Pfizer Inc.

views updated

Pfizer Inc.

THE POWER OF ZYRTEC CAMPAIGN
SCHICK TRACER FX ADS CAMPAIGN
SEE YOU LATER, ALLIGATOR CAMPAIGN
SUPER FANS CAMPAIGN
VIAGRA LAUNCH CAMPAIGN

235 E 42nd St.
New York, New York 10017-5755
USA
Telephone: (212) 573-2323
Web site: www.pfizer.com

THE POWER OF ZYRTEC CAMPAIGN

OVERVIEW

Pfizer Inc. emphasized the strength of Zyrtec, a prescription antihistamine, with surreal advertisements that showed people fleeing from allergy-inducing animals and flowers, then taking Zyrtec and resuming their normal routines. "When allergies are a nightmare, remember Zyrtec for fast relief," said one print ad. Since its U.S. launch in 1996, Zyrtec had experienced dynamic growth. This was due in large part to changes in the way that prescription drugs were marketed. After the U.S. Food and Drug Administration began allowing pharmaceutical companies to advertise prescription medications directly to consumers, demand for allergy drugs increased dramatically. Early promotions for Zyrtec and its rivals had mystified consumers, because marketers were not allowed to name a drug and specify what ailment it was designed to treat in the same ad. In August 1997 the guidelines for television commercials were revised, and drug companies began airing spots that described their products, their purposes, and possible side effects in more detail. "The Power of Zyrtec" campaign was developed by the Lyons Lavey Nickel Swift advertising agency and the New York office of Health Medical Consumer Advertising & Marketing. The campaign ran in print and broadcast media throughout 1998 and into 1999.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Pfizer was founded in Brooklyn, New York, in 1849 when Charles Pfizer began producing chemicals such as citric acid to add flavor to food. Because the company had difficulty obtaining limes and lemons from Italy during World War I, a way was invented to extract citric acid from molasses. The spacious vats used in that process were perfect for making large quantities of penicillin to treat the ill and wounded during World War II. By 1998 Pfizer was manufacturing dozens of drugs, which accounted for 85 percent of its sales. Its prescription medications included Norvasc for hypertension, Zoloft for depression, Zithromax for infection, Viagra for erectile dysfunction, Lipitor for elevated blood cholesterol, and Aricept for Alzheimer's disease. Pfizer also made nonprescription products such as Visine and OcuHist eyedrops, Unisom sleep aids, BenGay muscle rub, Plax mouthwash, Bain de Soleil sunscreens, and medicines for animals.

Zyrtec, first marketed in the United States in 1996, had been sold in other countries since 1987. Available in tablet form and as a fruity syrup, it was designed to be taken only once a day to provide relief from allergies for 24 hours. Ads for Zyrtec emphasized that the product was easy to use and caused only "mild to moderate" side effects, but because of restrictions imposed by the Food and Drug Administration, the brand's first television commercials did not state that Zyrtec was an allergy medication. One spot that aired early in 1997 featured a businessman scaling a rock wall. The camera rose to provide a bird's-eye view, revealing that the wall spelled out the brand name. A three-page print advertisement published in the spring of 1997 was equally surreal but less mystifying. It showed a man in a business suit using a rope to climb a giant sunflower. A headline on the second page said, "Big Allergies. Big Relief." The text promised "BIG relief" and "BIG value—lowest cost/day of widely prescribed branded antihistamines." The third page listed the drug's potential side effects in smaller print. "The Power of Zyrtec" campaign continued to emphasize the product's strength, but it focused on the word "power" instead of using size to convey that message.

TARGET MARKET

Demand for pharmaceuticals in general increased dramatically after drug manufacturers were allowed to advertise their prescription products directly to consumers. The advertisements were part of a larger marketing effort in which sales representatives visited doctors and pharmacists to deliver free samples and discuss the results of clinical trials that measured the performance of each drug. Although doctors and pharmacists were targets of the advertisements, another primary audience was patients who would see the ads, realize that medication appropriate for their health problems might be available, and ask their health care professionals about the drugs. Of 40 million to 50 million U.S. consumers who suffered from seasonal allergies, an estimated 12 percent consulted doctors to alleviate their misery. About 18 percent endured the symptoms without taking any medication, while others relied on over-the-counter remedies available without a prescription.

Seasonal allergy attacks were the body's response to outdoor irritants such as mold spores and pollen from trees and weeds, which caused problems only during certain times of the year. Perennial allergy attacks were typically caused by dust mites, house pets, and other indoor irritants. The body produced a chemical called histamine to counteract the irritants, which caused sneezing, itching, watery eyes, swelling, and other unpleasant symptoms. Market research indicated that people with allergies were most interested in a strong product that would quickly relieve their symptoms. Zyrtec and other remedies known as antihistamines worked by blocking the release of histamine, but the drugs sometimes led to side effects such as rapid heartbeat, headache, or fatigue. Most advertisements for antihistamines explained briefly how the drugs worked, then mentioned the possible side effects as required by law. Ads for Zyrtec and its two major competitors emphasized that they were less likely than many other antihistamines to cause drowsiness. Zyrtec was effective against both indoor and outdoor allergens and could also be used to treat chronic itching and hives. In May 1998 Zyrtec became the first leading prescription antihistamine approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use by children two to six years old.

COMPETITION

In 1998 the leading brand in the $2 billion U.S. market for allergy drugs was Claritin, made by Schering-Plough Corporation, with U.S. sales of $1.1 billion. Claritin's sales of $908 million in 1997 were more than twice its 1995 revenues. Zyrtec was second with U.S. sales of $355 million in 1998 and $250 million in 1997. Allegra (made by a German company, Hoescht AG) was third in 1998 with U.S. sales of $324 million, up from $201 million in 1997 and $22 million in 1996. Flonase (an antiallergy nasal spray manufactured by a British company, Glaxo Wellcome PLC) had U.S. sales of $207 million in 1997. As sales skyrocketed, companies significantly increased their advertising budgets. The industry's direct-to-consumer advertising totaled $595.5 million in 1996, $843.9 million in 1997, and more than $1 billion in 1998, according to Competitive Media Reporting.

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT

Pharmaceutical companies often spent hundreds of millions of dollars to bring a drug to market, but only 30 percent of drugs approved by the federal government generated sufficient sales to make a profit. To increase the probability that a product would be successful, Pfizer's marketing team had an unusual amount of influence over which drugs the company would develop. When a new product was under consideration, the marketing staff ran complex cash flow models to predict how factors such as the drug's side effects might increase or decrease sales. If the analysis indicated that the company was unlikely to recoup its development costs, the drug was seldom placed on the market. Pfizer also employed more than 5,000 sales representatives to distribute free samples of its products and to discuss a drug's efficacy with doctors.

Schering-Plough spent $69 million to advertise Claritin in 1997, up 21 percent since 1996, with $31.2 million going for network television commercials. Launched in the United States in 1993, Claritin had worldwide sales of $1.73 billion in 1997 and was the most popular antihistamine in the world by 1998. At that time it controlled more than 50 percent of the U.S. market. Schering-Plough was one of the first pharmaceutical companies to run advertising campaigns aimed at consumers, and Claritin was the first prescription product advertised on prime-time television after the Food and Drug Administration revised its direct-to-consumer advertising guidelines in 1997. Some of the brand's advertising in 1998 included appearances by Joan Lunden, host of the television program Good Morning America. These were the first direct-to-consumer advertisements in which a celebrity was allowed to endorse a prescription product.

Claritin's extensive promotional program included the "Blue Skies" campaign of print advertisements and television commercials, introduced in August 1997. An advertisement in Money magazine in March 1998 showed a profile of a woman's face gazing serenely at a powder-blue sky where a Claritin tablet hovered like the sun, complete with a pink and blue halo and white rays radiating outward. The headline read, "Escape the limitations of seasonal allergies." The ad urged consumers to ask their doctors about Claritin, a drug that would not make them drowsy and could be taken just once a day. The text emphasized that Claritin was the leading prescription antihistamine, that it caused few side effects, and that it was available only by prescription. The ad included the company's Internet address, a toll-free number to call for more information, and the tag line, "Nothing but blue skies from now on."

The third most popular prescription antihistamine, Allegra, was promoted with television commercials in which people exclaimed, "Ah, Allegra!" Ads for Allegra emphasized that the medication could enable allergy sufferers to experience outdoor adventures even during allergy season. Whimsical television commercials showed people wind surfing through a wheat field, snorkeling through a field of flowers, and skiing through a meadow in the summertime. Like Zyrtec, Allegra was introduced to the United States in 1996, three years after Claritin's launch. In 1997 Hoechst spent $64 million to advertise Allegra, a 220 percent increase since 1996, with $17.2 million going for network television commercials. Allegra had worldwide sales of $215.1 million in 1997, up from $17.3 million in 1996.

Hoechst also made Seldane but voluntarily discontinued that popular allergy medication early in 1998 because it caused serious heart problems if consumers took it with certain other drugs. Seldane had been launched in 1985 and was one of the first major prescription drugs promoted with direct-to-consumer advertising. After the Food and Drug Administration proposed in 1997 to remove Seldane from the market, Hoechst spent more than $20 million on advertisements that invited consumers to try its other antihistamine, Allegra, "a seasonal allergy medicine with the relief of Seldane but with more freedom." Meanwhile, the makers of Claritin ran two-page newspaper advertisements that said, "Seldane may no longer be an option. Claritin is a clear choice."

Zyrtec also competed with numerous nonprescription allergy drugs such as Nasalcrom, made by Pharmacia & Upjohn, Inc. A headline in a 1998 magazine advertisement said, "The best way to stop suffering is don't start!" The ad explained in detail that Nasalcrom could "flat-out prevent allergies" within a week of continual use, and the product caused no drowsiness or other unpleasant side effects. The text added, "It's so safe you can buy it without a prescription, at full prescription strength, and use it through the whole allergy season." The tag line was "Allergy prevention pure and simple."

MARKETING STRATEGY

In August 1997, when the Food and Drug Administration revised the guidelines that governed television commercials for prescription drugs, pharmaceutical companies were allowed to expand the content of their advertisements. Pfizer could move beyond its vague references to Zyrtec's "big relief " and discuss in some detail the product's effectiveness as an antihistamine. The Food and Drug Administration dictated that television commercials for prescription drugs had to explain some of the major risks that could result from taking the drugs. In addition, the commercials had to inform consumers where they could obtain more information regarding who should take the medication, how it would affect them, and what side effects it might cause. Because of the complexity of the regulations and the brevity of television commercials, most spots promoting prescription drugs were so-called "reminder" ads that did not go into much detail. Instead, they were designed to familiarize the public with the brand and encourage consumers to ask for it by name when they visited their health-care providers. Print advertisements were required to describe the uses, benefits, and risks of each drug in much more detail. They often included a second page of small type that provided much of the same information typically inserted into the drug's package for use by doctors and pharmacists.

Like earlier ads for the brand, "The Power of Zyrtec" campaign featured intriguing, surreal images. One television commercial used special effects and computer graphics to show a man opening his front door and facing the "nightmare of allergies." Pollen-producing vines and flowers grew in seconds from the cracks in his brick walkway. Dogs and cats joined the looming, threatening plants as they chased the man through his house. He ran into his bathroom and found a package of Zyrtec. The nightmarish plants and animals ran back outside, and the man went on with his day, protected by "the power of Zyrtec." The campaign included extensive print advertisements. One magazine ad featured a photograph of a man fleeing through his house, pursued by a dog, cat, flowers, and a vacuum cleaner. The headline read, "When allergies are a nightmare, once-a-day Zyrtec starts working fast." A smaller photograph showed the man hugging the same dog after taking Zyrtec. Another television commercial showed a woman encountering a poodle and then sneezing. A mob of animals came running from numerous doorways as she fled down a corridor. She rushed into a room, slammed the door behind her, and swallowed a Zyrtec tablet. In great relief, she went outside and met a woman carrying a poodle. The poodle sneezed, and the allergy sufferer smiled.

Direct-to-consumer advertising and other promotions for Zyrtec were handled jointly by Lyons Lavey Nickel Swift (a unit of Omnicom Group) and the New York office of Health Medical Consumer Advertising & Marketing. In 1997 Pfizer spent $103 million to advertise its prescription drugs directly to consumers, according to Competitive Media Reporting. Its advertising budget for Zyrtec was $53.5 million that year, with $4.5 million going for network television commercials. During the first five months of 1998, Pfizer spent more than $12.3 million to advertise Zyrtec, Schering-Plough spent $11.1 million to advertise Claritin, and Glaxo Wellcome spent $7.3 million to advertise Flonase, according to Scott-Levin's Direct-to-Consumer Advertising Audit.

OUTCOME

In February 1999 "The Power of Zyrtec" campaign won Health Medical Consumer Advertising & Marketing first place in the International Mobius Competition's pharmaceutical category. In September 1998 a nationwide survey of 2,000 physicians found that when patients asked for a drug by its brand name, they most often requested an allergy medication. Zyrtec, Claritin, and Allegra were among the four brand-name drugs requested most often. Three years after its introduction to the United States, Zyrtec was the second most popular prescription antihistamine in the United States. It had worldwide revenues of $416 million in 1998, up from $265 million in 1997 and $146 million in 1996. Forbes magazine reported that the wholesale drug market in the United States generated record revenues of $81 billion in 1998, an increase of more than 60 percent since 1994. Pfizer's pharmaceutical sales increased three times faster than the industry average. In 1998 the company had overall revenues of $13.5 billion, including $12 billion in drug sales, an increase of 26 percent since 1997. For the second consecutive year Fortune magazine included Pfizer on its list of the world's most admired companies. Forbes magazine named Pfizer the "Company of the Year" in January 1999. Chief Executive magazine listed the board of directors at Pfizer among the top five in the nation. At the end of 1998 Pfizer was the third largest pharmaceutical enterprise in the world, up from thirteenth in 1990.

SCHICK TRACER FX ADS CAMPAIGN

OVERVIEW

NOTE: Since the initial appearance of this essay in the 1999 edition of Major Marketing Campaigns Annual, Warner-Lambert was acquired by Pfizer Inc. The essay continues to refer to the company's former name, as that was the official name of the organization when the campaign was launched.

In 1995 Schick, a unit of the Warner-Lambert Company since 1970, introduced the Tracer FX, a permanent razor that was designed to alleviate shaving irritation. The product was targeted at young men with sensitive skin and was positioned against the Gillette Company's Sensor Excel, which incorporated a number of high-tech safety and comfort features. To launch the Tracer FX, the J. Walter Thompson advertising agency created a campaign that showed the model Magali shaving her face and flirting with male viewers. The ads were a hit, but the Tracer FX itself did not live up to consumers' expectations, and once the launch campaign had run its course, Schick shifted its marketing focus to other products.

By mid-1997, however, the Tracer FX was back in the spotlight as Warner-Lambert launched a $100 million global campaign to burnish the overall Schick image among younger consumers. J. Walter Thompson developed the new campaign, highlighted by slick television spots relaunching the Tracer FX with the tag line "The Feel of Smart Design." The spots featured hard-hitting sound tracks and male athletes using high-performance equipment—a pitch to the consumer who it was hoped would choose the Tracer FX. Schick also continued its ongoing association with the National Basketball Association (NBA), focusing particularly on rookie players. By 1998, in an intensely competitive and growing shaving market, the Tracer FX was enjoying a significant increase in sales worldwide.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

From 1923 on, the Gillette Company was the leading manufacturer of razors, holding steady at about 65 percent of the wet-shaving market throughout the twentieth century. Schick was consistently a distant second to Gillette in razor sales, historically with about 15 percent of the overall market. And while Gillette was a product innovator, Schick was a follower, albeit a fast one.

In the mid-1970s the Bic Corporation shook up the shaving market with its introduction of the disposable razor. Gillette quickly developed its own disposable razor, a move that Schick followed. By the late 1980s disposables represented 60 percent of all razors sold, and because the profit margin on these units was low, shaving product companies began looking to create alternative sales with permanent razors. In 1990 Gillette introduced the Sensor, a high-tech, premium-priced razor with two independently suspended blades that were designed to give a "contoured" shave. The company took a risk by spending large sums to develop the product. It then increased its marketing budget by more than 40 over the previous year, throwing nearly all of its advertising behind the Sensor and abandoning its advertising for disposable razors. The strategy worked as men picked a closer shave and a higher price over cheaper convenience. As Lawrence Ingrassia reported in the Wall Street Journal in 1990, "Gillette says it sold 20 million Sensor razors in its first eight months on the market, which was its original goal for the entire year." The shaving wars of the 1990s had begun.

Schick saw the wisdom of selling an appealing, premium permanent razor, and in 1991 the company came out with the Tracer, a variation on the Sensor and an attempt to capture some of Gillette's market. The Tracer was described as a razor with blades that adjusted "to follow the unique contours of your face"—terms that essentially paraphrased the description of the Sensor—and it was aimed at what Schick called "young, active, risk-takers." Schick put a reported $12 million toward advertising for the Tracer and an additional $17 million into waves of hard-hitting promotions that included product samples, coupons, and rebates. Bruce Cleverly, a marketing vice president for Gillette, told the Wall Street Journal that his company was "delighted" that Schick was introducing a new permanent razor system, as it "reinforces the success of our business strategy." Meanwhile, Gillette countered Schick's move with coupons of its own and stepped up its ad campaign with the tag line "Gillette: the best a man can get."

By late 1993 Chain Drug Review was stating that "retailers say that in general men are demonstrating heightened interest in their appearance and a greater willingness to broaden the range of grooming products they buy. Manufacturers have responded with line extensions and a slew of value-added promotions." Manufacturers did indeed respond. In 1994 Gillette introduced the Sensor Excel, which had a rubber strip and other innovations that promised a closer, safer shave. The item was a tremendous success and was often credited with driving an overall boost in sales of shaving products during the 1990s. Schick's Tracer FX followed in 1995. Like the Sensor Excel, the Tracer FX also represented a product upgrade with advanced technology. But rather than focus on technological superiority and safety as the Sensor advertising did, Schick chose to pursue the niche of men with sensitive skin. Mediaweek quoted a Schick senior product manager as saying that the improvements on the Tracer answered "an important consumer need."

The razors themselves featured flexible blades, a skin-conditioning strip with aloe and vitamin E, a rubber skin guard, and an ergonomically designed handle. These attributes, while similar to the Sensor's, were used to distinguish the Tracer FX as the only razor designed specifically for sensitive skin. At the same time the brand's high-tech name and special packaging put it in direct competition with the design advancements of the Sensor Excel. In addition to capitalizing on a niche market and competing with the Sensor Excel, the Tracer FX also afforded Schick more shelf space in retail outlets. Too, the Tracer FX's packaging and marketing were used to distinguish the brand from other, less expensive Schick products.

For the Tracer FX launch in 1995, Schick ran the Magali ads. After an initial surge, sales dropped off, however, and Schick discontinued the campaign. Then, in 1997 the Tracer FX was relaunched (with a slightly revised design) as part of an overall master branding effort, this time carrying the tag line "The Feel of Smart Design." The $100 million Schick put toward its overall campaign in 1997 and 1998 represented a tremendous increase in spending on advertising, which in the previous year had been estimated at approximately $70 million.

TARGET MARKET

The same brand of razors was typically not marketed to both men and women, and the initial target for the Tracer FX was men with sensitive skin. Men in general accounted for about 70 percent of razor sales in the United States, and Schick's research found that more than 50 percent of men felt that they had sensitive skin. Those identifying themselves as having sensitive skin skewed slightly younger than average—18 to 34.

For its branding campaign Schick used the relaunch of the Tracer FX to position itself as hipper and trendier than the broad-based Gillette and to draw in younger men. In 1997 a Warner-Lambert vice president explained to Stuart Elliott of the New York Times, "Our target has been more of a general audience of males 18 to 54. Now we are focusing on a younger target audience, 18 to 24."

COMPETITION

In the world of razors Gillette was the name marketers had to contend with. In fact, Gillette's preeminence in the market was so complete that in some countries the very name had become synonymous with "razor." Gillette built its dominance by aggressively anticipating trends and constantly developing high-quality products in all niches of the shaving market. The company's research and development of products was a model for the industry, and Gillette often spent many years and millions of dollars before introducing a new item. In the 1970s Gillette shrewdly began protecting its ideas by designing products that required complicated machinery for their production and thus were difficult for competitors to copy.

When the Sensor—with its independently suspended blades—was introduced in 1990, it had gone through a decade of development and had cost Gillette $200 million, including the equipment needed to manufacture it. Schick later won rights to the Sensor patent but was unable to replicate the product because the company did not have the laser-welding machinery needed to reproduce the Sensor technology. Although Schick captured some market share with the Tracer and Tracer FX, its premium-priced products never caught up with Gillette's Sensor and Sensor Excel.

MARKETING STRATEGY

Following the Magali campaign, Schick conducted extensive research and found that younger men were dissatisfied with the shaving products available to them. These men were more than willing to try alternatives and were even seeking new products. With the opportunity open to build brand loyalty among a group still forming its shaving habits—men 18 to 24—Schick relaunched the Tracer FX with an image campaign. "The Feel of Smart Design" was reflected in the ads, which dispensed with the traditional man-at-the-sink shaving spots. Instead, a high-performance sports image was employed to appeal to the target audience and to draw a link to the improved control offered by the new product.

BETTER ADVERTISING THAN TECHNOLOGY

When the Tracer FX was originally launched in 1995, it was positioned to appeal to shavers on the basis of skin sensitivity rather than on the technological advancements around which the rival Gillette Company touted its Sensor products. The television spots showed 19-year-old French fashion model Magali lathering up her face and shaving it as she teased male viewers about their shaving woes. Magali purred lines like "You guys are so sensitive." Or, as she shaved under her chin, she asked, "Is this the sensitive part, right here?" The voice-over interspersed bits of information about the razor's design "for a smooth shave with less irritation." Magali finished the ads by wiping water from her upper lip and saying, "Are you the sensitive type? I like that."

The Magali campaign was considered a success in launching the Tracer FX. The ads generated media attention, and trial sales of the handle and initial blade were good. Manufacturers realized their greatest profits in repeat sales of blades, however, and because the product did not perform especially well, the Tracer FX failed to win over long-term customers. A J. Walter Thompson executive said, "The advertising worked, but the technology didn't."

Sports popular with younger men formed the motif for the campaign. The artistic, stylized television ads, which showed athletes windsurfing, skateboarding, skiing, golfing, and performing other feats, were fast paced. They had techno-rhythm music in the background and a dark contemporary look. J.J. Jordan, a J. Walter Thompson vice president, told the New York Times, "There are hallmarks of great, functional design, especially for men, in the world of sports," and the Schick ads "clearly communicate" that spirit. For instance, a diver bouncing off a board into a pool paralleled the "flexing action" of the Tracer FX. Jordan also explained that the ads conveyed the idea that the product was "distinctive, [looked] cool and [had] a smart reason for being that way." Since good design was a central concept of the campaign, it was thought that older customers would not be put off by the spots and might even find them appealing.

In tandem with the advertisements, Schick continued its ongoing sponsorship of the NBA Rookie Game and recruited spokesmen from among the players. The company also became the premier sponsor of the NBA's website and launched a website for Schick separate from the Warner-Lambert site. Special promotions, such as a package of Tracer FX razors and a free can of another company's shaving gel, helped sales in 1998 as well.

OUTCOME

Schick's overall branding campaign was considered to be a success, with the Tracer FX in particular catching consumers' attention. In a review of shaving products, a writer for the Los Angeles Times said that the "smooth Tracer FX handles like a Porsche on the Grande Corniche." Throughout 1998 sales of Schick's Tracer FX system and refills grew. In addition, the introduction of the Schick Protector bolstered the brand's market share. The Protector, with a new technology of wire-wrapped razors and a striking, curvy red handle, was touted as a product for sensitive skin and was intended to compete with Gillette's forthcoming MACH3. By 1999 Drug Store News was reporting that "though Gillette dominated the refill razor category, Warner-Lambert's Schick showed strong increases for 1998, a performance attributed to relaunches and strong ad support." Shaving systems generally were Warner-Lambert's best-performing category for 1998.

Despite these successes, however, Gillette's 1998 introduction of the MACH3 overshadowed all other developments in the shaving category. Gillette spent a reported $750 million to develop the MACH3's ultra-thin, diamond-carbon-coated blades. The investment paid off. Launched in mid-1998, the MACH3, which was more expensive than the Sensor or Tracer lines, ranked third in sales for the year.

SEE YOU LATER, ALLIGATOR CAMPAIGN

OVERVIEW

NOTE: Since the initial appearance of this essay in the 1998 edition of Major Marketing Campaigns Annual, Warner-Lambert was acquired by Pfizer Inc. The essay continues to refer to the company's former name, as that was the official name of the organization when the campaign was launched.

In 1990 the Warner-Lambert Company began an advertising campaign that starred eye-catching alligators to illustrate the beneficial properties of its product, Lubriderm Hand and Body Lotion. The campaign, which continued throughout the 1990s, featured the reptiles walking or swimming near beautiful women who had soft, moisturized skin. To emphasize that the alligators were metaphors, the J. Walter Thompson ad agency used stark settings with white backgrounds that symbolized the clean feeling of Lubriderm lotion. Because most other advertisements for hand and body lotion centered on women applying the product to their skin, the unusual alligator campaign set Lubriderm apart from its many competitors. The ads emphasized the therapeutic and cosmetic properties of the brand by contrasting the scaly skin of alligators with the smooth skin of the women using Lubriderm, and they created an icon that would make consumers think of

[Image not available for copyright reasons]

Lubriderm when they needed a moisturizer. The company credited the ad campaign with helping to heighten customer awareness of the brand and increase sales.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Lambert Pharmaceutical Company had been established in 1881, and Warner Drug Company had been founded in 1886. The two companies merged in 1955. Warner-Lambert became one of the world's largest marketers of prescription drugs, consumer health products, and confectionery. In 1997 the company's products included Listerine mouthwash, Trident and Dentyne gum, Certs breath mints, Benadryl antihistamine, Sudafed nasal decongestant, and Schick shavers. The original Lubriderm hand and body lotion had been developed in 1946 as a compounding base for dermatologists, and in 1950 Warner-Lambert began marketing the product to pharmacists in the United States. Lubriderm was first marketed to the general public in 1980. During the next two decades, the company introduced several line extensions including a body bar, a loofah bar, a bath and shower oil, a moisturizing gel cream, and a lotion for sensitive skin. Some of those products were subsequently discontinued.

[Image not available for copyright reasons]

Because the first ads for Lubriderm had been aimed at dermatologists, they had focused on its therapeutic value as a remedy for dry skin. Later, when the product was sold directly to consumers, advertisements mentioned its cosmetic value as a lotion that could improve the appearance of skin, but the fact that it was recommended by dermatologists was still an important element in the marketing strategy. Advertising campaigns helped publicize each line extension as it was introduced. The basic Lubriderm formula was upgraded in 1996, new graphics were designed for the product's packaging, and new advertisements were developed in 1997 to promote the reformulated base lotion.

TARGET MARKET

Lubriderm was sold primarily to women 18 to 49 years old, but a line extension was being developed for launch in 1998 for women slightly older who were concerned about the aging effects of the sun's ultraviolet rays. A large percentage of the general population suffered from some degree of dry skin, and more than 80 percent of women in the United States used hand and body lotion once or twice daily. Consumers wanted a long-lasting product that would soothe and moisturize without leaving a greasy residue that would rub off on their clothing.

By emphasizing that Lubriderm was the brand of skin and body lotion most often recommended by dermatologists, Warner-Lambert called attention to the product's therapeutic, healing qualities. The ads also pointed out Lubriderm's cosmetic benefits by showcasing beautiful models with smooth, radiant skin. The campaign assured women that the lotion would feel clean, not greasy or clammy, and many of the ads mentioned water or showed photographs of it to emphasize Lubriderm's ability to hydrate the skin.

COMPETITION

Traditionally, mass-marketed lotions had been advertised with an emphasis on their cosmetic benefits—such as making skin soft and attractive-while premium lotions that sold for a somewhat higher price had stressed their therapeutic, healing properties. Lubriderm products had 5.6 percent of the premium market in the United States, putting the brand in third place in the hand and body lotion category. The top-selling lotion was Vaseline Intensive Care, made by Chesebrough-Pond, a division of Unilever. In second place was Jergens, made by Andrew Jergens Company, a subsidiary of Kao Corporation. Other major competitors included Suave Skin Therapy Lotion, made by Helene Curtis, Inc., another division of Unilever; Curel, made by Bausch & Lomb, Inc.; and Nivea, made by the Beiersdorf Company. Annual revenues in the hand and body lotion category totaled $808 million.

The Procter & Gamble Company's Oil of Olay brand led a related category, facial skin care, with a market share of 24.5 percent. L'Oreal's Plenitude brand had 17.1 percent, and Unilever's Pond's brand had 14.7 percent, according to Information Resources, Inc. The world's best-selling brand of skin care products was Nivea, but in the United States the brand's top line extension, Nivea Visage, was ranked sixth with only 4.5 percent of the facial skin care market. In 1997 Beiersdorf ran a $20 million campaign on television and in print media with the tag line "Nivea Brings Your Face to Life. Nivea Brings Your Skin to Life." Samples of the product were distributed in conjunction with the ad campaign. After the ads ran, Nivea's annual sales were $21.5 million, an increase of 5.2 percent.

Another facial skin care brand, Revitalift, was promoted in 1997 by a $25 million ad campaign. The antiaging cream, which was part of L'Oreal's Plenitude line, had led the category in 1996. The corrective, anti-wrinkle cream category had been pioneered during the early 1990s and was the most rapidly expanding segment of the skin care market. It served primarily women who were at least 40 years old. Also in 1997 L'Oreal Plenitude FUTUR.e, a moisturizer that contained vitamin E, was launched with a $20 million advertising campaign on television and in print media.

The top-selling hand and body lotion, Vaseline Intensive Care, was publicized in March 1997 with Chesebrough-Pond's sixth annual "Skin Awareness Month." The $6 million promotion featured advertisements in the magazines Better Homes & Gardens, Woman's Day, Family Circle, Good Housekeeping, Reader's Digest, and TV Guide. A toll-free consumer hotline, referrals to dermatologists, and displays at retail outlets were also included. Other advertisements for the brand used sandpaper to represent the feeling of dry skin. Products in the Vaseline Intensive Care line had been reformulated in 1995, the brand's packaging had been redesigned, and its advertising budget had been increased to $25 million, up from about $8 million previously. In addition to hand and body lotion, Chesebrough-Pond offered a line extension called Vaseline Intensive Care Moisturizing Body Wash.

Commercials for the second-place brand in the hand and body lotion market, Jergens, focused on the touch-ably soft skin of a mother and her daughter. The company also offered line extensions in closely related market categories. The company had invigorated the $158 million liquid body cleanser market with the introduction of Jergens Refreshing Body Shampoo in 1994. The next year it launched Jergens Naturals with Baking Soda Deodorant Skin Care Bar. For consumers who preferred products that cleansed and moisturized at the same time, Jergens had introduced a water-activated gel called Shower-Active Moisturizer. The company had also restaged Jergens Aloe & Lanolin and Vitamin E body wash bars.

PHARMACEUTICAL INNOVATION

During the 1800s William R. Warner, one of the founders of Warner-Lambert Company, invented sugar-coated pills to mask the bitter taste of medicines. In 1879 the company's other founder, Jordan Lambert, developed the first surgical antiseptic, which saved the lives of many patients undergoing medical operations. By 1997 the product had become the world's most popular mouthwash, Listerine Antiseptic.

Another competitor, Procter & Gamble, led the body wash category in 1996 with a market share of nearly 30 percent, thanks largely to its Oil of Olay 2-in-1 Moisturizing Body Wash. Its $50 million marketing plan revolved around the tag lines "You May Never Need a Body Lotion Again" and "Moisturized Skin No Bath Bar Can Touch." During 1997 Procter & Gamble continued its Marketing Breakthrough 2000 program, which had been launched in 1995 in an attempt to lower marketing costs from 25 percent to 20 percent of net sales. For the fiscal year ended June 1997, the company's marketing costs were 24.3 percent, up from 24.1 percent in the previous year. By the end of 1997 Procter & Gamble had abandoned the program, but it was still cutting costs, including its advertising budget.

MARKETING STRATEGY

Like many of its competitors, Warner-Lambert had developed line extensions of its original hand and body moisturizer over the years. But in 1997 the Lubriderm bath and shower oil, body bar, and loofah bar were discontinued, and marketing efforts concentrated on the basic skin therapy lotion, which had been upgraded in the previous year. A campaign budget of $16 million was allocated for television and print advertisements in the United States. "Big Drop," the only television spot that aired during 1997, began with a woman's face reflected in a drop of water while she asked, "What exactly is clean moisture? Well, it's what you'll find in a new, even better Lubriderm." The drop of water reflected the words "New, Clean Moisture Formula" and the Lubriderm logo on a bottle of lotion. The camera panned across the woman running her hands over her arms, legs, and shoulders while she continued, "And it's best defined by a feeling. A feeling that's almost invisible on your skin. One that feels distinctly less greasy, even though it's working every bit as hard as always. So it's recommended by dermatologists even more than before. New cleaner-feeling Lubriderm." The drop of water reflected more words from the Lubriderm bottle and the woman's face, and finally the drop fell into an alligator's eye. As the reptile strolled away, the woman's voice concluded, "See you later, alligator. Hello, clean moisture." The commercial aired primarily on network television during the day and during prime time, but it also ran on cable and syndicated television.

During 1997 several print ads also ran in magazines with large female readerships, such as Better Homes & Gardens and Cosmopolitan. One ad featured a model in a pose that emphasized her bare arms and legs as she lounged beneath the words, "Moisturizers and dieting. Live by the same rules. If it's greasy, stay away." Another ad read, "Your moisturizer shouldn't make you feel clammy all over. That's what first dates are for." A third said, "Some moisturizers act like your ex-boyfriend. A little too clingy." In each ad smaller type at the bottom read, "Lubriderm's clean moisture formula is a hardworking, fast-absorbing lotion that helps get rid of dry, ashy skin without feeling greasy or clingy. That must be why it's the #1 leading moisturizer recommended by dermatologists." Each print ad featured a picture of a bottle of Lubriderm lotion next to the tag line "See you later, alligator," but none actually showed the alligator.

The company developed at least one new spot each year in the "See You Later, Alligator" campaign, and there had been variations on the central theme since the advertisements were introduced in 1990. One of the first television commercials had featured attractive women swimming underwater with live alligators. Another showed models and alligators in surroundings that looked like glamorous bedrooms. All the spots referred to the alligator in some way, but by 1997 the creature had become a signature at the end of some television spots instead of the central figure it had played in earlier commercials. In some spots the alligator made only a brief appearance, walking away as the tag line "See You Later, Alligator" was spoken. Other spots featured the alligator throughout.

ROFESSIONAL RECOGNITION

In 1997 the advertising industry bestowed an ADDY Award for excellence on "Smart Woman," a print advertisement in the "See You Later, Alligator" campaign for Lubriderm hand and body lotion.

The idea of using alligators as an eye-catching visualization for rough, scaly skin had originally been suggested by a copywriter at J. Walter Thompson. Alligators are frequently thought of as being dry, rough, and scaly. In addition, "See you later, alligator" is a familiar phrase, an informal way of saying good-bye. Therefore, the tag line invited the consumer to say good-bye to dry skin by using Lubriderm. In developing the advertisements, the challenge was to achieve a highly stylized tone yet deliver a message to which consumers could relate. The simple white backgrounds of the ads helped emphasize the clean, nongreasy nature of Lubriderm lotion, and the campaign emphasized that Lubriderm was the brand most often recommended by dermatologists. "Lubriderm always tries to stand for the highest standard of therapeutic moisturization. We're not the housewife in the kitchen talking about dry elbows," said Wendy Trees, an account executive with J. Walter Thompson. Because the ads were strikingly different from those of Lubriderm's numerous competitors, they helped the brand stand out and created a memorable image that would make consumers think of Lubriderm when they thought of relieving dry skin.

OUTCOME

It took time for consumers to become accustomed to the alligator ads and to associate them with Lubriderm after the campaign was launched in 1990. But the company stayed with the same advertising theme, and eventually the alligator became Lubriderm's signature. "Consumers love the alligator. Our sales have increased since we've been using it. It's highly effective," said Trees. In a 1997 survey by USA Today's Ad Track, 22 percent of respondents said the ads were effective, although only 11 percent said they "liked the ads a lot." Respondents 18 to 24 years old gave the campaign higher scores; 36 percent said it was effective, and 26 percent said they liked the ads. Only 8 percent of men liked the ads, compared to 13 percent of women. Nearly half of the 1,002 respondents recalled seeing the ads at least three times.

Warner-Lambert reported record income in 1997, including a 1 percent increase in its $1.4-billion U.S. consumer health care operations. That segment of the company had grown 3 percent in 1996. The company's worldwide sales were $8.2 billion.

SUPER FANS CAMPAIGN

OVERVIEW

With a budget estimated at $20 million and a campaign overseen by J. Walter Thompson USA of New York, the Warner-Lambert Company in mid-1998 launched a series of television spots for its Rolaids brand antacid tablets. The campaign, Rolaids' first since 1996, focused entirely on television as opposed to print, and it represented a return to traditional themes for the brand, including an emphasis on sports. Hence the title "Super Fans."

Recent years had seen a number of changes in the highly segmented category of digestives, including an increased emphasis on the calcium content of antacids. Much more portentous for antacids, however, had been the introduction of histamine 2, or H2, acid blockers. Whereas antacids neutralized acids in the stomach, H2 blockers actually stopped the production of stomach acid. According to Advertising Age in 1996, industry experts believed that sales of H2 blockers alone would reach nearly $2 billion by 1998.

With the advent of this innovative over-the-counter treatment for heartburn, Rolaids and its traditional competitors had struggled to keep up with a changing market. "Rolaids is such a classic brand," Christina Villante of J. Walter Thompson told Michael Wilke in Advertising Age at the outset of the 1998 campaign, "but got lost in the last couple of years with the H2 blockers, which really changed the game. Everyone in the category was re-evaluating their advertising, and that cost them equities. But if you ask consumers about Rolaids, they remember the spelling and the sports, so it's a natural to go back to that."

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

The word "spelling" was a reference to Rolaids' classic advertising campaign from the 1970s, "How do you spell relief?" As millions of TV viewers during that decade learned, the proper spelling was "R-o-l-a-i-d-s." Spots dramatized this in numerous ways, for instance with a waitress scrawling the seven-letter name on an order pad or a coach in a locker room spelling it out on a chalkboard. Indeed, the themes of food, sports, and tension repeatedly came together in the heyday of Rolaids advertising, as they would again with the 1998 "Super Fans" campaign.

Warner-Lambert introduced Rolaids in 1954 with a single flavor, peppermint. In 1988 it extended its line to include assorted fruit flavors, but from the beginning its emphasis was on scientific claims rather than on taste. Hence the much-touted promise that "Rolaids consumes 47 times its weight in stomach acid," illustrated in television ads with a dramatization using a simulated Rolaids tablet and a bucket of colored water. The company backed up the claim with detailed information regarding clinical testing and research.

In the mid-1980s, as competitors touted the calcium content in their products, Warner-Lambert let it be known that Rolaids had always contained limestone, which included calcium. The company also touted other health factors in its product, including the fact that Rolaids was aspirin-, cholesterol-, and fat-free.

TARGET MARKET

Assessing the market for H2 blockers and antacids in 1997, Al Heller of Drug Store News could as easily have been citing the potential for the resurgence of antacids when he noted "the ongoing high-stress lifestyle of Americans, which makes stomach remedies as essential a personal accessory as a pen, pager, or credit card. Digestive diseases impair more than 2 million Americans and result in 200,000 absences from work each day, according to the Glaxo Institute for Digestive Health, Digestive Disease National Coalition. As a nation, we experience 32 million new cases of frequent heartburn each year, another 20 million of irritable bowel syndrome and gallstones, and 4 million ulcers."

Warner-Lambert itself conducted a study, the results of which it reported in October 1998. In line with its use of sports imagery in the "Super Fans" campaign, the company undertook what it called the "Rolaids Fanatical Fan Sports Ritual" survey, which found that one of every six sports fans had at some time experienced acid indigestion, heartburn, or sour stomach. The survey found that, of some 100 million sports fans in the United States, one in five described themselves as "fanatical fans" who would "do practically anything to support their favorite teams."

To an extent the survey was tongue-in-cheek, but it also presented a number of realities that served to indicate the target market for Rolaids. A press release announcing the survey results indicated that "fanatical fans" typically experienced the worst indigestion when their teams lost, of course, but win or lose, "the foods that baseball fans traditionally enjoy in large quantities—such as hot dogs and other fatty foods—are also associated with heartburn. During the 1998 baseball season, it was predicted that a record 26 million hot dogs would be eaten in the nation's 30 stadiums."

The somewhat humorous portrayal of sports fans called to mind a popular Saturday Night Live skit from the early 1990s in which comedian Chris Farley and others conducted a talk show devoted exclusively to the Chicago Bears football team and the Chicago Bulls basketball team. In the midst of talking about "Da Bearce" and "Da Bullce," as they called them, Farley and company consumed vast amounts of fatty foods and alcohol, which led to regular "heart attacks" in the middle of the talk show. Ironically, the 33-year-old Farley's own unhealthy lifestyle caught up with him in December 1997, when he was found dead in his Chicago apartment.

HOW DO YOU SPELL ACCOUNT?

In October 1998 former advertising sales representatives of Turner Broadcasting held a 20-year reunion. Among them were Larry Diveny of Comedy Central, Lou LaTorre of Fox Sports Net, and Harvey Ganot and John Popkowski of MTV. Because of another commitment, Ted Turner himself could not attend the reunion, which was held at Denim & Diamonds in New York City, but as Bradley Johnson speculated in Advertising Age, "Ted stories no doubt will abound." Johnson relayed a particularly popular anecdote concerning Turner and Warner-Lambert, makers of Rolaids.

At the time the many sales alums had gone to work for Turner Broadcasting in the late 1970s, Turner was already a well-known millionaire man-about-town in Atlanta, but he was far from the billionaire he would become. There was no Jane Fonda, no CNN, no Turner Classic Movies; indeed, there were few of the fixtures that would come to characterize the Turner legend. Turner's broadcast "empire" consisted of little more than flagship station WTCG (later WTBS) in Atlanta, and cable TV itself was struggling at the fringes. Nor could the industry count on Turner's magnetism to increase its exposure, since Turner himself was not the national celebrity he would later become. But he was well on his way.

WTCG desperately needed the advertising dollars of consumer products giant Warner-Lambert, and Turner managed to get a meeting with the top brass at the company. On the date of the appointment, however, he showed up looking ill, holding his stomach and moaning. He did this until one of the Warner-Lambert executives asked him what was wrong, whereupon Turner—no doubt with a sly smile—said, "I need a Rolaids." He got the account.

The participants in the putative talk show looked like a portrait of Rolaids' target market: middle-aged men who lived a high-tension lifestyle. Of course, Rolaids was also marketed to women, but the greater presence of male figures in commercials suggested a heightened focus on men. Age was also a factor, for as Heller noted, future increases in the digestives market would "be fueled by the continued aging of baby boomers, who have greater needs for the products as they cross the 50-year threshold."

COMPETITION

Perhaps it was fitting that in a market in which sales were motivated in part by physical and mental tension among users, competition itself was tense. Among Rolaids' many competitors were the liquid antacids Maalox, produced by Ciba-Geigy, and Procter & Gamble's Pepto-Bismol. Even more direct competition came from SmithKline Beecham's Tums, like Rolaids a chewable antacid.

When the calcium craze hit during the 1980s, Tums took advantage of the new trend not by changing its product—which already contained calcium—but by touting that fact aggressively in its marketing efforts. This led to a staggering 50 percent increase in sales during 1985, knocking Rolaids out of first place among antacids. Warner-Lambert responded by producing a sodium-free version of Rolaids and by introducing calcium supplements, but its marketing placed much less emphasis on calcium content than did the advertising for Tums.

A decade later, not only Rolaids but all traditional antacids were reeling from the introduction of entirely new competitors: H2 blockers, led by SmithKline Beecham's Tagamet HB. As Leon Jaroff of Time wrote in 1995 in describing Tagamet's forceful marketing, "Suddenly a roar issues from the TV set. On the screen, a giant tongue of flaming gases erupts from the sun, and one bold statement after another is superimposed on the solar surface: 'The idea behind it led to the Nobel Prize in Medicine,' reads the first, followed by, 'It's the most prescribed medication of its kind.' … Then, against the glowing corona of a totally eclipsed sun, 'And now it's available without a prescription.' "

Introduced in 1977, Tagamet enjoyed patent protection for 17 years, and during the 1980s it became the first drug ever to earn $1 billion in a single year. But as the end of the patent approached in the early 1990s, SmithKline Beecham applied for and received federal approval for an over-the-counter version. Around the same time Johnson & Johnson/Merck presented Pepcid AC, and British pharmaceutical company Glaxo Wellcome introduced Zantac 75. Warner-Lambert held U.S. marketing rights for the latter, but at the same time it also began to market Rolaids more aggressively.

By 1996, when Warner-Lambert launched a new advertising campaign for Rolaids, the fortunes of the once-powerful brand had fallen greatly. Having fallen from first place a decade before, it now held just 4.6 percent of the $1.45 billion digestives market, placing it 10th after Pepcid AC, Tums, Mylanta (McNeil Pharmaceuticals), Tagamet, Imodium (McNeil), Pepto-Bismol, Zantac 75, Maalox, and Alka-Seltzer (Bayer). Of the growth in H2 blockers, a Warner-Lambert executive told Chain Drug Review, "I can't think of any one category that has grown like this."

MARKETING STRATEGY

During the late 1990s still more H2 brands entered the market, and antacid manufacturers in 1996 spent a total of $55 million in advertising to shore up their brands by "setting them apart from the many acid blockers," as Wilke wrote in Advertising Age. A brand manager for Maalox told him, "It's self-preservation from the OTCs [over-the-counters] against the H2s." Of that $55 million, Warner-Lambert devoted a hefty portion—$14 million—to a new Rolaids campaign orchestrated by J. Walter Thompson.

Rolaids, which had recently added magnesium to its product, used advertising to highlight quick relief and acid absorption. Still sales declined, and by early 1997 Rolaids had less than a 4.4 percent market share. Worse news appeared on the horizon in early 1998 when Pepcid introduced chewable H2 tablets, thus "targeting loyalists of roll antacids such as Tums and Rolaids," according to Tan Sheet.

Hence the change of advertising strategy by Warner-Lambert in mid-1998. The company increased media spending for Rolaids by $6 million, to $20 million, and as Wilke reported, "look[ed] to the brand's past for its first new campaign since 1996." Once again, Rolaids advertising would contain the tag line "R-o-l-a-i-d-s spells relief" and would emphasize sports. The thrust of the advertising would be different, however. The 1970s spots for Rolaids had included sports figures such as then Los Angeles Dodgers manager Tommy Lasorda, whereas the 1998 campaign would poke gentle fun at sports fans themselves. As always, the focus would be on television, with no print ads planned.

Thus in October 1998, when Warner-Lambert reported the results of its "Rolaids Fanatical Fan Sports Ritual" survey, the company noted that "'fanatical [sports] fans' seem to already be fans of Rolaids, as represented in the current Rolaids ad campaign that personifies the fan in action—body painted, cheering, and finding relief from acid indigestion in Rolaids."

OUTCOME

At the time of Rolaids' return to the roots of its classic campaign, Paul Kelly of Silvermine Consulting told Wilke in Advertising Age, "I'm surprised they're abandoning the quick relief message already, since from a marketing standpoint that's how everyone is dividing out." The last phrase presumably referred to the fact that, just as the growth in H2 blockers had tapered off, the decline in antacid sales had leveled off as well. In spite of this settling in the market, however, Rolaids sales had dropped still further by the middle of 1998, when the company adopted its new campaign.

The results of the campaign had not materialized by mid-1999, and the lack of reporting on the subject made it difficult to discern the future direction of Rolaids. As early as mid-1997, when the market was still decidedly bullish on H2 blockers, one industry analyst had suggested to Heller that Rolaids still had a well-defined and assured niche: "There is still a place for conventional antacids in the convenience part of the [digestives] market. It's easier to carry with you a roll of Tums or Rolaids in that form than it is to carry individual doses of Tagamet, which are tablets but not chewables. This is still an important aspect."

Although the advent of chewable Pepcid AC had placed even that aspect of Rolaids' appeal in jeopardy, the time-honored brand enjoyed the support of a company with a long history of marketing consumer products and substantial resources to devote to that marketing. The $20 million Warner-Lambert put into Rolaids in 1998 said volumes concerning how the company felt about its 42-year-old chewable antacid brand.

VIAGRA LAUNCH CAMPAIGN

OVERVIEW

In March 1998 Pfizer Inc., the world's largest research-based pharmaceutical company, won FDA approval of its anti-impotency drug, Viagra. Because of the nature of the condition it was meant to treat, Viagra came to market that April amid a frenzy of publicity, much of which mocked impotency and its treatment. Though the publicity helped Viagra to reach record-setting sales figures before any advertising appeared on behalf of the drug, Pfizer wanted to exert control over the Viagra image. After waiting for the media buzz to wane, the company, along with health-care advertising agency Cline, Davis & Mann of New York, broke its first ads supporting the drug's launch in late June 1998.

The first series of ads, having an estimated price tag of $25 million, were branded print spots featuring older dancing couples and the tagline "Let the Dance Begin." These were followed, in the spring of 1999, by a television commercial featuring former senator and presidential candidate Bob Dole speaking frankly about his experience with erectile dysfunction, as impotence came to be known. The Dole spot, which did not mention Viagra, was complemented by TV versions of the "Let the Dance Begin" ads, which, though they used the Viagra name, included no dialogue or explanation of the product's use. By sidestepping a full explanation and identification of Viagra in these two different ways, Pfizer was able to avoid an FDA-ordered listing of the drug's side effects. The cost of the 1999 television campaign was estimated at $35 million, and the TV spots were supported by the ongoing print segment of the campaign.

Viagra sold extremely well both before and after the advertising campaign's debut, and its introduction, along with the initial advertising behind it, was credited with helping to destigmatize impotency. The focus on elderly people in both the dancing spots and the Dole spots, however, risked alienating younger men. In following years Pfizer attempted to appeal to a broader age range of men by enlisting younger sports celebrities as Viagra spokesmen.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Started by immigrant cousins Charles Pfizer and Charles Erhart in 1849, Pfizer helped usher in the age of modern medicine by answering the U.S. government's call, during World War II, to devise a process for mass-producing penicillin. During the early 1960s Pfizer was the primary North American manufacturer of the Salk polio vaccine, and during the 1970s and 1980s an increased commitment to research and development led to the discovery of major medicines and fueled the company's global expansion. During the 1990s the pharmaceutical giant launched blockbuster drugs Zoloft, Lipitor, and Norvasc, among others.

In 1997 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration relaxed its policies regarding the television and radio advertising of prescription drugs, and drug company advertising expenditures increased dramatically as a consequence. Long reliant on marketing drugs primarily to physicians and other medical professionals, pharmaceutical manufacturers now began to advertise their products directly to consumers, much as other consumer goods had always been advertised. Though restrictions remained regarding the disclosure of side effects, and though most companies continued to submit their advertisements for FDA approval before airing them, direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising quickly became ubiquitous in America, putting patients, rather than their doctors, increasingly in the position of deciding which drugs might best satisfy their needs.

In March 1998 the FDA approved Pfizer's anti-impotency drug Viagra, the first easily administered treatment for an affliction widely assumed, until then, to be essentially untreatable. Viagra's groundbreaking and controversial nature, unaided by any consumer advertising, made it an immediate pop-culture phenomenon upon its April launch.

TARGET MARKET

Pfizer allowed the initial media buzz to abate somewhat before launching its first advertisements on behalf of Viagra in late June 1998, a delay which likewise allowed for FDA approval of the ads. Some questioned the necessity of advertising a drug that seemed fully able to sell itself, but Pfizer, enlisting agency Cline, Davis & Mann, wanted to exert control over the Viagra image in the face of widespread, often uncomplimentary commentary about the drug. The primary audience in the campaign's early stages was older males. Among males over 65, the incidence of impotence ranged from 15 to 25 percent.

Pfizer's use of focus groups to prepare for the first Viagra campaign led to the conclusion that, as company executive David Brinkley told Advertising Age, "people want a positive message, they don't want to be reminded of their dysfunction and already know how devastated they are by it." Individuals in the focus group likewise "responded to the 'connectedness' the drug helped them feel with their partners." The first branded print ads, using the tagline "Let the Dance Begin," conveyed this positive, dignified message of connectedness, positioning Viagra as the answer to the romantic problems impotence can cause, through photos of mature couples dancing cheek to cheek alongside an image of the distinctive diamond-shaped blue pill.

The campaign's television launch, in the spring of 1999, brought to center stage, through the figure of former senator Dole, the message that erectile dysfunction was a condition to be taken seriously rather than dismissed or stigmatized. The unbranded Dole spot, which had a print counterpart, took the form of a public-service announcement and did not even mention Viagra, with the elderly senator speaking frankly about his own erectile-dysfunction experience and urging afflicted men to seek treatment. Branded 15-second TV spots, again featuring the dancing couples and using no dialogue or voice-over, broke soon after, reinforcing the image of Viagra as a path back toward romantic union.

COMPETITION

Viagra was preceded to the anti-impotency treatment market by a variety of less effective therapies and drugs that could be delivered only via injection. The first treatment not requiring injection—a urethral suppository named Muse, manufactured by VIVUS, Inc.—debuted in January 1997 and generated 17,000 prescriptions a week as well as a rapid increase in the price of VIVUS stock in its first year. The 1998 Viagra launch, however, proved devastating for VIVUS. Muse prescriptions dropped to 3,000 a week, the company lost $80 million, and VIVUS stock fell from its peak price of $40 per share to $2.

DOLE'S OTHER "LITTLE BLUE FRIEND"

For the 2001 Super Bowl, Pepsi and BBDO New York used Bob Dole in an ad that directly parodied Dole's work for Viagra. The spot showed Dole on a beach with a golden retriever, mimicking imagery associated with pharmaceutical ads. Dole said, "I'm eager to tell you about a product that put real joy back into my life … What is this amazing product?" The product was Dole's "faithful little blue friend" Pepsi, of course. After cutting to a store interior in which a man told viewers to "ask your local convenience-store clerk" if Pepsi was right for them, the camera returned to Dole, who was shown doing backflips on the beach and saying, "I feel like a kid again."

For five years Viagra remained the only impotence treatment available in pill form. As such it established a virtual sales monopoly in its category beginning at the time of its launch, but in late 2003 two new rivals touting advantages over Viagra entered the market behind high-profile launch campaigns.

Bayer AG and GlaxoSmithKline plc teamed up to market Levitra, which was touted as a faster-acting alternative to Viagra and which could be, unlike Viagra, taken with food. The partner drug companies anted up $6 million a year for a three-year Levitra sponsorship of NFL football, as well as an additional $10 to $15 million in media buys, and enlisted former Chicago Bears and then-current New Orleans Saints coach Mike Ditka as Levitra's spokesman. The resulting TV, print, outdoor, and promotional campaign, dubbed "Tackling Men's Health," broke in time for the fall 2004 football season. Within four months of its launch, Levitra had amassed a 14.4 percent market share.

After winning FDA approval for Cialis in late 2003, Eli Lilly and Company partnered with ICOS Corp. to comarket the drug. The Cialis launch campaign cost an estimated $100 million and broke during the broadcasts of the two NFL conference championships on January 18, 2004, before Cialis joined Levitra as an advertiser on that year's Super Bowl broadcast. Cialis distinguished itself from competitors by touting its 36hour window of effectiveness, compared with the four or five hours promised by Viagra and Levitra. In order to make this claim in its "Bathtubs" television ads, Cialis broke with Viagra and Levitra to run spots featuring not only the product name but also an explicit explanation of its use. This was seen as a risky move because of FDA requirements calling for a corresponding focus on a long list of side effects, which could negatively affect viewers' perceptions of the drug. Cialis likewise targeted a key portion of its target market with a 2004 sponsorship of the PGA Tour. By October of 2004, Cialis was the number two anti-impotency drug, with an estimated 17.8 percent market share, compared with Viagra's 68.9 percent and Levitra's 10 percent.

MARKETING STRATEGY

The unprecedented media attention generated by Viagra's April 1998 launch was both a help and a hindrance to Pfizer as it set out to define the brand on its own terms in July of that year. On the one hand, as Pfizer executive Brinkley said, "It became OK overnight to talk about erectile dysfunction." Moreover, as consultant Al Ries of Ries & Ries told Advertising Age, "Publicity created the credentials for the brand before the advertising ran, so when you saw the ad you were already convinced that if you took one of the pills, you'd see a bodily reaction." On the other hand, much of the publicity was negative. Viagra and impotency became prime material for late-night monologue jokes, making Pfizer worry that many men, seeing that the condition had been dismissed as trivial, might yet remain unwilling to seek treatment.

A month after Viagra's launch, while Pfizer and Cline, Davis were still planning the drug's first advertisements, former senator Dole, as a guest on CNN's Larry King Live, revealed that he had participated in clinical trials for Viagra after prostate surgery and that he considered it "a great drug." Pfizer and Cline, Davis were surprised by the conservative icon's readiness to speak about such a sensitive matter, and they approached the former senator about doing an awareness campaign to supplement the ads then in production. He agreed to the proposal.

The consumer campaign broke in late June 1998 with the reserved, relationship-centered "Let the Dance Begin" print ads as well as educational spots, which appeared in magazines including Newsweek, Time, Life, and U.S. News & World Report. Then in March 1999 the Dole spot marked Viagra's television launch. It was supported by branded 15-second Viagra advertisements as well as the ongoing print portion of the campaign. The branded TV spots used the concept of dancing couples from the initial print campaign and included no dialogue, voice-over, or text explaining Viagra's function. Because of the early publicity Pfizer could count on consumers knowing the Viagra name and its intended use, so the branded spots needed no explanation and therefore could forego any FDA-mandated listing of side effects.

The Dole commercial likewise was informed by the early publicity and was, in a different way, able to steer consumers toward Viagra without having to mention any side effects. Though Dole directly addressed the condition of erectile dysfunction, there was no mention of the Viagra brand. The spot was framed, instead, as a public-service announcement in which Dole, against a stately senatorial-looking office backdrop, urged men suffering from erectile dysfunction to learn about all available treatment options. Viagra was, however, the only treatment then available in pill form, and its universal brand recognition made it the logical beneficiary of the pitch.

Dole opened with the word "courage" and then explained, "When I was diagnosed with prostate cancer, I was primarily concerned with ridding myself of the cancer. But secondly, I was concerned about postoperative side effects." Dole acknowledged, after introducing the previously little-known term "erectile dysfunction" in place of the less palatable "impotence," that "it's a little embarrassing to talk about E.D., but so important to millions of men and their partners … and there are many treatments available." Dole also referred viewers to an 800 number for the American Federation of Urological Disorders hotline.

OUTCOME

Before the advertising campaign broke, Viagra had already set a prescription-drug launch record by amassing $182.2 million in sales in its first two months on the market. In its nine months on the market in 1998, Viagra's total sales reached $788 million, and in following years its sales topped $1.5 billion. It became one of the most well-known brand names in the world, changing "pharmaceuticals as a business by virtue of the rapidity and degree to which it was absorbed into popular culture," according to Pfizer marketing executive Pat Kelly.

The advertising that supported Viagra's launch, particularly the Dole commercial, was credited with helping to destigmatize the condition of impotence, but both the branded spots and the Dole spot were blamed for attaching an "elderly" image to the medical condition and brand, thereby threatening to alienate younger men. In 2000 Pfizer began to phase out the Dole work as well as the branded spots, in favor of a "Faces of ED" theme, which featured men from a range of age groups. In 2001 Pfizer enlisted NASCAR driver Mark Martin, then in his early 40s, as a Viagra spokesman. A TV spot showing Martin's Viagra-sponsored car making laps around a track ended with Martin, on-screen, taking off his helmet and asking, "Who'd you expect? Bob Dole?" In 2002 Pfizer continued to run advertising that appealed to a broader range of men than the initial campaign had, using then-38-year-old baseball player Rafael Palmeiro in TV spots for the drug.