How do the pizza concept test results (Exhibits 7 and 8) compare with the findings for pasta (Exhibits

3 and 4)? The pizza concept test results are not as strong as the concept test results for pasta. In both instances 300 concept tests were conducted; pasta was conducted across several cities and pizza was conducted through mall intercept interviews. An overview comparison between the purchase intent results observed in Exhibit 3 (Pasta) and Exhibit 7 (Pizza) are shown below:
Measure Top Two Box Mean Likeability Mean Price/Value rating Pasta 76% 4.1 3.2 Pizza 60% 3.7 3.0

In the mall intercept, 60% of the respondents replied in the Top 2 boxes for pizza, this means the responses are either definitely would buy or probably would buy. The percentage number can be broken down into TruEarth customer or non-customer. We can thus calculate the trial volume by using the available awareness and purchase behaviour estimates. The total volume is 1.685MM to 2.408MM, which translate to retail market size of $21 million to $30 million. This estimate exceeded the wholesale volumes of $12 million to meet the companys return requirements. The Top Two Box measure is a measure of the respondents who indicated they definitely would buy and probably would buy the product. These percentages translate into 228 out of the 300 indicated they had a level of interest in buying the pasta product. The result for the pizza product was lower; only 181 out of the 300 had a level of interest in buying the product. Mean Likeability is a measure on a 5 point scale of the likeability of the product with 5 being like extremely. Again, the pasta concept test results were much more favourable than that of the pizza results. Pasta scored 4.1 out 5 while pizza scored 3.7. The last measure Mean Price/Value rating is a measure on a 5 point scale of the perceived price per value with 5 being extremely good value. The results again show a more favourable result for pasta; 3.2 versus pizzas 3.0. Exhibit 4 (Pasta) and Exhibit 8 (Pizza) indicate the number of individuals which were favourable to the concept and those that were not. It also shows which attributes the respondents indicated they like or dislike about the product concept. A summary of the results are shown below:
Measure Favourable to Concept Food Qualities LIKES -Whole grain -Freshly made and dated -Looks appetizing Preparation LIKES -Product Selection -Easy to prepare Other LIKES Pasta 76% 32% 38% 22% 17% 21% 60% 19% 31% 24% 16% 16% Pizza

-TruEarth brand name -Good price DISLIKES -Limited selection -Too expensive -Limited time to product expiration

33% 18% 20% 8% 16%

24% 9% 23% 27% 12%

These results show that more individuals were favourable to the whole grain pasta kit (76%) than they were to a whole grain pizza kit (60%). As shown in the results above, key food quality attributes for the pasta included that it was whole grain and freshly made and dated. However, for pizza the fact it was whole grain wasnt a key like in the results. Other attributes where pasta outscored pizza were: easy to prepare - 21% pasta versus 16% pizza and good price 18% pasta versus 9% pizza. The highest scoring dislike for pasta was the limited selection. For pizza, it was too expensive. We can say that people seem to favour fresh pasta concept rather that fresh pizza concept. People rated the pizza dislikes more than pasta case. People finding Pizza case too expensive amongst the sample is 27% where as for pasta case it is 8%. Overall, the concept for a whole grain refrigerated pizza kit was not as well received as the whole grain pasta kit. From the results, we can infer this is because there is not a significant interest in a whole grain pizza and they kit is seen as being too expensive. At the same time, analysing the consumer view, concept comparison and the possibilities of the first-mover advantage, it is highly likely that TruEarth have to enter the market with challenges such as educating the consumers about the new product category, changing the consumer preference and usage patterns of pizza-eating, competing with multiple competitors, while extending the distribution channels and finalising product development, which all require huge investment. In order to overcome above challenges, it is inevitable to conduct an extensive marketing campaign, however, in the process; there is a high possibility that TruEarth will lower the entry barrier for the competitors, who will enter when the market is ready to accept the new product concept.