In the latest of a long run of tit for tat cases, Tesco complained to the Advertising Standards Authority about an Asda press campaign featuring lines such as “Asda saving you money every day” and “Lower prices than any other supermarket.” Did these bold claims withstand ASA scrutiny? Omar Bucchioni reports.
Topic: Comparative
Who: ASA and ASDA Stores Ltd
When: September 2010
Where: UK
Law stated as at: 27 September 2010
What happened:
Recently the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) investigated a national press ad for Asda. The double-page spread was headed “The big Asda Rollback”.
On one side of the page, headings stated “Lower prices on everything you buy, week in week out – Over 930 prices lowered on grocery essentials – Over 200 prices lowered on bakery – Over 180 prices lowered on frozen essentials – Over 330 prices lowered on fridge fillers – Over 60 prices lowered on health and beauty – Over 160 prices lowered on household essentials – Over 130 prices lowered on baby essentials – ASDA SAVING YOU MONEY EVERY DAY”.
On the other side of the page, a heading stated “Lower prices than any other supermarket +”. Text inside arrows underneath stated “ASDA 4483 products cheaper than Sainsbury’s; ASDA 4834 products cheaper than Tesco and ASDA 4259 products cheaper than Morrisons”. Text underneath the arrows stated “WINNER OF BRITAIN’S LOWEST PRICED SUPERMARKET AWARD NOW 12 YEARS RUNNING [Asda’s website address]”.
The cross sign was linked to footnote text which stated “Comparison made against Tesco, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons only. Asda, Tesco and Sainsbury’s prices checked on 12th January 2010 by independent comparison site mySupermarket.co.uk. Asda and Morrisons’ prices checked independently on 11th January 2010 and validated by mySupermarket.co.uk. Comparison based on same brand and size products on Asda, Tesco (8344 products compared) and Sainsbury’s (7378 products compared) websites and in selected Morrisons stores (6881 products compared) across Great Britain. Includes promotional prices. Majority of stores. Available while stocks last. Online prices may vary from those in-store. For verification write to [Asda’s postal address].”
The challenge
Tesco challenged the claim on three points:
a) whether the claim “Lower prices on everything you buy, week in week out” was misleading and could be substantiated because they believed the claim was ambiguous in that it was unclear as to whether it compared Asda’s prices with Asda’s own prices in a previous week or those of their competitors.
b) whether the headings on one side of the page which stated “Over 930 prices lowered on grocery essentials – Over 200 prices lowered on bakery – Over 180 prices lowered on frozen essentials – Over 330 prices lowered on fridge fillers – Over 60 prices lowered on health and beauty – Over 160 prices lowered on household essentials – Over 130 prices lowered on baby essentials” were misleading and could be substantiated. The price checks Tesco had made themselves at Asda on 4 January and then again on 11 January did not show that Asda had made the number of reductions in each product category claimed in the ad.
c) whether the claim “Lower prices than any other supermarket” was misleading and could be substantiated because Asda’s prices had been compared with one segment only of the supermarket sector.
What Asda had to say
Asda did not believe the average consumer would be misled.
a) They indicated that there was no reference to their competitors in that part of the ad. The headline “The big Asda Rollback” was promoting Asda’s own price reductions, something they believed the average consumer, and certainly the average Asda consumer, was aware of. Also the sub-headline, “Lower prices on everything you buy, week in week out” referred to Asda’s own position only.
b) They supplied spreadsheet information which listed the individual product lines in the categories stated in the ad and the week in which the price reduction had taken place (24 – 30 December, 31 December – 6 January or 7 – 14 January). They said all the reductions had therefore been made before the ad was published on 14 January.
c) They said the “Lower prices than any other supermarket” claim was linked by a “+” symbol to footnote text which stated “Comparison made against Tesco, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons only” which they believed clarified the main claim. They believed, moreover, that the limits of the claim were demonstrated by the arrows which stated the names of the supermarkets whose prices had been compared and the number of products found cheaper at Asda.
What the ASA had to say
The ASA upheld all the three points raised by Tesco.
a) Comparing Asda’s prices or those of its competitors’?
The ad was aimed at customers who were new to Asda as well as existing Asda customers. Since the heading “The big Asda Rollback” ran across both the section of the ad that referred to price reductions against previous Asda prices and the section that referred to price comparisons with Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Morrisons, the claim “Lower prices on everything you buy, week in week out,” in the context in which it appeared, was ambiguous in that it could be interpreted either as referring to price reductions that had taken place within Asda or to price comparisons with the named competitors. Because of that, the ASA concluded that the ad breached the CAP Code clauses 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness), 18.1 and 18.3 (Comparisons with identified competitors and or their products) and 19.1(Other comparisons).
b) Comparing one week or three weeks’ prices?
The ad was published on 14 January and Tesco had carried out their own monitoring on 11 January which had not shown that Asda had made the number of reductions claimed. Asda supplied spreadsheet evidence that showed they had made the number of price reductions claimed in stages over the three weeks that preceded the ad. However, the heading “This week’s independently checked results” was ambiguous in that it could be taken to mean that the price reductions had been made in the week that immediately preceded the ad, not over the three weeks.
Therefore, notwithstanding that Asda had demonstrated that they had made the number of price reductions claimed over the three weeks that preceded the ad, because the ad did not explain that, and because it could be taken to mean that the price reductions had taken place in the week that immediately preceded the ad, the ASA concluded that the headings which stated the number of price reductions that had taken place in each product category breached the CAP Code clauses 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness) and 19.1 (Other comparisons) but did not breach 3.1 (Substantiation).
c) Comparing any other supermarket or Tesco, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons only?
The headline claim “Lower prices than any other supermarket” was followed by arrows that stated the number of products that had been found cheaper at Asda than at Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Morrisons respectively and was linked by a “+” symbol to footnote text which stated “Comparison made against Tesco, Sainsbury’s and Morrisons only […]”.
The ASA considered that the reference in the headline claim to “any other supermarket” suggested that the claim was an absolute one, relating to any other supermarket, rather than simply a comparison of prices of same brand and size products at the three supermarkets referred to in the ad, and that the information in the arrows and the footnote text only contradicted, rather than clarified the claim. The ASA therefore found the “Lower prices than any other supermarket” claim in Asda’s ad breached the CAP Code clauses 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness), 18.1 (Comparisons with identified competitors and or their products) and 19.1 (Other comparisons).
Why this matters:
Brand owners and advertisers are reminded to ensure that:
a) ads make clear when price comparisons are made with their own previous prices;
b) ads do not imply a large number of reductions have been made in the preceding week if that is not the case; and
c) ads do not make broad headline claims which are contradicted rather than qualified in small print.
The case is reported on the ASA website here.
