Target Malpractice

As Mid-Strength Guinness is making waves in the market, David Gluckman remembers the ill-fated Guinness Light launch in the 1970s. The moral of his story? Be careful who you target

The recent introduction of Mid-Strength Guinness into the West of Ireland inevitably takes me back to the ill-fated Guinness Light in the mid-1970’s. I was working as a consultant to the company at the time, though I must hasten to mention that I did not create “the Irish brand”, as it might have been called. By the late 1970’s no one dared mention it by name. And no-one could be found who had had anything to do with creating it.

The history started in the US a few years earlier with the launch of Miller Light. It was skillfully positioned as the “less filling beer” and Miller was able to use retired sportsmen to endorse it. (One might imagine charismatic modern retirees like Keith Wood or Martin Johnson endorsing such a product nowadays, if the law allowed it, which is unlikely.) Miller Light was a huge success. And one of its imitators, Bud Light still flourishes in the US today, being even bigger than its heavier antecedent.

At that time, Guinness was beginning to notice that younger drinkers, 18–24-year-olds, were rejecting its brand in favour of the new-fangled lager drinks that were taking hold.  Guinness was too heavy, too bitter, too demanding. So, taking a leaf out of the Miller book, they created a new lighter Guinness.  And they tested it. And tested it. And tested it. Among 18–24 Irish males. It beat traditional Guinness hands down, being clearly preferred by the chosen target group. As a product, it was a winner.

Moonwalking
And following the Miller line, the company called it Guinness Light and rather than trickle it apologetically into Limerick, as it might have done with a Guinness variant, it was launched with a bang and brouhaha right across the country. Guinness went onto TV with a serious-throated American called Bill Mitchell doing the voice over. The pictures showed Armstrong taking his great leap for mankind on the moon. The advertising strap line was “They said it couldn’t be done”, which referred both to walking on the moon and the creation of a new, light Guinness.

The brand soon ran into trouble and we were called in to have a look at its credentials, talk to a few consumers and recommend some ways of repairing the damage. It was an interesting challenge, though by this time, I don’t think the company seriously believed that we could turn it around. They were right.

We looked at all the past research and the figures were extraordinary. Targeted young consumers really did prefer Guinness Light to Guinness “Heavy” and the font design and advertising were very well received. If you bought the data, Guinness was on to a sure-fire winner.

Then we went out and talked to consumers and it was all summed up by the remarks of one man in one focus group that we carried out in Limerick. He said something like this: “I walked into this bar and the place was festooned with Guinness Light material. There were banners and posters and drip mats and even special glasses. Previously, I had seen it advertised on TV. I must try some of this I thought, so I ordered a pint, in a special glass with Guinness Light printed prominently on its side. As I put it to my lips, there was a tap on my shoulder and an older 30-something friend, looked reprovingly at me. ‘Drinking ladies’ Guinness are we?’ he said.”

And so it failed. What Guinness had forgotten to do was to test the impact of the new variant in a social environment, in the bar, so that they could assess the response – not of their preferred target, the young, but of Guinness “Heavy” die-hards. I remember people in groups parroting back the line “They said it couldn’t be done” and adding, triumphantly, “and they were right. It couldn’t.”

There was an almost jubilant “I knew it couldn’t work” attitude among these men, a rejoicing at a fall by the mighty Guinness. It was the consumer flexing his muscles as the ultimate arbiter of brand innovation.

Compromise?
In today’s “drink responsibly” environment, the new Guinness makes a lot of sense. The core product has enough character and strength of flavour to compensate for the reduction in alcohol. But I wonder whether the “it-does-what-it-says-on-the-front” name, “Mid-Strength” is too obvious a statement of compromise. After all, it will look like any other Guinness in the glass.

There seem to be close parallels between Guinness Light and Watneys Red Barrel and its ill-fated “Red Revolution” of the 1960s.  There are men today whose fathers weren’t born when Red Barrel bit the dust, who claim to remember the brand and compare it to making love in a punt! Legends like that have a habit of living forever. I wonder what impact Guinness Light will have on Guinness Mid-Strength. And whether new generation Guinness people will have learned the lessons of the past.  db  May 2006