Confectionery (FMCG)
From Losing Market Share to Market Leadership
Client Leading Confectionery Brand
A leading confectionery brand was losing sales and share to competitors. A Central Location Test with children found the cause was not the brand but the product experience — the chew was too hard. Optimising softness and chewability returned Brand A to the #1 position with 26% market share.
In numbers
- 26%
- Market share
- #1
- Category position
Challenge
A once-strong candy brand was losing its grip on the market.
Brand A was facing a worrying decline in sales and product offtake. While the brand struggled to maintain momentum, competitive candy brands were gaining market share.
The warning signs were coming from multiple directions:
- Declining sales
- Falling product offtake
- Increasing retailer complaints
- Growing competitive pressure
- Consumers increasingly choosing competing products
The question
Why were consumers — particularly kids — choosing competing candies over Brand A?
Rather than relying on assumptions, Stage 3 went directly to the target consumer.
Approach
We asked the people who actually eat the candy.
Stage 3 conducted a Central Location Test (CLT) with the brand's target market — children — to understand exactly what was driving product preference and competitor switching.
Methodology
We evaluated the product's organoleptic profile across key dimensions including:
- Taste
- Texture
- Chewability
- Mouthfeel
- Flavor release
- Stickiness
- Overall product liking
- Purchase intent
Insight
The answer was hiding in the chew.
The research uncovered a critical product experience issue: the chew was simply too hard.
For the target consumers, this created a chain reaction:
Hard Chew → Poor Chewability → Poor Mouthfeel → Weak Flavor Release → Candy Sticking to Teeth → Lower Product Enjoyment
The issue wasn't necessarily that consumers disliked the brand. They disliked the experience of eating the product.
And that experience was giving competitors an opportunity to win.
Recommendation
We didn't just identify the problem. We helped optimize the product.
Stage 3 translated consumer feedback into actionable recommendations for the production team.
The key intervention was to improve the softness and chewability of the candy, creating a smoother, more enjoyable eating experience.
But Stage 3 went one step further. We looked at the economics too.
Alongside product optimization, we tested slightly lower product weights to determine whether the brand could improve its contribution margin without negatively affecting consumer acceptance.
The optimized samples were evaluated for:
- Product likability
- Purchase intent
- Overall consumer acceptance
- Eating experience
- Commercial viability
The result was a better-tasting, more enjoyable product — with an opportunity to improve profitability at the same time.
Impact
From a declining brand to market leadership.
The optimized product helped Brand A regain its position as the #1 brand in the category, achieving 26% market share.
At the same time, the brand achieved a stronger commercial proposition — a better contribution margin opportunity, a better consumer product experience and higher retailer and consumer satisfaction.
The intervention created a rare win-win: better product experience for consumers, better economics for the brand, better proposition for retailers.
A conventional research study might have told the client "kids don't like the product". Stage 3 went deeper — identifying exactly what they didn't like, why they didn't like it, and what could be changed to make them like it more.
