Shailesh Dobhal: What brand wars tell us about consumers

These battles are as much an indication of the nature of consumerism as they are markers of corporate rivalries

The sudden opening up of the India economy post the economic liberalisation of 1991 as a result of balance of payments crisis stunned not just the hitherto insular industry, but also the famished-for-choice Indian consumer. Suddenly, her world and home were flooded with newer and better products and services — from durables, expendables and new television channels to new ways of paying and consumer credit. Those were the early days of Indian consumerism, and the consumer herself was like a kid in a candy shop, awestruck and impressionable.

No wonder the 90s was a time full of the soap, shampoo, chocolate and cola wars. Combative Indian entrepreneurs fought with entrenched multinationals — recollect the fight for entry-level detergents in Nirma versus Hindustan Lever’s Wheel. Multinationals fought multinationals for the emerging market for impulse goods — the Cadbury’s Perk versus Nestlé’s KitKat saga. Back then, shampoo wars — between traditional rivals Unilever and Procter & Gamble — and toothpaste ones involving Colgate and Unilever, not just kept consumers bemused but also sent cash registers ringing for many a fledgling television channel.

The mid-to-late nineties was also the time the Indian consumer was learning to let her hair down, an ideal time for the eternal cola wars. Coca-Cola was walking back to India almost two decades after an inglorious exit in 1977, and Pepsi had just established a beachhead here a few years ago. Their global rivalry was in full view, whether it was a direct dig at each other in television spots, the famous, and expensive, blocking of each other across channels or simply the genius of gorilla marketing in the way Pepsi walked out with more traction for its “Nothing Official About It” campaign around the Coke-backed 1996 Wills Cricket World Cup in India.

As bright, new things kept pouring into the consumer’s life, the initial excitement gave way to maturity, though the lighter Polo versus MintO saga, too, continued. But the real brand wars, so to say, moved a level up the consumption hierarchy by the early to mid-2000s. It was time for the car, television channel, mobile phone, airline or insurance product marketer to jostle for a share of the consumers’ mind and wallet. The advent of the internet made comparison easier, therefore, the battle moved from the mere optics of a television spot to hard facts around pricing, features, safety, delivery et al.

With the changing nature of the consumption basket, brands wars, too, moved to the services sector. With organised retail came mine-is-cheaper-than-yours Wednesday offers. And even as the current smartphone war rages on, it has spawned in its wake a Facebook versus Google Plus, a WhatsApp versus Hike, an Uber versus Ola, a Flipkart versus Amazon duel and many more such tussles.

As the ongoing Reliance Jio versus other telecom service providers war continues across newspapers and regulatory corridors, with unprecedented name-calling, from the consumers' perspective it is important to understand it for what it is. Though we have seen telecom battles in the past — there was one involving Reliance again back in the 2000s — why this one seems different is because the fight this time is for a more fundamental aspect of the consumer’s life: her digital being. As most products and services — anything from entertainment, sports, utilities, government interface, education, health care, even manufacturing — go digital — something being referred to as the third industrial revolution — the Indian consumer is seeking connectivity to this new emerging digital world. The fight in that sense is one of fostering an ecosystem and being the default pipe to it. It is as much a technology battle, something that the consumer herself is struggling with in her life, what with current piecemeal solutions to her needs in this digital world.