Akshay Kumar goes back on Vimal Pan Masala ad campaign - Surrogate Advertising!

 April 21st 

Classic case of having the cake and eating it too. 

What Bloody Hypocrisy! First, the 50+ actor endorses the tobacco-based product ("I don't know that it has tobacco!?"). 

Then his fans howl in protest and to avoid the backlash pesto says that he will withdraw and will not endorse any such products in the future.

He also says that the endorsement money will be given for a "WORTHY CAUSE". 

At the bottom of the same post, it says the brand will continue to air the advertisement.

When will we realize that our reel heroes are not real heroes? They have feet of clay that will melt at the first instance.

Comments: 

Niketha Nigam: The product doesn't have tobacco but this brand majorly deals in pan masala products. They are just doing surrogate advertising. Casting 3 top most expensive actors for selling elaichi 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Raj Sampat: I m doing business of Vimal pan masala, first of all Vimal is not tobacco, so cut out miss confession of the product...

Anil Ramesh: Surrogate advertising Raj Sampat like Niketa Nigam said. Surrogate advertising itself is a dubious way of promoting a product.

Raj Sampat: Anil Ramesh on the packet itself they have written pan masala

Anil Ramesh: Raj Sampat, check this out.

When former James Bond star Pierce Brosnan faced flak last year for appearing in an advertisement for Pan Bahar, a mouth freshener, a spokesperson for the manufacturer argued that the outrage was the result of “public misconception” since he explained, the company didn’t “produce either gutka or pan masala.”

Ashok and Co, the company that produces Pan Bahar, does manufacture pan masala. It only doesn’t add tobacco to the sachet, because state governments started banning all food products containing tobacco after new regulations were framed in this regard in 2011.

While it is true that the actor was only endorsing a mouth freshener, the ‘misconception’, seems to be less a fault of the public and more a deliberate strategy by companies like Ashok and Co, who use tobacco-less products to market and sell tobacco products. Welcome to the world of surrogate advertisements – where the product being advertised is only a front for selling another product, usually a banned one.

Those manufacturing smokeless tobacco products have been resorting to this strategy for a long time now. So when you see Ajay Devgn promoting Vimal Pan Masala or Priyanka Chopra promoting Rajnigandha Pearls, both of which don’t have tobacco or nicotine, you must understand that they are not just selling pearls, they are selling something else too – a brand name that’s also associated with tobacco-containing products. It is a strategy used by most companies, done with the aim to sidestep laws that restrict the manufacture, sale, and advertising of these products.

In 2003, for example, the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) banned all direct or indirect advertisements of any tobacco products, except at the point of sale, storage, or manufacturing. A study conducted soon after found that the “annual cost of advertisement of plain Pan Parag on two television channels alone is 3.8 times its annual sale value.”

Were they running the company into loss then? Not really, if the tobacco-containing Pan Parag made up for the remaining expenses on advertising on Pan Parag and generated profits on top of that. “This indicates that the Pan Parag pan masala advertisements are a surrogate for the tobacco product (gutka) the company manufactures under the same brand name,” the researchers had to conclude in the study, which gave sufficient leeway to the company.

What seems to have come to the aid of manufacturers is another law that has really helped them sidestep the previously stated laws. The amended cable television network rules allow the usage of the brand name and logo of a tobacco product, subject to a few conditions, provided the product being sold does not contain tobacco. This has been used ingeniously by the manufacturers of the tobacco-containing pan masala or gutkha.

For instance, according to its own website, the pan masala Ashok and Co manufacturers went through three phases – selling pan masala without tobacco until 1988, then with tobacco, and after 2011, again without tobacco. However, the brand names for the pan masala — ‘Begum’, ‘Natkhat’, ‘Wah’, and ‘Dilruba’ — continued to be the same.

If the manufacturer could get the brand name stuck in the consumers’ minds, at a shop, they only had to choose whether the pan masala they wanted was with or without tobacco. If they chose a pan masala with tobacco, the nicotine in it would do the rest of the trick. Even if they were driven to the shop to buy a tobaccoless product, advertising tobacco at the shop itself wasn’t banned. The manufacturers had ensured that advertisements continued to reach consumers. But the Food Safety and Standards (Prohibition & Restrictions on Sales) Regulations, 2011, banned any food products containing tobacco and nicotine from markets, effectively banning even the production of tobacco-containing pan masala and gutkha. Any allegations, as the spokesperson for Ashok and Co would say, of surrogate advertisements would be meaningless if manufacturers couldn’t make the product that they are accused of surreptitiously marketing. Except, just like manufacturers found a way to work around the 2003 ban on advertisements, they have found a way to circumvent the 2011 manufacturing ban.

Only about a fortnight before Brosnan landed in the Pan Bahar controversy, the Supreme Court had revisited a submission by the health ministry that explained how the 2011 regulations were being flouted. The ministry had informed the court that “manufacturers are selling pan masala (without tobacco) with flavoured chewing tobacco in separate sachets”, which are often “sold together by the same vendors from the same premises.”

The spokesperson for Ashok & Co had told the BBC at the time of the controversy that they had chosen Brosnan because he is “suave, cool and a master-blender.” There couldn’t a better PR statement. The pan masala manufacturers’ plan of selling twin gutkha packs to be mixed as one, and advertising it through a tobaccoless product of the same brand name, requires a lot of mix-up or mixing. It is a master blender of a plan.

These surrogate advertisements too are then a health risk because every fifth adult uses smokeless tobacco in India, and perhaps more are gravitating towards it due to celebrity endorsement. A WHO monograph in fact argues that more than half of oral cancers are caused by smokeless tobacco. The clandestine production and sale of these products is something that perhaps only the government can stop – a process that for now is being gradually pushed forward through litigation and might need rules that are framed in a better manner. However, that this process does happen is something a casual visit to your local cigarette and paan shop will easily reveal.

If celebrities still endorse these products, it shows that they don’t mind being part of this cunning and dangerous trade. They can’t plead ignorance. Brosnan at least took a stand against Ashok and Co after facing criticism, but that didn’t stop the company from using the advertisement. When the Delhi government wrote to a bunch of actors that today participate in such surrogate advertising of smokeless tobacco, only Sunny Leone cared to reply and agreed to not endorse the products. For others, a little moolah is all it takes to endanger lives.

Deepesh Agarwal: I believe one can’t undermine the power of a binding contract I believe sir (the actual reason why the ad won’t be taken down). I am not sure what he was thinking “ok I’ll endorse Vimal elaichi (not a to tobacco) and the public won’t notice the pseudo marketing”? I am mean grow up Akshay as I am not sure what you were thinking that Indian citizens are so innocent that they won’t realize what you are really trying to do here? It doesn’t matter if it is elaichi and not tobacco. At the end, the true test is how the advertisement is perceived by the general public. At least Ajay Devgan (still not a great example though) endorses Vimal knowing fully well the reputational risks (a lot of memes are already there) unlike this double standard and hypocrite guy!

Being on the Button - Celebrity Endorsements

First published on Facebook on 15th January 2021

Companies have to tune into the present and keep responding to changes as they happen. 

First, it was Kinley's advertisement where Saurav Ganguly's daughter is advising her father to drink more water (albeit mineral water), to get over his illness. 

Not to be outdone Walkmate is airing its advertisement with Ravichandran Ashwin. Ashwin is injured and he needs to get well and what better to wear, than a comfy Walkmate! Wow.

Comments: 

L.K.Sandeep:  Sir, Huggies has some advice for Virat too...😀

Anil Ramesh: Good

Rohini Pisupati: Gosh, yes sir...it crossed my mind when I saw that Walkmate ad today. Also, does the general public still believe that the likes of Ashwin wear Walkmate?

Anil Ramesh: The celebrities don't and that is how the advertising pie crumbles, do you think that filmstars really use Lux soap or that calorie-conscious Salman Khan drinks Thums Up. They don't but make us believe that they do use the products they endorse, power of Persuasion, Rohini Pisupati. BTW, does it sound like a lecture at CBIT!

 Rohini Pisupati: Been a while on that side of the classroom, so I don't mind.

Owners acting as Celebrity endorsers for their own companies – Smart or Over Smart!

Most students of marketing remember what their teachers and advertising books have ingrained - "half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is; I don't know which half.".

This thought-provoking insight is credited to John Wanamaker (1838-1922), the department store magnate. 

Very true John Wanamaker, we all resonate and sympathize with you. You said it almost two hundred years ago and the chickens have come home to roost. 

chickens have come home to roost', means that the bad things that someone has done in the past have come back to bite or haunt the individual. The bad deeds that one may commit in one's lifetime are compared with chickens.

Most companies spend a lot of money on advertising and then lament the fact that it is not effective and after the over-spend and overkill, stop spending money on promotions, altogether - killing the messenger who brought in the bad news. 

The trigger for this post is JSR Group SUNCITY, a real estate company in Hyderabad that carpet-bombed the Telugu TV channels with its Vinayaka Chavithi greeting and beseeching prospective customers to buy its plots at the earliest. The celebrity endorser pitching for JSR SUN CITY is none other than the Managing Director, Dr. Jadapalli Narayana himself. 

This is where things become puzzling, we have heard of the 80-20 Principle popularly called Pareto's law. But most are ignorant of 85% -15%. 

The advertising professionals would have heard and practised it too! Out of the hundred rupees a company spends on advertising, 85% goes to the promotional media, and 15% goes to the advertising agency as advertising fees or the advertising commission. 

That is why advertising professionals are called 15% men. Let me hasten to add that 15% is not sacrosanct. Depending on the situation and the media, the percentage might go up or down. Still, generally, for print and broadcast media (television and radio) the 15% agency commission holds good. 

Some companies try to save money by short-charging the agencies by releasing the advertisements or advertisement campaigns themselves. This practice is not encouraged, and most reputed media houses refuse to accept advertisements directly from the companies. Still, in these changing times, this is practised in breach and not as an exception. 

The company can theoretically save 15% by releasing advertisements on its own or by setting up an in-house agency to save that 15% and make the campaign that much more cost-effective. 

Do you want to save 15% of hard-earned money on the promotional campaign and pat yourself on the back about being a shrewd businessman or would you ponder that for saving 15%, 85% of the rest of the promotional campaign cost has been compromised? 

What is more important - saving 15% cost or trying to make the 85% more productive and seeing that it brings in the needed awareness/attention and results! This tricky issue is what I want you to think and ponder over! 

Another way some company owners try to save money is by becoming celebrity endorsers themselves. Some do it to save money, and some do it for narcissistic reasons (the owners are in love with themselves). The reasoning is, that if celebrities appear in promotions and advertisements, why don't we become endorsers and hog all the limelight. 

The most famous founder who became a celebrity endorser for his own company is Colonel Sanders of KFC (Kentucky Fried Chicken). Colonel Sanders's face still appears in the KFC logo. Such is his popularity! 

One of the first proponents of this theory in India was MDH spices Owner 'Mahashay Dharampal Gulati, who regularly appears in MDH advertisements, both in the print version and in Television commercials. No doubt MDH's products are popular, and the recall of the old man might be good. Is the recall good because of the repeated exposure, or is it because he is perceived as an old man who promotes the product? Is he seen as a patriarch, an expert cook/chef or an expert rooting for spices!  

The second owner who has become famous for promoting his own company is Mr. Kiran Kumar (Gundu garu) of Lalitha Jewellers. Most readers might argue that Mr. Kiran Kumar is well-known and recognizable, just like any celebrity. 

Is he popular on his own merit of using an owner–celebrity concept being a brilliant coup, or is it the tack of honesty and fair prices that have touched a chord among the viewers and readers? Mr. Kiran Kumar becoming a celebrity might be a by-product of a brilliant positioning strategy. 

Would an Allu Arjun, Anuksha or Ramya Krishna prove to be even more popular and bring in even more moolah? Celebrity endorsements work on the concept that they bring in immediate awareness and quick sales. Did Lalitha Jewellers miss a trick by spending money on popularising the celebrity "Mr Kiran Kumar"? A point for further research. 

In most cases, the promoters get influenced by their company's success and try to ride roughshod over the agencies. It does not matter whether the agency is an in-house agency or a regular agency. The promoters have the last laugh. After all, it is their money to blow! Most agencies succumb after some feeble attempt to dissuade the owners. They know which side of their bread is buttered! Once the agency is malleable, the owners have the whole field to themselves. 

The owners try to project themselves as celebrity endorsers and try out all things, including trying to be macho men. The owner promoters who come to mind immediately are Y. Rajeev Reddy and Mr Saravana of the Saravana group. 

Y. Rajeev Reddy, the owner of Country Club and Amrutha Castle poses in all sorts of photographs including paragliding and parasailing. He is indeed an all-rounder! 

Another owner convinced that he is the best endorser is the owner of the Saravana group, Mr. Saravana himself. 

Mr. Saravana is so convinced of his good looks and acting prowess that he is acting in a Tamil feature film. Talk of a part-time passion becoming a regular profession! Mr Padmasingh Isaac, the owner of Aachi Masala, also falls in the same mould. He regularly appears in print and television advertisements for Aachi Masala.   

Another owner who is very fond of appearing in his own promotional campaigns is Mr. Harikrishnan Vasanth Kumar of the Vasanth & Co electronics group, the largest retail home appliances chain in Tamil Nadu. 

Mr. Vasanth Kumar appears in all his store advertisements. Generally, electronic store advertisements are practical and feature products and unbelievable discounts on offer. Vasanth electronics advertisements are different. They all feature a beaming Vasanth clad in a three-piece suit. 

Most Tamilians might be familiar with the three-piece-clad Mr Vasanth appearing in the advertisements. A visitor to Chennai might be puzzled as to what the three-piece-wearing model is doing in an advertisement targeting lower-middle-class and middle-class customers. 

As illogical as Roger Binny appearing as a celebrity for a cigarette brand, No-1 in the eighties. Cricket lovers would have caught the mismatch. The number one bowler at that time was Kapil Dev and not Roger Binny. Cricket lovers remember Roger Binny for his exploits in the 1983 Prudential World Cup. The tag of number one was with Kapil Dev. Roger Binny and number one was "Yeh bhaat kuch hajam nahi hota (this point is somehow not digestible)". 

Interesting concept – Owners as celebrity endorsers, food for thought. (My profuse thanks to Dr Madhusudan Kota for helping me with the research part and suggesting many company owner's names and the relevant promotional campaigns).