Opportunity:

1. Wrigley Wellness Case Study UK - BoC Regional Retail Test September – October 2008 Contacts: Sas Horscroft

2. Strategic Rationale: • Rapid decline of consumptions after 25 years of age - making it a necessity to provide older chewers with new reasons to chew. • Social acceptance of gum acts as a barrier. • Identified retail partner, Sainsbury’s, because shoppers have a generally healthy outlook on life and are likely targets for the weight management consumer messaging. • Objectives & Strategies: • Test the Benefits of Chewing weight management messaging as a category growth sales driver by increasing communication to consumers through eight-week retail initiative including 360 marketing activity. • Communication strategies: • Creating branded awareness of the benefits of chewing gum. • Increase positive perceptions of gum. • Generate increase in intention-to-purchase, chew gum. Opportunity: To test the impact of Benefits of Chewing weight management consumer messaging on sales, amongst the lapsing 25-44 year old age group.

3. Tactical Components: Total $1.1MM Spend incl research Retail test included a variety of integrated marketing tactics in-store, including: Shelf highlighter flags, shelf stripping and aisle end units with the message “Chew More, Snack Less.” 350,000 Extra branded store leaflets promoting a wellness contest offering consumers a chance to win a luxury spa trip for two or one of 60 de-stress pampering kits. In-store radio ads promoting wellness contest. Branded petrol pump nozzles at Sainsbury’s convenience stores with message “Chew More, Snack Less.” Additional tactics, included: TV Ads with complimentary messaging (ran three weeks from mid-September to mid-October). Direct mail to 80,000 consumers with product sample. PR stunt featuring a giant pack of Extra dueling a Tea Lady (ala Gladiators), showcased ability to combat snack cravings.

4. Results: Awareness: TV advertising is cutting through and snacking message is clear, POS is recalled at shop exit. Branding is clear. Perception: Amongst light/lapsing chewers, message is less relevant and less believable. Amongst older female heavy/medium chewers, ad message is more relevant and believable. Branding: BoC is not adding to Extra’s BF brand equity. It appears that any noticeable brand activity can improve bonding. Persuasion: Poor amongst light/lapsing chewers. Some indication that heavy/medium chewers will increase frequency of purchase/chew. In terms of sales impact, Central Region,( 8 wks pre Vs during) TV has had no Net impact on total Wrigley sales but Extra is +1.6%ppt. In JS, (yoy pre Vs yoy during): Total Wrigley sales in test stores +1.7%ppt Vs control Total Extra +0.9ppt Vs control .

5. Key Learnings: • Attitude changing comms is unlikely to lead immediate sales. • UK consumers hold strong opinions on gum….often barriers • A potential opportunity still exists to extend gum chewing amongst heavy/medium chewers through new occasions/need states. • Weight management (and Stress) are secondary benefits of gum and is not a motivating reason for light/lapsing chewers to re-engage with gum chewing. • Due to its impulse nature, gum category benefits from saliency building activity such as POS. Recommendations: Results do not support a national roll out of regional Test. “ Chew More, Snack Less” message does not motivate light/lapsing chewers to purchase BoC (Chew More, Snack Less) is still a potential opportunity worth communicating to 25+ years medium/heavy chewers. Potential to extend usage/frequency and hence drive category growth medium/long term with appropriate targeted media. BoC (Chew More, Snack Less) should be branded as the Wrigley range or Extra. From a claims perspective, more defensible when branded as Wrigley we can only make brand specific claims on weight management and Dental pillar. Further explore how to motivate older, light/lapsing chewers to keep chewing.

6. Appendix

7. Key Result Metrics at a glance

8. Instore Awareness: At shopper exit, total awareness of the point of sale material has significantly increased. Bigger pieces of POS noticed. Q13a. Do you remember having seen this promotional material for Extra in store today or on any recent visits to this or other stores? Pre% Post% * Seen any POS material Multipack fixture surround * Shelf highlighters * Shelf strip Petrol nozzle * Aisle end shroud Base: (445) (399) Millward Brown * Significant to 95% reliability pre v post

9. CAWITrackingnorm% PerformanceVsnorms Total post%  Helps you snack less 65 Media Awareness/Message:Prompted results showed snack replacement message is very clearly coming through Millward Brown Base Total Respondents – Extra (160) A/B - Significantly different at the 95% confidence level IPSOS

10. CAWITrackingnorm% PerformanceVsnorms Millward Brown Total post% = Branding (top box) 24 media Awareness/Branding:Millward Brown confirms the ad was sufficiently branded Base Total Respondents – Extra (160) A/B – Significantly different at the 95% confidence level % Ipsos & Millward Brown

11. Awareness/Branding:Prompted with POS, clarity of ‘Extra’ Branding appears to be at good levels Instore Q14. How easy was it to tell which brand of chewing gum this was for? Pre% Post% Couldn’t fail to remember it was for Extra It’s quite good at making me remember it is for Extra It is not all that good at making me remember It could have been for any brand of chewing gum It could have been for almost anything 4.07 4.11 Mean score: Base (seen material): (169) (289) Millward Brown

12. CAWITrackingnorm% PerformanceVsnorms Total post% =  Enjoyment Engagement 60 4.58 6.79 media Perception/Engagement: Results showed the ad is entertaining and engagement is high Base Total Respondents – Total 480 for finished film; Total 200 for the animatic version. A/B – Significantly different at the 95% confidence level

13. * * * media Perception/Credibility: Regional test also confirms credibility as an issue, particularly amongst light/lapsed chewers. Credibility less of an issue amongst 25-44 year old, female heavy chewers. CAWITracking norm % Perception Total post% Perf. Vs norms Light/ lapsed% HeavyUsers% Male Users% Female Users% 53 45 49 71 49 New info. Different info Relevant Credible Better than others   =   Base: (19 ads*) (248) (252) (245) (255) 16 - 24 post% 25 – 44 post% 45+ post% Perception New info. Different info Relevant Credible Better than others (158) (79) (63) Base: * Caution: low base Millward Brown * Significant to 95%

14. media Perception:Impact on social barriers • No shifts in attitudes or perceptions over the 8 week test period. • We don't’ know if there is a potential for longer term shift.

15. Pre test Perception/Branding: Focus on snack replacement message results in some drop in breath freshening benefits of Extra. Ad helps to modernise the Extra brand Total Sample Medium/heavy Light/Lapsing Base Total Respondents – Extra (160), Control Cell (160), A/B – Significantly different at the 95% confidence level Ipsos

16. Perception/Branding: In regional test, for Extra we see growth in both regions – and a growth in bonding only in Central media Central ROC Pre Post Pre Post Bonding Advantage Relevance Presence Millward Brown

17. Perception/Branding: Visibility driving improved perception of brand equity – not due to BOC message media Central% ROC% Q12. Please give your impressions of these brands, whether or not you’ve TRIED them yourself. Pre Post Pre Post Are good quality Gives you what you want from a chewing gum Appeal to you more than other brands Taste better than other brands Is the most popular brand of chewing gum More acceptable price than other brands Are growing more popular Offer something different to other brands Total Image Change (Extra) Total Image Change (other brands) +20 -25 -7 +11 Base (Heard of): (245) (251) (168) (169)

18. Persuasion:In central, consideration shows little change for Extra Gum – even when cut by heavy/medium/light, male/female media Central% ROC% Q10. The next time you buy chewing gum, how likely are you to consider choosing …(BRAND)? Pre Post Pre Post The only brand I would consider One of 2 or 3 brands I'd consider One of several brands I'd consider A brand I might consider A brand I would not consider Mean score: 3.36 3.32 3.28 3.36 Base: (245) (251) (168) (169)

19. Instore Persuasion: However there is limited evidence that purchase of Extra has increased amongst those who bought gum on the day Pre% Post% Q3. Which of these brands of chewing gum did you buy in store today? Extra Gum Extra Ice Airwaves Orbit Complete Extra Fusion Trident Splash Wrigley’s Spearmint Trident Soft Wrigley’s Doublemint Juicy Fruit Trident Sweet Kicks Hubba Bubba Mentos Pure Fresh Base: Bought today (130) (121)

20. Persuasion:TV has had no incremental impact in Central Vs total coverage but Extra value sales is ahead by +1.6%ppt in Central Vs total Sales Total Coverage Regional Breakdown: Total Wrigley Value Sales 8wks of BoC Trial Vs Previous 8wks Total Coverage Regional Breakdown: Extra Brand : Value Sales 8wks of BoC Trial Vs Previous 8wks Source ACNielsen Answers data: Pre Trial data 8wks to w/e 30.08.08.Trial data 8wks to w/e 25.10.08.

21. Persuasion:Within JS, yoy % growth trends, Tot Wrigley performance is +1.7%ppt, ahead of control and +2.5% ppt ahead of total coverage but behind total grocery mults. Sales Has The Performance in the BoC Stores being better than the Control Stores? Total Extra +0.9%ppt ahead of control Poor performance in single packs reflects move away from gondola ends (only at Kiosks). Source ACNielsen DME data to w/e 25.10.08. ACNielsen Answers data to w/e 25.10.08

22. Persuasion:Comparing performance in JS pre and during shows total Wrigley sales in BoC Stores +4.7% pts compared to the remainder of the estate Total Wrigley Value Sales in BOC Stores increased by +12.1% in the 8wks of the trial compared to the 8wks prior. This is +4.7% higher than the increase achieved by the remainder of the estate. If rolled out nationally a +4.7% would be worth +£744k in JS p.a. Alternatively if rolled out to the whole Grocery Channel this +4.7% is worth +£4.6M p.a. Sales Sainsburys Stores Value Sales % Chg: 8wks of Trial Vs Previous 8wks +10.4% pts +3.7% pts +12.5% pts +5.0% pts +4.7% pts -2.1% pts +2.6% pts +4.0% pts Source ACNielsen DME data: Pre Trial data 8wks to w/e 30.08.08.Trial data 8wks to w/e 25.10.08. ACNielsen Answers data to 25.10.08