p TODAY'S CLIMATE of CANADIAN CONCERN about POLLUTIONand its ACTIONABLE SIGNIFICANCE in RESPONSEto STANDARD'S "F-310," and to ''LEADFREE" GAS - A "Before" vs 11 .\fter" Segment Submitted Imperial Toronto, Canada Submitted Analysis - to: Oil Limited Ontario by: Albert Shepard Associates Yorktown Heights: New York October 1970 - Ind x to our r i ndi ng Ex cutiv · Sun ry St lt m nt - THREEINDICATED STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITIES for IMPERIAL -ESSO I. TODAY'SCLIMATEof CANADIAN CONCERN about POLLUTION, - Perception - Expectations II. III. of "Causes." about "Imp r ove me nt" FACTORSand APPEALS MOTIVATING SEGMENT RESPON SE to STANDARD'S F-310 CONFLICTING HOPESvs FEARS EVOKEDBY ''LEAD FREE" GAS It ,•t1t iv , m1m111 i•y 8 t. tt' 1111nt: ... 'l'HRF.1':tNl)lC',Al'b:I) S1'RA'l'EGIC OPPORTUllll'l'I)•: S 'b'OR IMPRRIAJ..MESSO STRATEGIC OPrORtUNITY Utiliee #1 - the indicated special opportunities Imperial Oil to help resolve widespread, flicting fears among Canadian motorists possible effects power,~ on present engines, in some feasible conabout of a lead •·free gas on decreased mileage, most effective for and noisy knock, especially by developing for Esso the promise of smooth performance, form of "99% pure" reduced-lead gas, taking advantage of Esso's believable assets among Canadian motorists in your "engine cleaner," ''Tiger Power," and "fast winter starts." STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY #'J_ Since both the Toronto and Vancouver results, and the Los Angeles and San Francisco indicate that motorists pollution are personal especially and public ~ concerns about and deepseated, around urban areas, among the evidence, young generation and growing, and especially of car drivers, among mothers troubled about family health, among college-educated segments in the population, and since we find continuing expectations for Imperial, "Electronic£!!. Clinics" transfer - based on your and your "more research special any new kinds of "electronic" special 11 cleaner-running engines, air, e to invest Continue on any steps water or ~ ~ and "cleaner burning with gas," in intensive of improvements pollution, stations, tools, to help further and cleaner opportunity to your neighborhood through tune-ups," - Canadian "leadership" in Canada," - which represents for positive and - whether research in decreasing from tailpipe efforts air and exhaus~, - and m_.2.1t... ~c.l es peciall y t hose most visibla emissi ons behin d big~ and truckR, from ref i nery smoke stac k emissionR, from oil @ - or tank er sp i ll s . Announce, and promot e , every initiative Imperial, specific even on wor kin g pro gress research Standard's steps terms in order to avoid F-310's Vancouver overexpectations, worl d-wide in real i st ic Californi thereby a and helping to avoid any boomerang entangl ement with intense significant for any activities. Promote any such "1st" Imperial by improvements in th i s di re ct ion , res ulting from your own or Jersey E> - or air pollution concerns among segments of the Canadian public. We now report the detailed findings upon which these Three Strategic Opportunities were based, about today's climate - of Canadian concerns about pollution, actionable significance and its in response to "F-310"and to "lead-free" gas:- I. TODAY'S CLIMATEOF CANADIAN CONCERN ABOUTPOLLUTION - Perception - Expectations of "Causes" about "Improvement" I. TODAY'SCLIMATEOF ABOlITPOLLUTION CANADIAN CONCERN - Perception of "Causes", - Expectations 1. Our depth interviews that spontaneous spread, 2. genuine, These air by close pollution concerns Angeles" students fears we find that not in both Toronto their and intensity, more intensely among and among college educated, and faculty. about air pollution people anxiety in San Francisco more immediate in Vancouver, smog "is not as bad ill express intensely interviewed. while just expressing to become "as bad as Los Angeles." recog- as Toronto ••• or Los about "preventing from becoming as bad as Toronto" respondents are expressed were expressed present their are wide- with somewhat lesser of all motorists While we find nizing about air pollution younger car drivers, in Toronto, and Vancouver reveal and deep-rooted. These concerns including 4. concerns and are shared, by about half mothers, in Toronto to 3 out of 10 motorists Vancouver, 3. about "Improvement" Vancouver as we found California a similar concern 2 S. Th r fl d mu h mor t th s r ju in various rticl f th C nadion ourc s of d p rson 1 pons pr { to m di ling 11th • cl W found rly ______ __ s p opl 's annoying s nsory _e_x~p eyes and nostrils, perceived into - with an unpleasant frightening gr y or black town, - with smokestack 6. bu~ which tended smog as one driv irritations by the smell of exhaust or trucks", emissions in crowded traffic, to evoke underlying monoxide", which the total interviews reveal perceived "villain" fears evidence We find air Spring, pollution, and completed "carbon" also pollution, reports invisible report because about "carbon more than lead, this past interviews linkage people have heard about carbon monoxide" in closed cars. details conduc- Summer. or stories further depth spontaneously to be the most feared of its was '.'behind big in these at the time of the two waves of field ted this s an experience as the most frequent in air sm 11, - with emissions. We found one of the most vivid triggered d about the problem, element in in newspaper "deaths (We will and the from 3 strategic Chapter opportunities III on conflicting "lead-free" 7. immediate, hopes vs. air pollution and more personal, about possible 8. not only to colds, sore throats in about a both 100re nightmare and family health, and bronchitis, fears about "lung or "emphysema." we found that immediate and daily ment about pollution endangering frequent threat because inmediate and rivers, in Toronto. 29 years to younger about use of water and health people. resent- possibly poisoning of We found of age and under, even more intensely to them, and health, swimming, slightly~ more frequent concerns seemed a of intense and about "mercury yollllger motorists, seemed to feel to comfort expressions young children slightly water pollution of lakes in Vancouver; fish," remote concerns on personal though we found frequent that fears smog effects Generally less concerns among mothers who worried but even to some underlying cancer" "carbon" gas.) We found these related of these fears about water pollution, in Summer are more seem somewhat more 4 W lao found, l though l!l fr qu ntly, a to "oU epillag beach s" and to anxiety "arctic 9. up th about Beneral cooutal threats to t he ecology." We found that emission to.£!!: m uing ou ,iponton the primary responsibility is attributed about~ makers and their and their gasoline, out any specific times as frequently car engines, as to oil with no indicated Canadian oii for exhaust companies tendency to single company as more responsible for the problem than any others. 10. We found in Vancouver, sion of feelings trying that "at least to do something" from the combined effects beginnings of publicity or "low lead" tion of "leadership" wave of Toronto clinics" the oil expres- companies are about air pollution, of Standard's resulting F-310, and the free" gas. We found significant spontaneous from Imperial positive Esso, and Vancouver interviews, based on Esso's new things," positive about new forms of "lead 11. dents spontaneous general and on awareness leadership in our first which responin "innovating of your "electronic and your "more research expecta- in Canada." car 5 In relation to this, we found not one single in the comments of any motorist editorial rather Canadians, evidence Imperial We did find, Vancouver, significant 12. continues in these a significant leadership to indicate part that to of the increase reduction, expectations from Imperial response companies; "as Canadian as Hockey." however, to air pollution, owned" oil Esso is an integral Canadian landscape, direct of some of the newspaper cot1DI1entsabout "foreign our total reflection Esso, in expectations "after" Standard's in in relation and a corresponding from Standard, promotion Our probed depth data also revealed in of F-310. these two danger signals:a. When our field interviewers a choice between talking "leading car makers", offered each respondent to "government or "leading oil leaders" company executives", we found more than 6 out of 10 of our Canadian dents expressed leaders, about a desire to talk the government "bigger pollution. About 2 out of 10 Canadian a wish to talk "1st" to "compel" respon- to government "forcing" or imposing cated fines" "1st" or or "requiring" improvement in air respondents indi- to .£!! makers, and about half 6 as many indicated reflecting a wi sh to talk both in the Toronto the consumers' sibility present f or air expectation about the possibility compared to those that found more than half conviction in that protesting "do anything equally companies to half might and all with that between to invest companies, the will about 2 out of 10 expressed forcefully will hopes were industries" and improvement", and the car makers. terns response on today's "improvement." these in research information, about some hope that the "large for your for industries big companies We now report, environment, we expressing act voluntarily, divided who can "afford of field they'd voluntarily." some companies the oil of govern- might have to be "forced", "none" of these Among the close about of companies" and 4 out of 10 in Vancouver that level problem. of our respondents all respon- to cope with air pollution, have to be forced", Toronto, present of required to cope with this to act "voluntarily" "probably of the relative and their When probed on "what kinds expect companies, and Vancouver reg i ons , perception pollution, ment intervention b. "ls t " to oil "causes", the detailed concerns and about about expectations pat - I • A. TODAY'S CLIMATEof CANADIAN CONCERN aboue ENVtRONM!i:NT - TORONTO Air 1- Spontaneous ''Discussion" about "Environmental Dangers" ~ VANCOUVER lli. Water 42 38 35 49 53 34 44 39 52 52 36 57 69 62 78 74 2- s2ontaneog§ - "Personalli !!!2!S, Disturbing" 3- Pro!!ed - Intensity Concern 4- Getting of ''Worse Lately" - 5- Air Pollution ''Worse" vs "Better" in ''Your Area" vs ·~ of CanadaW--:''WORSE" 75 33 11 12 54 BETrER" 7 A. TODAY'SCLIMATEOF CANADIAN CONCERN ABOUTENVIRONMENT (See Probed Response Pattern 1. Spontaneous "Discussion" When we encouraged "discussions" our respondents in recent more frequent dangers" we found months. of spontaneous vs. water pollution, mention of air pollution note 2. pollution in Vancouver, Spontaneous-"Personally" in Toronto, you've turbing," first mentioned, note that in both cities, reference increased to 441. in Vancouver. reference - 49% to 35%. "which of these you personally references and that by about 427. Most "Disturbing" When we asked each respondent, that reference that we found to 387., as compared to somewhat more frequent to water that did remember several When we compared the frequency pollution Dangers" us about any and neighbors, the overwhelming majority to air to tell about any "environmental such discussions page) about "Environmental they remembered with friends that I-A, opposite to air dangers find most dispollution the frequency were of 101. to 53% in Toronto, 8 3. Probed - Intensity At a later point, lems troubling of Concern we introduced people reference in Canada", to "six and listed prob- such other problems as "drug use by the young", - "truces and prices", the "quality along with water and air pollution, personal concern of education", and probed for a rank order of each respondent of the with each of these problems. Combining those who assigned find that more than half indicated this both air general and water to 57% concern dents close revealed of our respondents high level pollution, about water compared to 36% about Overall, a #1 or #2 ranking, in Toronto of concern about which increased pollution we slightly in Vancouver, air. to 3 out of 10 of our Canadian a #1 intensity of concern about responair pollution. 4. Getting Note that "Worse Lately" in both cities the dominant 7 out of 10 is that both been "getting lately." worse air and water feeling pollution of about have 9 5. lli Pollution - "Worse" in "Your Area" When we probed pollution note between Toronto Toronto air feel that "Rest specifically in "your Canada", vs. vs. area", their of Canada" about area is to the and substantial and Vancouver, is - impressions compared a significant pollution "Better" "~", "better" with "rest air of difference 75% convinced where than about that 547. in Vancouver the rest of Canada. I-B. PERCEIVED"CAUSES" of AIR POLLUTION - TORONTO 1- Alternative VANCOUVER "Causes" Smoke Stack Emissions Car Engines Gasoline Home Heating Fuel 2- Who is "Primarily 43 50 36 10 1 46 8 61 26 61 2 Responsible" Car Makers Oil Companies 27 3- Whomwould you wish to 1 'ralk to 1st. " Government Car Makers Oil Companies 63 20 11 73 16 8 4- S:e2ntantaneous: What "causes Pollution" from tail pipe emissions "Carbon" ''Lead" 66 26 74 21 {I B. \>ERCElVEO "CAUSirn" Prob d R<' pono (S Alt rnativ 1. 01r /\IH Our field "Cou intervi possible P11t 11 nrn of air on th pollu · JI, oppou 11 T> re ion. emissions singled Note that about 4 out of 10 felt"~ pattern throughout this engines" reflection study, about 1 out of 10 perceiving gasoline sible. that this time, we note saw home heating pollution in Canada, awareness about successfully fuel of a with only fewer respondents, as a basic at cause of air some scattered a change in home heating the level w•r as mainly respon- though we did find reduced amokc•f!tftr ; l< in Toronto. mor Note the first And finally, P''W) of v11d ow p ·Ion W• found out by about half, mainly responsible. consistent ·, s" we probed "causes" l'OJJ,ll'l'IDN fuel having of smog and pollution in London. 2. Who Is "Primarily Responsible" When we probed for perceived problem of air pollution, of both the Toronto identical blaming note the unusual and Vancouver 61% blaming~ oil "responsibility" companies. makers, for the stability response, with and only about an 26% 11 3. WhomWould You Wish to "Talk To 1st" When we offered each respondent to Government leaders, executives, leaders, or car makers, our tabulations of 10 indicated an opportunity revealed a wish to "talk reflection of a dangerously that 1st" somewhat more frequently or oil to talk company about 6 out to Government in Vancouver, growing feeling dence upon Government intervention a of depen- to cope with this problem. Note that only about 2 out of 10 wanted to talk to car makers, panies, bility 4. and only about 1 out of 10 to oil further confirmation assigned by Canadian industries Spontaneous When we probed that of the relative motorists ··cause - What "Causes responsi- to these two for impressions pollution 2 out of 10 mentioning "lead", recent lead about from about what it from tailpipe as the key "villain" publicity Pollution" Emissions- 7 out of 10 respondents "carbon" com- •• Tailpipe might "1st" emissions", spontaneously compared despite and "lead is that note identified to a little some of the free" gas. over I-C. EXPECT.-\ TIONS about IMPRffl.':"i:1ENT - W~ NCO i'i'I/ER TORONTO Bcfo ie gm_ 1- This coming year, Air Pollution w-i.11:Improve Get Worse 53 40 39 58 40 56 75 17 8 73 2 13 63 3 16 30 24 12 33 35 45 18 8 6 66 76 69 2- Will Air "ever be ~ 90% Pollution Free" - ''No-Never" 1975 -'79 1980 - 2000 3- How much ''Improvement by 1972 ?" 10% 20% 30% - COMPETITIVE FAVORERS 4- Spontaneous: Which Oil Company will be '"i'st'"'with ~ improvements? Esso Standard 45 18 13 15 31 49 44 5 13 5- Which Oil Company "1st" Tun! Up?" with "Electronic at Neighborhood Stations Esso Standard 34 1. Thi Our probing pollution 1 ~. Coming on l'o I I 11t lon W1 t I : - Alr xpc•cLutiorw of itnp ov ,n •nt tn oir r v alad n slight 'f:iv to i'our nw:r~'ln of hop for improv ment in Toronto, to four margin of feeling get worse this 2. compnr •d to " hingR will thnt coming year,'' over 90% pollution 75% in Toronto indicating "No, never." in Vancouver, ranged with again, of F-310, resulting 90% pollution the time expectation from 1975-79 in Toronto, in Vancouver. probably Free::""~ being an almost identical wave in Vancouver, Note one of the initial to 63%, who still be "over Note that free", about air and 73% in the "before" of the promotion "never" skepticism fiv · in Vancouver. Will Air "Ever Be Over 90% Pollution Note a widespread revers fl feel effects in a 10% decrease the air will free." for such improvement to dominantly 1980-2000 I I It, I\ t 11t 1lu11 II I l,111 I, 11111u11t Whl1 h 011 01 1 ·h WI\'< nhlt u Ofl h p d lot N t ml, h1r th bu in I I 111, f1np1· , n h lmut Cmnpnnic lt 1d r11hip I, l,1,111 t "I, 1 l<1Z \./11 J O 1:,1111p11ny pl h lr,t,•rvt•rw for pr,,h11bly ·1 Ntn w s r v rs dafter Van ouver by 31% to 15%. h pr:,,b •d 111 th "lat'' with r 111r'.. 1\bout Eaeo in Toron xp e ntton brand w whf, ·h of 11hout o, F vor r ", motorts e pr· ·n ly of gas. whil Eeoo 1 d S andard by 18% to 13% before this I 1,,,1 I II I' '" 111 ,,11 l y would "Comp tiliv c mp titiv I I" imp1·ovt•m nl 4 t o 11 11,, l111p1t1 • th, 1 11011111 ••• I I 11/ p1,il,,il thH 't.,..,1 It" 1 II ' 1111111 ,, , "" "' F-310, Note that F-310 was introduced, Standard led Easo in 14 5. Which Oil Company "1st" "El ctronic Our Field Tune-ups" Staff the possible probed effects "car performance", With at Neighborhood first for all on "car air", on which Company would be expected some "new kind of electronic their neighborhood expression tune-up is expected buildup, to clean parts; as believably thereby out clogged resulting mileage, less performance exhaust "engine to and believably deposits, desired better carbon results mileage, of cleaner wasted emission, air. car, burning and overall a clear potential ingredients, and with smoother indication cleaning" his~ among a tune-ups as related or reducing and carbuertor of smoother the publicly gasoline, and better for linking buildup or carbon was visualized gasoline preventing a or engine motorists linking for deposits result and believable of Canadian that more completely in the tuned-up and improved for use at carburetors expected in less of the significant majority tool, with We found a significant to remove carbon producing engines", to be "1st" by Canadian motorists the significant about and then probed tune-up stations." majority impressions of a "tune-up" or "cleaner Stations? clog, carbon with the performance desired benefits and I •, Not th indicflt d 11ptd Esso in relation to pofl :lbl kinds of " lectronic tool11", Esso's substantial F-310, and a continuing 811\0nK the potential respect for Esso's though 1 ·RII r, Thea believability electronic in your car clinic centers, through development tune-up and to Esso gasoline nil TcJt't>nf ,, , b1·lon· .,;. 3'i'7. to l 37. I ·wt r·Rult:fl of st ps car clinice hood stations, tools, 49% J II l Ad over St: ndard 4117.tcJ confirm fin Opp<,rt1111f1t,n d<•v, lop11Lt111 c,f 111,y ,ww even aft r F-310. in Vancouver, equipment 1 .'trotq~t t nd to o lrrinnf:n ~nd diagnostic to your n ighborof some n w kinda of through development and improvement of the ingredients formulation of your "engine cleaner." furth and r : (, II. FACTORS nd APPEALS MOTIVATING SEGMENT RESPONSE TO STANDARO'aF-310 In order to identify response the key factors to Standard's after exposure to F-310 advertising, recently of C~mpetitive close to two months of $Witched To Standard, Standard who - vs. Buy rs one or more tankfuls buying Standard, had not even tried rcpr ca nt ·d segments of motoriot Brands who had tried but not continued Regrocnt F-310, we systematically in our Vancouver sample, had actually motivating - vs. Resist onc e during these rs who many we~kA of F-310 advertising. our Field Staff encouraged neously about hearing about any brands friends, then probed about leading Standard "everything each motorist interesting" of gas, in Vancouver, was referred to, they remembered seeing oponta- they rem rn1u 1· ~ Ld~ _: this vnlu ." 11y, It II who 1 11 (;u , hn.vt 1111,111,,r.cl t;n 'l k l,t I ·10 :11, Hi rd lt gooil, 11 n pl CC< p ind:lng l,ul' on l y I ot ion . wh:1.ch th ut a h i f1.h r :r. c u-rR npp ar d to bo ro pr - hins -2. ..tnndnrd. typically n w Fw3]0 might b hnuAt rums, 11 y ol ot1 .r. · with. old t c R 101. :Clu h1 pt, p,\rt i u oh , 1t1l1101 l,y l\Ol w tt 110 ' 1111ight l-1 11 I u l\ll t 11 v, tended to acknowled ge that Rome !!light I nm sk ptical that improvement in they ore ~-rattng 26 D. THREEINDICATED BASIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE VANCOUVER MARKET ANDTHE CALIFORNIA MARKET,IN THEIR RESPONSETO F-310 - 1. We found less positive active interest and involvement, either or negative, and more of a ton~ of passive among all segments of Vancouver motorists awareness, compared to California. 2. We found less widespread discussion controversy about F-310 in Vancouver. discussions appeared positive to mildly and debate, 3. either ad recall involved advertising Our indicative these differences California 1. with less by critics or defenders argument of Standard. of somewhat less personally recall intense and emotionally in Vancouver. suggest that the basic sources of bett11een Vancouver and in response were the following:·· The more stable pared and less clues from mildly skpetical, pattern intense The tone of these to be more ranging We found a consistent detailed and less to the price price gap that situation developed in Vancouver, com- in Los Angeles, which provoked a more intensely Resisters, and required to a greater 2. people need to justify switching paying Second, as noted in our previous to be a~ level of intense, anxiety about pollution Angeles market. 3. negative As noted above, more stable and stations cantly~ level market. Chapter, personal, there seems and immediate than in the Los satisfaction of a with dealers with an indication and discontented in the Vancouver market Angeles much more." we allSO find many indications of general by to Standard "that in Vancouver, and service, restless reaction of signifi- switching around than we had found in the Los II-A. SEVENFACTORSin SEGMENT RESPONSEto STANDARD'sF310 --- VANCOUVER Standard Switch Tos Standard 1st 1&2 Favorers Triers "Cleaner Air" Mileage" n~ '\lore Power" STES- 72 STES 38 ST- 41 79 72 15 40 52 35 18 9 48 41 55 4 37 53 4 67 4 ES- °Cleaner Engine 0 ST- 34 41 ES- ''Usually Lead in people's needs" ~ to'"'iiieet STES- 34 STES- 55 ST- 86 55 45 VANCOUVER Comeetitive-Favorers Before After --- 41 3 SH- 9 4 1 4 7 2 SH-24 11 7 7 5 SH-14 13 12 15 SH-13 29 14 9 9 SH- 9 28 22 0 5 20 8 SH-12 12 18 5 11 16 10 SH-11 13 4 3 3 7 7 ''Kore people Switcbin& lately" !£ "Personall;t l!! in a n .ew neighborhood" 65 44 12 try ES- 96 86 78 TOB.Ol,'10 CompetitiveFavorers 18 SEVEN PRODF.O FACTORS IN E. SEGMENTRESPONS}•; TO STANDARD'S F- W now report whnt we found, at interviews, field factors wh n w p~int in oor ''b tt gm nt fi ld 1° pow r , 11 " "mor r mill!, uc:h hout bul t ct fn ~ult SEVEN FACTORS IN SEGMENT RESPONSE TO STANDARn's "II-A. (se e opposite F-310," Herc, pag ). for your background patterns of response among significant 1. l tr prob d ap c i fie 11y aa "clean r nir," with the comparatives JO - information, or to probes on thee Standard for "cleaner more th n 7 out o( 10 air," directly appeal of the "clean balloon." Vane. Compet, Favs. with cleaner only 15% of~ the Note that and among all of competitive Standard w:i.th cleaner note that air, (favorers scl ct reflecting about 4 out of 10, both among Triers, By contras~ d scv n fnctora, Switch Toa and Favorers Vancouver) credit d•tni.l segments:- "CLF.ANERAIR" - Note that advertising th brands in air. Favorers credit and only 3% to 4% of Competitive it Favorers. 29 Not th int r eting s many favorers cl an r ir. translations pot nti 1 in Torontn, of comp titiv br nds er dit of your engine cleaner ''BETTERMILEAGE"- Note that reflect the effects on their Favorers. promotion, Note that mileage your selection 41. before to 2% after better mileage translation of shared by 35% of i% among Triers, as many Esso Favorers (18%), and that Favorers, Note, as expected, this Favorers. only about half with better in the competition. goes down to only and 7% among Competitive indirect 38% to 52% of Switch Toa car of F-310, Note this twice• F.;sso with s Shell (18% to 9%,) reflecting bs nco of any "F-310" or ''Lead-Free" 2. wh r on this credit it among Competitive factor went down from F-310. in Toronto that than 2 to 1 among buyers Shell of all leads Esso by competitive brands, 24% to 11'1., 3. ''MoRE POWER"- Note that about 4 out of 10 Switch Tos and Favorers power. Note that who actually tried this select Standard goes down to only~% Standard recently, for more among those and remains stable Ill 111d ., 11 l• '\VIII l\" I I n p, 1t l ,., Ji:, 11 Ill ,1111111 f I 11p. I rt. 1111114 JIii ,, 11111011p, V11111 1111 II I ""' O ,f "' I 1111 0 I n t , th t 10' l•'avo1 ·,,r 1 1 11'11 1101· , I oy11 I l ,h 111 417... 'X. nd, IO (11 ,''w1th:1111d,,d. th N t 1r I f mdo qu po r in Torno. 4. "CLEANER ENGINE"- Not of Sh 1 I o nd ity t J•,1wo 011 that mor than 3 out of 10 switch Tos nnd Favorers trano l otod the "clean bal l oon" into the hope for a "cl anor ongino, " though this actually tends to be rejected tried competitive for this Standard users in Vancouver (12% of whom select among Favorers, (53% to 37%), and that F-310, was still motions succeeded Note in Toronto produced buyers (4%) than by the remainder of Stan dard factor.) Note that before more by those who have Esso leads maintained, your past a 29% to 13% lead of all competitive significantly your?_% to 3% edge over Standard in narrowing that Standard though the F-310 pro- it to a 15% to 12% edge. engine cleaner activity for Esso over Shell, brands. This contrast has among furthe r JI indicates the need for Imp rj 1 o the multiple resulting benefits xt.r from your engin imum advantage mil a of rJmooh p t cl an r, of your "cl an r overcome the ''better 5. in xp nd .ind 1n · n • i vt i:111p1,11d111f po11f1 •!v11, tl11i1 1 in! e. 11>ouf "I •ml In," i l p probt •1 ot 1·,1111, mid 1.mp·r. 11, .I rm rf then their We report percciv d our d tail ,.( eta d,,•rl rti,,, 11bo11t ,, " l I wl c· I 1· 11t1' r" I 11 as vs. a "d - c11rbo1dz'ln11. np.ln tenns of th ir p n· iv d 1111y 11 • ts on "!: J..!:_ '...!!!..'~ 1.11. :c" 11nd on p