Combative Advertising Combative advertising, a characteristic of mature markets, is dened as advertising that shifts consumer preferences towards the

advertising rm, but does not necessarily expand the category demand. Eschewing the prevailing theory in advertising that one should never mention the name of your competitors product, many companies are taking a page out of political campaigns and are going all out with attacks on products and ads of the competitor firms. Combative Advertising is nothing new in India, this has been practiced right from cola manufacturers to dish operators. But what is new, is the rise in the number of companies engaging in such advertising campaigns and the growing intensity with which the rivals are hitting back. The trend is most visible in the consumer goods section today, where the companies are trying to increase their market share in a economy which is growing at its slowest pace in a decade. Although a dangerous proposition with plenty of potential to backfire, agencies tasked with creating these campaigns have found injecting humor to be the best method of ensuring success. Additionally, the charges being leveled against the competition need to be well-researched and not simply anecdotal. Advertisers shouldnt underestimate the savvy of their customer base by pushing unsubstantiated claims, simply to move a few more units. The risk outweighs the reward in these instances, given the internets potential to reach a wide audience if any fallacies are uncovered by the public, thus alienating the very people they were attempting to reach. At the same time, a poorly conceived strategy opens the door for the competition, allowing them proper justification to employ undercutting tactics of their own. Consumer goods companies have started registering more complaints with regulatory bodies and courts against their rivals making counterclaims through competitive advertising. A report from the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) has seen a sevenfold rise in the number of complaints received in fiscal 2013 over fiscal 2012. In 2013, companies raised objections to 784 advertisements, of which 640 were upheld by ASCI. At this juncture it would be worth nothing that the Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Colgate against Pepsodent Germicheck Superior Power advertisement. The new advertisement by Pepsodent Germicheck Superior Power is one such example of Combative Advertising. Incidentally it would also be interesting to note here that the new Pepsodent ad was launched on 9th August, ahead of a long weekend during which Colgate could not take a legal recourse.. The timing of the campaign also clearly states that HUL was expecting a rap on the hand by the court but escaped if only narrowly. Such ad campaigns and we can be sure of many more that would come after this judgement, would only leave the consumer all the more confused leaving him with the power of choosing the David and Goliath all to himself.