Red Bull’s Size Issues
The size of Red Bull has increased from 250mL to 375mL to 473mL. No doubt this has been brought on by huge sized cans from rival energy drinks such as Mother and Rockstar. However, it will erode their product differentiation as THE most potent energy drink on the market.
Red Bull originated as a western version of Thai drink Krating Daeng. Rumours persist that the Thai drink contains amphetamines to achieve the energy kick. The western Red Bull has been pulled off shelves for testing positive to cocaine a number of times. Red Bull has been blamed for various health problems and has even been attributed as the cause of death in a student. It is currently banned in Denmark and Uruguay and was previously banned in France Norway.
While all these factors seem like a PR nightmare, it has worked in Red Bull’s favour and given them the reputation as the most potent energy drink on the market. Red Bull can sell the smaller can at a similar price to their larger sized competitors because of this perception. There’s a nice little profit in that strategy.
The larger sizes are going to cause differentiation erodement and reduced cost efficiencies.
In contrast,the new 60mL Red Bull ’shot’ is a great move for the brand. It capitalises on the potency reputation and the identity as a category leader and innovator.
Interestingly, Josh Strawczynski and Daniel Oysten commented on this strategy in December last year before the new sizes were introduced. Josh predicted that Red Bull would follow their competitors while Daniel said they should skip and go even larger (1.25L!).
I’m sure that Red Bull have spent thousands on research and will spend even more on marketing the new sizes. But on gut instinct, I don’t think it was a good move. What do you think – were the larger sizes a good move for Red Bull?
Related posts:
I knew it wasn’t going to be long! http://www.idontspeakgerman.com/2009/01/raging-red-bull.html
Great post Nathan!
The brand image is gold. The Red Bull cocaine scandal was hugely positive for the brand, as every 15 – 25 year old instantly raced out and bought up all the Red Bull they could.
They are one of the few brands that truly leverage global PR and remain cool within their target audience. I recently heard an FMC consultant referring to Red Bull’s rivals as ‘not for the brand conscious’… amazingly true.
@zac not quite at the 2L level yet but can you imagine how much Jager you would need to bomb that
@Josh absolutely. I think even the most cowboyish of brand managers would have difficulty letting that kind of press flourish
I think it’s a bad move – I remember being handed a can of Mother in the city somewhere, and their big claim was “50% more energy” – I remember scoffing and remarking that the can was 50% bigger so of course it would…
I always heard the rumours that Thai red bull was so potent they couldn’t store it in cans, it would eat away the metal – that’s why it was sold in glass bottles. Probably bullshit but I do remember being suitably impressed.
It’s Uruguay.
@Ashley – cheers. Nothing against Uruguayans, just can’t spell it.
I agree that following suit with other energy drinks erodes Red Bull’s core brand characteristics of potency and innovator.
To me Red Bull has always been the pioneer of energy drinks, with other entrants into the market simply followers. Even with the onslaught of competitors they have managed to maintain their higher price and from a retailers perspective replacing them with another brand isn’t really an option (just like trying to give people a rum and Pepsi doesn’t quite work, Jager and V is equally as unappealing).
Leave your response!
Another Advertising Wanker
Nathan Bush
Digital Strategist at DP Dialogue
Brisbane, Australia
Subscribe
archive
Blogroll
Recent Comments
Wanker tweets...
Most Read
Most Commented
Top Comments & Smart Folk