madcomments

Lament for lost Innocence

Posted in General, Advertising, Marketing, Branwell Johnson May 8th, 2007 by Branwell Johnson

Eyebrows have been raised by the news this week that Innocent and McDonald’s are partnering to include the smoothies brand in the fast food giant’s Happy Meals offering.

For many observers the news is akin to hearing that SNP leader Alex Salmond and David Cameron are joining forces to launch a new party. At first glance the two brands seem such uneasy bedfellows it’s a wonder they can even inhabit the same high street.

The Innocent story is well (and expertly) told with co founder Richard Reed artfully detailing the yarn of how three friends decided to throw in their jobs and give their natural ingredient smoothies a whirl at a summer festival. The careful attention to packaging and positioning has made Innocent into a flag carrier for integrity and credibility in the production process and won the brand a loyal army of consumer advocates.
McDonald’s, on the other hand, has suffered from a never-ending series of criticisms couched in a myriad ways from the film SuperSize Me to the book Fast Food Nation. Its very name is anathema to the Innocent demographic who probably prefer their burgers from more upmarket outlets, such as Hamburger Union.
So, who is to gain most from this alliance? First, it should be pointed out it is a test to include a 180ml innocent drink in Yorkshire and the North East, not a national initiative yet.
For McDonald’s it seems a coup. The deal could be the icing on the cake for the company, which has been making strenuous efforts to appear more aware of the public concern over “healthy” food products and to be more transparent in its dealings to its customers. Innocent gives the Happy Meal a credibility no amount of giveaway toys can to reassure mums that the food has nutritional value. As an aside, it also allows McDonald’s to trial a new premium price of £2.19 rather than the current £1.99.
But what does it portend for Innocent? Already shouts of betrayal of the original Innocent ideals are being heard and it’s possible the brand may actually be damaged by the association.
But it’s far more likely Innocent will weather the storm. Who now, apart from the diehard activists, recalls that Green & Black’s is owned by Cadbury’s or Ben & Jerry’s by Unilever – or even that Innocent rival PJ Smoothies is owned by Pepsico? And no-one is suggesting that Innocent is being bought by McDonald’s.
But the company might be manoeuvring into position to be bought by someone. Reed recently stepped away from day to day responsibilities to work on European expansion and presumably international distribution deals. The company has offices in France and Benelux and is looking to expand into Germany and Austria.
The McDonald’s tie-up gives a potential sales boost as a sampling exercise to a largely new demographic and if the trial really works, then McDonald’s can offer a pan-European, if not international, distribution channel. All of which could help develop Innocent’s allure for any potential buyer.
The Innocent team has always maintained that they are in it for the fun but maybe the fun is beginning to wear off as the company becomes larger. The decision to scale down its annual London Fruitstock event, which attracted some 200,000 people over its weekend last year, illustrates the growth of the empire. Maybe the emperors are beginning their long term plans to vacate the throne.