Ad lider+marketing+research+for+drawstring+trash+bags

TB0141

Copyright © 2004 Thunderbird, The Garvin School of International Management. All rights reserved. This case wasprepared by Professor Rosane Gertner, Pace University; Professors Dennis Guthery and Richard Ettenson, Thunderbird,for the purpose of classroom discussion only, and not to indicate either effective or ineffective management.

Ad-lider Embalagens, SA:Marketing Research for

Drawstring Trash Bags in BrazilIntroduction

In July of 2001, Lazlo Sved and his new partner, Emilio Figer, were going over the market research onemore time. The two senior executives at Embalagens Ad-lider, SA (Ad-lider Packaging, Inc.) were care-fully considering how the findings of the marketing research they had commissioned would impact thelaunch of their new drawstring trash bag product line named Climp Fecha Facil (Easy Close). See Ap-pendix 5 for a picture of the product. They were looking for information about consumer preferences,consumer habits, and perceived competitive advantages that would impact pricing, product size, anddistribution decisions. Having invested one million dollars for the new production machine, the twoexecutives were anxious to “get it right” with respect to targeting and positioning, and creating value forthe consumer.

Lazlo was convinced that a successful launch of the Fecha Facil was of extreme importance. Hebelieved that the current Ad-lider product mix would not bring satisfactory profits in the long term. Hefelt that Ad-lider needed to launch a new product that was different, modern, and offered the market amore favorable cost/benefit relationship than products currently on the market.

Brazil’s Population and Economic Stabilization

Brazil is one the world’s largest countries, covering an area of 8.5 million square kilometers. The coun-try is divided into 24 states, two territories, and a federal district. The five regions of Brazil and theirrespective population sizes are presented in Appendix 1. Of Brazil’s 170 million population, almost43% or 72 million, live in the Southeast. Brazil’s three largest metropolitan areas are all in the Southeast:Sao Paulo (20.2 million), Rio de Janeiro (12.15 million), and Belo Horizonte (5.3 million).1

In the mid-1990s, after a long period of high inflation and economic stagnation, the successfulBrazilian economic stabilization plan, known as Plano Real, restored the purchasing power of the low-income segment of the population. This upturn allowed many Brazilians to purchase consumer goodsformerly inaccessible to them. As a result, during the second half of the 1990s, numerous segments ofthe economy, including several product categories, underwent fantastic sales growth.

Brazilians categorized in the Social Class C group were the most benefited by this economicstabilization. The Brazilian Market Research Association, ABIPEME, developed a social class classifica-tion that was widely adopted by local researchers, marketers, and advertising agencies. The scheme

1 http://www.worddiq.com/definition/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population.

October 18, 2009

2 TB0141

combined income, education, and material possessions to define five social classes—A, B, C, D, and E.Classes A and B members possessed the highest levels of income, education, and purchasing power, andtended to be more sophisticated consumers. Classes D and E lacked purchasing power and struggled toafford even the most basic goods and services. Class C consumers have been described as typical workersin the lower middle class, and comprised 12.6 million Brazilian households. The 30% of Brazilianhouseholds classified as Class C accounted for 28% of Brazil’s total consumption. In contrast, Classes Aand B made up 19% of Brazilian households and accounted for 52% of the national consumption. Thelower classes D and E made up 51% of the households but accounted for only 20% of the nationalconsumption.2

Another view of socioeconomic differences can be seen by examining income distribution. In2000, the wealthiest 10% of Brazilians received 47% of the national income. The next 40% received39.5% of the national income, while the bottom 50% of Brazilians received only 13.5%.3

Ad-lider Embalagens, SA

Ad-Lider Embalagens, SA was founded in 1970. The company, headquartered in the town of Tres Rios,Rio de Janeiro, is one of Brazil’s largest manufacturers of plastic bags and packaging. A commercialoffice is located in the city of Rio de Janeiro. The company controls Ad-lider Transportation, a truckingfirm that distributes its products. The firm sells direct to large accounts and uses 43 specialized distribu-tors to cover other accounts throughout Brazil. Sales by region vary greatly: the Southeast accounts for50% of sales while the North and Northeast combined account for an additional 25%; the Central-West and South account for 12% and 10% respectively.

Total sales in 1998 were US$21 million and were forecasted to be in the US$25–27 million rangefor 2001. The company had three divisions: commercial products, industrial products, and consumerproducts.

The commercial division, which accounted for 52% of company income in 1998, had two pri-mary lines, AD-ROLL and AD-SHOP. The AD-ROLL line consisted of plastic bags for produce andmeat departments. The AD-SHOP line consisted of bags purchased by retailers as diverse as fashionboutiques and supermarkets for shoppers to carry purchases home.

The consumer division sold three products for the consumer and commercial firms. Limp-O-Lixo, the primary product, was a line of household garbage bags, sold in rolls, with individual bagcapacities from 15 to 100 liters. A second line, FREEZER, was sold to consumers for storing food infreezers. SACOS REFORCADOS AD-LIDER (reinforced bags) were sold to commercial firms such ashospitals, restaurants, and building maintenance companies.

The industrial division had three product lines: an automated packaging line for manufacturersthat packaged products, such as beans and rice, in plastic bags for sale to consumers; packaging materi-als to shrink-wrap pallets; and a line to bundle products together so as to eliminate the necessity ofcardboard boxes.4

The Household Plastic Garbage Bag Market

In 1997, the Brazilian garbage bag market was estimated to move around 1.3 billion pieces and wasvalued at US$120 million.5 The product came in blue and black with capacity/sizes of 15, 20, 30, 50,60 and 100 liters. The bags were packaged as rolls or folded. The rolled bags came in a plastic bag, and

2 Gazeta Mercantil, February 20023 Ibid.4 http://www.adlider.com.br.5 Datamark, The Brazilian Packaging Industry, 1996.

TB0141 3

the folded bags were packaged either in plastic or cardboard boxes. Smaller bags for the kitchen andbathrooms were also available.

There were three national brands of garbage bag rolls: Limp-o-Lixo, Dover Roll, and Koleta. Themanufacturers of these brands were Ad-Lider, Fort-Roll, and Colmag. These brands could be found inall major supermarket chains throughout Brazil. In addition to the national brands, there were regionalbrands and many supermarkets carried their own store brands.

The three major national brands were sold directly to the largest supermarket chains. Wholesalersand distributors were used to distribute the product to smaller supermarkets, convenience stores, andother small retailers such as meat markets and fruit stands.

The large supermarkets constituted the channel of largest growth in retailing. With regard to trashbags, the large supermarket chains tended to work with one leader brand and no more than two otherbrands. Some chains, like Sendas, Bom Preco, and Extra had their own private trash bag brands. Inmost retail stores, trash bags were located in the household cleaning products section. Typically, the bagswere on the bottom shelf and, given the fact that many were rolls packaged in plastic bags, the area wasoften in disarray.

Fort-Roll was the strongest competitor to Ad-lider. It was the manufacturer of Dover Roll, themarket leader and a symbol of quality to many consumers. According to the Fort-Roll Web site, DoverRoll was targeted to Class A and B consumers. The company also had products targeted to Class Cconsumers.6

Market Research—Focus Groups

In November of 1999, Ad-lider commissioned Sinergia, a well-respected market research firm, to con-duct focus groups relating to the launch of the Climp Easy Close garbage bag. The focus groups wereconducted on November 24–25, 1999, in the cities of Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo. A total of threefocus groups were conducted, two in Sao Paulo and one in Rio de Janeiro. In Sao Paulo, one focusgroup consisted of housewives living in apartments, and the other was of housewives living in houses. InRio, the focus group consisted of housewives living in apartments.

The objective of the research was to evaluate the acceptance of the new Easy Close garbage bag, tolearn about packaging preferences, and to determine how the easy close (draw string) feature was per-ceived by garbage bag purchasers.

Participants were selected from the A and B social classes. All participants were involved withhousehold responsibilities, including supermarket shopping for the family, and all used plastic bags forgarbage disposal.

The profile of the Sao Paulo participants living in houses was married women, ages 28–40, withchildren, and a minimum of a high school education. Some women were university graduates and hadprofessional careers. The Sao Paulo participants living in apartments had the following profile: marriedand single women, ages 28–39, most with a university degree. Most women in this group were profes-sionals with careers in such areas as clinical psychology, education, nutrition, and small business. Theirfamily income was comparable to the other Sao Paulo group. In both Sao Paulo groups, participantswere drawn from geographically dispersed regions of the city.

The Rio de Janeiro participants were mainly single and divorced women, ages 32–42, with orwithout children, and with a high school education. A minority were professional women. Family

6 http://www.Dover Roll.com.br.

4 TB0141

income was comparable to the Sao Paulo groups, and the individuals were drawn from several areas ofthe city.

Differences in lifestyles existed between participants from Rio and Sao Paulo. The Rio partici-pants were active in exercise programs, with most belonging to a gym and/or regular sports participantsor walkers. Almost none of the Sao Paulo participants were active in exercise programs.

The Interview Guide for these focus groups is in Appendix 2.

Market Research—Individual Interviews in Test Market

The Climp Fecha Facil garbage bag was placed in Sendas Supermarkets in Rio de Janeiro during April–June, 2001. Additional consumer research was conducted in May–June of 2001 to:

• Determine the profile of the garbage bag purchaser (user) by gender• Determine the frequency of garbage bag purchases by households• Determine the relative market shares of major brands• Determine the primary motivators/concerns with the purchase of garbage bags• Determine how well the Climp Fecha Facil bag competed with the Dover Roll with-a-handle

bag.

Purchase Intercept Interviews were conducted on seven consecutive Saturdays, April–June, 1999.All interviews took place in 29 Sendas Supermarkets. A total of 528 interviews were conducted, ofwhich, 495 were considered valid.

It is noted that during the time of these interviews, the brand Dover Roll was on sale for twoweeks. During the final week of the research, the Limp-o-Lixo brand was on sale. The results of thisresearch are presented in Appendix 4.

TB0141 5

Population, % Region/CountryRegion Census 2000 Population, Census 2000Southeast 72,297,351 42.6%South 25,089,783 14.8%North 12,893,561 7.6%Northeast 47,975,416 28.2%Central West 11,616,745 6.8%TOTAL 169,872,856 100.0%

Source: http://www.terravista.pt/Enseada/1347/mapado.htm, viewed on June 01, 2004.

Appendix 1 Brazilian Population by Region

6 TB0141

Appendix 2 Interview Guide for Garbage Bag Focus Groups

1. WARM-UP (5 minutes)

• Introduction to research process• Presentation of the participants being interviewed: name, age, profession, civil status (married/not), kids,

etc.• Presentation of the theme of the research: cleaning material

2. HABITS (10 minutes)

• The day-to-day activities of the family– What are the activities of each member of the family; what is their day-to-day schedule?– What they like and dislike (enjoy or not) to do

• Domestic activities– Do they depend on maids/hired help (monthly or daily pay hire)?– Level of interest in the home administration– Involvement in domestic tasks, in what tasks, frequency and intensity– Which are the domestic tasks that they most and least enjoy?

3. CLEANING MATERIAL/GARBAGE BAG (30 minutes)

• Presentation of the theme“Now we are going to talk a bit about cleaning materials, about supermarket purchases, and the utilizationof some of those products.”

• Cleaning equipment/products that they utilize the most; what contributes in those choices• Who decides the cleaning products to be purchased, with what frequency (weekly, twice a month, monthly),

and where they purchase?• Behavior in relation to the storing/disposal of garbage

– Do they purchase garbage bags?– Ultimate utilization of plastic garbage bags (other than for the disposal of garbage)– How do they tend to store/dispose of domestic garbage and what do they utilize for storing/disposing

of the many types of house garbage: kitchen garbage, the office/library, the bathroom, the garden,maid’s bathroom, etc.?

– If a garbage bag is not used, what is used and why?– If they have already used garbage bags but no longer do, why did they stop using them and what factors

encouraged them to go back to the plastic garbage bags?– If they use garbage bags, in what proportion for what type of garbage?– What are the characteristics of the garbage bags used in relation to thickness, color, size, brand, etc.?

• In relation to the purchase of the garbage bag– Who decides and purchases the garbage bags, with what frequency (weekly, twice a month, monthly),

and where do they purchase them?– What are the decisive factors that define the purchase of the plastic garbage bags; what do they value at

the time of purchase: brand (which), price, quality, packaging, thickness, etc.?– Satisfaction with the garbage bags they currently use

• In relation to domestic garbage– Who is usually responsible for the storing/disposing of each type of garbage?– What are the biggest problems noticed during the usage of the garbage bags?– For how long does the stored garbage remain inside the house/apartment?– Garbage destination: after storing the garbage, what is its destination (does it go to a definite place,

await the garbage man, or is it collected by apartment employees)?

4. THE GARBAGE AND ITS ENVIRONMENT (10 minutes)

“Since we are talking about garbage, I would like to know from you all about the garbage and its environ-ment.”

• The group’s perception in regard to the garbage and environment/impact on the environment

TB0141 7

• In relation to the recycling of garbage, do they know of any program and what is the group’s stand onsuch a topic (are they compromised or not, do they believe in the programs success, etc.)?

5. MARKET/COMPETITION KNOWLEDGE (20 minutes)

• Perception of the several existing plastic bag products; how they see the products on the supermarketshelves (exposure, visibility, attractiveness)

• What are the brands they know?– Images– Characteristics– Strong and weak points– Closure– Size, thickness, and color– Preference– Packaging: economy and super economy

• Preferences– What are the preferences?– What is the relationship between price and quality?– What are the similarities and differences among the brands?

6. IDEAL PACKAGES (10 minutest)

• What is the ideal package; expectations?

7. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED NEW PRODUCT (30 minutes)

• Packaging: show the box packaging and plastic packaging, alternately, among the groups– Reactions– Understanding of the product through the package– Perception/image that is sent

• Presentation of the new garbage bag– Reactions– Likes and dislikes– Relationship of presented packaging and product– What do they most like and dislike?– Noticed benefits and advantages– Use expectation and finality– Perception of the product in a kitchen: aesthetics, functionality, and hygiene

• Again, presentation of the product in both box and plastic packaging– Preference between them– Strong and weak points of each– Transmitted image– Roll vs. folded

• Economy and super economy packaging– Knowledge—know what it is?– Do they purchase it or not?– Ideal quantity of garbage bags by package

• Price– Compare the packages present in the market—relationship of price between them; how is the price?

Would they pay more for the new bag? How much?– Present quantities of the plastic bags in super economy packages of 30L (50 units), 50L (50 units) and

100L (25 units): are they willing to pay more for packaging and less for bag/relationship (single priceand total)?

8. COLOR (5 Minutes)

• Present the colors and question preferences and why

8 TB0141

9. PRESENTATION OF THE REMAINING PRODUCT LINE (10 Minutes)

Depending on the disposition or the progress of the group, the other plastic garbage bags will be presented tothem to quickly verify:

• Reactions• Utilities• Likes and dislikes

10. END OF THE SESSION AND THANK YOU

TB0141 9

Appendix 3 Analysis of Garbage Bag Focus Groups

INTRODUCTION

The qualitative research was performed on November 24 and 25, 1999, in the cities of Sao Paulo and Rio deJaneiro. The objective of such research was to evaluate the acceptance of the new garbage bag “Fecha Facil,” andlearn about the packaging preferences and the perceptions of housewives in relation to the closing system of thenew product.

In Sao Paulo, the research base consisted of two groups—one of housewives and one of apartment-wives, and inRio, one group of apartment-wives. The groups were made up of housewives (and apartment-wives) of A and Bclasses, who were involved with domestic activities and responsible for the supermarket purchases and usage ofplastic garbage bags.

THE DAY-TO-DAY ACTIVITIES OF THE HOUSEWIVES

Similarities were found in the day-to-day activities of the women interviewed. Their days were hurried, the womenwere quite involved with the administration of the household, with the education/schooling of children, with theshopping, and, additionally, some of them had long commutes in their professional activities.

The majority of the interviewees had some type of help for domestic activities, be it two to three times a week orlive-in maids who worked six days per week. In households where the maid did not work daily, the housewivesperformed some of the daily routines like cooking, cleaning the house, and laundry. The housewives liked to cookbut disliked house cleaning and ironing. It is clear that none of them found gratification with their domestic duties.Many times these necessities were imposed upon them.

Interestingly, the housewives from Rio de Janeiro took care of themselves physically, they were members of a gym,did sports, and walked. In Sao Paulo, with rare exception, this daily routine was not part of the lives of interviewedhousewives.

In Sao Paulo, the housewives were more demanding of their maids and themselves in regard to the home: “The girlthat works at home is good, but she [does] not [do the work] exactly the way I like it…so what I think is out ofplace or was not done right to my liking, especially in the cleaning part, I will go and do it” (house dweller, SaoPaulo).

In reference to the monthly shopping for cleaning materials, the majority of the time, these were purchased by thehousewives. In Sao Paulo, it was very rare when a husband became involved in this process. It was also noticed thatyounger couples in Sao Paulo were becoming involved together in the supermarket shopping.

In Rio, the husband or boyfriend was more involved in the decision about which product was to be purchased thanin the actual shopping. However, some men did the shopping and even decided on what to purchase. “I am veryattentive, since we have a big family. I know the right quantity that needs to be purchased and what is needed. Ipractically make all the decisions, but my husband loves the supermarket” (apartment dweller, Rio). “My boy-friend loves the supermarket. He gives me hints, he keeps talking and I keep buying” (apartment, Rio).

It can be noted that some housewives were loyal to some brands, like Bom Bril (steel wool), Omo (clothes deter-gent), and Sadia (chicken, pasta).

The women were more rational with the purchases, while the men were more curious—they liked to experimentwithout regard to price. “The supermarket part is all me…he helps, who decides is me, he likes to experimentmore. He buys, I control” (apartment, SP).

Important Factors in the Purchase Decision for Cleaning Material

Especially for the women interviewed who live in houses in Sao Paulo, practicality was the most important factorin the purchase decision for disposable and cleaning materials. They also admitted that advertisement influencedthem when purchasing.

10 TB0141

Price, practicality, and quality are fundamental attributes for the housewives and they understand quality as “thatwhich works”; “that one is good and efficient”; “that is the product that does what it really promises.”

THE KEEPING/STORAGE OF GARBAGE

In general, the storage of domestic garbage was done with plastic garbage bags (of varied sizes, in blue or blackcolor), other than utilizing grocery plastic bags from the supermarkets (this was especially done in apartments).

Behavioral Differences of Those Living in Apartments versus Those Living in Houses Regarding the Storage ofGarbage

1. Apartments

In relation to the storage of garbage, there was a noticeable difference between the apartment residents in Sao Pauloand the ones in Rio de Janeiro. The difference was basically in the color of plastic bags that the housewives utilized.

In Sao Paulo, there was a predominant usage of the black color, as it was perceived as more durable than the bluebags. In Rio de Janeiro, the black color was not present/available in the domestic market, and therefore the bluecolor was associated with garbage bags. When the black garbage bag was utilized, it was for large quantities ofgarbage (100 L bags) for professional use or by the demand of the condominium.

However, in both cities, supermarket plastic bags were also used for small garbage such as bathroom and kitchengarbage. It is worth mentioning that use of the supermarket plastic bag was higher in Sao Paulo than in Rio.

The question of cost, more so in Sao Paulo, was not clearly noticed as a factor for the usage of the supermarketplastic bags, but the end purpose of the bag was clear: it was used to be thrown away. “The priority in my house isthe small plastic bags. What I am going to do with [them]? Throw [them] away? When I run out, I have thegarbage bags” (apartment, SP).

In Rio, the usage of the supermarket plastic bag was more closely associated with its ease of closing due to itshandles. “The garbage bag needed to have a precise measurement of space so that I can tie it. [The garbage bagmanufacturers] haven’t had this idea yet. Why do we love the supermarket plastic bag? Because it has ‘ears.’ We lovethat” (apartment, Rio).

Brands and Capacities of the Garbage Bags Used by the Residents of Apartments

Sao Paulo

Brand: Curiously there was no recognition of a brand in Sao Paulo. Only the brand Sacolimp was recalled, with alot of uncertainty and resistance, by only one interviewee. Another interviewee mentioned a certain garbage bag“with the little straps.”

Capacity: In regard to the sizes, there were 20L, 30L, 40L, 50L, 60L, and 100L. “I use the 30L and 50L bags forbottles and kitchen garbage. In the bathroom, I use a supermarket bag. Now I look at price” (apartment, SP).

Rio de Janeiro

Brand: In Rio, the Dover Roll brand was quickly mentioned and remembered by nearly all interviewees. At first, aninterviewee said, “I use that one of 30L, of the small roll and the little strap,” when she was quickly interrupted byanother interviewee introducing the Dover name to the group, which was the brand most purchased by the partici-pants.

Capacity: It was also noticed that there was a certain uniformity of usage in relation to the capacities: 15L, 30L, and50L. “I always use the Dover Roll. I use the 50L for the kitchen and the 15L for the bathroom. Of all the ones Ihave used, it is the one that least rips” (apartment, Rio).

Sanito was another brand name mentioned in Rio, preferred by only one participant. “I use the blue (Sanito)…[it]is more resistant, and stronger than the others, it doesn’t rip with such ease. Sanito is a bit darker, and I prefer thebag; I think I have grown accustomed [to it]” (apartment, Rio).

TB0141 11

The importance of a strong garbage bag was clear in Sao Paulo as in Rio. In Rio, where the Dover brand was themost well known, when stimulated to relate its strong and weak points, they said:

• It’s practical• Hygienic• Has “a thing to tie”• It’s in a roll—“Dover Roll…already comes rolled, it’s the only one.”

Conversely, the handle (as a closing system) and the roll, previously cited as strong points, were factors thatdispleased the housewives. “When it’s time to close the bag it’s horrible. It has that handle, it’s horrible when youtie a stronger knot [and] it breaks. The handle should be stronger” (apartment, Rio). “When it’s time to detach itout of the roll, if you are in a hurry, it doesn’t cut, it rips” (apartment Rio).

When the Rio group was asked what made Dover different from the other bags, the answers were the color and thehandle. They noticed the Dover color blue was more milky and resistant (strong).

Purchase Definition/Decision

When the groups of apartment residents in both Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro made purchases, the purchasedecision in Sao Paulo was more price conscious. Therefore, the question of strength became secondary (theywanted price with quality).

In Rio, price was not cited very much, since the choices were basically defined by the usage habits of certain brands.For example, Dover was perceived as the bag that was closer to the housewives’ necessities: it was not transparent,it was resilient, and it had a closing system (however inefficient it may have been).

2. Houses–Sao Paulo

Since garbage collection was not performed daily, the large 100L black bags were sometimes used. These werepurchased at mass merchandisers or from door-to-door salesmen. Rarely were 100L bags purchased in the super-market. According to the group interviewed, garbage bags purchased in the supermarket were perceived as poorquality. “I used to purchase black bags in the supermarket, but due to [their] bad quality, I started to purchase[them] in the warehouses. The black bags are cheaper, their quality is better” (house, SP). “The garbage man comesthree times a week, therefore I use those 100L black bags; for the house, I use the little plastic bags” (house, SP).

In regard to the brand of the black bag, there wasn’t one specific preference. The housewives believed that there wasno specific brand that was of better quality, and that they only came with a guarantee from the manufacturer. “Ibuy it from a supplier. I am tired of changing brands, now I only buy from them” (house, SP).

The 100L black bags served as storage for the other house trash that generally was bagged in the blue trash bags.However, it was clear that if there was a smaller black bag in the market, “I would use all black.” The black colorwas associated with good quality. “Black is good! The thickness of the black is better, you can’t see the garbage, [theblack bag] is more resistant” (house, SP).

The garbage bags used inside the house, such as those in the kitchen and bathroom, are used similarly in apart-ments. The 20L and 30L blue bags were used as the supermarket bags were—for the kitchen sink (in smallerproportion in comparison to the apartments). However, in Rio, it was a bit different; there was a higher usage ofblack bags of smaller capacity (60L) sold at mass merchandisers or by salespeople.

In relation to the blue bags, they informed: “the blue is horrible, and not even that little thing is strong, thesupermarket bag is much better.” When asked “What little thing?” they answered, “the little strap/handle that ithas for us to tie it.” “Sincerely, the blue garbage bags, in my opinion, I won’t even buy” (house, SP). The issue ofprice was hardly brought up. Strength was the main factor for the housewives interviewed.

Another issue that was mentioned by the group, in relation to the 100L black bags, was the difficulty in closing itdue to its thickness. “The only inconvenience is that it’s difficult to close it. I’ve even purchased rubber bands forit” (house, SP).

12 TB0141

One of the interviewees mentioned having bought a different garbage bag from all the others, and how she liked itand was hoping to find it again in the supermarket. When its characteristics were explained, the other participantsof the group quickly asked for the brand and place where they could purchase it. (The housewives welcomed thirdparty referrals.) “The bag has a border as though it is folded over, it’s green, and I pull the sides and close. There isno need to tie the mouth.”

Brand Recognition

Upon asking the interviewees for brand names of garbage bags, it was with great difficulty that they cited Pro-Lixo,So-Lixo, Pra-casa, Nips, and So-Limpo.

Difficulties with Storing the Garbage

The task of storing the garbage was acknowledged as not easy by the interviewees. When they lived in houses, therewas the necessity of having to handle big bags of 100L, which were normally black and difficult to close.

When they lived in apartments, and normally the black bags were not used, they handled blue bags, which in theiropinion were weak and ripped easily. They mocked: “When we need to move the garbage, what woman doesn’twonder whether the bag will leak or rip!” (apartment, RJ). This was an issue dealt with on a daily, every other day,or two- or three-day basis, depending on whether the routine garbage removal took place in a house or an apart-ment.

PURCHASE OF GARBAGE BAGS

When the housewives went shopping, they experienced a lack of package imaging along with disorder in theshelves and aisles of the supermarkets. This was a unanimous perception. “They (the garbage bags) are well hidden,generally completely disorganized and mixed. They are usually on the bottom shelf with the cleaning products, andthe blue bag always stands out (SP and RJ). I think that is why nobody remembers the brands” (apartment, SP).

Regarding the exposure of garbage bag products in the supermarket, housewives had a suggestion to facilitate thedecision process at the time of purchase: “We look and have no idea of the size. The supermarket should display thesizes of the bags.”

1. Market Knowledge

Brands

There were numerous brands of bags in the markets, but were the brands known by the housewives? Did theypurchase by the brand?

In Rio, the housewives were more in tune with the garbage bag market than the purchasers in Sao Paulo. Quicklyand without hesitation, some participants of the group identified the Dover Roll brand, followed by Sanito andLixito. The similarities of these bags are that they are all blue; the differences are in the texture, or in other words,in the resilience.

Interviewees were requested to associate specific words to the brands, and they responded:

• Lixito was associated with the word fragile;• Dover Roll with roll; and• Sanito to cleanliness.

The housewives of Sao Paulo, initially a little shy and quiet, ended up citing Saco Limpo, Pro Limpo, and Pro Lixo.They were not able to clearly define the similarities, differences, or even the preferences between the brands. “Iprefer the one with the drawing of the little man.” “There are many confusing packages, because generally there isonly printing on the front.”

The housewives of houses in Rio selected, without much conviction, Modeplast, So Lixo, Pralixo, and Vulcao, butwere unable to distinguish between them. Some distinguished the products by the packaging, “If it is a goodpackage it gets attention.”

TB0141 13

For the housewives of Sao Paulo, there was no difference or similarity with the blue brands; they were usuallyconsidered the same and of equally poor quality.

Packaging

Despite the preference of packaging in rolled bags, the housewives from Sao Paulo are not big purchasers of them,especially since, in the market, the black bag (which was most used), came folded, not in rolls.

With regard to the packages, no comments were made about the terms “economy” or “super economy” garbagebags in either Rio de Janeiro or Sao Paulo. When asked, participants seemed not to know even one supplier, or thesignificance of such packaging. When even further stimulated, the response was:“It’s that one that comes with more and you pay less.”“It’s the size of the bag.”“It means I am not going to use so many bags for the amount of garbage I have—I am going to use less.”

It was confirmed that these terms were not part of the daily lexicon of the housewives.

2. Important Aspects for Purchase

For all the interviewees, resilience was a fundamental factor in choosing garbage bags. “When deciding, we knowif the bag is of good quality and [strong], by its weight.” This attribute was valued more by the people of Rio deJaneiro, since in Sao Paulo, strength was identified with black bags.

In Rio, where the blue bags were basically the norm, the differentiating factor was mainly based on the question ofstrength. As per the group, there were blue bags that were more resilient and others that were not.

Resilience was necessary to the Sao Paulo housewives who resided in houses, but this factor was not verbalized asthe first factor responsible for the purchase. The moment they decided to use black bags, it had already beendetermined that resilience was important, as they knew the black bag was synonymous with it. As per them, pricewas chosen as the deciding factor of the purchase.

For all the Sao Paulo housewives living in apartments, a garbage bag with ideal capacity/size was the primary factorin their purchase decision, although the question of resilience, once again, affected their purchase decision, to-gether with the price: “I see capacity first. It’s not worth purchasing it if is not the right size.”

In conclusion, resilience, size of the garbage bag, and price were important factors in the choosing of a garbage bag.The closing aspect of the bag was important; however, the participants did not mention it as a main factor. It isclear that an efficient closing system would have helped the housewife considerably.

Whether it was transparent or not, other than being connected with the resilience of the garbage bag, color wasalso associated with privacy. A Sao Paulo apartment housewife was decisive in bringing attention to the color as animportant factor in her choosing of garbage bags: “A clear garbage bag is like transparent clothes—takes away theprivacy” (apartment, SP).

THE NEW GARBAGE BAG

As previously brought to attention, there was no garbage bag that completely satisfied the demands and necessitiesof the housewives. But what would be the ideal garbage bag? What would its specifications be?

1. The Ideal Garbage Bag

Basically, the ideal garbage bag would need to be “something easy to close, resilient, with a different color from theothers.”

In Sao Paulo, in both groups, an efficient closing system was expected. The words “handle to close” were usedmany times. With the house group, this was an even more relevant attribute; after all, the closing of a strong, 100Lblack garbage bag is not an easy task, as has been mentioned. Resilience followed closely in importance after theclosing feature, which was followed by the color/opacity.

14 TB0141

In Rio, color and resilience came before the closing attribute. It was mentioned that Dover had the best closingmethod. Another color for the bag would have been ideal (mentioned by the group), as a way to differentiate thebag from the others. But they wanted “a product of quality with low price.”

In conclusion, the ideal bag needed to have a closing system, be resilient, opaque and not too clear.

2. Packaging Appearance (Plastic and Box)

Right after the participants defined the ideal garbage bag, a package was displayed with the goal of understandingthe product through this package.

In all three groups, without exception, the reaction was of pleasant surprise and gratitude for having designed a bagsimilar to the ideal one. They exclaimed: “This [is] it, look at the garbage bag! Very interesting, you pull, [it] closes,and you tie it” (Sao Paulo and Rio, apartments). “They made a product exactly the way we were talking” (referringto the ideal bag, RJ apartments). “If it was in the shelves I would take it” (house, SP). “The bag is elegant, big, andthe closing is great” (house, SP).

It was observed that the participants defined, through the packaging, the closing system with a handle and the wayto carry the bag when filled. However, generally, they focused on the color of the bag, the texture, size, and quantityof the bags inside the packaging. In other words, they insisted in analyzing the package, not by the concept of thebag, but by the information described on it. And they always made the movement of closing with the hands,showing how to close it. The drawstring was the big differentiating factor of the product.

Curiously, in Sao Paulo, the first reference was made to the Easy Close (Fecha Facil), opposite from in Rio, wherethe first reference was to the brand name, Climp. “You can close with the handles and carry it by the handle”(house, SP). “I thought it was [too] small for the outside and [too] big for the inside of the house. If there wereother sizes I would buy it” (house, SP).

The Packaging Preferences: Box or Plastic

The plastic packaging was shown to the house group of Sao Paulo and apartment group of Rio. The box packagingwas shown only to the apartment group in Sao Paulo.

Sao Paulo

Curiously in Sao Paulo, with both groups, there was a division in preference in relation to the box packaging andthe plastic packaging. Those that chose the box noticed it as more practical and pretty. “The plastic packagingdoesn’t work. The bag comes rolled inside; to take it out, one needs to take the entire roll out, pull, and store theentire roll again” (apartment, SP). “The box is different, it’s more [common] in the supermarket, it’s a differentiator,it is easier to take the bags out” (apartment, SP).

Those that chose the plastic packaging also depicted it as practical, but what determined their preference was theperception of the box “as being more expensive.” Those that preferred plastic argued that what was important wasthe ability to see the product.

When showing the packages—plastic and box—with the same price, there was a slight tendency to favor the box,especially with the apartment group.

The interviewee residents of houses did not perceive the drawstring bag as appropriate for large capacities. Almostalways, they referred to the new bags simply for the use of small quantities of garbage.

Rio de Janeiro

The cariocas (native residents of Rio) did not accept the box, saying that it was “more expensive, could wrinkle,and get wet.” “The box is a darling, but for the everyday, the other is better. The box is too chic” (apartments, RJ).Rio interviewees were more used to using the garbage bags that came in a roll, like Dover, and rejected any changewith the packaging.

TB0141 15

Packaging Elements

Two box packagings were displayed (green and blue) with different design elements. Preferences for aspects ofcolor, design, attractiveness, exposure, and clearness were studied.

The apartment residents in both Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro responded similarly to the different suggestedchanges, although there was no consensus. Some preferred the blue box; others, the green box. However, it wasnoticed that there was a tendency to mix the boxes, e.g., drawing one as the other, and mixing up the colors fromone to the other. But there was a consensus with the 50L size, which was more clearly identified as “appear[ing tohave] 50 bags quantity.” The Fecha Facil (Ease Close) in the blue package was thought to be more attractive. Somesuggestions from the interviewees were:

• “I would put the entire [amount of ]garbage [that] can fit inside [on the outside]”• “I would put the capacity inside of the garbage [bag]”• “Put that the bag has a bigger capacity, because it closes from the top, therefore you use more bag.”

As for the house group, a certain confusion of preferences was noticed. There was not one tendency; they mixedboth packages in an antagonist manner from the other two groups. It was not the new amenities that prevailed;they mixed the colors. They preferred the same design but had mixed preferences on the colors: “It’s the blue in thegreen design.” “It’s the green in the blue design.” Agreement was found with the attention of the Fecha Facil (EasyClose) as in the other two groups: “The Fecha Facil is what will make you want to know what it is.”

3. The Presentation of the Garbage Bag Climp Fecha Facil

After analyzing the packages, garbage bags with the Fecha Facil system were distributed. The objective was toevaluate whether the presented product had been well described in the packages.

The group members appeared to be curious, and when the bags were distributed, the first reaction was to test thehandles. As the bags were empty, some of the reactions were negative/contrary: “I was under the impression thatwhen you pull, they come together by themselves” (apartment, SP). But in both apartment groups, there was oneparticipant who explained how the handles worked and their efficiency when the bag was filled with garbage,which was automatically accepted by the other participants.

Once again, the color was very much related to resilience. When they were shown darker bags with handles, theyassociated them with a better texture, and when they tried the clear bag, the first reaction was “weak bag.”

When motivated to analyze the other aspects of the bags, the apartment groups automatically favored the sidestitching.

The house group of Sao Paulo reacted well to the new product, “it’s practical,” “appears to be hygienic,” but theydid not associate its use outside of the house, or in other words, with the 100L size. They would only use the bagsof 50L with the Fecha Facil system.

The Perception of Resilience Prevails

“[It] is not [resilient]; if only [it] had the thickness of the black one!!! What if it’s full? Will the handles manage?”(house, SP).

“The package gives the impression [that] the bag [is] better, from the packaging that [it] comes in, we have the ideathat [it] is pretty [resilient], and that is not what it feels like” (the presented bag—house, Sao Paulo).

For the house participants, closing the 100L resilient black bag was difficult if it was full of garbage, as alreadymentioned. Therefore, it can be expected they would appreciate the closing system if the bag was perceived asresilient. They were tired of choosing garbage bags and were loyal to their door-to-door supplier. They must becertain of its strength. They viewed the new bags as hygienic and practical, even “beautiful,” but would purchasethem only if they were dark and resilient, since the ones presented were clear and transparent. “Bags with darkercolors, I wouldn’t think twice; [they] would be adopted at my house.”

16 TB0141

The questions from the participants were constant. They wanted to know the price, the sizes/capacity of the bags,the color. They appeared to be anxious for the answers. “If it has an affordable price, that would be wonderful, itwill be the most purchased bag in the market” (apartment, Rio). “Independent from the price, I would buy it, I[would] like to try [it]” (apartment, SP).

4. Advantages of the New Garbage Bag

Asked what advantages or benefits were noticed in the new garbage bags when compared to the ones already on themarket, they quickly responded, “the closing of the bag.” “To close the garbage and not let it leak…and to be ableto carry it.” “[The garbage bag} is not Bom Bril (steel wool pad), but it has 1001 utilities.”

Participants were disposed to purchasing the bag because of the drawstring closing feature; however for the major-ity, the actual purchasing was related to the price: “I would certainly purchase it, depending on the price.” “If theprice is more, I won’t purchase.”

The garbage bags with Fecha Facil offered other uses mentioned by the participants, such as the storing of sheets,shoes, dirty clothes, towels, books, or clothes that they don’t use anymore. And better, “it can be hung.”

5. The Price

It can be clearly noted that there were different price perceptions between Sao Paulo and Rio. This differencebasically existed in the groupings of existing garbage bags in the market, in other words:

• In Rio, the existing plastic garbage bags were divided into two groups:– The majority of the plastic bags in the market were simple and weak– Dover Roll were more milky, thick, and had a closing system (‘wings/ears’)

• In Sao Paulo, there was no differentiation. Blue bags were perceived as “all weak” and “with weak handles.”Housewives did not believe that the handle could be a differentiator. The groups are:– The blue bags– The black bags

Classifying them in the order above, the following variety in price was found:

Sao Paulo

The price of a new garbage bag should not differ much from the blue bags, or be much more:• The housewife residents in apartments would pay the same as for Dover, even though it had a different

closing system.• The housewives of houses admitted to be willing to pay a bit more than for Dover.

Rio de Janeiro

The comparison of price was with Dover, the bag acknowledged by the group as the one of better quality. Theyadmitted a willingness to pay a certain value/premium over Dover.

In any case, the participants from both groups believed the bags to be too expensive, especially the blue ones, sincethey were not considered to be worth what they paid for them. In relation to the black bags, there was not much ofa complaint regarding its price. However, there was a preference stated for a green color as it was perceived as“prettier” and “different” and “easier to find on the shelf.”

With regard to color vs. resilience, darker colors were stated as better, since the darker bags appeared to be moreresilient. This perception was even greater in Sao Paulo. In Rio, there was no distinction; both colors could beresilient.

OTHER BAGS

Even showing the Tie Tie (bags with ties—plastic or “twist–ums”) and the Handle Tie (bags like supermarketplastic bags with “handles”), the preference was still the “bag with handle” (drawstring).

TB0141 17

For the Tie Tie, some interviewees believed the bag to be more resilient under the weight of the garbage and that itwould be cheaper. As for others, they believed the method to be more complicated due to the number of edges.

For the Handle Tie, the perception was the same as of the Tie Tie: there were those that liked it and those that didnot. They believed it that it would be cheaper than the drawstring.

18 TB0141

Appendix 4 Purchase Intercept Interviews

1. Consumer Data

Purchases by gender:• Women – 71.72%• Men – 28.28%

During the study, it was discovered that 8.57% of the men who purchased garbage bags bought the ones thattheir wives had asked for, so a more accurate proportion was:

• Women – 74.14%• Men – 25.86%

2. Market Data: Purchases

The percentage of garbage bags in rolls, with and without handles, was calculated:• Garbage bags in rolls – 81.21%• Garbage bags w/handles in rolls – 18.79%

The brand share of garbage bags in rolls was calculated:• Limp-o-Lixo* – 48.12%• Dover Roll – 19.05%• Koleta** – 18.30%• Sendas – 14.53%

*All Limp-o-Lixo were considered in this line: super-economy and multi-use**All Koletas were considered in this line: super-economy, sink/bathroom, condominium, and black.

Garbage Bags with Handles in Rolls:• Climp Fecha Facil – 88.17%• Dover Roll with handle – 11.83%

Brand Share of Major Brands:• Limp-o-Lixo – 38.79%• Dover Roll – 15.35%• Climp – 16.57%• Koleta – 14.75%• Sendas – 12.32%• Dover Roll with handle – 2.22%

The table below shows the brand preference, in accordance with the gender of the consumer:

Sex Climp Dover Roll Dover Roll w/handle Koleta Limp-o-Lixo SendasFemale 18.31% 17.18% 2.25% 14.08% 39.44% 8.74%Male 12.14% 10.71% 2.14% 16.44% 37.14% 21.43%

Market Share by Manufacturer:• Ad-Lider Embalagens, SA – 55.35%• Fort-Roll Ind. Com. Exp. Ltda. – 29.90%• Colmag Dist. Com. E Ind. Ltda. – 14.75%

Sales by Capacity of BagOnly the 15, 30, 50, and 100 liter bags were analyzed; other types, such as bath and sink bags, were notconsidered:

• 15 Liters – 8.68%• 30 Liters – 22.49%• 50 Liters – 35.31%• 100 Liters – 33.52%

TB0141 19

The following table shows the percentage relative to the sale of each brand, by size.

Size/Product Climp Dover Roll DR w/handle Koleta Limp-o-Lixo Sendas Total15 Liters 20.45% 11.37% 11.37% 34.09% 22.72% 100%30 Liters 16.67% 13.16% 1.75% 11.40% 35.09% 21.93% 100%50 Liters 17.32% 27.19% 1.68% 14.52% 34.64% 10.05% 100%100 Liters 15.88% 10.59% 3.53% 14.12% 50.00% 5.88% 100%

This table shows the percentage of each brand’s sales relative to the size.

Size/Product Climp Dover Roll DR w/handle Koleta Limp-o-Lixo Sendas15 Liters 10.46% 6.49% 7.35% 7.43% 15.87%30 Liters 22.09% 19.48% 18.18% 19.12% 19.80% 39.68%50 Liters 36.05% 50.65% 27.27% 38.24% 30.69% 28.58%100 Liters 31.40% 23.38% 54.55% 35.29% 42.08% 15.87%Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

Periodic Purchases:The following is an analysis of periodic purchases. In case of a different period, it was considered as the closestto it.

• Weekly – 2.12%• Every 15 days (twice a month) – 22.08%• Monthly – 71.76%• Every two months – 4.03%

The following table shows the percentage of total bags purchased, relative to the brand, for each period.

Period/Product Climp Dover Roll DR w/handle Koleta Limp-o-Lixo Sendas TotalWeekly 10.00% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 20.00% 40.00% 100%Twice a month 20.19% 5.77% 0.96% 6.73% 56.73% 9.62% 100%Monthly 16.57% 18.93% 2.66% 15.09% 34.62% 12.13% 100%Every 2 months 5.26% 21.05% 0.00% 36.85% 31.58% 5.26% 100%

Note: The weekly purchase was performed by males 66.67% of the time.

In this table, the percentage is shown by period of sale for each brand.

Period/Product Climp Dover Roll DR w/handle Koleta Limp-o-Lixo SendasWeekly 1.27% 9.09% 2.99% 1.09% 7.14%Twice a month 26.58% 8.11% 9.09% 10.45% 32.07% 17.86%Monthly 70.88% 86.49% 81.82% 76.12% 63.58% 73.21%Every 2 months 1.27% 5.40% 10.45% 3.26% 1.79%Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

From the data collected, it was also possible to find a middle period for the repetition purchase of each brand,better displayed below:

Average Time between Purchases• Climp – 26.01 days• Limp-o-Lixo – 25.92 days• Dover Roll w/handle – 26.55 days• Sendas – 26.21 days• Dover Roll – 30.41 days• Koleta – 30.88 days

20 TB0141

Purchase Motivator

Motive/Product Geral Climp Dover Roll DR w/handle Koleta Limp-o-Lixo SendasBrand 27.68% 8.54% 55.26% 45.45% 31.51% 30.73% 1.64%Price 15.15% 1.22% 18.18% 10.96% 4.69% 90.16%Benefit Cost 13.94% 4.88% 3.95% 9.59% 28.65%Quality 12.93% 17.07% 25.00% 18.18% 6.85% 11.46% 3.28%Practicality 10.71% 59.76% 1.32% 18.18% 0.52%Strength 5.66% 2.44% 26.03% 3.65%No opinion 5.05% 4.88% 5.26% 8.22% 5.73%Promotion 4.44% 3.95% 9.90%Purchase by order 2.42% 5.26% 1.37% 3.65%No defined brand 0.61% 1.37% 1.04%Sink 0.61% 4.11%Color 0.20% 1.22% 1.64%Do not place much weight 0.20% 1.64%First purchase 0.20% 1.64%Garbage bag is not so important 0.20% 1.64%

100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

TB0141 21

Appendix 5