admin
September 12, 2024
By Richa Naidu and Dhwani Pandya, Reuters
London/Mumbai,12 September 2024
For years, the world’s biggest condom maker Reckitt Benckiser designed products and marketing to lure Indian men to its Durex brand. Now, it is pushing a growth strategy by betting on women and rural consumers.
India last year surpassed China to become the world’s most populous nation, but still fares poorly on the use of contraceptives. India’s government estimates only around 10% of men use condoms and for women, sterilization remains the popular form of contraception.
Social stigma surrounding sex – which some say stems from Victorian social norms established during British colonization – has for decades marginalized female pleasure in the Indian society.
But attitudes are changing and Reckitt is shifting marketing gears to take advantage of an upswing in condom use among Indian women – now a key target audience for Durex.
Around 9.5% of married Indian women cited using condoms during sex by 2021, almost double the use five years earlier, according to latest available government statistics. Among unmarried women, such use more than doubled to 27%.
Reckitt is reformulating products such as lubricants aimed at attracting women consumers, and has new marketing campaigns, Pankaj Duhan, Reckitt’s senior vice president of intimate wellness, told Reuters in an interview.
The Durex lubricants in India will use improved formulations to appeal to women and have been created after performing clinical studies to address concerns females face — 30% of Indian women experience some discomfort when having sex with their partner.
“We want to change this … That is why we are relaunching our lubes portfolio,” said Duhan. “The women tend to become a little bit more underserved consumer groups.”
The India condoms market is currently dominated by Mankind Pharma, which makes Manforce, followed by Reckitt and TTK Healthcare.
CHALLENGES
The British consumer goods firm faces some stiff challenges in its quest to carve out a lucrative slice of the female condom market and rural consumers, primarily with distribution and pricing – two areas industry watchers believe are key to success – but also in coaxing a still-largely conservative rural population to buy its products.
Moreover, competitors are making a pitch to women too, with Durex’s main rival and market leader Manforce tweaking its marketing — a recent ad stars a Bollywood actress talking about benefits of condoms and asking women to “go buy your own.”
“One challenge Reckitt may face is consistency of messaging,” said Devangshu Dutta, head of retail consultancy Third Eyesight, adding the company needs to figure out if it is targeting condoms for health, family planning, or pleasure as there could be different messaging for each type of shopper.
The growth opportunity is compelling – India’s condom market size is merely worth $210 million, compared to China’s $4.1 billion, but is forecast to grow at 7.4% compound annual rate between 2024 and 2030, according to Indian consulting firm 6Wresearch. The global market is worth $11.3 billion.
Growing the market will take some doing though, not least because of India’s vast size and millions of mom-and-pop stores require a widespread distributor network.
Currently, only about 10-15% of Durex’s sales in India come from rural areas, which is far more price sensitive than urban cities.
“Distribution is the big challenge simply because even though most consumer goods companies have made their way to all pincodes in the country, the question is maintaining availability at retail points,” said Dutta of Third Eyesight.
CHIPPING AWAY AT TABOOS
Sex education in the conservative country is also lagging, and there is a vast gulf between awareness and actual use of contraceptives.
Matt Godfrey, executive vice president for Asia Pacific at Monks ad agency, part of S4Capital, said marketing tweaks by the likes of Durex are a welcome change but condom use and sex education need to improve in India.
“There are significant societal and cultural aspects that need to be rapidly shifted to reverse the status quo,” he said.
In the eastern state of Odisha, for example, a small medical store of Sudam Padhan does not prominently display condoms as “people frown upon them”.
In India, it’s men who mostly buy condoms, but some like Pooja, a marketer in Mumbai, are trying to drive change. She made an “awkward” decision to buy condoms herself for the first time this year, saying “when I’m asking for a condom over the counter I am basically putting my health first”.
Still, in a telling sign of the somewhat taboo nature of the topic, the 31-year-old declined to share her last name as she is unmarried and feared societal admonition.
“An open conversation encouraging safe and responsible sex in India has been steadily progressing but needs to be continually supported” by brands including Durex, S4Capital’s Godfrey said.
Like many of its rivals, Reckitt has over the years largely focussed on Indian men, with many ads featuring women wearing skimpy clothes.
Rival Manforce Condoms features former pornstar Sunny Leone in videos, some labelled “EXCLUSIVE UNCENSORED”. Duhan said many of the condom ads “objectified women.”
But that’s changing. Durex earlier this year launched a risqué “Explorers Wanted” lubricants campaign in India which featured sensual shots of nude male body parts.
PRICING PAINS
Pricing is another big challenge, especially in stores in smaller towns and villages which are reluctant to stock condoms and lubes. Duhan said products have to be “extremely cheap” to sell in some rural areas, where many use free government-provided condoms.
Padhan, from the medical store in Odisha, doesn’t stock Durex “because they are costly and there’s no demand for them in rural areas,” and says most sales are of Ustad “Deluxe Condoms” made by a state-run firm.
Ustaad costs just 10 rupees (11 U.S. cents) for a pack of six. A pack of 10 Durex condoms starts retailing at around 250 rupees, with some priced above $6, and a similar pack of Manforce starts at $1.
But the smaller three-condom Durex pack starts retailing around 99 rupees, and Reckitt believes they will sell better in rural India.
“We are starting at the top (and) planning to get down to the rural areas,” Duhan said. “It’s a massive undertaking”.
(Reported and Published by Reuters)
admin
August 31, 2024
MG Arun, India Today
Aug 31, 2024
Nearly five years after the Centre brought in norms to rein in multinational e-commerce companies operating in India, Union commerce minister Piyush Goyal sparked fresh controversy by raising concerns over the rapid expansion of e-commerce. He also drew attention to the pricing strategies used by some e-commerce firms, questioning what he termed “predatory pricing”.
“Are we going to cause huge, social disruption with this massive growth of e-commerce? I don’t see it as a matter of pride that half our market may become part of the e-commerce network 10 years from now; it is a matter of concern,” Goyal said at an event in New Delhi last week.
His comments come at a time when the ecommerce business in India is growing exponentially. Estimated at $83 billion (around Rs 7 lakh crore) as of FY22, the market is expected to grow to $150 billion (Rs 12.6 lakh crore) by FY26. The growth will be due to multiple levers: a growing middle class, rising internet penetration, the proliferation of smartphones, convenience of online shopping and increasing digitisation of payments. The overall Indian retail market was pegged at $820 billion (Rs 69 lakh crore) in 2023, according to a report published by the Boston Consulting Group and the Retailers Association of India. E-commerce still comprises only about 7 per cent of that, as per Invest India.
The Indian e-commerce market is dominated by global giants, including Amazon and Walmart (which took over Flipkart in 2018). They, along with domestic players, offer huge discounted prices compared to retail prices, which drives online sales significantly. In FY23, Amazon Seller Services and Flipkart posted Rs 4,854 crore and Rs 4,891 crore losses, respectively. Goyal’s argument is that these losses are due to their predatory pricing.
“Is predatory pricing policy good for the country?” Goyal asked, while stressing the need for a balanced evaluation of e-commerce’s effects, particularly on traditional retailers such as restaurants, pharmacies and local stores. “I’m not wishing away ecommerce—it’s there to stay,” he said. Later, he said e-commerce uses technology that aids convenience. But there are 100 million small retailers whose livelihood depends on their businesses.
The Centre has specific laws that permit foreign direct investment (FDI) in e-commerce exclusively for business-to-business (B2B) transactions. However, according to Goyal, these laws have not been followed entirely in letter and spirit. Currently, India does not allow FDI in the inventory-based model of e-commerce, where e-commerce entities own and directly sell goods and services to consumers (B2C). FDI is permitted only in firms operating through a marketplace model, where an e-commerce entity provides a platform on a digital or electronic network to facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers (B2B).
The country’s laws also stipulate that in marketplace models, e-commerce entities cannot ‘directly or indirectly influence the sale price of goods or services’ and must maintain a ‘level playing field’. Entities in the marketplace model re allowed to transact with sellers registered on their platform on a B2B basis. However, each seller or its group company is not permitted to sell more than 25 per cent of the total sales of the marketplace model entity.
Goyal said certain structures have been created to suit large e-commerce players with “deep pockets”. Algorithms have been used to drive consumer choice and preference. For instance, several pharmacies have disappeared, he said, and a few large chains are dominating the retail space. He invoked the importance of platforms like the Open Network for Digital Commerce where small businesses can sell their products.
E-commerce firms counter the argument on predatory pricing. “It is the sellers’ discretion as to what price they should sell at,” says an industry source. The e-commerce player who provides the platform seldom has a role in it, he explains. “Sellers could be doing clearance sales or liquidation of old products at cheaper prices. Some sellers also source products at manufacturing cost and park it with e-commerce firms instead of involving warehousing agents. This helps cut their overhead costs and allows them to offer lower prices on the platform,” he adds.
Some experts are of the view that the government should not step in with controls and allow the market forces to play their role in determining prices. Price controls may lead to shortages, inferior product quality and the rise of illegal markets. Moreover, the Competition Commission of India (CCI), which is mandated to act against monopolies, may be given more teeth. It is ironical that, on the one hand, the Centre wants more FDI to flow in, but places more and more controls on foreign players on the other hand. At the core are the interests of small traders and retailers, a key section of the electorate.
Others argue that the government has a role to ensure that there is fair competition. “It is not just small retailers the government would be speaking for, but for large domestic players too,” says Devangshu Dutta, founder of consultancy firm Third Eyesight, emphasising that the government’s role should be to establish laws and practices that promote fairness.
According to him, it is no secret that e-commerce has grown through discounts. “For large e-commerce firms, market acquisition happens by acquiring a share of the consumer’s mind and through pricing. When a large sum is spent on advertisements, it is for acquiring the mind share of the consumer,” he says. “Pricing matters in a big way too. Whether you call it predatory pricing or market acquisition pricing depends on which side of the fence you are.”
(This article was originally published in the India Today edition dated September 9, 2024)
Devangshu Dutta
October 29, 2014
(The Hindu Businessline – cat.a.lyst got marketing experts from diverse industries to analyse consumer behaviour during the last one month and pick out valuable nuggets on how this could impact marketing and brands in the years to come. This piece was a contribution to this Deepavali special supplement.)
Two trends that stand out in my mind, having examined over two-and-a-half decades in the Indian consumer market, are the stretching or flattening out of the demand curve, or the emergence of multiple demand peaks during the year, and discount-led buying.
Secular demand
Once, sales of some products in 3-6 weeks of the year could exceed the demand for the rest of the year. However, as the number of higher income consumers has grown since the 1990s, consumers have started buying more round the year. While wardrobes may have been refreshed once a year around a significant festival earlier, now the consumer buys new clothing any time he or she feels the specific need for an upcoming social or professional occasion. Eating out or ordering in has a far greater share of meals than ever before. Gadgets are being launched and lapped up throughout the year. Alongside, expanding retail businesses are creating demand at off-peak times, whether it is by inventing new shopping occasions such as Republic Day and Independence Day sales, or by creating promotions linked to entertainment events such as movie launches.
While demand is being created more “secularly” through the year, over the last few years intensified competition has also led to discounting emerging as a primary competitive strategy. The Indian consumer is understood by marketers to be a “value seeker”, and the lazy ones translate this into a strategy to deliver the “lowest price”. This has been stretched to the extent that, for some brands, merchandise sold under discount one way or the other can account for as much as 70-80 per cent of their annual sales.
Hyper-opportunity
This Diwali has brought the fusion of these two trends. Traditional retailers on one side, venture-steroid funded e-tailers on the other, brands looking at maximising the sales opportunity in an otherwise slow market, and in the centre stands created the new consumer who is driven by hyper-opportunism rather than by need or by festive spirit. A consumer who is learning that there is always a better deal available, whether you need to negotiate or simply wait awhile.
This Diwali, this hyper-opportunistic customer did not just walk into the neighbourhood durables store to haggle and buy the flat-screen TV, but compared costs with the online marketplaces that were splashing zillions worth of advertising everywhere. And then bought the TV from the “lowest bidder”. Or didn’t – and is still waiting for a better offer. The hyper-opportunistic customer was not shy in negotiating discounts with the retailer when buying fashion – so what if the store had “fixed” prices displayed!
This Diwali’s hyper-opportunism may well have scarred the Indian consumer market now for the near future. A discount-driven race to the bottom in which there is no winner, eventually not even the consumer. It is driven only by one factor – who has the most money to sacrifice on discounts. It is destroys choice – true choice – that should be based on product and service attributes that offer a variety of customers an even larger variety of benefits. It remains to be seen whether there will be marketers who can take the less trodden, less opportunistic path. I hope there will be marketers who will dare to look beyond discounts, and help to create a truly vibrant marketplace that is not defined by opportunistic deals alone.
Devangshu Dutta
July 22, 2011
The apparel retail sector worldwide thrives on change, on account of fashion as well as season.
In India, for most of the country, weather changes are less extreme, so seasonal change is not a major driver of changeover of wardrobe. Also, more modest incomes reduce the customer’s willingness to buy new clothes frequently.
We believe pricing remains a critical challenge and a barrier to growth. About 5 years ago, Third Eyesight had evaluated the pricing of various brands in the context of the average incomes of their stated target customer group. For a like-to-like comparison with average pricing in Europe, we came to the conclusion that branded merchandise in India should be priced 30-50% lower than it was currently. And this is true not just of international brands that are present in India, but Indian-based companies as well. (In fact, most international brands end up targeting a customer segment in India that is more premium than they would in their home markets.)
Of course, with growing incomes and increasing exposure to fashion trends promoted through various media, larger numbers of Indian consumers are opting to buy more, and more frequently as well. But one only has to look at the share of marked-down product, promotions and end-of-season sales to know that the Indian consumer, by and large, believes that the in-season product is overpriced.
Brands that overestimate the growth possibilities add to the problem by over-ordering – these unjustified expectations are littered across the stores at the end of each season, with big red “Sale” and “Discounted” signs. When it comes to a game of nerves, the Indian consumer has a far stronger ability to hold on to her wallet, than a brand’s ability to hold on to the price line. Most consumers are quite prepared to wait a few extra weeks, rather than buying the product as soon as it hits the shelf.
Part of the problem, at the brands’ end, could be some inflexible costs. The three big productivity issues, in my mind, are: real estate, people and advertising.
Indian retail real estate is definitely among the most expensive in the world, when viewed in the context of sales that can be expected per square foot. Similarly, sales per employee rupee could also be vastly better than they are currently. And lastly, many Indian apparel brands could possibly do better to reallocate at least part of their advertising budget to developing better product and training their sales staff; no amount of loud celebrity endorsement can compensate for disinterested automatons showing bad products at the store.
Technology can certainly be leveraged better at every step of the operation, from design through supply chain, from planogram and merchandise planning to post-sale analytics.
Also, some of the more “modern” operations are, unfortunately, modelled on business processes and merchandise calendars that are more suited to the western retail environment of the 1980s than on best-practice as needed in the Indian retail environment of 2011! The “organised” apparel brands are weighed down by too many reviews, too many batch processes, too little merchant entrepreneurship. There is far too much time and resource wasted at each stage. Decisions are deliberately bottle-necked, under the label of “organisation” and “process-orientation”. The excitement is taken out of fashion; products become “normalised”, safe, boring which the consumer doesn’t really want! Shipments get delayed, missing the peaks of the season. And added cost ends in a price which the customer doesn’t want to pay.
The Indian apparel industry certainly needs a transformation.
Whether this will happen through a rapid shakedown or a more gradual process over the next 10-15 years, whether it will be driven by large international multi-brand retailers when they are allowed to invest directly in the country or by domestic companies, I do believe the industry will see significant shifts in the coming years.
Devangshu Dutta
July 14, 2010
It’s curious how James Dyson consistently gets “more” (price) for “less” (components). First it was the bagless vaccum cleaner, now it is a bladeless fan. The retail price is currently pegged at £200, and the product is initially being targeted at the US and Japanese markets, which obviously have more people facing hotter temperatures for more weeks in the year than Dyson’s home country, the UK. Or perhaps a bigger market segment for the latest tech toys that perform well in addition to looking cool.
Branded the Dyson Air Multiplier, it is certainly a fan-tastic idea, and the uphill struggle should be significantly less than when he was trying to sell bagless vacuum cleaners. If anything there is now a “Dyson premium” available to him on the price.
However, in this case, the prices definitely need to be more accessible, or he’ll be facing clones within months. Fans are already a more acceptable reality in income poor countries, and the market significantly larger in those countries. At some lower price point the addressable market will be exponentially larger, and someone else will definitely tackle it. Patent or no patent.
Here’s a Youtube video of Dyson explaining how the fan works. Share your thoughts below, after you’ve watched the video.
