“Core Market Offerings and Defining the Product” Please respond to the
following:
From the case study, take a position on whether Tropicana did or did not
make a major mistake in changing its product packaging. Next, suggest the next
two (2) steps that you believe Tropicana should take in its branding strategy in
order to counteract the initial negative response to the new product packaging.
Provide a rationale for your response and do not duplicate your classmates’
responses.
* From the scenario, prioritize the attributes of Golds Reling’s brand from
the brand map presented in the scenario according to the attributes that you
believe would be most important to the new tablet’s target market. Provide
support for your response. Note: Must be type in APA format. This is a discussion post minimum 500 words. Please see attachment for article.
tropicana.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
TROPICANA:
SOCIAL MEDIA TEACH MARKETERS A
BRANDING LESSON
Colleen P. Kirk, Mount Saint Mary College
Karen A. Berger, Pace University
This critical incident was prepared by Colleen P. Kirk and Karen Berger, and is intended to be
used as a basis for class discussion. The views presented here are those of the authors based on
their professional judgment and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Society for Case
Research. Copyright © 2011 by the Society for Case Research and the authors. No part of this
work may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means without the written permission of
the Society for Case Research.
Neil Campbell, president at Tropicana North America in Chicago, part of PepsiCo Americas
Beverages, sat with his head in his hands. He had been reviewing a barrage of emails from his
key marketing staff indicating significant consumer displeasure with the newly-launched
packaging for the division’s flagship product, Tropicana Pure Premium orange juice. The new
product design packaging had been on store shelves less than six weeks, and the Internet had
already been flooded with articles, postings, and comments regarding the new product
packaging. The company had invested $35 million in the new package design and associated
advertising campaign, yet sales had dropped precipitously since the new packaging was
launched. What went wrong? What should Tropicana do now?
Tropicana Brand History
Tropicana was the largest orange juice brand on the market when PepsiCo purchased the product
line from Seagram Co. Ltd. in 1998. PepsiCo felt Tropicana was a superb addition to its
beverage portfolio, competing with and surpassing Coke’s Minute Maid orange juice brands.
Further, while orange juice margins were thinner than those of soft drinks, sales of orange juice
products were expanding at a much faster 8% rate than the soft drink beverage business, due in
part to a growing awareness among adults of the health benefits of orange juice (Light, 1998).
At the time of the acquisition, Tropicana’s 42% orange juice market share dwarfed the 24%
share owned by Coke’s Minute Maid orange juice brand. However in 2001, Coca-Cola
responded by launching a new premium orange juice line called “Simply Orange.” By 2006,
Tropicana found its market share dropping steadily from 42% in 2006 to 33.6% in 2009, while
that of Simply Orange grew from 8.1% to 14.8% during the same time period. It was clear that
Coca-Cola’s focus on the fresh-squeezed orange juice experience of Simply Orange
(Anonymous, 2001) was resonating with consumers, and Tropicana needed to react.
Tropicana’s Packaging
The iconic orange and straw graphic pre-dated PepsiCo’s purchase of the Tropicana brand, and
was originally conceptualized as part of Pixar’s first animated television commercial, produced
for Tropicana in 1989 (Pixar, 2010). When the Coleman Group incorporated the “straw in an
orange” graphic into the Tropicana juice carton in 1997, EVP Jonathan Asher noted “We
recognized we could strengthen the brand franchise by building on existing design equities, and
create a more distinctive and ownable brand identity” (Anonymous, 1997).
On January 8, 2009, PepsiCo announced a package re-design and accompanying new marketing
campaign for the Tropicana product line (Zmuda, 2009). Research showed Tropicana that about
half of consumers thought orange juice contained added sugar, and brand managers felt that the
fact that Tropicana was pure, natural, and 100% squeezed from fresh oranges needed to be
highlighted. Noted Tropicana president Neil Campbell, “We wanted to create an emotional
attachment by ‘heroing’ the juice and trumpeting the natural fruit goodness” (Hein, 2009).
The redesign was spearheaded by the Arnell Group (Arnell.com, 2010), and in a press
conference launching the new packaging, Peter Arnell noted the agency wanted to leverage the
biggest single billboard available – the product’s package (Levins, 2009). Tropicana packaging
had never shown the inside of the orange, and designers felt that they could better emphasize the
purity of the juice by displaying the juice itself. Arnell also explained “We no longer wanted to
work with assets or parts that were not clear to the consumer. They might have identified with
the orange and the straw on the old packaging but no one knew why it was there” (Hein, 2009:1).
According to Arnell, the design team was instructed to use “design language that was clear,
simple and profound” (Hein, 2009 1). Thus, the words “100% orange pure and natural” were
positioned front and center on the carton (Hein, 2009). Additionally, the carton’s new cap was
designed to mimic the outside of an orange, both in appearance and texture, and designers felt
opening it implied the squeezing of an orange ergonomically. Arnell explained that, in keeping
with the theme of Tropicana’s new $35 million advertising campaign, the new package design
drew on the power of love through a squeeze or hug (Levins, 2009). (Note: images of the old and
new Tropicana package designs can be found online (e.g., Edwards, 2009)).
The Blogosphere Reacts
The new package design hit the shelves in early January, and consumer response was immediate,
calling the new design “ugly,” “stupid,” and “resembling a generic bargain brand” (Elliott,
2009). Internet bloggers were particularly vociferous in their online postings about the new
packaging, noting that “…a large, juicy, fresh orange with a straw stuck right into it… screamed
freshness, while the new box looked like “a no-name brand orange juice made out of
concentrate” (Meydad, 2009). Criticisms leveled by Matt Everson, founder of Astuteo, a design
firm in Madison, Wisconsin, included the difficulty in distinguishing product variations (such as
pulp, calcium, etc.), the “cold and corporate” logotype, and the scrapping of the “practically
famous,” “straw in the orange” (Everson, 2009).
Online readers of blogs and articles joined the fray, providing fuel for a blogosphere fire. Some
of the more gentle reader postings included: “Even store clerks talk about how hard it is to see
what’s on the shelf”; “Do any of these people actually shop for orange juice? Because I do and
these new cartons stink”; “This generic redesign doesn’t have half the appeal of the ‘straw in the
orange’ [Peter Arnell] so casually dismisses… Simply Orange will have the last laugh…”
(Brandweek, 2009).
Not everyone agreed that Tropicana’s new package design was a disaster. Brandweek’s Todd
Wasserman felt that Tropicana’s redesign was “terrific” and that making the carton look like a
private-label brand was a “brilliant strategy” to reinforce the idea of value in a tough economy
(Wasserman, 2009).
The Decision
Neil Campbell was lost in thought. Had Tropicana made a major mistake in changing its package
design? In an interview just a few weeks earlier to discuss the new packaging, he had
commented that “The straw and the orange have been there for a long time, but people have not
necessarily had a huge connection to them” (Elliott, 2009). However, it appeared Tropicana had
underestimated the emotional response to the disappearance of the old design. He noted that
“what we didn’t get was the passion this very loyal small group of consumers have. That wasn’t
something that came out in the research” (Elliott, 2009).
Campbell realized that with the Internet and social media, consumers can communicate with
marketers more easily and quickly than ever before. In the six weeks the new packaging had
been on store shelves, consumers had been able to declare their opposition in a manner
impossible before the Internet. However, he wondered, was this simply a case of a small but
vocal minority of consumers expressing their negative attitudes towards the new packaging
through the easy availability of social media, or was there really something more fundamentally
wrong with the new packaging?
He wondered what to do next. The company had invested $35 million in the new package design
and new advertising campaign, which featured shots of the new packaging (Young & Ciummo,
2009). However, initial sales figures appeared to be declining, not rising. Should Tropicana
move forward with their existing advertising plans and press on with the new packaging,
assuming consumers would grow to like it? Should they try to tweak the new redesign in some
fashion? Or should they scrap the new package redesign completely, returning to the old “straw
in the orange” theme?
References
Anonymous. (1997). Tropicana carton gets a facelift. Paperboard Packaging, 82(3), 8.
Anonymous. (2001). A Closer Look. Dairy Foods, 102(6), A.
Arnell.com. (2010). Arnell. Retrieved October 12, 2010, from http://arnell.com/
Brandweek. (2009). Reader Responses, Packaging and Design Blog. Retrieved November 1,
2010, from Brandweek (2009). www.brandweek.com/bw/content_display/news-andfeatures
/packaging-and-design/e3if42f3145e3efa9c481cd68b13e3db.
Edwards, J. (2009). In Blow to Arnell, Tropicana Drops Package Redesign. bNet: The CBS
Interactive Business Network, February 23.
Elliott, S. (2009, February 23). Tropicana Discovers Some Buyers Are Passionate About
Packaging. The New York Times.
Everson, M. (2009, October 12). Eight Major Failures of the Tropicana Redesign.
http://astuteo.com/blog/article/
eight_major_failures_of_the_tropicana_redesign/
Hein, K. (2009, January 16). Tropicana Squeezes out Fresh Design with a Peel. BrandWeek.
Levins, H. (2009). Peter Arnell Explains Failed Tropicana Package Design. Advertising Age,
(February 26, 2009). Retrieved from http://adage.com/video/article?article_id=134889
Light, L. (1998). Tropicana: A Way for Pepsi to Squeeze Coke. BusinessWeek(3589), 78-79.
Meydad, J. (2009). Ho Not To Re-Brand: Tropicana Orange Juice. Jay Meydad’s Life Mashup:
Thoughts on social applications, usability, search, mobile, music, and sports Retrieved
November 1, 2010
Pixar. (2010). Pixar History. Retrieved October 9, 2010, from
http://www.pixar.com/companyinfo/history/89.html
Wasserman, T. (2009). Tropicana Scrapped A Terrific Redesig. Brandweek, 50(9), 030-030.
Young, S., & Ciummo, V. (2009). Managing Risk in a Package Redesign: What Can We Learn
from Tropicana. BrandPackaging(August), 18-21.
Zmuda, N. (2009). Tropicana Line’s Sales Plunge 20% Post-Rebranding. Advertising Age.
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Order a plagiarism free paper now. We do not use AI. Use the code SAVE15 to get a 15% Discount
Looking for help with your ASSIGNMENT? Our paper writing service can help you achieve higher grades and meet your deadlines.
Why order from us
We offer plagiarism-free content
We don’t use AI
Confidentiality is guaranteed
We guarantee A+ quality
We offer unlimited revisions