September 22, 2006
Chain Takes Shots at Competitor with Comparison Ads
Quiznos is looking to toast the competition with ads that draw a direct comparison between its menu offerings and those of the competition, specifically Subway.
The campaign, which Quiznos calls its “most aggressive” in its 25-year history, puts its cheese-steak sandwich against Subways. The campaign, which runs through Oct. 22, takes
men off the street and asks them to look at two sandwiches (one from each chain) and choose the one they’d prefer to eat.
Jehad Majed, a Quiznos franchisee with a single store located in Dearborn Heights, Mich., told Ad Age, “We want them to show the food and educate [consumers] about the
food. Another thing that Quiznos doesn’t advertise is that we slice everything fresh. Comparing our sandwich to Subway’s is a start.”
Ad Age reports the cheese-steak sandwich comparison is not exactly done on a South Philly to South Philly basis. Quiznos sandwiches are priced from $5.29 for a small to
$9.99 for a large. Since consumers can add meat for about a dollar extra at competitive shops, a few orders for more meat would make the Subway sandwich, for example, heftier
than the item sold by Quiznos.
“Comparative advertising is very risky business,” said Tom Barry, professor-marketing at Southern Methodist University’s Cox School of Business. “You’re giving your competitor
time in your ads.”
“Comparative advertising makes the people doing it feel better,” said John Greening, associate professor of integrated marketing communications at Northwestern University’s Medill
School. It doesn’t, however, have any real impact on competitors or consumers, he said.
“Subway has been effective with its fresh position and diet position around Jared [Fogle, the longtime spokesman who claims to have lost weight eating Subway sandwiches]. Quiznos
does not have a brand promise. Their brand at this point is ‘attack the other guy.’ That’s not a brand,” said Prof. Greening.
Discussion Questions: Is comparison advertising an effective means for a retailer to gain a competitive advantage? Have you seen campaigns that you could
point to as being especially successful or unsuccessful using this tactic?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
There are a lot of opinions around this topic, and I guess there is no way to get any real quantitative evidence. My personal opinion is that it would work on me. I give the advertiser credit for “taking the gloves off” and pushing their product. I know the long term wisdom is not to give air time to your competition, but that is a little naïve especially if there is a strong leader. Who has not heard of Subway? Quiznos on the other hand needs to get noticed and one way to do it is by throwing sand in the face of their dominant competitor. This makes me want to give this scrappy competitor a try.
I don’t think this will work, although it may make the Quiznos franchisees feel better.
I don’t think it will work either. Subway can easily come back and do the same thing.
Quiznos is heading down the wrong path here. Subway has positioned itself to the health oriented consumer looking for convenience and variety. Quiznos needs to find its own position. Knocking the competition just reinforces its well earned position.
The ads will attract the curious and the disloyal. But it will not build long term loyalty and brand identity.
Like everything else, it depends how you do it. David Ogilvy showed six decades ago that direct comparisons can work, which is where the genre started. (Anyone out there old enough to remember the magnificent Rolls-Royce ads?) But God is in the details. Isn’t the terrible (in my view) political advertising we have now direct comparison advertising? Haven’t we seen how effective THAT can be?
Quizno’s branding strategies over the last eight years have all been “me-too:” Fresh, delicious, healthy. Exactly the same as Subway’s. Quizno’s is not differentiating itself in the marketplace, and THAT is the problem, coupled with its higher price. From the sketchy description of the ad above, I don’t see a strong differentiation here either. There are a number of differentiators Quizno’s could use, but it would need to be sure these are differentiators customers care about and that are core elements of how Quizno’s works or of its sandwiches — differentiators need to be more than just marketing slogans.
Consumers do not always trust comparison advertising and have grown to mistrust all advertisements. Too many times, the comparison is slanted and the consumer understands. If one shows a bigger product, but does not confirm an equal price, what has been accomplished? The real risk is actual performance. If a consumers goes into the store and does not receive what is shown in the advertisement, they will not trust in anything said.
Prof. Greening, Ryan and David are exactly right. Heck your grandmother knew more about branding than the Quiznos ad agency – didn’t she always say that you can’t raise yourself up by putting someone else down? When I see this kind of thing in product or political advertising I immediately conclude that there are not enough strong attributes to sell the product/politician based on its/his/her own merits.
The real winner here is steak. Beef processors are probably in cow heaven over this campaign. Personally, I think it will stimulate sales at both chains, and it gives Quiznos a higher profile being mentioned in the same breath as Subway.
One thing consumers might find deceptive. Subway’s sandwich is a couple of bucks cheaper. But that’s true for most of the two chains’ products. Quiznos’ customers pay more for better perceived quality.
I’ve tried both, by the way. Quiznos wins the taste test, but I visit the two chains for very different reasons.
While comparison ads can be very effective (everyone remembers the Pepsi Challenge campaign that had Coke scrambling), I agree with my fellow panelists that this is a very risky strategy. Giving your competition air time, showing their brand and naming them gives them profile and may even create a “boomerang” effect with shoppers who feel the advertising is being unfair and overstepping ethical bounds. An “attack” ad can be a short term tactical strategy but as Professor Greening from Northwestern points out, in the long term you must be building loyalty/equity with consumers behind a strong brand positioning. Quiznos’ agency may regret selling this campaign to their client in place of a great campaign that can truly differentiate Quiznos from Subway.
For a time, Quiznos’ positioning centered around the fact that its sandwiches were toasted in a conveyor-type oven that melted cheese and warmed the bread *yawn*. Subway undercut this by offering optional toasting and it has widened its menu to include more hot sandwich options.
Showing off a bigger, more expensive meat sandwich in a comparison ad seems most likely to be impressive to college-age males. I think Quiznos is playing the upstart role to Subway’s establishment position. So why not take the risky route of comparison advertising? I think the risk is minimal – Quiznos does’t have to prove it’s better, only stake a claim as an alternative on par with its much larger competitor.
Head to head comparisons work only when the competitor you target has a lot of ambivalent fence sitters among its customers. If Subway’s customers are very brand loyal they have an emotional bond to the chain, and as we marketers know, breaking that emotional connection is difficult at best.
I agree with those that fault Quiznos’ lack of understanding around brands and branding. They need to research their customers and non customers and examine their attributes for clues to their brand and their optimal market position. Only then can they begin to differentiate themselves in the market space.
Finally, in food, its all about trial. Their campaign, once they understand the market a little better, needs to be designed to drive people to come into the store. Only then can they begin to create brand loyalty and a solid market following.
Maybe it’s because I was on the Pepsi side of that Pepsi challenge era, but I’ve got to disagree with the majority of the comments so far. Comparative advertising can be devastatingly effective IF YOU ARE #2. It’s always risky for the number one brand to step down into the mud with a challenger. It gives the challenger instant implied credibility and makes #1 brand loyalists suspicious as to why the dither. But if you are #2 and take on the big guy — you get credit for hutzpah if nothing else. Just ask AVIS.
Comparative ads — or any ads for that matter — work only if they can highlight something that isn’t obvious; what a sandwich looks like and costs is obvious to anyone who walks thru the front door….as there are a lot of Quiznos around, the actual problem seems to be that (literally) not enough people are taking that step: they would probably be better off putting illustrated signs in the window.
Considering the Quiznos Cheese-steak sandwich is much better than Subway’s, it might work. Now I think I’ll head over to the post on Weight Loss/Health Clinics at Rite-Aid….
Comparison advertising can be an effective means for a retailer to gain a competitive advantage. However, it is only worthwhile if it is a sustainable advantage – if the competitors are unable to get around it.
If a retailer like Wal-Mart can pass on the savings it garners by having a cost advantage, it can communicate that via advertising. Wal-Mart’s “always the lowest price, always” statement directly suggests that their competitors do not always have the lowest price – so why shop around? Come to Wal-Mart! They successfully do this without giving their competition any air time or free advertising.
Quiznos is attempting to cover both cost and differentiation advantages in their ad. Aside from the fact that Quiznos’ customers that may not have considered trying Subways MIGHT do so based on the ad, it does not make sense if Subway can swiftly address the differentiation advantage that Quiznos is highlighting by “beefing up” their sandwich. According to AdAge, this is what Subway is doing! Or, if Subway promotes their sandwich at a lower price point, it completely neutralizes the Quiznos campaign.
It appears that Quiznos has not spent the time to develop a good marketing strategy. They appear to have concluded “we need to drive sales and keep the franchisees happy – NOW!” Even the comment from the franchisee highlights the lack of understanding: increasing awareness by showing the food and letting customers know that everything is sliced fresh will not sell more sandwiches. There are fundamental issues that need to be addressed BEFORE you employ comparison advertising if you believe your customers don’t know what you sell.
It’s hard to build a brand in the fast food business. You need a winning position that can’t easily be copied or challenged. And you need to be consistent in your advertising. Most fast food companies meet neither requirement, so Quiznos isn’t unique in its tactical/strategic failure. Let’s see how soon Quiznos drops its Subway comparison campaign in favor of another campaign it will drop, too. You can bet that when the Quiznos comp sales don’t substantially increase, the Subway comparison campaign will be history.
More Discussions
Is Five Below Poised For Even Greater Growth?
Five Below is hitting serious growth numbers. Can this trend continue?Should IKEA Be Flattening Management?
Should IKEA be trimming down its management headcount?Is Legislation the Answer on Visa, Mastercard Swipe Fees as ~$200 Billion Record Is Set?
Is lawmaking the way forward on swipe fees?
There are a lot of opinions around this topic, and I guess there is no way to get any real quantitative evidence. My personal opinion is that it would work on me. I give the advertiser credit for “taking the gloves off” and pushing their product. I know the long term wisdom is not to give air time to your competition, but that is a little naïve especially if there is a strong leader. Who has not heard of Subway? Quiznos on the other hand needs to get noticed and one way to do it is by throwing sand in the face of their dominant competitor. This makes me want to give this scrappy competitor a try.
I don’t think this will work, although it may make the Quiznos franchisees feel better.
I don’t think it will work either. Subway can easily come back and do the same thing.
Quiznos is heading down the wrong path here. Subway has positioned itself to the health oriented consumer looking for convenience and variety. Quiznos needs to find its own position. Knocking the competition just reinforces its well earned position.
The ads will attract the curious and the disloyal. But it will not build long term loyalty and brand identity.
Like everything else, it depends how you do it. David Ogilvy showed six decades ago that direct comparisons can work, which is where the genre started. (Anyone out there old enough to remember the magnificent Rolls-Royce ads?) But God is in the details. Isn’t the terrible (in my view) political advertising we have now direct comparison advertising? Haven’t we seen how effective THAT can be?
Quizno’s branding strategies over the last eight years have all been “me-too:” Fresh, delicious, healthy. Exactly the same as Subway’s. Quizno’s is not differentiating itself in the marketplace, and THAT is the problem, coupled with its higher price. From the sketchy description of the ad above, I don’t see a strong differentiation here either. There are a number of differentiators Quizno’s could use, but it would need to be sure these are differentiators customers care about and that are core elements of how Quizno’s works or of its sandwiches — differentiators need to be more than just marketing slogans.
Consumers do not always trust comparison advertising and have grown to mistrust all advertisements. Too many times, the comparison is slanted and the consumer understands. If one shows a bigger product, but does not confirm an equal price, what has been accomplished? The real risk is actual performance. If a consumers goes into the store and does not receive what is shown in the advertisement, they will not trust in anything said.
Prof. Greening, Ryan and David are exactly right. Heck your grandmother knew more about branding than the Quiznos ad agency – didn’t she always say that you can’t raise yourself up by putting someone else down? When I see this kind of thing in product or political advertising I immediately conclude that there are not enough strong attributes to sell the product/politician based on its/his/her own merits.
The real winner here is steak. Beef processors are probably in cow heaven over this campaign. Personally, I think it will stimulate sales at both chains, and it gives Quiznos a higher profile being mentioned in the same breath as Subway.
One thing consumers might find deceptive. Subway’s sandwich is a couple of bucks cheaper. But that’s true for most of the two chains’ products. Quiznos’ customers pay more for better perceived quality.
I’ve tried both, by the way. Quiznos wins the taste test, but I visit the two chains for very different reasons.
While comparison ads can be very effective (everyone remembers the Pepsi Challenge campaign that had Coke scrambling), I agree with my fellow panelists that this is a very risky strategy. Giving your competition air time, showing their brand and naming them gives them profile and may even create a “boomerang” effect with shoppers who feel the advertising is being unfair and overstepping ethical bounds. An “attack” ad can be a short term tactical strategy but as Professor Greening from Northwestern points out, in the long term you must be building loyalty/equity with consumers behind a strong brand positioning. Quiznos’ agency may regret selling this campaign to their client in place of a great campaign that can truly differentiate Quiznos from Subway.
For a time, Quiznos’ positioning centered around the fact that its sandwiches were toasted in a conveyor-type oven that melted cheese and warmed the bread *yawn*. Subway undercut this by offering optional toasting and it has widened its menu to include more hot sandwich options.
Showing off a bigger, more expensive meat sandwich in a comparison ad seems most likely to be impressive to college-age males. I think Quiznos is playing the upstart role to Subway’s establishment position. So why not take the risky route of comparison advertising? I think the risk is minimal – Quiznos does’t have to prove it’s better, only stake a claim as an alternative on par with its much larger competitor.
Head to head comparisons work only when the competitor you target has a lot of ambivalent fence sitters among its customers. If Subway’s customers are very brand loyal they have an emotional bond to the chain, and as we marketers know, breaking that emotional connection is difficult at best.
I agree with those that fault Quiznos’ lack of understanding around brands and branding. They need to research their customers and non customers and examine their attributes for clues to their brand and their optimal market position. Only then can they begin to differentiate themselves in the market space.
Finally, in food, its all about trial. Their campaign, once they understand the market a little better, needs to be designed to drive people to come into the store. Only then can they begin to create brand loyalty and a solid market following.
Maybe it’s because I was on the Pepsi side of that Pepsi challenge era, but I’ve got to disagree with the majority of the comments so far. Comparative advertising can be devastatingly effective IF YOU ARE #2. It’s always risky for the number one brand to step down into the mud with a challenger. It gives the challenger instant implied credibility and makes #1 brand loyalists suspicious as to why the dither. But if you are #2 and take on the big guy — you get credit for hutzpah if nothing else. Just ask AVIS.
Comparative ads — or any ads for that matter — work only if they can highlight something that isn’t obvious; what a sandwich looks like and costs is obvious to anyone who walks thru the front door….as there are a lot of Quiznos around, the actual problem seems to be that (literally) not enough people are taking that step: they would probably be better off putting illustrated signs in the window.
Considering the Quiznos Cheese-steak sandwich is much better than Subway’s, it might work. Now I think I’ll head over to the post on Weight Loss/Health Clinics at Rite-Aid….
Comparison advertising can be an effective means for a retailer to gain a competitive advantage. However, it is only worthwhile if it is a sustainable advantage – if the competitors are unable to get around it.
If a retailer like Wal-Mart can pass on the savings it garners by having a cost advantage, it can communicate that via advertising. Wal-Mart’s “always the lowest price, always” statement directly suggests that their competitors do not always have the lowest price – so why shop around? Come to Wal-Mart! They successfully do this without giving their competition any air time or free advertising.
Quiznos is attempting to cover both cost and differentiation advantages in their ad. Aside from the fact that Quiznos’ customers that may not have considered trying Subways MIGHT do so based on the ad, it does not make sense if Subway can swiftly address the differentiation advantage that Quiznos is highlighting by “beefing up” their sandwich. According to AdAge, this is what Subway is doing! Or, if Subway promotes their sandwich at a lower price point, it completely neutralizes the Quiznos campaign.
It appears that Quiznos has not spent the time to develop a good marketing strategy. They appear to have concluded “we need to drive sales and keep the franchisees happy – NOW!” Even the comment from the franchisee highlights the lack of understanding: increasing awareness by showing the food and letting customers know that everything is sliced fresh will not sell more sandwiches. There are fundamental issues that need to be addressed BEFORE you employ comparison advertising if you believe your customers don’t know what you sell.
It’s hard to build a brand in the fast food business. You need a winning position that can’t easily be copied or challenged. And you need to be consistent in your advertising. Most fast food companies meet neither requirement, so Quiznos isn’t unique in its tactical/strategic failure. Let’s see how soon Quiznos drops its Subway comparison campaign in favor of another campaign it will drop, too. You can bet that when the Quiznos comp sales don’t substantially increase, the Subway comparison campaign will be history.