Getting New’d in the Bathroom

banging on about advertising, marketing and social media

27 July 2009 6 Comments

An agency head of strategy once told me “If your product has something that is ‘new’, scream it. You only have one chance to be ‘new’”.

A quick look in my bathroom showed that he wasn’t the only one who believed in the power of ‘new’:

(excuse the manky shower holder – I’m waiting for this financial crisis thing to be over before replacing it)

Garnier Pure: “NEW *keeps skin nutrients for 5 days”

Neutrogena RapidClear: “New Look”

Dove Therapy: “New formula”

This all looks impressive on the bottle but does it really add value for the consumer?

Out of these three, the only ‘new’ of slight benefit to the consumer is Neutrogena where the user is assured that they are purchasing the same product but with different packaging. The other benefits of improved product are so vague that they fall flat. Does anyone really understand a shampoo formula and notice the difference any alteration would make?

I suspect that in this category of product that the ‘new’ is used to further clutter the packaging in order to further confuse the consumer. This small bit of packaging copy may just be enough to justify the purchase decision without actually adding more value.

What do you think? Is there any value in the word ‘new’ anymore?

6 Comments »

Sheila (@stinginthetail) said:

As a consumer i am cynical about NEW on packaging. So cynical, i assume it’s a lie.

New means sod all, other than, we’ve thought of a NEW way to rip you off – often by the pack reducing in size, or them rejigging their formula or sourcing so it’s cheaper for them, but the product’s price not reducing.

# 27 July 2009 at 11:59 am

Cheryl Gledhill said:

New packaging? Wow, let me drop everything to run out and buy it.

I don’t think I really notice “new” unless it says “new and improved” as that always makes me laugh – something can’t be both new AND improved, they need to pick one.

# 27 July 2009 at 2:21 pm

Andrew said:

Neutrogena have even taken it one step further and managed to subtly drop it into their brand name.

I think if I saw a shampoo on the shelf that said “Tried and true formula – we haven’t buggered with it for 10 years, because it has always given the best results” I would be much more likely to purchase it.

# 27 July 2009 at 3:16 pm

Johnny Rotten said:

Nice one Cheryl.

‘New’ and ‘Free’ are two killer words, but since everyone uses them, they’re used due to the fear of what could happen if they didn’t.

# 27 July 2009 at 3:28 pm

Daniel Oyston said:

The problem with all the products having something “new” is that consumers don’t get the chance to settle in to and become loyal to a product. But maybe people aren’t loyal in this category and that is what promotes adding something new all the time.

And besides, who is checking that anything is actually new? Wow, Dove has a new formula “Thanks God … I never bought it before because I hated the formula. Now I can buy it because they have changed the formula!”

# 28 July 2009 at 8:23 am

Karalee_ said:

Great post.

I tend to agree with Andrew – products that have the messaging of ’still the same’, ‘tried and true’ are much more appealing to me as a consumer. There is something comforting about a product that has lasted the test of time and is still going strong. You know, the old face cream which grandma used, then mum used, now I use it?

The beauty product market is absolutely cluttered with new and old products and brand loyalty is questionable I would think particularly with males?

Perhaps having ‘new’ on the label is the way to make consumers feel they are beating the rest, are experiencing something different and better, therefore appealing to our sense of competitiveness?

Reminds me of toothpaste.. how many formulas can you develop with mint but still make it new?