CONTEHD i, Executive Sumnafy 21 Key Conclusions 3· Project Protocol a, Sunrmary Perspective or Results Across Countries 15 5, How Were LocationslGraup Typer Differentiated! General Principals 16 6, Expected Benefits (All Groups, All Locations) 18 i, Expected Oirbenefits (Ril Groups, All Locations) Ip 8, Importance Rlnking of principal Benefits 20 9, Consumer Interpretations of Benefit Technology 21 10, Alpha U,K, Toplfne Observations 23 11, Alpha Swiss Topline Observations 28 12, Alpha German ropllne Observations 33 13, Alpha Finnish iPpline Observations 37 11, Appendix i: Standard Expressions for Introducing Principal Benefits 41 15, Appendix II: Copy Puertionnaire (Rll Locations) pj Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 1, EXEC~IYE S~RI O O ~1 N ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni 2. KEY CONCtUS~ONS O C11 U1 0\ (JJ Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 a, PROJEC'I PROTOCOL ~CI O P.! ~1 Ir; 0\ Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 PROJECT ALPHA: PROTOCOL BACKGROUND the brief was to conduct a series of qualitative discussion groups in a European centres (U,K,, Switzerland, Germany and Finland) using naive consumers all of whom were smolrers, Deadline for completion Including reporting was June 26th (for June 30th) 1987, PRIME OBJECTIYE To determine the relative impact that demonstrated awareness of product benefits has on consumer reaction to the 1CAPRI' ultra slim product, principal benefits of concern being loner sidestream and ash generation, tower risk of accidental fire and lower biological activity, ADDITIONAL ISSUES i, It was considered important to examine the trade-off of these 'benefits of concern' against each other and against other attributes of the product, 2, The impact of the 'benefits of concern' on willingness to purchase was measured quantitatively. 3, The impact of eAPRI brand name and imagery was separately assessed as a secondary issue, a, Reaction to availability of Own main brand in the ultra slim format was assessed, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 5, Reactions to the product were measured pre- and pcst· sampling in order to determine the sensory contribution to the creidibiiity of the offer, 6, tonrumer recruits were rtringent~y security screened regarding media or tobacco associations, I, Introduction of the towered biological activity' benefit was strictly standardised and specific expression sanctioned by Legal Departant. Ihe other principal benefits were also standardised, 8, The introduction of the lover biological activity benefit was designed to also clarify the issue of specific activity vs dose level activity, 9. Every effort was made to ensure mawimurn comparability of research structure across the 4 centres, Depending on language constraints, ~ groups were either personally moderated or monitored with parallel translation, SAMPLING Number and composition of discussion groups Is a most important Aspect of this study since this will determine the capability to examine how attitudeslreactions differ as a function of delivery level of usual main brand, sex, age, and social class' Since the study covered 4 European centres, cross· cultural effects may also be examined, The following sampling scheme was adopted for each country: Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·11· 8 GROUPS, 8 INDIVIDUALS PER GROUP, EACH GROUP DURATION 1 1/2·2 HOURS, GROUP TYPES I, All male, low tar, 501 aged 20·30, 501 aged 40·50 I Social 2, All male, full flavour, 50t aged 20·30, 501 aged 40·50 3. All female, low tar, 501 aged 20·30, 50X aged 40-50 4. All female, full flavour, 50: aged 20-30, 501 aged 40·50 5, Mixed sex, mixed delivery, aged 20-50, social class B/C1 6. Mixed sex, mixed delivery, aged 20-50, social class C2/0E 7, Mixed sex, full flavour, aged 20050, social class C1/C2 8, Mixed sex, low tar, aged 20-50, social class C1/C2 · U,K, social class norms have been used, cultural equivalents Here adopted in each country, · 'Full flavour' defined as 14 mg and above, 'Low tar' defined as sub 10 Rlgl OUALITATIYE DISCUSSION STRUCTURE i, Oetermi ne unprompted consumer reactf on to the product presented blind and without the opportunity to smoke it, Examine expectations of sensory performance, aesthetics, social reaction to the user, expected user type, perceived benefits, perceived disbenefitsl 2. If principal benefits of concern have not appeared unpromptedly, introduce them using standardised phrases, then hierarchise all perceived benefits and perform a similar exercise for perceived disbenefits, 3, Introduce a 'willingness to purchase' scale with a mid· point baseline set at own (conventlonal) brand, Conrensus- scale following hypothetical scenarios: Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·12- (a) The ultra slim smokes just as well as conventional cigarettes but has no other obvious benefit apart from appearance. (b) The ultra slim smokes just as well as conventional cigarettes and has the benefit of lower biological activity, (c) The ultra slim smokes just as well as conventional cigarettes and has the benefits of loner Sldestream, ash and fire risk. (d) The ultra slim smokes just as well as conventional cigarettes and has the combined benefits of lower sidestrean, ash and fire risk, and lower biological activity, (e) The ultra slim does not smoke as well Is conventional cigarettes and has no other obvious benefit apart from appearance. (f) the ultra slim does not smoke as well as conventional cigarettes but has the benefit of lower biological activityl (g) The ultra slim does not smoke as well as conventional cigarettes but has the benefits of lower sidestrean, ash and fire risk, (h) The ultra slim does not smoke as well as a conventional cigarette but does have lower sidestream, ash, fire risk, and lower biological activity, a, Now sample the product and fully probe for sensory reactions and the credibility of sidestteam, ash, fire risk and low biological activity claims. Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·13· S, Introduce a consensus sensory sealing exereise using limited attributes (draw effort, impact, irritation, taste, acceptability) and compare the ultra sliP against conventional cigarettes, Scale for willingness to purchase and establish consensus over which of the hypothetical scenario's detailed previously j3) best describes the product, 6, Reveal brand name and packaging and probe fully, Examine impact on willingness to purchase, 7, Examine reaction to the possibility of own Main brand being available in the ultra slim format tin with and without benefits mode). Measure using the willingness to purchase scale, a, Measure price sensitivity for the following offers: (a) CAPRI, without 'benafits of concern', (b) CAPRI, with Ibenefits of concern', (e) Own brand in ultra slim format without 'benefits of concern', (d) Own brand in ultra slim fonat with 'benefits of concern", 9. Ptrfon a syndicate exercise a 'how would ~j! market the product?', requiring the group to consider: Who to? What price7 What copy line benefits! What imagery! 1O, Confidentiality brief and close, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 -14- SUMMARY OISCUSStON SWUC'TURE 1, Unyrompted reaction, blind and unlit, Expectations, perceived benefits/disbenefits, 2, Introduction of 'standardl benefits, 3, Hierarchlsation of benefitsldfsbenefitsI 4, Willingness to purchase scaling of benefit combinations, 5, Sampling, sensory reactions and credibility of benefits, 6, Sensory scaling, 7, Willingness to purchase scaling, 8, Introduction of brand name and packaging, reactionl expectations, 9. Willingness to purchase scaling, 10 Reaction to concept of onn maj n brand as an ultra slim, II, Willingness to purchase scaling, 12, Price sensf tf vity sc11 ing, 13, Syndicate exercise an promotional strategy, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 4, SUMMARY PERSPECTIVE OF RESULTS ACROSS COUNTRIES n o I' j V1 In '·I C] Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·IS· PROJECT ALPHA: SUMMARY PERSPEC~IYE OF RESULTS I11.X, ivit2,rlad Bruoy/Fillml Biological Relevance J Activity Credibility XX X XX low Relevance ~( Sidestreu Credibility X X X Low Relevance X X X X Ash Credibility X J Low Fire Relevance I ,I· Risk Credibility X X For fennales r' J For Males and Females I X X/I X For Young For Old I I I I I CAPRI Execution I , X I I I Full Flavour Reaction XX X X Low Tar Reaction 1 5 1 Sensory Reaction X/: ItnroluiTadiie/H~~~nic / i Biological Activity XX X xl: Copy Line Sidestream 1 I xx Xll Usage Ash X XX X X Fire Risk x xx X xll ~ J Strong Yes (: Yes I :Maybe X I No XX I Strong No, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 5, HDW WERE 10CATIONSIGROUP MPES DIFFERENTIATED? GENEI~~PRINnPALS Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 -16· HOU WERE THE LOCATIONS/GROUP TYPES DIFFERENTIATED! GENERAL PRINCIPALS I, While all locations showed consumers to be generally opposed to communication of rational benefits, Finland and the U,K, were relatively more responsive whilst Switzerland was most strongly opposed, All locations were in favour of comnunication of elegance, shape, taste and tactile aspects, 2, Perceived relevance of principal benefits was the subject of high consensus across locations, Lower biological activity and sidestream were consistently endorsed as most relevant, with biological activity as the leading concern (although in Germany the benefit 'ties' with low sidestream as a key issue and in Flniand, sidestream dominates), low fire risk is relevant to specific sub· group across all locations and lower ash is generally lacking relevance in all cultures (being seen as 'either an all dr nothing' benefit), 3, Credibility of principal benefits as defined within the ultra slim offering is uniformly low across all locations, a, Females, and lower delivery smokers are generally more responsive to the product across all locations, 5, Younger consumers are generally more responsive to the product, with the exception of Germany, where younger smokers currently show a trend to favour fuller flavour propositions, 6, Social class is not a strong differentiator of attitudes although professional classes tend to be more responsive across locations, The exception here is the U,K, where class is the dominant variable, lower social class subjects being actively antagonistic, B Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·17- 7, All locations see the product as almost exclusively a female proposition (even presented blind), In the U,K,, subjects could imagine a possible extension to the less gender conscious young generation males, a. The 1CAPRI' inagerylpackaging execution was positively received in the U,K,, Gennan reaction was neutral shading to positive, Swiss reaction was generally negative, while for the finns the imagery/packaging was the major determinant of attitude to the product, generally acting to offset a negative response to the blind product, 9, Reaction to the sensory property of the product was very similar across locations, being too weal: for full navaur smokers and often too strong in certain specific attributes for low tar smokers (flavour, aftertaste), In general however low tar smokers respond well to the product, 10, Finnlsh consumers are the relatively unusual group in this research, shoving a higher level of response to the lower sidestream concept as a reflection of their stronger social rather than personal health motivation, Finnlsh response to the product seemed disproportlonately conditional on the presence of imagerylpack etc,, and response to the proposition (espeeially In terms of describing 'user types' showed a marked personal dissociation (i.e~ the brand was seen as being so acutely aspiraticnal as to be 'good, but not all for me or for everyday use'), this 'alienation' would probably decline with further exposure to the product, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 6. MPEC'TED BENEFITS (AIIGROUPS All LOCAtIONSJ 1 Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·18· EXPECTED BENEFITS OERIYElj FROH THE BLINO/UNLI'T PRODUCT (ALL LOCATIOIS, ALI GROUPS) Elegant appearance Low tar with taste Stow burning Compact packaging Less fillers Cheaperllast longer Coolerlmilder Not so much nicotine Firmer than usual cigarettes Special filter action Slim south sensation Novel appearance/origivlity Feminine/far ladies For low consumption light smokers Beginners cigarette Limits daily intake Nice feel in the hand A snort break cigarette Attracts curiosity Less harmful/less tar and nicotine Less smoke" Fingers may not stain Ashtray would hold more butts Looks cleaner Could be smoked in a car To smoke in the hoPe Wouldn't attract too much attention Wont crush so easily Would fit well behind the ear 'Infrequent reference, u Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 'I, EXPECTED OtSBENEFrTS (All G9OUPS, ALL IOCAI~S! O O IJ: In u O Oa Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·· ·19· EXPECTED DISBENEFITS DERIVED FROH THE BLINDIVN1IT PRboucr (ALL 10CATIONS, ALI GROUPS) Difficult draw Unusual mouth Sensation Effeminate Fragile Poor value Too tightly packed Difficult to hold Fast burning May extinguish too easily Socially uncomfortable Yenti lation (mildness/dryness) Unconventional smoker image Reminiscent of roll·ups Less tobacco Low satisfaction Too thinltoo long Too much paper in relation to tobacco too uniform Contrived sample appearance Filter may not be efficient enough May i ncrease consumption May generate more smoke than usual Toylike · not serious May be more expensive iaste on re-lighting may be aversive ,, Would attract Icadgers' Not apt for standard ashtray A commercial decepti on Long filter/less tobacco Children may mistake for sweets Would break in the pocket Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 8. IMPORTANCE RANKING OF PRINCIPAL BENEFITS h Q If! CI1 Cr: G Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·20· IMPORTANCE RANKING OF PRINCIPAL BENEFITS U.K, Switzerland Germany Finland lower biological Ilower biological I lower sidestream smoke Lower sidestream acti vity activity lower bi ological acti vity I sroke lower sidestream I Lower sidestrean I lower tire risk lower biological smoke smoke acti vi ty Lower fire risk Lower ash Lower ash Loner fire risk Lower fire risk Lower aSh lower ash Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 g, CONSUMER INTERPRETATIONS OF BENEFIT TECHHOLOGY Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 10, ALPHA U,K, TOPL!NE OBSERYATIDNS a ;3 P; L'1 In U W Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·23· ALPHA U,K. TOPLINE OBSERVATIDHS 1~ Age and sex both strongly condition response to the product, Even blind, the product is seen as a dominantly female proposition and females respond more positively to it, Younger consumers ate generally more positive (20·30), 2, Social class is a particularly strong conditioning factor, upper social classes are relatively positive and loner social class subjects are actually antagonistic, fhf s was a very polarlsed response, 3. Rejection by lower social class subjects was largely due to activation of social dlssonance (expected embarassment) with Some evidence of active defending against personal health concern, which the product tends to act as a reminder of, a, The product is generally seen as a 'beginners' cigarette for 18·25's, principally women, homosexuals, and Iposeurs', Some positive reference was made to the prospect of the product appealing to less gender conscious young males, 5, Lower social class, male and older subjects associated the product with pandering to non·smokers and the anti· smoking lobby i,e,'these eigrette benefits are all for the good of non·smoters · so why should i put myself out on their behalf', The manufacturer in this Instance Is seen as being~engaged in a 'sell·outl. 6, The lower sidestream characteristic was generally not Seen as credible (despite the concept being regarded as relevant), This was clearly because the sidestream plume is the immediate cue used as the basis of judgement, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 7, Low asn on the other hand was seen as marginally credible, but not relevant: 'a butt in an ashtray is a butt in an ashtray · the only true innovation here would be an ash · or no ash situation', a, low fire risk was seen Is relevant, especially by office workers jtelephone) and craftsmen, where wort distraction often involves putting the cigarette down, Credibility however was questionable and the counter argument was raised that the Stick, being lighter and not designed to 'fitl in arhtray slots Has auch more likely to fall out of the ashtray, g, A more significant 'serendipitous' benefit of the self· extinguishing feature seemed much more important · namely the value for money implication of a cigarette that doesn't burn away to nothing in the ashtrayl Added to this, subjects reported that the cigarette didn't show the usual aversive taste on re·llghting, 10, Prior to smoking, the perceived firmness thigh) of the rod was an important cue leading to an expectation of slow burn rate and some disagreement about whether the draw would be harder or easier than usual cigarettes (majDrity opinion was that high firnness would help the draw), 11, Unlit tobacco smell was an important cue to expectations of product strength thigh), This offset to some extent any 1Jurprise' factor on subsequent rlM~ing. 12, Less tobacco was not seen as a 'rip-off' but was seen as a rneanr of funding 'benefits', therefore very few subjects supported the idea of pricing over conventional expectation level, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·25· 13, Older men, especi aly of lower soci o-economi c class, were unanimous in seeing the cigarette as sexually ambivalent and women were worried on the same score (i.el that men using such a product were lacking in Ivirility'). However, women Saw the product as being acceptable for younger, more fashionable males, 14. 'CAPAI:' imagery was seen positively (especiatly by women) in the extent to which it 'cleans up the smokers act' i.e~ is clean, spare In design, colourful and contemporary, Hales appreciated the design, while acknowledging that it was clearly female oriented. The immediate association of the packaging to other goods: perfume, chocolates, did not apper to be a negative, in fact this aspect apparently reinforced the concept of cigarette purchasing as 'se~f· 4ifingll 15. Hen volunteered the parallel of perfumes and aftershaves marketing to that of CAPRI, ~~e, why not market Ihis and hers' versions of the same brand much as big perfume houses do, with relevant pact changer, but an association to the same house name, 16, 'CAPRI1 asseciated immediately with cars and sports for men · a JPS·like execution was a very common theme, gold/black and white designs being a consensus view. Women were also positive advocates of a bolder colouring approach. An ultra slims JPS was apparently a strong potential concept to both sexes. 17, The product var not seen as JoEially en~barassing, in fact, especially for women, it has clear prestige and elegance associations. As a caution, this association gets dangerously close to novelty 1Sobranie' type status, and tends to be so prestigious that while it may be aspirational for upper social classes it is a positively unattainaaie and therefore rejected iaage for lower ~CI Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·26- social class women who do fear the attribution of having lairs and graces', The product was described as a 'yupple cigarette', 18~ Those for whom CAPRI is aspiratfonal tended to think that the prodult would actually heip to make then less socially conspicuous as smokers (though not because of loner si dest ream), 19, The carton packaging was unanimously seen as positive, especially the compactness, protection and easier access to withdrawing pacts, The extra packing us not seen in any way as a Icon', 20, On smoking, the unfamiliarity of handlinglsire in fingers and lips was seen limply as a matter of re·learnlng, Here negatively, the product was seen as reminiscent of 21, The American blend Character was inrmedlately identified Ijust like Marlboro', negatively received and generally describe as drying, strong smelling and over flavoured, 22, Sensory characteristics were seen as out of balance, i,el some characteristics more in common with low tar products (merhanlcs, irritation, impact) and others more In common with full favour products (flavour, aftertaste), 23, Repeatedly the product was reported to very obviously get stronger a it is smoked down, and satisfaction in first puffs is seen as a problem. 24, Filter end stain was very often commented on as more conspicuous and was an important cue most frequently attributed to the purported better performance on the biological test (i,e, more stain, more extraction), The idea of a standard biological test was taken completely a for granted and unpuestioned, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·27· 25. While the biological test was taken for granted, consumers e~ually had no real concept of either dose level ~ specific activity, nor were they all that bothered, Host sekers made it clear that they accept the risk of smoking and the social pressure factor is seen as more disturbing, All risk was clearly seen as relative and being better on a biological test was still only relative~ better, Consumers were clear that they were more concerned that 'harping' on about biological testing would only tend to attract more debate, and this was regarded as something devoutly to be avoided, Thus, while biological test performance was seen as relevant it was not seen as credible to the ~nti·smoking lobby and therefore not credible to pursue, 26, The idea of the product as a 'speclal occasion' cigarette was prevalent (i,e, to use in social situations, in clubs, restaurants etc, rather than as an everyday use product), 27, The notion that the cigarette may be 'saferl was somewhat defeated by the widespread view that such a position would simply lead to smokers feeling they had license to smoke morel 281 In advertising promotion these consumers were in favour of image, lifestyle and appearance being the principal platforms, with minority support for the biological activity argument (pending concrete third party endorsement) and strictly limited support for the sidestream case, Ash and fire risk were not seen as viable advertising platforms, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 11~ ALPHA SWISS IOPLIHE OBSERYATIONS d C r, C~1 In Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·28· ALPHA SWISS TOPLINE OBSERVATIONS 1, Most groups talked spontaneously about health concern and Ipollution' (with the exception of fire risk which was seen as not salient), the problem however was clearly the perceived difficulty in using 'benefitsl in overt conununication, the prospect of direct communication Ishocted' the groups and animated dissonance, The group clearly preferred the Ibeneflts' to be implied (especially full flavour smokers), 2~ Smoking is seen as dangerous and risky · 'to smoke is to risk take but if one does not take this risk, there is no attraction', 3, There was general suspicion of manufacturers · credibility Of ~Pllcl~imS would teouire mlssive certificatiPn (especially given the Barclay eontroverry), Rational/ scientific language is not credible, a. Less ash and less fire risk were not at all credible (a) because of the way they are validated from perceptual cues (especially the latter) and (b) because of Isubconscious disdain' of non·risty behaviour, 5, Rational benefits were seen as antitheticat to the hedonic raison d'etre of smoking "for me, to smoke is to take riskY, 6, Consumers were clear that the principal arguments for this product should be pleasure, taste, and social appearance~ 7, Ifo smoke is to make smoke and to surround the other' there was much subconscious reference to smoking as In aggressive act of self-assertion, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 -29· S, The ultra sliP was seen as tending to break the cigarette out of the traditional domain, provoking experimental and selfconscious behaviour, 91 The cigarettes were seen as 'class' and 'elegant' especially for women, The imagery tended to polarise expectations of the cigarette as being either for high status alder women or 'young trendies'l The Imagery clearly confused these two and was generally liked as a design exercise but not for a cigarette brand, 10, The brand name CAPRI was very negative inspiring the clear association to a well known song "Capri · cest fini', Other associations were, outmoded kitch, not relevant to cigarettes, faded glory, 11, Use of 'benefits' was clearly seen as a position of weakness on the part of the manufacturer · a case of the 'producer selling the consumer out to the antl's'l As smokers, the Swiss expect the manufacturer to be convinced about his own product, 12, For these consumers, an incredible act (smoking) cannot be defended by rational reasons, uld these consumers all agree that smoking s i rrational , Rational argument is seen as a posture Of defence, The very act of arguing or conrmunicating that you are right, Inplles that you are not - this is the 'language of culpability', 13, Rational communication is generally alien to the Swiss, cigarette communication being almost exclusively hedonic (i,e, taste, pleasure, satisfaction), 14, The product threw up a clear contradiction of farm and taste · its form implying fine mild taste, therefore there was some surprise at the strength of taste which manifested for some consumers las would be predicted by b Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·30· dissonance Cheery) as an assertion that the product had no taste, 15, Swiss consumers want images for the product · to help set it in a definable universe, The current packaging is not image and life style linked strongly enough for them · this showed in a strong demand for clarification of who or what the product was aimed at. 16, Differences in response to the product were found by age, sex and usual delivery level smoked, Male full flavour smokers totally reject the product on values of masculinity land an implied fear of homosexuality), There was 1 clear rejection of being seen in public with CAPRI: 'don't lint this with me!', CAPRI was seen by there consumers as fragile, perfumed and low delivery, Full flavour men strongly reject the idea of this product as IlesJ harmful', reporting a clear desire for full sensory reward and rejecting the attenuation of visual·tactite features, 17, In general, the view on 'benefitsl was that if the cigarette is astonishingly different (which the appearance ~) then 'beRefits', to be credible, must be similarly sc, But outstanding benefits were clearly not seen to be announcing themrelvesl 18, Older smokers were more negative than younger smokers, who themselves looted for 'enabling' or authorlslng messages, or the assurance that others in their peer group may be using the product, 19, Full flavour women smokers also reject the product on the basis that they look for tactile sensation and hedonic pleasure · the ultra slim was referred to as a 'gadqet','not a large sensual pleasure', a 'babyl cigarette,.,' risk is a part of consuming life, don't tell me its safer, all cigarettes are harmful, I: consciously take the risk', Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: nill h) ·31· 20, The draw effort of the cigarette was widely disliked, the product beloaing seer as a thing of nori, not of pleasure, 21, Females saw the packaging as for the Iboudoir', not consonant with cigarettes despite being a nice design per rl~ The pacbging served to reinforce the perceived unreality of the cigarettes and most associations were to chocolates, Irleenex, condoms, perfumes, 22, Females expected to use the product were very polarised l,e, very young females looking for something different or older (40~) high status women looking for a very pure Iclassl look, Hen could not imagine the product as anything other than a womens cigarette, The length and white tipping tend to inhibit imagining a potential male platform, 23, In general these consumers had great frustration determining the niche for this product, definition of the product being currently elusive, This was very negative since subjects clearly wanted to see the product in a position which they could define themselves in relation to, 24, The low tar males responded favourably to the originality of the product, but in this form found acceptance very difficult since the slimness is a clear social signal (whereas they can smoke conventional site low tar without being exposed as weak), 25, These Swiss smokers were apparently quite repressed with regard to dissonant health concern and social pressure · they were all clear that heavy communication of 'benefits' would simply add to the repression load ,I~'con~nunieatlon of benefits holds the mirror of culpability up to the face of the smoter!l Since reactions to the product e Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 -32· proposition were so fundamental In psychological terms, no cultural differences were observed comparing Swiss- French and Swiss-German, 26, Oose level is a very strong concept for these consumers · (if they were to smoke slims they would expect to smoke more in tompensation), Clearly, on the other hand, these consumers have no concept of specific activity · so if anything, the character of dependence can be seen as greater for ultra slims, Hence the Ibenefitl of less activity is (1) not understood and (b) not credible (since they imagine they would frustrate the benefit by smoking more), 27, On the whole, Swiss reaction to the product is marginally more favourable than in the U,K, (due to blend compatibility) although the taste is Still seen as far too perfumed (flavoured), drying and strong in aftertaste, The big difference between Swiss and U,K. is that while the packaging design is seen as attractive per re, the application as a cigarette concept is seen as ill defined, contradictory, disturbing in its lack of connectedness to a clear image position, and consequentially is heavily rejected, 28, Unsatisfactory ratio of paper to tobacco was seen as an Important element of risk, 29, The Swiss are clearly rejecting of the notion of using any directly communicated 'rational' benefit, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 121 ALPHA GERMAN TOPLINE 68SERYATIONS h L7 I~·. I L': ru Cr, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·33· ALPHA GERMAN TDPLINE OBSEIYATIONS i, Age and sex condition product response. Product is seen as exclurlvely a female proporftion, fe~aler respond more positively to it, Younger consumers were relatively less responsive (Gernan sating trends favour full flavour for the young), 21 Social class did not seem to be a conditioning variable, 3, Product was seen as either for inexperienced 'beginners' or older, classy women, low tar and feminine, a yuppie cigarette, 4, Men expected social ridicule, women expected attention and curiosity when Imagining themselves as users of the product, 5, Sidestream was relevant (more than U,K,) but not credible, However, with this product the counter argument was raised that if others are getting less sfdestream, the smoker must be getting more tarlnicotine, therefore the 'less hamm'l'lon sidestream' benefits are mutually cancelling, 6, less ash was credible but quite irrelevant, low fire risk was relevant but not credible. 7, The ratio of paper to tobacco was seen to be high and this is seen quite distinctly as a risk element, 8, The biological activity benefit was seen as requiring detailed third party validation, and not in~nediately credible, Credibility also suffers a negative rub·bff from the credibility of other benefits i,e~ 'the other benefits were not credible by the evidence of our eyes, so maybe thi s one is not true al sc', a Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 f ·34· 9, Reactions to packaging are very similar to U,K,/Swiss/ Finnish groups, The name triggers associations with other comnodities which use this name currently in Germany tan ice cream and a drink), Thi s is not necessarily a bad association, Other associations are sun and holidays, 10, These groups were generally quite repressed re, health concern and tend to argue against the biological benefit assertion · as the presence of dissonance would predict, 11, The cigarette was possibly seen as an aid to cessation by some males, 12, For these people, the four benefits do not necessarily synergise, some may actually cancel each other out (e,g~ sidestream and biological activity), 13, Sensory reactions are much the same as other countries l,e, low tar smokers find it surprisingly strong and full flavour smokers find it weaker than their usual baseline, The cigarette again is clearly described as having strange tastelaftertaste and getting markedly stronger as one smokes down it, -· 14, Unlike the U,K,, Swiss and Finnish groups, the carton packing is seen as a 'conl to rake the carton look bigger · protection of the fragile product doesn't seer ;a he salient despite the lact that the product vas described as such, 15, The view of these consumers is that comnunication of this proposition would be by elegance, good taste, class and format and not by rational benefits (a) because such benefits are not credible (b) because the sort of consumer the product is targetted at is seen as being image- driven, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·35- 16, Like the other European centres, the whole imagery package is seen as good per se but not really linked to cigarettes~ Like the Swiss, the group had difficulty picking up cues from the brandlproduct to help position themselves relative to it, 17, Credibilitylcertification of benefits is seen as the big problem, and even with such certification, these consumers would only use such benefits as secondary, serendipitous 'hy the way' comnunicationr, since class, elegance and taste are seen as primary for the type of expected target consumers, 18, The low sidestream idea was generally a positive for German groups, and clearly accepted as a social issue, but not necessarily in connection with this format of cigarette, Salience of sidestreann is certainly higher in these german groups than in U,K, or Swltterland, 19, Parties were seen by women as the debut for smoking CAPRI · this reflects a requirement for a socially 'de·fusedl i nf ormal, suppor:i ve envi ronment, the theatre and restaurants were also mentioned, which reflects a similar motivation i,e, protected 'special' social environs where being stylish is socially sanctioned, 20, Like the other European centres, the images for CAPRI: usage are distinctly aspiratfonal, but most groups describe the usage images in tew whiCh tend to implicitly exclude themselves, Additionally, the image often comes across as ambiguous i,e, the same image capable of two alternative perspectives, either upmarket and stylish or childish and ridiculous · again reflecting a fundamental ambivalence of stance on the part of these consumers, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·36- 21, In general for all other aspects these German groups were strikingly similar to U,K, (i,el not quite so dissonant about health as the Swiss), The common feature again is a rejection of the credibility of 'benefits' and a clear rejection of rational benefit communication whether the benefits are proved credible or not, Indf rect, non·advertised third party support for the benefits sees the more attractive route. 22, The filter, with its visible vental zone is seen as implicated in the benefits and is associated with, and suffers from, the Barclay issue, 23. The notion of risk taking also appears, though less strongly than for the Swiss · and the idea that the loner biological activity benefit would be frustrated by smoking more also emerges, Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 13, ALPHA FINNISH TOPLINE OBSERYATIONS n C, e lil In U C Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ____ ALPHA FINNISH TOPLINE OBSERVATrONS --- i, Flnnish groups are strikingly impassive In response to the product at the blind level of presentation, but respond oui)e actively following erposure of branding, There consumers look for strong cues from imagery to condition their rcrp3nse to the product, The predolninant reaction was that the product itself was not generally Impressive (especially for luller flavour smokers) but that the pac~agingP~gc~ was positively reed ved by women and seen by men as very appropriate for women, In context of the other European centrer the product itself was relatively well rated reflecting the low baseline delivery ~x~e~cnce in this market. Tyoically the product was considered better than expected but not oulte on parity with own usual product, 2, perception of the relevance of the lour main benefits differed slightly from the other centres In that lower ~der~rcln was a more salient issue, ranking ahead of the other benefits for the first time In this study, The lowered biological activity was received with strong scepticism and the general view that cigarettes are dangerous whatever the issues of 'relative' harm may be, Consumers seemed clear that there already exists several ways for the health concerned saker to deal with this problem (notabty choosing lighter brands and modifying consumption), The stand to the notion of lowered biological activity did not have the character of defending a personal health concern, 'lhis reaction was one of passive disbelief, Finns being considerably more motivated by social concernlpressure, 3. Reaction to the low Irh benefit was outright ridicule and dismissal, In conmon with ether centres the low fire risk benefit brought mixed reaction but never more than secondary Interest, ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni ·38· a. like the other centres the majority reaction to the four benefits was that on trialllng the product there benefits are apparently not credible on evidence of observation. There war some limited evidence however that the sidestream benefit may be marginally credible (backed by I clear willingness to want this to be true). 5, the product blind, and especially branded, is seen as an exclusively female proposition by all but the smallest of minorities, Expected social reaction to the user Is again one of benign curiosity (females) ranging to mild ridicule from friends (men). 6, the tendency to see the brand as a novelty item was strong in finland with several references to CAPRI being the sort of brand you could use as a present to give away rather than smoke yourself. Descriptf ons of typi cal use situations were dominated by references to parties, nightclubs, casinos and most consumers described the product as being definitely not for everyday work (largely because of the Impractical shape and fragility), 7, Like ether centres (though perhaps even lore accentuated) descriptions of user types are so removed from 'everyQy' levels that they seem to go beyond aspirational to the point where these consumers are saying 'yes, that's fine, but leave me out!' the typical user type is again female, elegant, upmartet and either young ['yuppie') or older (40·50). Ail the images are of fashionability shading to posing and contrivance, 8, Reaction to the idea of using rational benefits in communication is apparently less negative than other centres, but significantly these consumers only assent to using lower sidestream and less biological activity as a secondary Iby the way' feature, and only when prompted, Unprompted response is agai n heavily oriented Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 to user and situation type imageryl and lone association to other luxury goods i.e~ perfumes, female ~Lce~arier, Several consumers resisted the idea of 'health' comnunicatiOQ Outright 'this would be for people who want to give up and to talk of the dangers rather than the pleasures of smoking', Ithere are all the light cigarettes in the world if you want that, the unique feature of this cigarette is its shape and elegance', 9, An interesting age effect for these groups had older women imagining the cigarette would be for younger Igirls' and 'Beginnerr' while younger women raw the cigarette being for distinctly older Icldrsy' women, fhis was not an invariable observation but was certainly more marked than in the other centres, 10, As with all centres in this exercise it is surprising that very few consumers imagine the cigarette to have significantly less tobacco (wost suggesting that the high finnness indicates tighter packing of the usual tobacco), Nevertheless the i dea is prevalent that one would smoke more of such cigarettes - one group suggesting that a CAPRI offer would have to be on the basis of 251s in recognition of this fed, 11, Despite the high level use of delivery data in Finland these groups were notable for the absence of references to del i very level, No consumer en~ui red the deli very level of the cigarette (this is true for the entire project), The only regular reference was that the product tasted stronger than It looked [though still being seen often as having a poor draw effort and being rel ati very Iii ght' ), 12, Finns were opposed to the idea of their own brand being available as an ultra slim · this being described variourly as Irillyl, It~stelesl' and 'saoilegiPusl. This observation reinforces the typical stance from Q Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: Dill ·QO· these groups - that they are prepared to be relatively Indulgent about the proposition (especially at branded level) so long as it is not associated with them, 13, The same degree of personal dissociation is very apparent regarding the issue of using rational benefits in conaunication, When prompted, quite a few censurers say they might use lower biological activity, lower sides:ream and lower fire risk but 'we would not believe It ourselves though', tP, In all other regards the Finnish groups produced reactions in line with the other centres, The key features of these consumers were (a) a higher level response to low sidestream and a stronger social rather than personal health concern motivation, (b) response to the proposition strongly conditional on presence of the imagerylpack etc,, (c) marked personal dissociation from the proposition without being directly negative, i,e, 'its good, but not at all for mel or If or everyday usel~ Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 APPENDIX I STANDARD EXPRESSIONS FOR INTRODUCING PRINCIPAL BENEFITS a 0 CI1 Ctl U C~J In Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 -41· STANOARO EXPRESSION FOR USE TN INTRODUCING THE LOWERED BIOLOGICAL ACTIVITY BENEFIT ,,,,,'sorne independent scientists believe that tobacco products that do well in the standard biological test lured in testing many typer of co~umer product) may be less likely to cause disease, This ultra slim style product tomes out significantly better in this test than any other tobacco product, Hare specifically, on a comparison based on an equal amount of tobacco burnt, the ultra slim smoke comet out significantly Letter on the testl~ STANDARD EXPRESSION FOR USE IN INTRODUCING THE LOWERED SIDESTREAM BENEFIT .,,,'non·rmokers, and often smokers themselves are sometimes irritated or otherwise affected by what Is called sidestream smoke · the smoke that smoulders off the cigarette between puffs, This ultra slim cigarette provider the smoker with all the smoke he or she wants when drawing on It, but reduces the amount of tobacco that is wastefully smouldered away between puffs, As a result, the smoke smouldering off the cigarette and filling the room will be significantly lower, therefore reducing the source of smell, eye irritation and general annmoyance', STANOGRO EXPRESSION FOR USE IN INTROOUCING THE LOW ASH BENEFIT ,,,,'because this product is less wasteful of tobacco, by ensuring that tobacco is not unnecessarily smouldered between puffs, it produces overall much less physical quantity of ash compared with conventional cigarettes', Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ·Q· ST~IIOARO EXPRESSION FOR USE IH 1NTROOUCING THE IOW FIRE RISK BENEFIT ,,,,'because this product burns frugally between puffs, has a much smaller lit end coal, and win tend to self-extinguish if left alone for a significant period of time, it represents a much lower risk of accidental fire due to negligence', Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 APPENDIX II COPY OUESTIONNArP,E (ALI LOCATIL\HS1 h Q 1=! r., C'1 L'1 U C~J Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 SCORING BOOKLET NAME: GROUP: a O ;7 rl U: (il Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 ,i: ·:- IMAGINE ,,,,,,,. this ultra slim product tastes and satisfies just Is well as conventional cigarettes, but has no other additional benefits apart from Its unique appearance, ,,,.,, HOW WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPARED TO IOUR OWN USUAL BRAND? MY OWN USUAL BRAND less will~nP Oa~C00il bre willing tonsfdarably Considerably PLEASE TICK THIS BOX IF rOU WOULD NOf BE i- WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT A~ ALL Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 I~GINt ,,,,,,,, this ultra slim product tastes and satisfies just as well as conventional cigarettes and does have the benefit of perfonning significantly better in the standard biological test (but no lower 's~destteaal, tower ash and fire rir~). ,,,,,, HOIJ WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A PROOUCT COMPARED TO YOUR OWN USUAL BRAND? MY OUN USUAL BRAND less wfllingConsiderably ao~000C! Considerably nore willing WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT AT ALL 17 PLEASE TICK THIS BOX IF YOU WOULD HOT BE Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 this ultra slia product tastes and satisfies just as well as conventional cigarettes and has the benefits of lower 'sid~strebm', lower ash and fire risk (but no advantage on the biological test), ..,... HOW WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPARED TO YOUR OIJN USUAL BRAND? HY 6WN USUAL BRAND less wlllfng '000[700 tate willing Considerably Considerably PLEASE TICK THIS BOX If YOU WOULD NdT BE C WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT AT All Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 IM461NE ~~~,~~~I this ultra slim product tastes and satisfier just as well as conventional cigarettes and has the comJ,ined benefits of loner 'sidestrean', lower ash and fire risk, and a significantly better perfonnanee on the standard biological test, ,,,,,, HOW WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPARED TO YOUR OWN USUAL BRAND? MY OWN USUAL BRAND less willingConsiderably [7C0000[1 Considerably wre willing PLEASE TICK THIS BOX 1F rOU WOULD NOT BE C WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT AT ALL Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 _ ~__~~___~ IMUIGINE ~~~~~~~. this ultra slim product does not taste and satisfy quite so well as conventional cigarettes, and has no other additional benefit apart fron its unipue appearance, .,,.., HOW WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPARED TO YOUR OWN USUAL BRANDt MY OWN USUAL BRAND Considerablyless willing "aoonoi~ Considerably more willing WILLING 10 PURCHASE SUCH A PROOUCT AT ALL O PLEASE TICK THIS BOX If YOU WOULD NOT BE Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 IIIAGIHE ,,.,,,,. this ultra slim product does not taste and satisfy quite so well as conventional cioarettes but it does have the beneRt of performing significantly better an the standard biological test Ibut no lower 'sidestream', lower ash or fire risk), ,,,,,, HOW WILLING WOULD IOU BE r0 PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPARED TO YOUR OWN USUAL BRAND? MY OWN USUAL BRAND Considerably 00oao0[7 AWrOeDnSrderih~ywilling less willing PLEASE TICK THIS BOX IF YOU WOULD NDt BI C1 WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT AT ALL Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 IMAGINE ,,,1,,1 this ultra slia Product does not taste and satisfy quite so well as conventional cigarettes, but it does have the benefits of lower 'sidestream', lower ash and fire risk tbut no advantage on the biological test), ..,,,. HOV WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPARED TO YOUR OWN USUAL BRAND? MI OWN USUAL BRAND Considerablyless willing 000003[7 Considerably more willing WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT AT ALL j_i PLEASE TICK THIS BOX IF YOU WOULD NOt BE Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 _· IMAGINE ,,.~,~.. this ultra stin product does not taste and satisfy quite so well as conventional cigarettes, but it does have the benefits of lower 'sidestrean', lower ash and fire risk, and a significantly better performance on the standard biological test, ,,.,., HOW WILLING WOULD YOV BE tO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPAAED 10 YOUR OWN USUAL BRAND1 HY OWN USUAL BRAND less wiilfngConsiderably oono~C]ICJ Considerably Mre willino PLEASE TICK THIS BOX IF YOU WOULD NOT BE iZI WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT AT AL1 Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 Same as ORAU EFFORT my usual brand ,,, the amount of effort necessary, satisfactory puff of smoke into the ooot[100 drawing on the cigarette, to net a mouth, Same as THROAT CATCH/HIT my usual brand ,~, the lomentary Irush' 'catch' ·1 or'hit' sensation felt in the onOOnon throat just as the sake is inhaled Same as IRRITATION my usual brand .,, the amount of lingering, ooot000 tingling, burning or prickling sensation in mouth and throat, Same Is TAS~ OUALITY my usual brand ,,, the quality of the smoke taste ooO~O00 Same as ACCEPTABIL~'fY/PREFERENCE my usual brand ,,. overall, how acceptable was uoo~0nO the smoke to you? Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 NOW THAT YOU HAYE SMOKED THIS ULTRA SLIM PRODUCT ,,,,,, HOU WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPARED TO YOUR OWN USUAL BRAND? #Y OWN USUAL BRAND less willingConsiderably OoonC]O~ Mre willConsiderablying PLEASE TICK MIS BOX IF YOU WOULD NOT BE C WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT AT ALL Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 FROM EVERYTHING IDU NOW KNOW OF THE U1TRA SLIM PROOUCT, HAVING SAMPLEO IT, WHICH OF THE FOILOWINC DESCRIPTIONS IS THE HOST AI;CURATE1 (TICK ONE BOX) This ultra slim product tastes and satisfies just as well C as conventional cigarettes, but has no other additional benefits apart from its unique appearance, This ultra slim product tastes and satisfies just as well C as conventional cigarettes and does have the benefit of performing significantly better in the standard biological test (but no advantage in 'sidestream', ash or fire risk). This ultra slim product tastes and satisfies just as wetl r as conventional cigarettes and does have the benefits of lower 'sidestream' lower ash and fire risk (but no advantage on the b/ologicai test). This ultra slim product tastes and satisfies just as well C1 as conventional cigarettes and has the combined benefits of lower 'sidestream', lower ash and fire risk, and a significantly better perfonnance on the standard biological test~ This ultra slim product does not taste and sati sfy quite l_i so well as conventional cigarettes, and has no other additional benefit apart from its unique appearance, This ultra slim product does not taste and satisfy quite iI so well as conventional cigarettes, but does have the benefit of perfowlng significantly better in the standard biological test (bot no advantage in 'sidestream', ash or fire risk), This ultra slim product does not taste and satisfy quite C so well as conventional cigarettes but does have the benefits of lower 'sidestream', lower ash and fire risk (but no advantage on the biological test). This ultra slim product does not taste and satisfy quite C so well as conventional cigarettes, but has the combined benefits of loner 'sidestream', lower ash and fire risk, and a significantly better performance on the standard biological test. Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 NOW rOU HAVE SEEN fHE PRODUCT WITH A BRAND NAME AND PACK DESIGN ; .,~~~~ HOW WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A BRAND COMPARED TO YOUR OWN USUAL BRAND? MY OWN USUAL BRAND Considerablyless willing O"oocOO more willingConsiderably WILLING tO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT AT All C PLEASE TICK THIS BOX IF VOU WOULD NOT BE Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 IMAGINE ,... YOUR OWN USUAL BRAND COULD BE MADE AVAILABLE tN AN ULTRA SLIM VERSION ,,,,,, HOW WILLING WOULD YOU BE TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT COMPARED TO YOUR OUN USUAL BRAND? MY OUN USUAL BRAND Considenbly nano~00 more wiltingConsiderably less willing WILLING TO PURCHASE SUCH A PRODUCT At ALL iI PLEASE TICK THIS BOX IF YOU WOULD NOT BE Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 HOW MUCH OO YOU NORMALLY PAY FOR ~HE 1 PACK (20) OF YOUR USUAL BRAND? (WRITE IN HERE) HOW MUCH WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO P~ L_i FOR 'CAPRI' WITH THE BENEFITS OF LOWER SIOESTREI, L61ER ASH ANO FIRE RISK? (XRITE IH HERE j HOW MUCH WOULD YOU BE PREPARED tO PAY i FOR 'tAPRI' WITH ME BENEFITS Of LOWER SIOESIREB, LOWER ASH ANO FIRE RISK IWRITE tN HERE) AND A SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER PERFORMANCE ON TH? BIOLOGICAL TESTl HOU'MUCH WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO PAY I~ FOR 'CAPRI' IF IT HAD NO OBVIOUS A001T10NAL BENEFITS OYER CONYENTIOUAL IwRITE tN HERE) CIGARETTES, APART FROM rTS APPEARANCE? Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 \\ FOR AN ULTRA SLIM VERSION OF YOUR OWN I i HOW MUCH WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO PAY BRAND, WITH THE BENEFITS OF LOWER (WRITE IN HERE) SIOESTREAM, LOWER AliH AND FIRE RISK? HOW MUCH WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO PAI I FOR AN ULTRA SLIM VERSION OF YOUR OWN BRAND, WITH THE BENEFITS OF LOVER (wRItE IN HERE) SIDESTREPM, LOWER ASH AND FIRE RISK AND A SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER PERFORMANCE ON THE BIOLOGICAL tEStl HOW MUCH WOULD YOU BE PREPARED TO PAY I FOR AN ULTRA SLIM VERSION OF YOUR OUN BRAND, WITH NO OBVIOUS ADDITIONAL (WRITE IN HERE) BENEFIT APART FROM I'IS SLIM APPEARANCE? Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 SCORIH6 BOOY~, i ~L "UCAYe~ d ~ V~~CC h~bf. I~·a : 6~6: P~4f jd ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni Al ~1~·· Yo~L arH ps~ 1~6 nq w vkWC ~Rlcb EDdlOCIDBUJ ~d Vlull~G eol3HO~UI~Ly Hoy wtulNo \IS ~ 14 JrYIWIII *IY*IUI*TIYYXI I~UI(PU I.VIIIYI: Oi Oa C: I i I; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 f · ~k lk461Yt···· ~nuun~ b 1ClpJ~~ ~1 ~~t~J, U,(C\a Y ~l~i~P~ '''' Row YIUIMO YI~ q~l(C I hkJ SR ~ ILla bwP~ ~ loo~ OYH ~a~ a~a - - ~4 ~D~III~T~I~ ~~00G00 ~~WHY ~\o a jr,LhfllLL·Ll)lrPP) OO ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni ~ ~~lr~l ~ ~ L~~~ U·~·L~Y _~'' Lv r·r u·~. I,~~lp ( th ply · YovlOkM W~ I~B wl ~ Cd~000~ m uu~ LI Ylol~ Q~WI~ ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni Q~iq (hRGINE~~.. ~hU~ht~UI ~ ~ L L~ ~l~~k: ~ I~i~n~-J14~~ L~U . You~ or~ ObH 8~0 kl ~ rJs Cb ~13 ~is I~ Ululy ~g30000 M,Y ~~3 a~~c~R~ BC (hs1·l·.~lh~~~lrucn· n) t ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni -~- ~sL. ctt~JI~L . ''' ~ ~Y YI~I~~U yw ~ p k~lA Ilbow gw~ ~ leul O~M IIH 1~6 ~ IW v~S I ca ul~l~ 00Po~00 Cll~y ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni 0$4 I~RG(NLIII( ~ L~U~ .~~ YI~L~~~ u'tr;C~iy WyaU, k ld~l ''' ' bn wPal YDOU bl((l k~ Jp A I~ PeuP OwM W~ 8~( In 1~1 LB yl~~ ~O~o~00 Mlr ~~I) a~lOWI~ ::.l.-.--,-l-c--d~ ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni ~L_· ___·~ ·· _· ~1C~ ok '"1tINt···· ttl (P~Jkf~ ddPjbl~ flq r p~t~~4(~clk~' ~~pa&1.~eCcu,~"tC~I·I~Lc~t~t). ' ~ ken WIUIN6 WDU~" Bt " ~i~w~e suul A PR~Ouc~_cpnPnP~ , qDvll ,,, VSUAC ~p?H~L~ ~Y w ws ko \j \I\ ~OuD~q "~r;3~0 conpt~s~ LE3~ WILlg HolE WILLING YIW~I Id~D~~iiW1B~h;llllll: O) ;i Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 u, n.,··- iiU~~ ~·1 ~~u3~9 + ul~q~~L ~ ~~~d ~·~ V~ *~Dtbljbid I~d~L1' '''' low ~IUIMI wev~ y,o It ~ ~~J Sa ~ Ib,w ~wMI ~ lout ur Its I~D i vz~ ~Z 091~ nq y~ QBb ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni Ikllm Y~DK c~ onR~ ~KoRf t~o~4~7 Y~Ro~iPL ~ l)i~~ Y1( m Urn~P ,,I, h ~MnSI~ '~I~WL~I$t~ll~'ynj~CI Yt"" ce[I~000 t~O~RI C4XHlan Ltu~*a~llW. ~?~,ooo~O[l IROxA~~a~J Iw~ nY~L 6~b ~4S~ QI]PNILI~il3tt V''000 ykslla ';YS~M~ c~,a i RcrtP~i~B~urcl uonn[lCI dna .. ~ . Wedl edOYP~1~ WPI tk Jt'p! Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 10u tHm yol Ikt 5n~ ~I uu~ I~y ~~ ... -- 9ouloww R~ 8~b II m C · la ~ 00d0~~0 Q~qC#HL~ 6 ~~(~~·l~t rr~~~ru· ulrn~.·L: ~1 ~ ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni pn ~ThU$ ~DU HU ~I~ bF TnCuca s~H jLCoGI Hlw( lk~ ~ ylb ~ * klu.~ )Imk~l P ~L ICI,LL i 6. r d J 30 ,. I O cMxnt~ ~,U ~·XJ~Yit~ul~ ~~17~· ~~zCI~ O ~j~b~ly ~~'W~ .s~~iu~~i ~~I L~JPS~~~ ,I~ U) ~ iuuqt 0 ~LL I~~JL.~ P~~rll ~4~Y~ilt~ O 111~~7 ~Wi ,IPMXnt~l~U ~~L C~~IIPI~LU6 O .~+ru~yk O ~.a~~u. --~- - U1 ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni ~ yo~ H# ~ ale w~ ~ LI ZLt M ~ I~le : '''' kOH WllllNbWOOLO yoYBLf0 PUPCSP5LSVCH youR ell~ USVAL B~P~D Hy P~JN vS~~ Sauo ,Y"o~asc~ LQ WLuy, ooc]00 cowsl0~d~y HOLC YUI~ Qlkl(~Yrac ma BatluuouiP nm BLylWLE SIII3YRb~l~j·PRLL: ~j C: I i I; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 Q ~ kl~ · ~ . C~tul DL~I a~ yl~y I * UVmA SUH VtfSLO1J '''' kow WICUNk WOULD ypU 84 ra PuP~nf~f, Svc~ d PRcDICT bwPRIL~a To gouli a~~ US~L B~NO HY OWN usw Co \133 a"D~a~ LCu cllruy, "000000 om~oceRs~y ~ "LU~~ \13·( 9ilb jhlli~yllb IrY~W*rllluln ~Y1~~IICVJIIIL:[II C: I i I; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111 QB bl~ Le~ ~q I~ ka )Mt dF four aws~o 9~9~"~'~i·'1~"-Y~~ ~1~L~ ~~~~ Ir Y*P UPCSnrMI I Y~ ii r0 ·~" I u~ ~~F~a eF uwa rlo~m b~kn a n o ~BY mt ura y(~ o I~ LI ~ wq T~ bENH~n ~ uy u~8lt~,0ug 41 CO C I ~···~· 7 de I~u~ L Iwk~ LA~~ or J13 I _i -T~t LlbbltK~ i 8 ~3b ·Iw CI~~ I)~ ~~m' J38 lG4 t~W~ II bblw rl~ithual La~ ~8 S LDIII~IOUL Qbff&iM 6QAIC ~~ ~ A(16Pf~A~CE ~ -- ClibPDF - v~~fastio.soni ~2os)ik~J Hucn wcud 9cJQ PeEOAI~O tO PPN tde ~· i·~i RrJ 01614 suH vW~o~ oC youe cwd BllknO,Jrm TbbKrn Fi lpuaL~g~R1 ad~il h~ohell I~b~t w ler~ ~~...·--··· .· ----- ~,.-·--·-·1·· -·-- ~~1 ---, ~~Wor HUWWFX~ qdli BL P~PA~D TP PCI W # VL~eR SLI~ V~~I8H ~CYWe~.D~lf~P~N~~ R p,:~t46~c~ b~N~FnJ OF Id~tP 510M L6~I~AUI I)E~O hP~ ~SU ~oio RUbhllFU~IRI( BFmPPt3~blWnnPN~H~(~_~ C~aocl WbW ~UM ~CUL~ YW Bt PPttRBfP'la Pay FhP ~4N UUI~UI I"/lol BM J~Pflo~ ECYWO~aMBeaiaD urm ~b abas RilDmaNAl b~Nt~ ~PrB FQ6H m s4H PRQEi~grH& .~ Clit; PDF -!::!!::!!::!.f3 StlC.i: 0111