Innocent's soul-searching

Innocent's 10th birthday last week coincided with a dramatic shift in strategy. As well as calling a review of its ad account, the brand has announced that it is axing its annual Village Fete experiential event.

The company can be forgiven for indulging in some soul-searching. A 10th anniversary is a milestone in the life of any innovative brand, and after Coca-Cola's acquisition of a significant minority share last month, all eyes are fixed on where Innocent goes next.

Certainly action is needed if the food and drink brand is to reverse a decline in sales for its core juice and smoothies business. The drop has been compoun­ded by the success of rival PepsiCo's Tropicana, which has posted an uplift in sales. In an attempt to diversify, Innocent launched a range of Veg Pots in 2008, and last month introduced a ‘Squeezies' snack for kids. Doubt remains, however, as to whether these will be sufficient to revitalise the brand.

Innocent's marketing director, Thomas Delabriere, says that the company is working on many different products and new areas. Nonetheless, he refuses to elucidate further, other than to add that the brand has ‘to offer consumers something different'.

Wider reach

Gareth Helm, Delabriere's predecessor at Innocent and now director at online research firm and brand development consultancy Brand Chat, gives a cautious welcome to Coke's buy-in to the business. ‘It will help with the global expansion of drinks, but in the mature market of the UK, I think Innocent needs to proliferate into other sectors.'

He agrees with Delabriere's assess­ment that product innovation, such as the brand's Veg Pots and Squeezies, is necessary to offer consu­mers fresh value. He goes on, though, to question whether previous NPD, such as Innocent's orange juice, achieved this.

However, according to Charlotte Highfield, director of brand consult­ancy Clear, Innocent's healthy posi­tioning gives it a unique opportunity. ‘If Innocent can own the territory of hassle-free health while maintaining its ethical brand values, it will be able to bring out new products in all areas of food and drink,' she says.

There is little doubt that Coca-Cola will bolster Innocent's NPD. Such considerations, however, have done little to stave off consumer expressions of dismay at its acquisition of a stake. On Innocent's website, one post read: ‘At best this is misguided. You'll be a fig leaf for Coke's unethical corporate machine. At worst it is a greed-driven betrayal of values and customers.'

Delabriere is adamant that the deal will not impinge on Innocent's current culture but simply provide it with greater financial clout. ‘There will be the same people here tomorrow, doing the same things and keeping the same values,' he says.

Helm claims that the Coca-Cola deal is struct­ured in a similar vein to the tie-up between Green & Black's and Cadbury. It will, he says, allow Innocent to remain independent.

Nevertheless, Highfield urges caution. ‘Coke is a business and I doubt that it will be happy with a 10% share forever,' she says. ‘At some point it will look to take a controlling share, and that could spell disaster.'

Helm also points out that Coca-Cola may restrict Innocent's NPD in markets other than smoothies. ‘It is a soft-drinks brand and all about drinking on-the-go,' he explains.

Innocent must expand in the UK, but it is unclear how tight a leash Coke will wield. How this conflict plays out over the next decade, then, will determine what sort of celebration marks Innocent's 20th anniversary.