Tag: David Reibstein

Estee Lauder’s New Skin Care Brand in China: The Potential for High-risk, High-reward

Can Estee Lauder Companies make “Osiao” a household word in China’s luxury skin care market?

The New York-based manufacturer of skin care, makeup, fragrance and hair care products is banking that Chinese women will buy a new high-end brand tailored specifically for them, designed to promote what Estee Lauder’s scientists say Asian women want most in a skin care product — “natural radiance.”  

Already known for such brands as Bobbi Brown, Clinique, MAC, Origins and La Mer, among others, Estee Lauder’s decision to launch a whole new brand — rather than simply a new product — suggests the company is confident that an initiative begun more than five years ago will expand Estee Lauder’s footprint not just in China, but throughout Asia. The Osiao product line is expected to sell for between US$45 and US$190.

The venture is not without risk. Osiao — which is being introduced this month in only two department stores in Hong Kong and on some Cathay Pacific Airways Hong Kong flights – already faces competition from other Asian skin care products. In addition, its success depends to some extent on continuing strength in the high-end luxury market, despite weakening in the Chinese economy overall. And some observers question whether a hybrid product like Osiao will appeal to Chinese women. According to a New York Times article, Osiao will use English labels but its formulas will contain such ingredients as ginseng, Asiatic pennywort and ganoderma.

Wharton faculty familiar with the Chinese market are generally optimistic about Estee Lauder’s venture, while also noting the challenges that any new brand faces. “As part of the Estee Lauder family, Osiao can and should leverage the high brand equity of Estee Lauder in the Chinese market, at least in the initial stage,” says marketing professor Qiaowei Shen. “Brand name is still a very important element when Chinese consumers are choosing their skincare products.” While it probably won’t be hard “to convince some consumers to try the new brand, the difficult part [will be] to convert them to loyal customers. The true quality of the product is ultimately the key.”

The concept of using Chinese herbs as ingredients in skincare products is not new, Shen adds. “A brand that claims to specifically cater to Chinese or Asian skin types does not necessarily win market share. Many brands originating from Korea and Japan, which are designed for Asian skin by nature, already have products with ginseng or other Chinese plants as ingredients. How is Osiao different from these?”

The market “is there [and] the brand will enjoy a glow from the [reputation] of the parent company,” says Shen. “But in the end, whether consumers are going to repeat their purchase and spread positive word of mouth depends on whether the product quality lives up to their expectations.”

A More Sophisticated Market

Estee Lauder, founded in 1946, is experiencing strong growth in China. The company reported a rise in fiscal fourth quarter earnings of 25% and a 9.2% increase in revenue, to $2.25 billion. According to an article in The New York Times, fiscal 2012 is the first year that sales in the Asia Pacific region exceeded $2 billion. The company sells its products in more than 150 countries and territories mainly through limited distribution in, for example, high-end department stores and perfumeries, and specialized retail stores. China, with sales of $500 million, is its third largest market, behind the U.S. and Japan.

Wharton marketing professor Barbara Kahn gives Estee Lauder high marks for “understanding how important skin care is to the Chinese consumer. One of the key differences between China – and Asia, in general — and the U.S. is the importance of skin care products. If you look at a typical drugstore, even a Sephora in Asia versus one in the U.S., you will see a larger percentage of the store devoted to [those items].” Kahn also points out that Chinese consumers think of the skin care process “as a multi-step regime, and they take it very seriously. They are generally more sophisticated in this category than the typical American consumer.” Given the importance of the skin care category “and the amount of money consumers are willing to spend, this strategy of developing a new local brand makes a lot of sense.”

Estee Lauder’s initiative is “brilliant [as well as] risky,” according to Wharton marketing professor David Reibstein. In China, he says, a number of trends come into play: “A strong desire to be beautiful, with a heavy concern about skin care; a desire to be on the leading edge of fashion and skin care [as shown by] designer clothes, shoes and cosmetics all coming from other parts of the world; and a desire for, and intrigue with, foreign brands [as shown by] the popularity of some of the most visible fashion brands.”

The fact that Estee Lauder understands “the Chinese market, the skin care needs of the market, premium positioning and branding, and how to gain distribution” suggests the new brand will be a “winner,” Reibstein adds. The risk for Estee Lauder is that “it’s a crowded market…. The big question is whether there is room for both La Mer [another premier skin product from Estee Lauder] and Osiao.”

Wharton operations and information professor Marshall Fisher – who was in China recently teaching a global supply chain management course — breaks the scenario into two questions: Will a high-priced product sell in China, and how much should the company adapt the product to Chinese tastes?

The answer to the first question “is clearly ‘yes,’ if you look at the number of successful luxury brands that have entered the country,” Fisher says. “The reason is that even though average disposable income in China is below [that in] the West, it is such a big country that the top of the income pyramid is huge. This has made China a prime target for luxury brands.”

Products entering China have adapted to varying degrees, Fisher adds. “Nike changed little, but KFC changed almost everything; their comment was, ‘All we brought from the U.S. was the picture of the Colonel.’ Both have been highly successful in China. Evidently, people who buy Nike buy it in part because it is a Western brand, and adapting it too much would destroy that value. I would guess that Estee Lauder is more like Nike than KFC.” 

At a dinner on the last day of their course, Fisher discussed this second question with the head of Starbucks in China. The Starbucks executive noted how the company eventually “tweaked Starbucks’ menu and flavors enough to make them appealing to Chinese consumers,” says Fisher. “His remark was that they finally figured out that consumers in China who buy Starbucks are looking for a Western experience, but one that is tuned to their taste buds.”

Competition from Other Brands

Fisher’s co-instructor in the global course was Edwin Keh, CEO of the Hong Kong Research Institute for Apparel and Textiles. He recalls a presentation at Wharton earlier this year in which he learned two things: First, that “Chinese consumers like lightly scented products and think a lot of Western products are too strong and overpowering. And second, that the Asian market sells [more] skin protection, skin tone lightening and moisturizers than the West, probably because the Chinese market is dominated by urban professionals who work in crowded and polluted environments.” Also, he noted, “light skin tone is considered a sign of beauty.”

Osiao “looks to be a very exclusive high-end niche brand” being launched at a top Hong Kong department store that is equivalent to Saks or Neiman Marcus in the U.S., Keh says. “The line can command a higher price point and probably will have fairly small volumes for the immediate future. This may be a good way to test the market and tweak the product.” But Keh, like others, points to the “significant brand competition from Japanese and Korean beauty brands, [which] align very well with the Chinese consumer and have near-market advantages.”

Beauty products and next-to-skin apparel “are tough to sell and expensive to market, especially in China,” Keh adds. “So a new brand will be high risk, high return. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.”

Although some observers express concern that Osiao could cannibalize Estee Lauder’s other brands in China, Shen does not see this as likely. “Given its pricing and positioning, it is targeting a different consumer segment from the average consumers of Estee Lauder and Clinique,” its two best-known brands in China. Instead, “the introduction of Osiao seems to explore the market opportunity with the ever-growing wealthy class in China. There is a segment of affluent Chinese consumers who are willing to spend a lot on skincare products. The economic downturn of China has little impact on the behavior of this segment.” Keh concurs: “The timing of the release could have been better, given the recent doom and gloom, but the rich Chinese consumer is still spending and there are still lots of rich Chinese. So I don’t see [the current economy] as an issue.”

Wharton marketing professor John Zhang describes why he thinks Osiao represents “a very far-sighted strategy. Up to this point, Chinese consumers worship anything Western, especially in cosmetics. However, at some point in the future, Chinese customers will become more rational, they will want to go back to their roots, they will value their own heritage and they will want the things that are good specifically for them. When that day comes, pure Western brands will lose their luster,” but Osiao may not.

Building a new brand from scratch is clearly expensive, he adds. “For that reason, starting in Hong Kong is a good way to test the water. In addition, it is also a good way to establish the high-end positioning. I believe that the success of the brand will depend on two things. First, there has to be solid science behind the new formulation. Without it, the brand will not succeed in China for long, and ginseng alone will not carry the brand for sure. Second, good marketing must balance modernity, tradition and science, especially in cosmetics.”

Posted in Knowledge@Wharton Today | Also tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Does NBC’s Olympic Coverage Deserve the Gold?

Now that the major controversies surrounding NBC’s coverage of the Olympics are old news – including the network’s decision to tape delay the opening ceremonies and many of the events – it’s a good time to look at who won and who lost during the airing of the games, what was done well and what could have been done better.

Wharton marketing professor Eric Bradlow, for example, suggests that because “we are in the super-information age, people want to see events when they happen.” He cites recent research showing that “even if you don’t know the outcome, but you know that others do … you enjoy it a lot less. I think this is what [happened] with NBC’s coverage.” Given that situation, NBC should consider reporting those outcomes “instead of pretending they are highly uncertain, and then give a more detailed analysis of what we saw.”

Another possibility is “segmentation. NBC could have two versions, one for people who have seen [the event] already, and another for those who have not.” He acknowledges this approach would increase the costs of coverage, but says it would “dramatically increase reach as well.”

Bradlow also notes the “over-saturation effects” of the coverage, starting with the “Today” show in the morning “where it’s all Olympics. I think it’s good that NBC has wisely become synonymous with the Olympics, but it’s almost too much.”

As for the sponsors, “I can’t remember one major [sponsor] from the Olympics other than Visa,” he notes. “Maybe there are others, but the length of the event leads to the diffusion of the message. This is very different than the Super Bowl.”

Scott Rosner, Wharton practice professor of legal studies and business ethics and associate director of the Wharton Sports Business Initiative, gives NBC credit for “not trying to reinvent the wheel” with their coverage. “It’s not a business in which you take a lot of risks, especially if you’re NBC and this is one of the few things you have going for you.” In addition, Rosner says, “you can’t argue with the ratings,” which have been high.

He points out that “there are very few things people congregate around in mass numbers, and most of those happen to be live sporting events.” What’s interesting about the Olympics is that “they aren’t being consumed in real time, but we are still watching the coverage. It’s more for the storylines than for the results.” This goes back to why this strategy works for NBC, Rosner says. “Think about what they are building their nights of programming around: swimming, beach volleyball, track and field – sports we would never care about if it weren’t the Olympics. Normally these sports get terrible ratings. But there is this sense of national pride. If there is one thing about Olympians, they have amazing stories. And NBC tells those stories well. Even if we know how [an event] ends, we want to know the means. That gives sports a competitive advantage over other industries: It is unscripted drama, and it is compelling television.”

But Rosner also suggests that in the storytelling arena, the network could have done an even better job. “They focused on the handful of athletes they thought would be a success,” even though “there were so many other unbelievable storylines.” So while it was good that the women’s soccer team got lots of attention, “the women’s basketball team didn’t, nor did the women’s water polo team.”

As for the initial criticism raging around Twitter over the tape delays, “my sense is that those criticisms subsided,” Rosner says. “The reality is that when you are NBC and you are paying billions for the rights to broadcast the games, you need to be able to monetize it. It’s a business. It was a business before Comcast [owner of NBC], and it’s a business now. Doing it in real time doesn’t allow you to monetize it because you aren’t in prime time. Who is going to watch?”

As for the sponsors, Rosner feels they have generally gotten their money’s worth, although “you will start to see some turnover if the prices keep going up…. The IOC [International Olympic Committee] is already going after Google and Facebook to be sponsors of” the games in Soshi, Russia, in 2014 and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2016.

Wharton marketing professor David Reibstein was in China for the first week of the Olympics. “Almost all I saw were events that China had won,” he says. “It gave me the impression that China had a huge lead in medals. I knew that wasn’t totally the case and figured the Chinese government was manipulating the coverage to give that impression and to build pride in the country. Then I returned for the second week to the U.S., and it was just the same — almost all the coverage this time was of the U.S. winning. I take it from this that … people like to see their country doing well, and the networks naturally cover what the people want to see. China watches every badminton and ping pong match and we watch track and field, volleyball and basketball.”

Reibstein also notes the positive influence social media had on the events. “Social media let the audience hear more from the athletes and ‘humanize’ them. Also, others were able to engage their friends on the events they liked. I have no doubt this was a big enhancement to the games.”

Looking ahead, Rosner suggests that NBC will have an easier time broadcasting the games in Rio because the time difference with New York is only one hour. It will be much harder in Soshi in two years, and in Pyeongchang, South Korea, in 2018. Already, he says, “the larger issue with the Olympics is the way people are changing how they consume TV and media in general. By 2018, who knows what will be happening?”

 

Featured Professors: ,
Posted in Knowledge@Wharton Today | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Experts All Atwitter about Super Bowl Ads

Super Bowl XLVI, and the $3.5 million that advertisers paid for 30-second spots, is over, but the ads linger on. Knowledge@Wharton Today asked Wharton faculty for their impressions of advertisers’ attempts to please the 100 million-plus viewers who tuned in to last night’s big game (which, by the way, the New York Giants won, 21 to 17, against the New England Patriots).

Marketing professor David Reibstein describes the ads as “less creative this year than in previous years. It also seemed to me there was a huge increase in the use of celebrities — Elton John, Beyoncé, Jerry Seinfeld, Jay Leno, etc. [Advertisers] may have been scared off by the negative reactions last year to the Groupon ads and some others.” Groupon’s Super Bowl XLV ad was criticized by some viewers when it pretended to talk about social issues — in one case, the crisis in Tibet — when it was instead promoting Groupon deals. Reibstein notes that animals (mainly dogs), kids and sexy bodies were also used extensively this year, and that automobile ads were another popular category “because of the value of gaining a customer.”

His favorite ads include:

For Wharton operations and information management professor Kartik Hosanagar, favorites included: The Acura commercial with Seinfeld — “a treat for Seinfeld fans; there was a storyline; it was funny and the short version of the ad worked quite well too” — and Budweiser’s End of Prohibition commercial:” Cinema lovers will love the cinematic feel to this ad. The entire look was unlike that for a typical beer commercial…. I like how they approached it with a different mindset.”

Hosanagar’s least favorite was the America’s Got Talent ad with Howard Stern. “I just didn’t get it,” he says.

Wharton marketing professor Eric Bradlow says that he was struck by two ads in particular. The first was the Dorito’s bribery ad. ”I thought it did a great job of being comedic, but also talked about the essence of the brand as being impulsive, ‘addictive in a good way,’ and a must have,” he says, adding that the commercial was also “tightly linked to the brand essence and hence made a lot of sense.” The most disappointing ads, Bradlow says, were the Coke ads with the polar bear. “They seemed like ‘been there, done that,’ and there were too many of them. This is a classic situation of ‘ad wear out’ because the ads all seemed too similar to each other.”

For Wharton marketing professor Stephen Hoch, “My only comment is that many of the ads had what looked like very expensive production value. This means that either the advertisers really went over the top on ad spending, or computer animation makes it cheap to look over the top.”

Meanwhile, the results of the second annual Wharton Future of Advertising Super Bowl Ad “Tweet Meet” are in, and the winning companies include Chrysler, Acura, Kia, Doritos and GE. The Tweet Meet featured a panel of experts and pundits that included Wharton marketing faculty, advertising executives, students and journalists, all of whom tweeted during the Super Bowl about commercials that “amused, disappointed or otherwise provoked them.” For complete results, click here.

And finally, “proving again the appeal of chatting online while watching TV, the tense end of Super Bowl XLVI on Sunday night set a new record for simultaneous Twitter messages,” according to an article in The New York Times. As the game was winding down, “Twitter counted 12,233 posts per second, the most for any English language event in the six-year history of the social-networking service,” the article noted, adding that Madonna’s halftime performance inspired 10,245 posts per second.

Posted in Knowledge@Wharton Today | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Red Flags over Groupon?

On the heels of LinkedIn’s stunning debut on the stock market last month, Groupon — the popular group buying site — has thrown its hat into the tech-valuation ring by officially filing for an IPO on Thursday. According to the Wall Street Journal, the deal “could value the e-commerce company at as much as $20 billion” as well as “test the strength of a tech-investing frenzy.”

Last year, Forbes called Groupon “the fastest growing company ever.” Indeed, according to the Journal, the company’s revenues grew from $30.47 million in 2009 to $713.4 million in 2010. Revenues for the first quarter of this year alone were $644.7 million. At the end of March, Groupon’s subscriber base reached 83.1 million — up from 152,203 in June 2009.

The Journal notes that there are some red flags for potential investors — particularly that “the company has been spending a fortune” to fuel its growth. (Recorded losses were $413.4 million last year.) Meanwhile, some heavyweight competitors — notably Google and Facebook — are entering the group buying space, which clouds the company’s future.

In a recent interview with Knowledge@Wharton, marketing professor David Reibstein said that the group buying site business model itself is flawed and will ultimately leave customers and suppliers disenchanted — and it could bring ruin to investors.

Given the pitfalls, is Groupon’s IPO merely one in a series of pile-on filings from tech companies hoping to match LinkedIn’s success? (Internet radio company Pandora and online real estate evaluator Zillow both filed earlier this year as well.) According to Wharton marketing professor David Hsu, “I do think that firms pay attention to market sentiment in order to try to capitalize on the appetite for new listings. Coming off a cold IPO market over the last few years, private firms may be eager to try to tap the public markets in response to recent signals such as the LinkedIn IPO.”

Still, Hsu says, Groupon’s IPO makes sense in terms of timing — for marketing and corporate development reasons. “My perception is that the company is eager to raise public funds in order to extend its lead against the plethora of competitors in the daily deal space. In addition to funding [Groupon's] rapid growth in sales and marketing efforts, I suspect that the company is trying to develop offerings which will provide additional value to consumers and merchants. For example, the Groupon Now product, which is a mobile platform for offering on-the-fly deals, would seem to be a capital-intensive development effort, but one which might be important in keeping ahead of competitors.” He adds that international markets would be a natural place for the company to extend its efforts as well.

Although no date has been set for the IPO, all eyes are sure to be on Groupon both during and after its debut on the market. Adding fuel to the speculation that we are witnessing a new tech bubble, LinkedIn’s shares have already dropped about 18% since their initial closing price.

Posted in Managing Technology | Also tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment