Out of Sight, Out of Mind?

Later this month, the House of Lords in the UK will be voting for proposals in a debate on the Health Bill. The proposal suggests removal of all cigarette branding in stores to prevent young people from taking up smoking.

The Times Online claimed that the “glossy tobacco displays” that are under attack are “designed to attract youngsters.” Simply removing them from sight, and keeping cigarettes themselves hidden from display does not infringe on the rights of smokers to choose their favourite brands. The article says, “ninety per cent of smokers already know which brand of cigarettes they will buy before going into a shop.”

Out of sight out of mind? Do tobacco companies rely heavily on having their branding appear prominently in convenient stores? Is it really a matter of recruiting new smokers or will hiding the branding effect sales to current smokers? In a cspnet.com article, the Premier Dalton McGuinty spoke to the temptation present for kids. “This is a health issue,” McGuinty said. “Science has demonstrated that these power walls are effective at enticing kids so we want to get beyond that.” Without the aid of regular advertising, tobacco companies need the point of sale displays to remain present in the minds of consumers. Its main purpose is to attract her smokers and stimulate sales. According to Smoke Free Action, “established smokers tend to be brand loyal.”

Image: Ontario Tobacco-free Network (theotn.org)

So how do companies gain new smokers? Despite regulations in 2004 in the UK that limited advertising at the POS to an A5 sized poster with 30% taken to a health warning, companies succeed by developing new variants of existing brands. Smoke Free Action cites a 50% growth of brand families since 1998. Benson & Hedges, as an example, grew from 4 brand variants in 1998 to 12 by 2008. This increase is meant to maximize the visual impact on the shelves of stores.

In Ontario, the first day, in May of 2008, of a cigarette display ban saw many store owners upset about what they considered too much government control. A FAQ sheet from Convenience Stores.ca answered, any “item with the name, logo, or distinctive design of a tobacco company or with any tobacco related words (i.e. cigarettes, cigars) which seeks to promote tobacco will need to be hidden from the public’s view.”

Preventing customers from touching the cigarettes before paying stops them from comparing two brands and thereby increases brand loyalty. The Windsor Star reported on the matter, talking to truck driver Rene LaPointe who said “he buys different brands and likes to try new products, but that the new regulation, [...] makes comparing cigarettes impossible.” Able to see both sides, store owner Sam Helou said, “‘as a businessman, it’s quite draconian. There are severe restrictions I never even imagined.’ …One bright spot, he said, is that he plans to advertise other things on the now blank space directly behind his cash register.

Here are some fast-facts from the Ontario Tobacco-free Network:

• The PowerWall, a retail store product display — one of the tobacco industry’s best hooks for addicting young people, is about to come tumbling down in more than 10,000 stores in Ontario on May 31st, 2008
• The ban on retail displays means children and others will no longer be exposed to tobacco industry advertising near corner store cash registers
• Eliminating PowerWalls prevents temptation for adults who have made the decision to quit smoking
• Progressive action by the government, with the encouragement and support of community and youth leaders, led to the inclusion of the Power Wall ban in the Smoke Free Ontario Act (SFOA).
• In 2006, the tobacco industry spent about $40 million on PowerWalls in Ontario alone
• Independent studies show that PowerWalls boost average product sales by 12% to 28%