Tuna Spring 2011

Report
Tuna
BRITTANY SCOTT
KATHRYN BAILEY
YAMEL ZAVALETA
Audit Summary
 11 Stores audited
 Price Cutter Springdale
 Harps Springdale
 Harps Garland
(Fayetteville)
 Wal-Mart Joyce
(Fayetteville)
 Wal-Mart Neighborhood
Market (Fayetteville)
 IGA Fayetteville
 USA Drug College
(Fayetteville)
 Ozark Natural Foods
(Fayetteville)
 Walgreens Township
(Fayetteville)
 Aldi Springdale
 Family Dollar Springdale
• 4 Different Manufacturers
• 59 SKUs
• 4 Different Private Label
Brands
Overview
 The Tuna category had total sales of 1,066,132,000
in 2007
 Star-Kist was the leader in sales with 341,371,000
 For our Private Label of Tuna, there were total sales
of 179,188,000
 Almost every store audited carried Private Label
except for Walgreen’s and USA Drug
 The supplier is in control!
Tuna SKUs
Store
SKUs
Wal-Mart Neighborhood Mkt
Fayetteville
24
IGA Fayetteville
19
Harp’s Springdale
17
Price Cutter
11
Wal-Mart Joyce Fayetteville
10
Walgreen’s College Fayetteville
5
Harp’s Garland
4
Aldi Springdale
3
Family Dollar Springdale
3
USA Drug Fayetteville
2
Tuna
 Stores to carry all of the brands and Private Label
 Price Cutter
 Harps Springdale
 Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market Fayetteville
 Wal-Mart Joyce Fayetteville
 IGA


The store that only carried Private Label was Aldi
A UNIQUE SKU – Solid Light Extra Olive Oil sold only at WalMart Neighborhood Market Fayetteville
Demographics






Private Label is high in incomes
< $29999
Family Size
Highest dollar volume index in family size 5+ members
Age
Female household ages 45-54
With Kids 13-17
Employment
Female head employed part-time
Education
Female head some education
Ethnicity
Hispanics
 Asians had the lowest
BUMBLE BEE - SEAFOOD- TUNASHELF STABLE
ENDING 12/27/03
ENDING 12/29/07
CHICKEN OF THE STAR KIST - SEAFOOD- TUNASEA - SEAFOOD- SHELF STABLE
TUNA- SHELF
STABLE
ENDING 12/27/03
ENDING 12/27/03
CTL BR - SEAFOOD- TUNASHELF STABLE
ENDING 12/29/07
ENDING 12/27/03
ENDING 12/29/07
TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS
INC - <$20,000
INC - $20,000-29,999
INC - $30,000-39,999
INC - $40,000-49,999
INC - $50,000-69,999
SIZE - 1 MEM
SIZE - 2 MEM
SIZE - 3-4 MEM
SIZE - 5+ MEM
AGE FH - UNDER 35
AGE FH - 35-44
AGE FH - 45-54
AGE FH - 55+
AGE FH - 55-64
AGE FH - 65+
AGE FH - NO FEMALE HEAD
100.0
73.8
77.7
96.4
120.3
102.2
73.9
103.7
109.7
124.9
75.8
102.0
120.6
110.8
116.2
106.5
100.0
68.8
77.9
95.5
89.7
102.4
68.0
108.9
108.0
128.6
74.8
105.7
118.7
114.0
119.9
107.8
100.0
74.3
87.5
87.9
111.5
110.7
71.6
100.5
107.5
146.2
88.5
110.5
120.7
99.5
110.4
90.7
100.0
71.7
90.3
94.0
112.4
113.6
69.6
99.5
117.1
126.7
93.3
114.5
124.6
88.2
99.3
79.3
100.0
73.7
85.9
96.2
99.3
108.9
73.1
101.3
112.0
127.8
102.0
107.8
117.9
95.1
101.8
88.2
100.0
109.1
102.5
98.9
102.1
93.4
75.2
95.9
109.8
144.8
94.6
107.1
109.0
95.1
106.2
86.3
100.0
111.6
108.3
109.3
92.0
104.3
68.4
99.8
111.9
144.3
98.7
110.7
109.8
94.5
96.8
92.2
82.4
79.2
79.5
83.6
81.0
96.0
90.7
KIDS - NONE < 18
KIDS - ANY < 18
KIDS - ANY < 6
KIDS - ANY 6-12
KIDS - ANY 13-17
EMP - FH EMPLOYED
EMP - FH EMP. FULL TIME
100.4
99.2
79.7
95.8
114.5
104.9
100.0
100.1
91.7
99.0
113.2
106.2
94.8
110.2
106.0
114.8
117.5
105.8
94.3
111.3
100.4
105.0
128.4
109.4
93.5
112.1
108.6
113.3
121.5
105.1
91.9
115.9
108.5
120.8
128.9
97.6
91.3
116.2
105.6
125.3
128.4
92.6
101.8
107.2
102.0
112.3
105.6
97.5
89.2
112.6
103.4
115.3
102.2
103.8
98.0
101.9
EMP - FH NOT EMPLOYED
EMP - NO FEMALE HEAD
ED - FH NOT HIGH SCH GRAD
103.0
82.4
103.7
79.2
103.3
79.5
96.1
83.6
104.1
81.0
105.4
96.0
114.4
90.7
90.4
96.9
90.1
91.2
108.7
110.6
121.7
ED - FH HIGH SCH GRAD
ED - FH SOME COLLEGE
ED - FH COLLEGE GRAD
ED - NO FEMALE HEAD
RACE - CAUCASIAN
RACE - NON-CAUCASIAN
RACE - AFRICAN AMER.
RACE - ASIAN
RACE - OTHER RACE
ETH - HISPANIC
98.8
107.5
110.5
82.4
100.5
98.3
89.8
79.0
117.1
107.4
100.5
108.8
79.2
99.0
103.4
101.9
77.3
114.2
100.6
108.2
109.6
79.5
99.7
101.3
79.4
115.6
132.3
100.5
111.7
100.6
83.6
101.7
93.6
84.4
67.9
115.2
107.8
109.7
93.4
81.0
103.3
88.5
81.7
67.6
105.4
99.9
99.7
102.0
96.0
104.5
82.9
73.1
67.4
102.7
111.8
105.1
81.7
90.7
106.3
77.9
70.0
55.1
96.9
130.5
127.8
130.0
120.4
106.0
92.8
100.9
JOB - PROF/MANAGERIAL
112.8
100.6
106.5
110.2
99.9
96.6
87.6
EMP - FH EMP. PART TIME
52 Weeks Ending 12/29/2007
52 WEEKS
ENDING
12/29/07
ITEM $ (000)
DOLLAR
SHARE
ITEM
BUYERS
(000)
ITEM
PENETRATIO
N
ITEM $ PER
ITEM BUYER
ITEM TRIPS PER
ITEM BUYER
ITEM $ PER
ITEM TRIP
ITEM UNITS PER % REPEAT BUYERS
LOYALTY
ITEM TRIP
(% 2+ TIME
(SHARE OF $
BUYERS)
REQ.)
SEAFOOD- TUNA- SHELF STABLE
1,066,132.3
100.0
79,354.8
68.4
13.4
4.3
3.2
2.9
74.2
100.0
341,371.8
32.0
43,113.9
37.1
7.9
2.6
3.0
2.6
52.5
49.9
297,511.8
27.9
31,820.8
27.4
9.4
2.5
3.7
2.8
51.6
51.2
212,247.3
19.9
31,690.9
27.3
6.7
2.1
3.2
2.8
45.3
40.1
179,188.5
16.8
25,813.6
22.2
6.9
2.9
2.4
3.2
52.5
45.7
STAR KIST - SEAFOOD- TUNA- SHELF STABLE
BUMBLE BEE - SEAFOOD- TUNA- SHELF STABLE
CHICKEN OF THE SEA - SEAFOOD- TUNA- SHELF STABLE
CTL BR - SEAFOOD- TUNA- SHELF STABLE
• Tuna in cans accounts for Core Traffic
• Tuna in pouches accounts for Cash Machine
Dominate Brand?
•
•
THE MOST DOMINATE BRAND IS STARKIST
THE GREATEST SHARE OF DISPLAY IS STARKIST BY FAR
•
•
•
StarKist was seen in most stores
StarKist also had the most facings & SKU’s
BUMBLE BEE WAS IN 9 OF THE STORES
•
StarKist was seen in less stores than Bumble Bee
Share of Store Facings Vs. SKUs
N-MFR
Private Label % of Total
Sum
% of Total N
Gross Margin
N
Starkist
% of Total
Sum
% of Total N
Gross Margin
N
Chicken of the % of Total
Sea
Sum
% of Total N
Gross Margin
N
Bumble Bee % of Total
Sum
% of Total N
Gross Margin
N
Total
% of Total
Sum
% of Total N
Gross Margin
N
Tuna Spring 2011
PCSPDF
HSPF
39.3%
22.6%
33.3%
20.8%
4
28.6%
22.2%
15.6%
4
35.8%
33.3%
61.2%
4
17.9%
ALDFF
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
3
IGAFF
WMJBLVDFF
7.1%
7.1%
10.0%
18.8%
2
60.7%
20.0%
5.6%
2
66.1%
35.2%
44.4%
61.9%
8
30.2%
60.0%
36.9%
12
25.0%
40.0%
63.1%
4
19.6%
47.8%
16.7%
14.9%
2
14.3%
22.2%
19.8%
4
11.3%
25.0%
14.6%
5
7.1%
10.0%
30.2%
1
7.1%
21.0%
16.7%
3.1%
2
100.0%
11.1%
2.7%
2
100.0%
30.0%
1.1%
3
100.0%
10.0%
100.0%
5.0%
29.8%
1
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
12
18
3
20
10
StarKist national brand showed to have the most shelf space
Stocking Rates
Bumble Bee = 21%
StarKist = 17%
Great Value = 15%
Chicken of the Sea = 9.4%
We found that Bumble Bee had the highest stocking
rate than its competitors and was found at every
store audited!
Who’s in Control?
StarKist showed to be most in control
- it showed to have the highest amount of display space
- it showed to have the highest variations of tuna
Bumble Bee is in 9 of the 11 stores audited which demonstrated the
highest competition for StarKist.
Gross Margin
Report
N-MFR
PC$GM
WMJBLVDF$G
ALDFGM$
M
100%
19%
Private Label
% of Total Sum
21%
HSPGM$
16%
IGAF$GM
Starkist
% of Total Sum
61%
62%
37%
63%
Chicken of the % of Total Sum
Sea
15%
20%
15%
30%
30%
1%
6%
Bumble Bee
% of Total Sum
3%
3%
Total
% of Total Sum
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
% of Total N
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Price Cutters
PC$GM
PCSPDF
1
Mean
1.2000
2
Harp's
HSPGM$
HSPF
N
1
1
Mean
0.5800
0.7567
6
2
0.5367
3
3
0.4200
5
3
0.4000
7
Total
0.6533
12
4
0.6633
6
Total
0.5276
17
Aldi
ALDFGM$
ALDFF
1
Total
N
1
Wal Mart-Joyce Blvd.
Mean
0.0367
0.0367
N
3
3
WMJBLVDF$GM
WMJBLVDFF
1
2
3
4
10
11
22
Total
Mean
0.9200
0.3000
0.1800
0.6600
0.2800
0.9000
0.1800
0.6180
N
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
10
Private Label
• A few of our stores audited carried Private Label tuna product
especially Aldi which only carried Private Label products
Aldi
-Northern Catch
Wal-Mart
- Great Value
Harps
- Always Save
Family Dollar
- Van Camps
Private Label
Aldi led the way for Private Label being at 100% of Private Label products.
With their presence in the market, they hold great success over other retailers
who trail quite a bit behind Aldi’s 100% gross margin category.
AD HOC
Private Label increased according to Ad Hoc from 2003-2007 in all income
levels except 40k-49999
Family size of 1 member bought less of Private Label Tuna
Ages 55-64 bought less
Caucasian and Hispanics were the only groups that bought more
Recommendations
Private Label shows a stable presence in the category although gross
margin are weaker than those of national brands. Private Label has
a presence in all stores and continues to sell for this core traffic
category. It would be wise for Private Label category to continue to
maintain its occurrence.

similar documents