Publications
Partners
Pedros Chicken has fired a direct salvo at Nando's and KFC. But perhaps it should focus on its own brand first, argues Gillian Rightford.
- For more financial news, go to the News24 Business front page
In case you’ve missed the latest fast-food chicken clash, Pedros Chicken launched an offensive assault with a satirical parody ad, somewhat hopefully called "Pedros TVC (TV commercial) Chicken Wars" recently.
The ad features a war-room run by established chicken brands, which is aimed at countering the popularity of Pedros Chicken.
The visuals are constructed to use Nando’s and KFC’s distinctive assets carefully, but there’s no doubt at all what brand the "over-priced chicken head office" reception sign in sort-of Nando’s font is referencing. Another clue is the heavily floured buns on the table.
And no prizes for guessing which brand "GFC" (Greasy Fried Chicken), with a distinctly shaped and recognisable bucket, is supposed to represent.
When the two brands find out that their spy at the upstart chicken chain has been converted to Pedros, tempers flare and a nasty fight breaks out. (The spy is a reference to KFC’s recent ad where a fraudulent "food inspector" is eventually rumbled after eating years of free KFC.)
It’s not the first time a smaller competitor takes a pot-shot at bigger brands to generate attention. This ad is the equivalent of running up to someone bigger than you, punching them in the nose, and running away.
It’s certainly entertaining and the public has shared it gleefully on social media platforms. It was the talk of my marketing classrooms last week. So, if attention was what Pedros wanted, they sure got it. Part of the excitement of course was how Nando’s and KFC will respond.
Nando’s has been a cheeky commentator on all sorts of cultural, political and other happenings since their inception, so could they really complain now they’re on the receiving side?
The ad seems to have taken key findings from research and brought them to life. Nando’s is expensive. KFC is seen as greasy. But the question I have is a simple one. What exactly is Pedros?
I’m left with the thought that there is no clear positioning other than "the cheaper Nando’s". And while that may be compelling to a certain target market, that is not enough.
Nando’s has never made any secret of the fact that they operate at a price premium. They are intentional about making their restaurants a place where people will want to sit and eat, and not just be a takeaway. The effort they’ve put into the décor and the experience within their outlets is testimony to their quality offering.
Rather than Pedros coming across as a cheeky challenger brand, I was instead left with the feeling, as identified by one of my students in our discussion, that they are in fact being a bully. Their commentary on KFC, renamed GFC, just seemed mean. KFC occupies a nostalgic and sentimental spot in many South African lives, and while some may feel it’s the unhealthier option because it’s fried, the GFC angle seemed overly harsh.
Options for KFC and Nando’s would be to turn to the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB). Nando’s has already made a complaint about Pedros, so this would be a repeat. Last year, Nando’s complained about two Pedros ads which referenced "Nan", clearly intending to be Nando’s.
Nando’s legal team submitted to the ARB that Pedros' unfunny ads promote its own business while belittling Nando’s. "The actions depicted in both commercials are not overtly humorous or exaggerated, and rely exclusively on the reference to Nando’s, in apparent disapproval, to promote Pedros," said Nando’s.
Using the word "Nan", according to Nando’s, clearly references its brand and products while leveraging marketing attention and riding on the back of its competitor’s reputation. In its defence, Pedros argued that Nando’s has, for many years, relied on controversial adverts that have made fun of competitors, among others. But the ad regulator sided with Nando's and found that Pedros was riding off the back of its competitors instead of establishing itself as a chicken takeaway brand.
Were Nando’s to lodge a complaint again, Pedros, as a serial offender, could be slapped with a pre-advertising clearance clause. This means its ads will have to be cleared by the regulator before they hit the public domain.
The bigger issue would be the use of distinctive and trademarked brand assets. While we have no laws against competitive advertising per se, there are definite laws about using and abusing someone else’s registered brand properties (trademarks and copyrights), especially when used with the intention of defaming the brand.
It remains to be seen how Nando’s and KFC will respond. Will they both take the high road and simply overlook the little bully spoiling for a fight? Or will they drag them to the ARB or to court to protect their intellectual property?
Either way, my advice to Pedros would be to focus on their own brand if they want to build a sustainable positioning that people come to know and love. No-one loves a bully.
Gillian Rightford is managing director of Adtherapy and teaches marketing at the University of Cape Town.
News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.
