订阅

多平台阅读

微信订阅

杂志

申请纸刊赠阅

订阅每日电邮

移动应用

商业 - 消费品

吉列刀片的寿命之谜

Scott Cendrowski 2012年06月11日

不久前发布的一则吉列广告,极有可能会载入剃须刀营销的史册,因为广告里有史以来第一次明确提及了吉列刀片的使用寿命。以前吉列向来对其刀片的使用寿命讳莫如深,是什么带来了这样的改变呢?

    今年,吉列(Gillette)首次推出了一则必将载入剃须刀刀片营销史册的电视广告。在这则30秒钟的广告中,演员布兰登•奎因向观众讲述,吉列让他环游世界,来见证一下ProGlide剃须刀头可以使用多长时间。在穿越非洲热带草原、巴黎和亚洲雨林之后,他对观众说出了吉列一直讳莫如深的真相:吉列刀片可以持续使用五周。

    每次谈到刀片使用寿命问题,吉列总是守口如瓶。如果是与剃须有关的其他任何问题,吉列都会给出详尽的答复。比如,你知道吗,男士每次剃须平均要刮150次?你是否知道男士面部有10,000 – 15,000个毛囊?你是否知道,只有10%的男士会定期更换剃须刀的刀片,而其他人只是凭感觉来决定是否替换?

    但一旦涉及刀片寿命的问题,吉列就会给出一大堆理由,辩称根本无法估算刀片寿命。吉列发言人戴蒙•琼斯表示,到目前为止,“这是吉列第一次如此明确地说明剃须刀刀片的使用寿命。”

    以前,吉列从未以刀片使用寿命作为广告噱头,因为没有这个必要。作为宝洁公司(Procter & Gamble)旗下的品牌,吉列能够发展成为男士剃须用品行业的领头羊,并不是因为它的刀片可以永久使用,而是因为质量更好,就是这么简单。而吉列产品之所以品质更高,原因在于公司比竞争对手在这方面投入更多——为了开发锋速3(Mach 3)剃须刀,公司毫不犹豫投入了10亿美元。此外,吉列从不提及刀片使用寿命的另一个原因是,消费者不知情对公司更有好处。毕竟,消费者不知道刀片的使用寿命,他们更换刀片的频率可能就更高。

    这也是吉列一惯的做法。1990年,一次性用品失宠,于是吉列推出了感应(Sensor)双刀片式剃须刀,1998年推出了锋速3三刀片式剃须刀,2006年,又推出了锋隐(Fusion)六刀片式剃须刀。此时,吉列在有利可图的美国市场所占的份额已经超过80%,而每年因替换刀片和剃须刀带来的销售额也接近10亿美元。

    随着刀片数量的增加,剃须刀头替换装的价格也在上涨。当然,在经济繁荣时期,这点涨幅算不了什么,但现在经济持续衰退,吉列的市场份额也受到冲击——从2010年至2012年第一季度,公司在美国剃须刀头替换装市场的份额减少了3个百分点。琼斯承认,新广告是公司面对这一形势做出的应对之策。他表示:“我们希望借此改变消费者对吉列品牌的价值感知。”换句话说:吉列得有更好的理由,说服男士们在剃须刀片上花更多的钱。

    吉列认为,与舒适(Schick)等竞争对手相比,吉列的定价更具竞争力。但实际上,调查公司SymphonyIRI Group的数据显示,目前美国市场上一包吉列刀片替换装的平均价格为18.04美元,比劲量控股(舒适品牌隶属该公司)同类产品的平均价格高出8美元,而行业平均价格只有15.32美元。

    This year Gillette debuted a 30-second television spot that will go down in the annals of razor blade marketing. Actor Brandon Quinn begins by telling the audience that Gillette sent him around the world to see how long he could shave with a single ProGlide cartridge. After gallivanting through what looks like the African Savanna, Paris, and some Asian rainforests, he tells viewers what Gillette never had: That the company's blades last up to five weeks.

    Gillette has always been famously tight-lipped when it came to blade life. Ask them anything else about shaving, and you got a thorough response. Did you know the average male takes 150 strokes per shave? Or that men's faces include 10,000-15,000 hair follicles? Or that 10% of male shavers replace their blades according to the calendar, while the rest of us go by feel?

    But broach the subject of blade life and you got a long list of reasons why it wasn't possible to estimate. Until now. "This is most specific we've been," says Gillette spokesman Damon Jones.

    Gillette never advertised blade lifebecause it never had to. The brand, owned by Procter & Gamble (PG), grew into the leading men's shaving line not because its blades lasted forever but because they were better, period. They were better because Gillette spent more than anyone else to make them that way -- it didn't hesitate to cough up $1 billion developing the Mach 3. And Gillette never mentioned blade life because it was better if the consumer didn't know. By not knowing exactly how long (or short) a blades' lifespan, the customer might replace it more often than necessary.

    And that's often what they did. After disposables lost their luster, Gillette introduced the two-bladed Sensor in 1990, then the three-bladed Mach3 in 1998, then the six-bladed Fusion line in 2006. By then its market share figures exceeded 80% in the lucrative U.S. market, and yearly sales of replacement blades and razors were approaching $1 billion.

    As blade counts rose, so did replacement cartridge prices. Which was fine when the economy was humming. But now as it limps along, Gillette's market share has taken a hit -- its hold of the U.S. replacement cartridges market slipped by 3 percentage points from 2010 through the first quarter of 2012. Jones says Gillette reacted with the new ad. "One of the things we wanted to do was to help reframe the value perception of our brand," he says. Translated from PR-speak: Gillette needed to give men another reason to pay more for its blades.

    Gillette contends its pricing is competitive with rivals like Schick. But the average price paid for a pack of Gillette's replacement blades today is $18.04, far higher than the $15.32 industry average and nearly $8 more than what Energizer Holdings' (which owns Schick) customers pay for a pack, according to SymphonyIRI Group.

1 2 下一页

我来点评

  最新文章

最新文章:

500强情报中心

财富专栏