Product sampling was, by far, the most powerful, because it allowed potential customers a try-before-you-buy approach. At the very heart of the matter was the confidence that a brand manager had in his/her brand … “if I can just get people to try my brand, I know that they will be convinced to buy it in the store the next time they shop.”
The biggest problems with sampling were as follows:
1. It’s expensive: Brand Managers were on the hook for a significant investment based on the cost-of-goods of a million or so sampled products distributed at no margin. Plus, Brand Managers had to pay for the shipping and delivery of the products.
2. It’s limited: Effective product sampling campaigns could reach perhaps 1 million consumer households while traditional coupon FSIs could reach 10 to 20 times that many households for the same financial outlay. Plus, sampling programs at that time were usually limited to home-delivery based on selected zip codes – meaning that EVERYONE would receive a sample whether they were currently loyal customers or new-users.
3. It’s not accountable or trackable: Like all other marketing tactics at that time, Brand Managers had limited opportunities to measure the success of product sampling other than analyzing coupon redemptions (assuming that Brand Managers added a special coupon with the sampled product).
All that being said, there was a marketing services firm called G.R.I Corporation in Chicago that offered a unique product sampling program to CPG firms called S.A.V.E. (Shoppers Association for Value & Economy). The S.A.V.E. program included two components:
On the B2C side…
… The program consisted of a ship-until-forbid continuity club that offered consumers opportunities to receive shipments of grocery products at a discount. Different collections were shipped about every 2 months and each shipment of products would be accompanied by coupons, product surveys, and recipes
.jpg)
Unlike traditional continuity clubs of that time (e.g., book and record clubs), there was no commitment on the part of members to purchase a minimum number of shipments, members could return any products they did not wish to keep, and members were free to cancel their membership at anytime.
The S.A.V.E. program appealed to an audience of “joiners” and households that were interested in trying new products as well as consumers that were interested in sharing their views directly with CPG manufacturers. The S.A.V.E. membership was about 1.4 million households.
On the B2B side…
… The program was actively marketed to every major CPG firm in the country and included participation of brands from P&G, McCormick, Colgate-Palmolive, Chesebrough-Pond's, Clorox, Armour-Dial, Kraft, and many, many others.
S.A.V.E. offered CPG firms capabilities of a sampling program that just did not exist at that time:
Here’s a partial list …
.jpg)
1. Targeted approach: Instead of a mass approach of providing samples to an entire neighborhood, the S.A.V.E. program shipped to selected households that were actually interested in trying products and new brands.
2. Cost effective: Participating brands in the S.A.V.E. program did not pay for delivery and, in many cases, received a rebate to assist in defraying the cost-of-goods.
3. Accountable results: Over 200 market research studies involving a pre-post, double-blind methodology proved that the S.A.V.E. program was successful in a conversion rate of at least 20% new-users to participating brands.
So …how does a dead program from 30 year ago apply in the 21st Century?
It is now possible for CPG brands to engage consumers on a nearly one-to-one basis. Modern tools and technology allow this and CPG brand managers are taking advantage of Social Media and Word-of-Mouth to foster conversations and dialogue with their consumers. Yet, traditional methods such as mass media advertising and couponing are still out there – and sucking precious marketing funds away from more targeted approaches.
I sometimes think that the advertising and coupon programs are only for the benefit of supporting the preferred channel of distribution (traditional grocery stores and the wide variety of firms involved in that supply chain) to demonstrate the support a CPG manufacturer will invest into its brands.
Are brand managers still that confident in the power of their brands and do they still espouse the notion that they would be able to convert new users if only they could: a) identify them; b) reach them; and c) get them to actually use the brand?
If the answer to the above is yes, then we could make a case for creating an old-fashioned targeted approach to product sampling. I really enjoyed my tenure as Marketing Manager of the S.A.V.E. program and I’d love to hear from anyone that knows of opportunities in effective product sampling programs.