energy drink brands, April 2009
Base:
internet users aged 18+ who have heard of the brand
EXPERIENCE OF SPORT AND ENERGY DRINK BRANDS
Lucozade most used, For Goodness
Shakes! lacks awareness
●
Explaining
its very strong brand stature relative to others in the sector, Lucozade is by far the most used, with
seven in ten having had experience. One in five are regular drinkers.
●
Half
have tried Red Bull, although half
of these are seemingly lapsed users, indicating only rare consumption.
●
Despite
launching in time for the 2004 Athens Olympics, a lack of serious advertising
exposure until 2008 has limited awareness of For Goodness Shakes!; three in five have never heard of it.
●
Around
half have heard of both Powerade and
the very recently (UK) launched Gatorade,
but have yet to try them, reflecting the serious competitive challenge posed by
Lucozade in particular.
BRAND INTENTIONS FOR SPORT AND ENERGY DRINK BRANDS
Health concerns hit Red Bull?
●
Matching
its dramatically higher usage compared with other brands, and well above the
typical three in ten base of sport and energy drink consumers, two in five plan
to continue using Lucozade.
●
On
the other hand, though it has second-highest retention of one in four, almost
two in five say they would never consider Red
Bull, indicating cynicism about its health and efficiency.
●
Unsurprisingly,
lesser-known brands Powerade, Gatoradeand
For Goodness Shakes! have relatively
high numbers of people (one in five each) requiring more information before
feeling able to consider them. This shows the importance of advertising to
trust and the importance of trust to purchasing. Recent advertising pushes
since 2008 should help.
BRAND SATISFACTION FOR SPORT AND ENERGY DRINK BRANDS
For Goodness Shakes! not so good
●
Again
highlighting its dominance of the sector, two in five users rate Lucozade as excellent, while twice that
figure represent its overall positive endorsement.
●
Although
its overall perception may be hampered by concerns about its healthiness,
drinkers of Red Bullare happy with
the brand – one in four think of it as excellent, two in three at least good.
●
Though
against a low user base, For Goodness
Shakes! has relatively high negative endorsement compared with the rest of
the category: around one in six rate it poor or unsatisfactory.
BRAND COMMITMENT TO SPORT AND ENERGY DRINK BRANDS
Lucozade users most loyal, Powerade
lacks emotion
FIGURE 30: Commitment to various
sport and energy drink brands, April 2009
|
|
Lucozade
|
Red Bull
|
Powerade
|
For Goodness Shakes!
|
Gatorade
|
Average
|
|
Base:
internet users aged 18+ who have ever used the brand
|
719
|
499
|
305
|
102
|
175
|
|
|
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Only
brand I will use
|
23
|
12
|
4
|
5
|
7
|
10
|
|
Unlikely
to use again
|
6
|
13
|
13
|
9
|
9
|
10
|
|
Worth
paying extra
|
15
|
14
|
9
|
12
|
7
|
11
|
|
Always
my first choice
|
30
|
10
|
4
|
11
|
9
|
13
|
|
Would
recommend
|
33
|
25
|
19
|
21
|
21
|
24
|
|
Strong
affection
|
18
|
9
|
7
|
7
|
8
|
10
|
|
I
like this more than others
|
26
|
12
|
6
|
3
|
9
|
11
|
|
Like
a lot – but will use others, too
|
23
|
25
|
18
|
17
|
19
|
20
|
|
Not
my favourite but still use
|
10
|
20
|
31
|
16
|
23
|
20
|
SOURCE:
GMI/Mintel
●
In
a relatively low-loyalty category, Lucozade
again trumps the rest of the pack, with one in four drinkers exclusively
committed to it.
●
Lucozade is also the most
recommended brand, by one in three, while three in ten put it as their first
choice.
●
Powerade, matching its
lukewarm satisfaction, has a relatively low emotional connection with users;
three in ten drink it despite it not being their favourite.
RED BULL
What the consumer thinks
|
Background
|
Launched
in Austria in 1984 as a drink that ‘vitalises body and mind’, together with
the still used slogan ‘Red Bull gives you wiiings!’ After years of robust
growth, international expansion began in 1994 when Red Bull reached Germany,
hitting the rest of Europe in 1997.
|
|
Market
positioning
|
The
UK market leader in energy drinks. A functional beverage with a unique
combination of ingredients, specially developed for times of increased mental
and physical exertion.
|
Personality: coolest
(one in five), most youthful and most fun (one in four), but also seen as the
most faddish. One in ten are cynical about its benefits, perceiving it to be
misleading.
Strengths
●
The
most distinctive brand, beating category leader Lucozade (almost two in five).
●
Comparatively
seen as worth paying more for, though only by a little more than one in ten
users.
●
Reasonable
overall usage, by half, though strongest among 18-34-year-olds, one in four of
whom are regular drinkers, while two in five of these are retained drinkers.
●
Three
in four 25-34-year-old Red Bull drinkers are positive endorsers, 10 percentage
points above average, although the 18-24s are most likely to rate it excellent
(just over one in three).
●
Highest
recommendation from the 25-34s (one in three), 7 percentage points above
average.
Room for improvement
●
Almost
two in five would never consider it, rising further among women and over-45s.
●
Average
preference: one in four use it as a repertoire brand.
●
Some
of its core customers, the 18-24-year-olds, are among the most likely to
consider the brand to be misleading in terms of what it offers, though this is
still quite low at around one in six.
●
Red
Bull’s key issue is its low trust, particularly for a market leader. Some
negative coverage regarding health impact may have dented its brand image,
leading to a significant minority who feel alienated. Cartoonish advertising
ensures it is top of mind, but some PR attention may also be needed to boost
its stature accordingly, particularly with Lucozade Energy on its heels.
LUCOZADE
|
Background
|
Launched
by a Newcastle chemist in 1927 under the name Glucozade, designed to provide
energy for those ill in hospital with common ailments such as colds and flu.
Renamed Lucozade in 1929 and retained the same positioning (while becoming
available through retail) until 1983, when ad agency Ogilvy & Mather
began to reposition it as an energy, rather than recovery, drink, with the
effect of a major sales boost. Has been owned by the company now known as
GlaxoSmithKline for much of its existence.
|
|
Market
positioning
|
Unrivalled
market leader in sports drinks, with over three times the share of next
biggest brand Powerade. Number two in energy drinks (Lucozade Energy), just
behind Red Bull.
|
What the consumer thinks
Personality: most
genuine (one in five), while one in four see it as healthy. Reliable and
refreshing, with some degree of vibrancy at just over one in ten.
Strengths
●
Outperforms
the average on all key performance indicators, consistently ahead of the pack.
●
By
far the most trusted brand, by one in five, consistent across demographics.
●
Bucking
the generally younger trend in the market, almost half of 45-54-year-olds trust
it, and more than one in five believe it has a good reputation, 5 percentage
points above the overall.
●
Highest
positive endorsement, with strong preference from three in ten. Most
recommended.
●
Again
probably relating to its illness connection, it is uniquely healthy within the
category, putting it well above top-of-mind Red Bull with its negative coverage
in this respect.
●
Overall,
performs notably strongly with older consumers, particularly over-45s. Despite
its 1980s repositioning, the no doubt lingering association with Lucozade as an
illness remedy has forged a strong link in the collective consciousness –
perhaps doubling up with the ‘new’ positioning among younger people who may
have had its health benefits extolled by parents.
Room for improvement
●
Lucozade
is the undisputed brand leader. While marginally less distinctive than quirky
Red Bull, this comes with the benefit that it is not seen as faddish, or to be
peddling style over substance.
●
The
only (slight) chink in its armour is a comparative perception of tiredness
relative to the average, surprisingly most prominently among its otherwise
positive over-45 audience. However, with fewer than one in ten holding this
view, it is of negligible concern. A very strong brand.
If you want Dissertations on Brand Elements in Sports and Energy Drinks Market, Contact Mahasagar Publications.
