This week saw Unilever announce the launch of new Organic Delight shampoos and conditioners under its Timotei brand, staking the company’s claim for the new products as the first mass-market

This week saw Unilever announce the launch of new Organic Delight shampoos and conditioners under its Timotei brand, staking the company’s claim for the new products as the first mass-market 100% organic haircare range.

With all-organic ingredients, Ecocert approval, a 95% biodegradable formula and 100% recyclable packaging, the new range will add a hefty dose of support to the brand’s ‘natural’ positioning. While it’s very unlikely that Timotei’s Organic Delight products will draw the UK’s most environmentally-active consumers away from smaller, specialist brands like Organic Surge, Lovea Bio or Green People, they offer a potentially punchy point of difference around which to grow and build new growth.

We were delighted to comment on the new launch in this week’s The Grocer. Rebecca Cook spoke of its relevance and appropriateness to the brand, adding that it was likely to be considered an attractive addition for existing users.

To see the full article, click here.

In celebration of our 25 year anniversary, we asked some of our earliest clients to cast their minds back to their “first time” working with The Value Engineers. Here, Kees Van Der Graaf recalls the development of the fruity ice cream phenomenon, Boomy.

In 1988 the Unilever Ice Cream Researchers developed a great new technology. It was now possible to create an ice cream which could be truly 3 dimensional, with no need for any symmetries. It was basically an application of the injection molding technology from the plastics industry. The only thing that needed to happen was to find a product for which this technology could be the long awaited technical solution.

It was a perfect example of a total disconnect between research and marketing. Marketing had to dream up a concept using this unique and patented process. At the time I was Marketing Director of the Spanish ice cream business. We were known for our creativity, and got the task to launch a great concept exploiting the technical possibilities. As I worked with the Value Engineers in my Walls Meat days I called Paul Walton and shouted “help”. Paul and team did not need a lot of convincing to come to Barcelona to work on this mission Impossible. As we all know no bridge is too high for Paul.

After some initial briefing sessions, including a visit to Unilever Research, TVE came up with some great ideas, of which the one with 3 different fruits on a stick tested very well (see photo). The concept was further developed into a very strong complete marketing mix. Boomy was the name of a fruit eating monster, who would do anything to get his portion of this fruit ice cream. The target audience was young children.  Boomy was reasonably priced.  A cartoon character, lovely comics and a funny TVC supported the launch.

The launch went very well.

Too well. Unilever’s central marketing resources took over the international roll out, and started to tweak the concept without involving The Value Engineers or the Spanish company. The price went up, the positioning was extended to all ice cream consumers, and by doing so they ruined the concept. A great pity, that this piece of brilliant marketing was never given the chance to conquer the market.

In celebration of our 25 year anniversary, we asked some of our earliest clients to cast their minds back to their “first time” working with The Value Engineers. Here, Jonathan Morley recalls Unilever’s first foray into male skincare and the project which led to the creation of this early customer segmentation:

There was a time, long ago, when being metrosexual meant doing something sexual in the back of a Mini Metro.  A time when the only thing a gentleman waxed was his moustache and one’s Man Bag was what one kept tucked away safely and securely in one’s underpants.  This was the time of Project Gambon – Unilever’s first foray into Male Skin Care.

The year was 1989.  A time before the Funnel, the Tunnel, the Consumer Technology Matrix and the Aggregated Project Plan.  A time when innovation wandered the barren landscape of (the empty slot in) next year’s activity plan, born from below-budget performance and sired by the imminent annual appraisal – a situation serious enough to give even the stoutest Marketeer, male or female, a distinct feeling of discomfort in the Man Bag.

Unilever’s male personal care portfolio at that time made unappetising reading. Norska, Denim, Lynx (then targeted at those sporting safari suits and the Christmas coffret market) and a brand called Rave that didn’t.  Even the strongest contender, Vaseline Hair Tonic – a jumbo-sized transparent sheath of brilliantine mixed with sheep jissom- failed to inspire.

A new idea of this business potential demanded a new brand identity and a new partner to help lubricate its passage through the funnel (or tunnel).  Enter TVE in the guise of Paul Walton.  Paul’s brief was to unveil the dark arts of Marketing to an audience of box-fresh Unilever graduate Marketing trainees.  The “Boston Matrix” was my first introduction to the discipline of brand portfolio management  – the Star, the Cash Cow, the Problem Child and The Dog (all hitherto considered by me to be Vietnamese calendar years or positions of sexual congress enjoyed by those more adventurous and experienced than I).  I had my idea (christened Project Gambon).  I now had the knowledge.  And I had found my lubricant.

I next met Paul across a table at Unilever HPC’s offices in the West End.  Paul was pitching for the Gambon project, with TVE in the role of NPD agency.  It was an unforgettable experience – charming, exciting, stimulating etc.  In an act of wanton (Walton?) abandon, Paul eschewed the presentation convention du jour, delivering TVE’s credentials using a pack of modified playing cards.  I have not witnessed a presentation like this since.

What followed is lost in a haze of 1990s excess – a heady cocktail of Jolt Cola and Global Hypercolour.  Some say that those who can remember NPD in the 1990s just didn’t develop anything.  Well, I can recall the brainstorms and the awaydays – the guilty excess of product development.  I recall the “” and “” of our customer segmentation.

I moved to a new role in the organisation and with it passed on leadership of the project.  From there, Gambon’s star waxed and waned.  It resurfaced in Vaseline (haven’t we all) and again in Axe/ Lynx as the foundation for the troublesome male grooming line.  Given time, even Knorr will have a shot.

During a recent shopping trip I noticed a new product in the ice cream aisle: Magnum Ghana Cocoa. Given my Ghanaian heritage, the reference to the provenance of this new product was really striking for me, and is a great demonstration of how brands – even those established and much-loved in their category – can use NPD to add a unique selling point to differentiate from competitors.

The milk chocolate and hazelnut flavoured Ghana Cocoa, along with the dark chocolate Ecuador version have other winning elements. They provide an opportunity to communicate a level of expertise – Ghana and Ecuador are two of the biggest producers of the world’s cocoa at 17% and 4% respectively (according to 2009/10 figures from the International Cocoa Organisation) – and also enhances Magnum’s (and in turn, Unilever’s) CSR profile, given the new product is being launched with the Rainforest Alliance certification.

There will no doubt be an expected consolidation of loyalty from core users. However, an added benefit for Magnum is the potential to attract new users (such as all of my Ghanaian family!) for whom the desire for a taste of ‘home’ is particularly appealing, as well as those for whom the origins of a product are a source of intrigue, and ultimately, desire.

A clever demonstration of simple and effective NPD from Magnum here, with the potential to re-confirm the brand as one of the market leaders in the chocolate ice-cream category as we approach summer 2011.

Two definitions for the price of one this week, as both relate to money and brands’ ability to generate it:

• “Brands are (perhaps) the biggest business phenomena of the last century”
• “Brands are value creators”

Whilst many of the definitions of brands, as previously discussed, focus on their relationship with their customers, the other side of the coin is equally important. Why are businesses so interested in brands?

The answer is simple, they help create value. As the various brand valuation surveys show, successful brands help deliver higher prices and better loyalty and so allow the companies that own them to deliver better margins. These brand valuation surveys are based on creating a comparison with a brand’s profit versus what the equivalent profit might have been if the product was unbranded for any year and then multiplying this up to allow for a brand’s ability to deliver this over time.

For example the Interbrand methodology measure what it calls the “conceptual role of the brand”, namely “the portion of demand for a branded product or service that exceeds what the demand would be for the same product or service if it were unbranded”. The estimated annual difference is then increased by a multiplier based on the brand relative size and competitive strength. Interbrand uses what it calls the Brand Strength Multiplier which it bases on 10 factors and reflects “the ability of the brand to secure the delivery of expected future earnings”.

The results give the current No. 1, Coca-Cola, a brand value of over $74billion suggesting that the annual increment in profits for the owners of the largest brands equates to billions of dollars.

So it’s not surprising that John Stuart, one time chairman of Quaker said: “If this business were to be split up, I would be glad to take the brands, trademarks and goodwill and you could have all the bricks and mortar – and I would fare better than you.” Brands may be an intangible, lacking the solidity of bricks and mortar but as numerous analyses have shown, the value of an organisation is increasingly based on intangibles and primary amongst those intangibles are the brands.

Whilst the debate continues about if and how you can measure the value of a brand and whether or not that value should be included in the balance sheet, it is undoubtedly true that businesses pay premiums to acquire brands.

Consider the $57bn P&G paid for Gillette and the $3.7bn that Unilever have just paid to acquire the brands owned by Alberto Culver. Commenting on the purchase, Paul Polman, chief executive of Unilever, said: “We are delighted to be acquiring Alberto Culver. Their people have done an excellent job of building an impressive range of brands such as Tresemmé, VO5, Nexxus, St Ives and Simple. These will complement Unilever’s existing portfolio of iconic brands like Dove, Clear and Sunsilk in hair care and Pond’s and Vaseline in skin care, and will help build on our strong global positions in hair care and skin care categories.”

So whilst brands build relationships with their customers they also build big businesses.