Yesterday i saw this ad from Rin which was a direct dig on the competitor detergent brand Tide. Don't know how long this campaign has been on or the history behind it, as weekends are the only time i am getting nowadays to watch TV. But rather than directly classifying this ad as illegal or uncompetitive, just thought or trying to think from the point of view of HUL, as to what might be the strategy behind such a ad campaign that can lead to a possible lawsuit from P&G's Tide.
Will it be actually true that RIN can provide more 'safedi' to clothes rather than Tide. Is there any scientific proof that RIN is superior to Tide, which HUL is taking to its advantage of to educate the consumer. Is HUL trying to prove a fact by making a statement, which could possibly be true, and in that way trying to help the confused consumer who is entangled and bored with the run of the mill ad campaigns which are hitting them from multiple directions. Is HUL trying to provide direct facts to the consumer, and in that way enabling him to compare two different products, in a objective and direct way. Is this giving raise to a new paradigm in ad making which seems to be more objective at the outset. This is one way of looking into the advertisement.
But the question remains that if HUL is so concerned about providing objective data to the consumer, why not do a comparison between RIN and Surf, both of which are the products of HUL. It is a very well known fact that Surf Excel is positioned and priced as a high end product when compared to RIN which is more of a lower end product in comparison. But leaving the comparison in terms of positioning and pricing why not provide a comparison of the first P, the product, between Surf and RIN. Or even for that matter of fact between Wheel and Rin.
The conclusion is clear as light, no organization actually cares about educating the consumer or even showing a concern towards the end user. All a brand wants is to spread, and even if it requires to kill the other brands with their vitriolic campaigning in the name of providing facts. Should wait and see what will be the response from P&G with respect to this...
