Comparative Advertising
Discussion
Morning folks...
Brief version... When advertising a product online (independent retailer with no connection to the product you are selling), can you make a comparison to another brand name?
For instance, "Branston Baked Beans - These are an alternative to Heinz Baked Beans which we no longer stock"
Not saying they are better, not criticising the quality of Heinz beans, just saying that these new ones are an alternative.
I have a similar situation, and now the "Heinz" company are saying I'm damaging their reputation, and want me to remove it, which I will do if I have to.
Cheers in advance,
Jon
Brief version... When advertising a product online (independent retailer with no connection to the product you are selling), can you make a comparison to another brand name?
For instance, "Branston Baked Beans - These are an alternative to Heinz Baked Beans which we no longer stock"
Not saying they are better, not criticising the quality of Heinz beans, just saying that these new ones are an alternative.
I have a similar situation, and now the "Heinz" company are saying I'm damaging their reputation, and want me to remove it, which I will do if I have to.
Cheers in advance,
Jon
You cannot make a claim of or even infer favourable comparison in advertising without absolute evidence and even then there are strictly regulated conditions that apply. That's why Carlesberg is 'probably' the best lager in the world.
In the example you quote, Heinz would argue why the need to announce that you do not stock their beans? Nothing to stop you advertising that you stock Branston Beans but why specifically mention that you don't stock Heinz? What about all the other brands of beans? So by singling out a specific brand could be seen as inferring something untoward about that brand. Plus you are directly promoting the fact that Branston provide an alternative to Heinz suggesting a taste and quality to be the same or superior.
As a general rule of thumb, it's not good practice to mention a brand or company in your advertising unless you are selling it.
(For the record, Carlsberg is certainly not the best lager in the world and Branston Beans are better
)
In the example you quote, Heinz would argue why the need to announce that you do not stock their beans? Nothing to stop you advertising that you stock Branston Beans but why specifically mention that you don't stock Heinz? What about all the other brands of beans? So by singling out a specific brand could be seen as inferring something untoward about that brand. Plus you are directly promoting the fact that Branston provide an alternative to Heinz suggesting a taste and quality to be the same or superior.
As a general rule of thumb, it's not good practice to mention a brand or company in your advertising unless you are selling it.
(For the record, Carlsberg is certainly not the best lager in the world and Branston Beans are better
)Edited by StevieBee on Friday 4th February 12:11
Many thanks for the advice.
The reason this came about is I used a sell a specific product (and sell lots of it), however my relationship with the UK distributor became unworkable. They price-fixed the product at £89.95, and categorically would not allow you to sell it at any other price. I use a bot to monitor competitors prices online, and adjust ours to ensure we are always on point. This would cue a phone call from the UK distributor on a Monday morning to say our price on eBay for instance had dropped to £89.90 and not £89.95, for instance.
I wasn't slaughtering the product price-wise, but we do run regular sales promos, and might drop the sales price by 5-10% for a weekend or a week at a time - think Black Friday etc.
Then they started to make things very difficult... refusing to supply us (we used to take two pallets of product paid for on pro forma, so no issue accounts wise), and then would leave us without product for prolonged periods.
Then I found an alternative product, and when I say alternative, it's largely identical, and the firm who makes it is run by one of the co-founders of the original brand I stocked. However, it is a largely unknown brand name. As customers would ask about the original brand, I mentioned in the description of the new product that it is an alternative to the old brand.
Now the head office of the original brand in the Netherlands is threatening me with legal action... to be honest they're just panicking that I'm starting to make inroads into their customer base, but they have brought it all on themselves.
I will remove the references however, as it's not worth the grief!
The reason this came about is I used a sell a specific product (and sell lots of it), however my relationship with the UK distributor became unworkable. They price-fixed the product at £89.95, and categorically would not allow you to sell it at any other price. I use a bot to monitor competitors prices online, and adjust ours to ensure we are always on point. This would cue a phone call from the UK distributor on a Monday morning to say our price on eBay for instance had dropped to £89.90 and not £89.95, for instance.
I wasn't slaughtering the product price-wise, but we do run regular sales promos, and might drop the sales price by 5-10% for a weekend or a week at a time - think Black Friday etc.
Then they started to make things very difficult... refusing to supply us (we used to take two pallets of product paid for on pro forma, so no issue accounts wise), and then would leave us without product for prolonged periods.
Then I found an alternative product, and when I say alternative, it's largely identical, and the firm who makes it is run by one of the co-founders of the original brand I stocked. However, it is a largely unknown brand name. As customers would ask about the original brand, I mentioned in the description of the new product that it is an alternative to the old brand.
Now the head office of the original brand in the Netherlands is threatening me with legal action... to be honest they're just panicking that I'm starting to make inroads into their customer base, but they have brought it all on themselves.
I will remove the references however, as it's not worth the grief!
Disclaimer: I have no background in this area!
It sounds to me like they are trying to use their relative size to try to bully you, especially as your alternative product is supplied by one of the ex co-founders (so you are likely a proxy for the bad blood there).
Perhaps you can expand your statement and word it carefully to not hint at equivalence. Something like: "InterceptorCorp no longer sells Heinz Beans and now offers Branston as an alternative. If you have previously bought Heinz from us please verify that Branston meets your requirements or feel free to contact us if you have further questions"
Given you don't have an ongoing relationship with Heinz, I'd personally not worry about pissing them off as long as you can stay the right side of any legal obligation. It sounds like you and Branston have some good shared goals that you could work on to promote the alternative option!
It sounds to me like they are trying to use their relative size to try to bully you, especially as your alternative product is supplied by one of the ex co-founders (so you are likely a proxy for the bad blood there).
Perhaps you can expand your statement and word it carefully to not hint at equivalence. Something like: "InterceptorCorp no longer sells Heinz Beans and now offers Branston as an alternative. If you have previously bought Heinz from us please verify that Branston meets your requirements or feel free to contact us if you have further questions"
Given you don't have an ongoing relationship with Heinz, I'd personally not worry about pissing them off as long as you can stay the right side of any legal obligation. It sounds like you and Branston have some good shared goals that you could work on to promote the alternative option!
egomeister said:
Disclaimer: I have no background in this area!
It sounds to me like they are trying to use their relative size to try to bully you, especially as your alternative product is supplied by one of the ex co-founders (so you are likely a proxy for the bad blood there).
Perhaps you can expand your statement and word it carefully to not hint at equivalence. Something like: "InterceptorCorp no longer sells Heinz Beans and now offers Branston as an alternative. If you have previously bought Heinz from us please verify that Branston meets your requirements or feel free to contact us if you have further questions"
Given you don't have an ongoing relationship with Heinz, I'd personally not worry about pissing them off as long as you can stay the right side of any legal obligation. It sounds like you and Branston have some good shared goals that you could work on to promote the alternative option!
You've pretty much hit the nail on the head... It sounds to me like they are trying to use their relative size to try to bully you, especially as your alternative product is supplied by one of the ex co-founders (so you are likely a proxy for the bad blood there).
Perhaps you can expand your statement and word it carefully to not hint at equivalence. Something like: "InterceptorCorp no longer sells Heinz Beans and now offers Branston as an alternative. If you have previously bought Heinz from us please verify that Branston meets your requirements or feel free to contact us if you have further questions"
Given you don't have an ongoing relationship with Heinz, I'd personally not worry about pissing them off as long as you can stay the right side of any legal obligation. It sounds like you and Branston have some good shared goals that you could work on to promote the alternative option!
It won't have helped that on Tuesday our annual industry trade fair opened, and Branston had a stand four booths along from Heinz.
egomeister said:
Disclaimer: I have no background in this area!
Perhaps you can expand your statement and word it carefully to not hint at equivalence. Something like: "InterceptorCorp no longer sells Heinz Beans and now offers Branston as an alternative. If you have previously bought Heinz from us please verify that Branston meets your requirements or feel free to contact us if you have further questions"
Given you don't have an ongoing relationship with Heinz, I'd personally not worry about pissing them off as long as you can stay the right side of any legal obligation. It sounds like you and Branston have some good shared goals that you could work on to promote the alternative option!
No need mention Heinz at all. Simply saying something like “A new alternative with better value” is sufficient (have a look at the various campaigns Pepsi has run over the years. Everyone knows they were taking a swipe at Coca-Cola but it was never or rarely mentioned in their advertising). Aside from the legal aspects, using a competitor’s name in your own advertising can come across a touch play-ground like to some buyers.Perhaps you can expand your statement and word it carefully to not hint at equivalence. Something like: "InterceptorCorp no longer sells Heinz Beans and now offers Branston as an alternative. If you have previously bought Heinz from us please verify that Branston meets your requirements or feel free to contact us if you have further questions"
Given you don't have an ongoing relationship with Heinz, I'd personally not worry about pissing them off as long as you can stay the right side of any legal obligation. It sounds like you and Branston have some good shared goals that you could work on to promote the alternative option!
And unless you have the means to out-lawyer Heinz, best not to piss them off too much!
ten200 said:
This is different to the OP’s situation. You’ve typed in the search bar for Ryobi and they’ve told you that they don’t sell Ryobi but they do sell similar brands. That’s perfectly legal and acceptable. They’re responding to an enquiry rather than volunteering the information as a means to generate a sale.egomeister said:
Dr Interceptor isn't a competitor to Heinz though? He's a reseller who previously sold Heinz product but now sells Branston therefore much more akin to the Screwfix/Ryobi scenario (except that he's referring to a particular product line rather than a brand as a whole)
That's true - but he's using the Heinz name in his advertising in a way that - they would argue - infers their product as inferior to Branston. Dr Interceptor is seeking commercial gain by using the name of a product he no longer sells. The key difference with the Screwfix scenario is that Screwfix provide that information only after an enquiry. The good doctor is proffering the information as a sales tool before any enquiry.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff