The brandgym blog

Who will win the vitamin water wars?

In the red corner we have Glaceau Vitamin Water, bought by Coke last year for, wait for it, $4.1 billion. In cash.  Founder and CEO J. Darius Bikoff is a very clever and now very rich chap.
In the blue corner we have V Water, launched in the UK in 2005, but bought in May this year by Pepsi.

So, who will come out on top, assuming the UK consumer and retail trade really don't need 2 almost identical vitamin water brands? I'll have a stab here at reviewing their mixes. Please do join in and add a comment at the bottom on about who you think will win.

1. Brand name
Why do drink brands copy each others names? In sports drinks we have PowerADE, GatorADE and LucozADE. Now we have V Water and Vitamin Water.
I think Vitamin Water has the edge here, as it has a brand behind it called Glaceau. More could be made of Glaceau, as the brand is not very visible on the pack. But there is potential there to load it with more content than the very generic V Water brand.
Winner: Glaceau Vitamin Water

2. Pack
Structurally the same, looking like they came from the same supplier. On graphics, I think Vitamin Water have made more use of their label as a comms. channel: what we call "packvertising". The text is bit innocent-like and chatty, though it tries much harder. Perhaps too hard, so lacks some of the charm. Also, some people have said the pack look "medical".

In contrast, V Water is very simple, but feels rather pale, and empty as a result. Almost anemic.

Winner: Draw

3. Sausage/Product
Both basically the same: water and vitamin pills in a bottle. No real difference in product-truth or story. Both are relatively new brands, and don't make a big story about their origins or manufacturing process.

The ranges are also pretty close, though there seems to be a bit less overlap in the V Water range. And as the drinks are by nature very water-y, there is not much difference in taste. I do find them a bit artificial and chemical tasting...

And not as healthy as you might think. The Vitamin Water I tasted had in it 23% of my daily allowance of sugar!

Winner: draw

4. Marketing muscle
This is a big issue, and perhaps what will decide the winner. Who is prepared to invest more in marketing, especially distribution and point-of-sale to become THE vitamin water. This includes both supermarket and out-of-home presence, such as the Vitamin Water display I saw in my local newsagent, placed for free by the Coke sales force.

Both brands are backed by the big boys of beverages. But, an important difference is that Coke have blown $4billion on their new toy and have global ambitions. In contrast, V Water is UK only, and so less of a priority for Pepsi.

Winner: Glaceau Vitamin Water

5. Sizzle/Emotion
This is where the biggest visible difference is. Glaceau Vitamin Water plays up that it is a US hit, now over in the UK. In the US, pop stars Kelly Clarkson and 50 Cent have been sponsored by the brand. Sports stars like basketball player Lebron James have also featured in ads.

Vitamin Water also has a quirky website, with wacky photography. Two features I liked were the changing messages as the site loads (e.g. "We'll spare you the cheesy music"; "Good things come to those who wait"), and the way the site displays the time you arrive and an appropriate version to try (note: checked back this morning, and got the same product! So not as good as I thought). 

V Water in contrast is much more relaxed and friendly. The site is cleaner, whiter and uses little cartoons. But as a result it feels a bit washed out. Its trying much less harder to be cool, and trying to let the product do the talking.

Which brand has got it right? This depends a lot on where the biggest opportunity is for this product category. Who will buy the stuff? My guess is 30-40, health conscious, urban people. More female than male. And in this case, V Water might work better. Glaceau Vitamin Water's may be too teen-like to appeal to this target. And I can't see teens drinking a lot of vitamin water.

Winner: V Water

So, net I do come down in the camp of Glaceau Vitamin Water, as they win narrowly 2-1 in my shoot-out.  I think the marketing muscle point will be what decides it. But what do you think?

We'll check back in a year's time for an update!

Gatorade takes on the sports drink bully boy

After a soft-launch last year, its a a full-blown push now for Pepsi's Gatorade Sports drink in the UK. They are attracted by the double digit growth in the energy/sports drink market (+11% in 2006 according to Mintel). But it does feel like they're arriving at the party way too late to get a date...

This is a market where Lucozade Sport dominates, with a whopping 64% market share of sports drinks. The Lucozade brand has been around for 40 years+, and the Sports version was launched way back in 1991. That's a 17 year head start. In the UK, Lucozade IS sports drinks. The next biggest -ade brand is Powerade, launched by Coke in 2001. Seven years on, and with the might of the Coke distribution model and the share is.... 19%.

So, let's put Gatorade through the brandgym bully boy screener introduced to evaluate another energy drink launch, of V versus Red Bull. We'll see how likely they are to get beaten up by picking a fight with Lucozade.

1. A decent bit of product/pack "sausage": you need some sort of product or pack innovation to make yourself worth considering. Not obvious at first sight what Gatorade has to get people to re-wire their brains from defaulting to Lucozade as THE sports drink.

Gatorade claim to be "improving performance since 1965"... and although this is longer than Lucozade Sport, it refers to US heritage. And there is no sign that people think Lucozade lacks heritage anyway.

Gatorade talks about you achieve "peak performance" through hydration. Lucozade has been hammering away a more specific claim on "33% longer".

Lucozade Sport also have a much wider range, based on user need, adding scale, credibility and impact:

 

=> Lacks sausage [3/10]

2. Bravery to break codes: you also need to be brave enough to break some codes and stand out. Here again, afraid there is not much to go on. The name of course follows the -ade model of sports drinks (LucoZADE, PowerADE, GatorADE). The pack is the same, being long and thin, rather than using the fatter and stumpier US bottle.

And they use the same 2 key sports drink brand codes as Lucoazde:

- Sports Science and Lab: but here Lucozade have the very well established Lucozade Sports Science Institute. And look at the lab-based imagery: can you spot the difference between the 2 brands' websites?!

- Athlete endorsement: again, Gatorade seems to be playing the same rules as Lucozade, by plugging pro sports people who use the brand. But Lucozade has been at this for years, and sponsor amongst others Stephen Gerard the Liverpool and England football star.

The one asset Gatorade does have going for them is one they don't seem to be pushing: its global, iconic status as the world's leading sports drink. As Arif Haq, Gatorade brand manager at PepsiCo said: ”Gatorade is one of the world’s most iconic sporting brands".

I think Gatorade could have positioned itself as "The Nike of sports drinks" = US, stylish, about winning with flair, cool. They could have re-positioned Lucozade and made them look the "Umbro os sports drinks" = local, UK only, out-dated, for geeks and serious sports people [Umbro is a UK brand of football gear].
[3/10]

3. Loadsamoney: you need some big bucks to fight the big boys. Re-wiring peoples' brains is expensive. Gatorade plan to spend £5million, which aint bad. But this about the same as Lucozade Sport, and about half what the total Lucozade brand claim to spend.
[5/10]

4. Stamina: its one thing to launch. Its a whole different challenge to keep up the battle for 2, 3, 4 years and longer. Be ready for a long, hard and bloody fight. The good thing here is that Gatorade is a key priority for Pepi. And you can imagine them saying "We can't be a credible global brand without a decent share in the UK!". So, I guess they are in it for the long-run
[7/10]

5. Winning mix: its early days yet, but I do find the comms. campaign strange, and even a bit disturbing. It uses people made half of scientists, and half of athletes to get across the idea of "The Science of Winning". I wonder if a more Nike-esque approach focused on the sizzle would not have been a better way to go: cool, US, stylish, not just for geeks?

=> [5/10]

TOTAL 23/50 = less than 50% chance of success, according to this sophisticated model! My prediction? Less than 20% market share within 2-3 years, taking mainly from Powerade who'll drop to 15%. Lucozade may go down a bit to 60%, but as the market is growing, sales will be OK.