Colgate Max Fresh: Global Brand Roll-Out
1. Assess the CMF launch in the US market.
The launch in the US was a safe launch—harnessing an already trendy/popular fresh breath technology and piggybacking on a successful US launch of Listerine Breath Strips as well as Crest brand’s “Crest + Scope”. CMF also capitalized on the consumer desire for cosmetic benefits – highlighting the “freshness and whitening” aspects of their product. CMF used a safe and economical option that held a high probability of success in the US.
It contributed to Colgate’s record share in 2004, successfully trading existing Colgate consumers to a higher-priced premium brand. After CMF was launched, value share went to 34.8% in the U.SS. market. In addition, CP wisely used mini breath strips as a component of Colgate Max Fresh as it had already enjoyed good success within the US market.
2. Were CP China’s changes to the CMF marketing launch program justifiable?
All companies need to make adaptations to be successful in foreign markets. This was especially true with CMF, particularly with the …show more content…
Creating a successful product is important to capture market share and ensure strong profit margins. Each time a launch gets pushed back, packaging is re-designed or study is conducted, it directly impacts the bottom line. With that being said, the intense research completed prior to the CMF launch in China did pay off, however, it would have been more prudent to have the same type of packaging in all three countries discussed in order to reduce costs. Of course, that may have proven difficult due to the cultural differences between the US, China and Mexico. CMF global market introduction was muted due to the emerging markets preference for therapeutic toothpaste as well as price sensitivity because CMF is considered a higher tier (price point)
1. Assess the CMF launch in the US market.
The launch in the US was a safe launch—harnessing an already trendy/popular fresh breath technology and piggybacking on a successful US launch of Listerine Breath Strips as well as Crest brand’s “Crest + Scope”. CMF also capitalized on the consumer desire for cosmetic benefits – highlighting the “freshness and whitening” aspects of their product. CMF used a safe and economical option that held a high probability of success in the US.
It contributed to Colgate’s record share in 2004, successfully trading existing Colgate consumers to a higher-priced premium brand. After CMF was launched, value share went to 34.8% in the U.SS. market. In addition, CP wisely used mini breath strips as a component of Colgate Max Fresh as it had already enjoyed good success within the US market.
2. Were CP China’s changes to the CMF marketing launch program justifiable?
All companies need to make adaptations to be successful in foreign markets. This was especially true with CMF, particularly with the …show more content…
Creating a successful product is important to capture market share and ensure strong profit margins. Each time a launch gets pushed back, packaging is re-designed or study is conducted, it directly impacts the bottom line. With that being said, the intense research completed prior to the CMF launch in China did pay off, however, it would have been more prudent to have the same type of packaging in all three countries discussed in order to reduce costs. Of course, that may have proven difficult due to the cultural differences between the US, China and Mexico. CMF global market introduction was muted due to the emerging markets preference for therapeutic toothpaste as well as price sensitivity because CMF is considered a higher tier (price point)