Case Study: Procter & Gamble, Inc. Scope
Procter & Gamble (P&G), first introduced a great tasting mouthwash that was minty green and sure to fight off bad breath, called Scope in 1967. In 1990, Scope led the Canadian market share with 32%. However, since 1988 when Pfizer Inc. launched a new mouthwash called Plax, it became Scopes’ major competitor. Plax offered something different from the typical mouthwashes. Plax had the advantage over other brands because not only did it offer fresh breath and killing germs, but it was also a plaque fighter. Gwen Hearst, brand manager, is in charge of increasing market share, volume, and profits for Scope.
First, does Scope intend on introducing a new line extension by developing a product that strictly focuses on fighting ...view middle of the document...
Problems & Opportunities
Because of Plax’s success in maintaining market share in two years, P&G saw their market shares decreasing in that product category. Competitors such as Listerine, are following in Plax’s steps by creating a product category that focuses on being a plaque fighter, not just a breath freshener and germ killer. Gwen Hearst recognizes this fact and is worried about trying to come up with a plan so that Scope is in the running to be just as competitive as the other brands.
More information needs to be collected from P&G to see what the consumer needs are and how to go about improving the product to meet those needs. By Scope remaining around its position of great taste that gives fresh breath and kills germs, it can add other claims to this statement. A new product line should not be introduced because it could only cause confusion to the consumer. It is important to focus on the competitive advantage that Scope already has and build a claim stating something about plaque. This route would be definitely safer and probably more secure in the long run.