Charities are facing a perfect storm, with growing numbers of people relying on them for support, while fewer people are able to afford to donate. On top of that, the rising cost of living is also increasing underlying operating costs. 

So what can charitable organizations do to keep funds flowing? We decided to dig into the issue by using Attest to survey 500 consumers in the US and 500 in the UK. We wanted to explore the ways charities and nonprofits could help people to keep giving through this difficult time – by asking the donors themselves. 

View the UK survey

View the US survey

Three key takeaways were:

1. Flexibility will help people to keep giving; charities should make it easy for donors to change how much they give, and skip payments.
2. A simple solution is reducing the baseline suggested donation amount and inviting people to donate less, to include a higher volume of potential supporters.
3. Wealthier donors are looking for different initiatives, like tax incentives, payroll deduction and interest donation schemes.

The UK is the hardest hit by a decline in donations

Before we got started with the solutions, we wanted to take a better look at the problem – just how much has the rising cost of living affected charities? In the UK, we can see that 27.6% of people have decreased their charitable donations in the last 12 months. That’s versus the 16.8% who have increased them, resulting in a net decrease of -10.8%. 

In the US, we actually see the complete reverse; a net increase of +10.8%. Only 13.8% of people have decreased the amount they donate to charity, while 24.6% have increased their donations. However, the US has a far higher percentage of people who haven’t donated to charity at all in the last 12 months (27.2% versus 13.8%).

What we might surmise from this is that there’s a starker divide between rich and poor in the States. So those who can afford to donate to charity respond by giving more, and those who can’t, give nothing at all. And the data backs this up, 87.1% of those with a household income of $90,000* have donated in the last 12 months, and 42.4% have increased their giving. 

*This demographic accounts for 26.4% of the overall sample

Flexibility is central to maintaining support

What people most require in order to keep giving is flexibility; 30.2% of respondents in the UK said being able to change the amount they give each month would help. It was also a popular solution in the US, where 27.2% wanted more control of value. This is something that could be implemented by shifting away from standing orders to variable direct debits or card payments; tuning up/down with each supporter’s circumstances (but aiming to avoid losing a donor entirely).

In addition to the flexibility to change the amount they give, donors would also like to be able to skip monthly donations if they’re having a difficult time; 22.8% of respondents in the UK and 20% in the US said this would help. Some charities have already launched this initiative, sending donors a text message every month to which they can respond ‘skip’. 

But one of the most effective actions for charities to take is actually the easiest to implement; simply inviting people to donate smaller amounts from the outside, potentially sacrificing a few units of value to include a higher potential volume of supporters. This is very close to the concept of price elasticity in marketing; the ratio of the percentage change in total demanded of a product to the percentage change in price. 

Organizations often set their baseline suggested donation quite high, and this can be off putting for those with less to give. But starting with lower expectations seems likely to lead to more people committing – especially in the UK, where 28.6% of people say it would make a difference (versus 20.8% in the US)

Different solutions for higher earners

American charity givers skew wealthier, and that’s underlined by the fact that tax incentives were named as the top solution for helping them to further their support. Just over 32% of people in the US said tax breaks would help them support charities, in comparison to 23% in the UK.

Likewise, other similar solutions were more popular with American donors than with British ones. These include the ability to donate the interest from their savings, which 18.8% supported compared with 8.4% in the UK. Donating directly from one’s salary also had greater support (21.0% versus 16.4%). 

And if we, once again, look at respondents with a minimum household income of $90,000, we get a clearer picture of how many higher earners might adopt these initiatives (see graph below). A significant 43.2% would appreciate being able to give to charity through a payroll deduction, for example, so it’s worth charities communicating with employers and employees about how this is done. 

Something that would help higher and lower earners alike is being able to round up transactions and donate the difference. Round up technology is already being used by some retailers, like McDonald’s, but charities could be pushing more businesses to get on board.

Banks and financial service providers are great candidates too – anywhere charities can take a regular stream of small contributions that can really add up without a material impact or decision for target consumers. More than 31.0% of Americans and 26.0% of Brits are supportive of rounding up, so even if it’s only a few pennies at a time, it’s likely to add up. 

The post How can charities maintain donations as inflation bites? appeared first on Attest.

After many grounded months, travel was finally back on the agenda in 2022, but it’s been anything but smooth runnings for travelers. We’ve had to contend with delays, cancellations, strikes, lost baggage, and any number of changing rules and regulations. 

On top of that, record-breaking inflation and some wild currency movements are making many destinations more expensive. What does this all mean for the future of travel, I hear you ask? We decided to find out what’s in store for the travel industry in the coming months by using Attest to survey 500 consumers in the US and 500 in the UK. 

We not only investigated consumers’ plans to travel but also their appetite for risk. Would they be more inclined to stay closer to home and avoid flying this winter? What were their top concerns when thinking about traveling? We also wanted to know if the uncertainty of the current situation would change the way people research and book trips. Read our findings below or dig into the data for yourself right here!

Three key takeaways were: 

1. People plan to increase their total travel over the next six months, but it’s domestic winning; staycations will make up the bulk of extra trips.
2. Affordability is the #1 concern, but Americans and Brits have differing worries and barriers when it comes to travel right now. 
3. Travelers are more careful and working harder; they’ll be doing more research, shopping around more, and booking further in advance.

Winter could be hotter than summer

With prices rising and disposable income being squeezed you might imagine that people would be eschewing travel plans for the next six months, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. 

Our data shows that there will be a net increase in the total number of trips being taken in both the US and the UK – although there’s stronger intent in the US. A net +16% of Americans say they will make more trips in the next six months than they did in the previous six months (in comparison to a net +6.6% of Brits). 

Americans’ planned travel includes both local trips and those further afield; a net +7.0% of US consumers say they’ll take more flights, while a net +15.2% will take more staycations (“going domestic” in American). In the UK, however, there’s a clear trend of people swapping trips abroad for at-home vacations; a net +10.8% plan to take more staycations in the next six months, while flights record a -0.8% net reduction. 

Affordability is still key

Despite plans to keep on traveling, it looks likely these will be governed by affordability. Both Americans and Brits say that affordability is the main concern they have when considering planning a trip – yet cost is felt more keenly in the UK; 66.4% of Brits rank affordability in first place versus 52.6% of Americans. 

What we see in the US is a far higher regard for health and safety fears; 22.8% say it’s their first priority and it ranks second overall. This is compared to the UK, where 11.2% put it in first place and it only ranks fourth overall. It means that American travel brands will have to work much harder to reassure their customers it’s safe to travel and to dispel health concerns. 

US results:

On the other hand, Brits are more concerned about travel rules and restrictions (coming in second overall). As these change frequently, travel companies can support their customers by staying on top of them and regularly communicating updates, to help reduce this risk and proactively lower the perceived barriers to buying travel.

UK results:

One thing that both nations agree on is that environmental impact is (unfortunately) at the bottom of their list of concerns when it comes to making travel plans right now. So while brands shouldn’t forego environmental initiatives, there is no consumer motivation to make the environment front and center of marketing campaigns right now.

Trips will be researched more

As a result of people trying to address their concerns about travel, they’ll spend more time researching trips and shopping around for the best deals. A net 29.2% of Americans say the amount of travel-related research they do will increase in the next six months, while 26.0% of Britons say the same.

At the same time, 10.2% of Americans are making reservations further out prior to traveling. And this trend is more pronounced in the UK, where 16.2% are booking earlier. So although these changes may represent increased wariness, they also present opportunities for travel brands to get more eyes on their offerings – and the possibility of locking customers in earlier.

It’s clear that consumers will need more hand-holding, reassurance and confidence in this cautious environment. Brands would be wise to look at ideas that have low cost of implementation, but high perceived benefit and value to consumers, which are based on this data as market conditions continue to evolve. Ideas like ‘price will not lower’ help consumers to take action and book early. 

Supplying and fuelling the demand for greater research, and systematically addressing barriers to travel will help travel brands keep consumers engaged and win as consumers change behavior. Demand remains high, but the basis of consumer decision-making, and therefore competition for travel companies, has shifted. As ever, the target consumers make the final decision, and hold the answers to all the important questions.  

The post Will travelers be more risk-averse in Q4? appeared first on Attest.

Brands frequently hear that they need to be continually innovating if they want to stay relevant to a Gen Z audience. Younger people are often looking for the latest trend – but how true is this when it comes to food and drink? Do they need their food to be fashionable? Do they want the contents of their shopping cart to make a statement?

We decided to investigate this by using Attest to survey 500 consumers aged between 18-25 in the US and 500 in the UK. We aimed to explore Gen Z’s interest in new food and drink products, the reasons they’re attracted to them, and the impact inflation might be having on their openness to trying new things. Read our findings below or dig into the data for yourself.

Three key takeaways were: 

1. It’s Gen Z’s natural curiosity that makes them far more likely to explore new food and drink products.
2. Newness is valued more in some categories than others – around 50% of Gen Z  are ‘very likely’ to try innovations in sweet treats and fast food.
3. Newness is important but price is more so. Around 80% say the rising cost of living is having a significant impact on their likelihood to try new F&B products.

What are the latest food trends for US Gen Zers?

Get the latest data on how Gen Z is thinking, shopping and eating with our new research results

See the trends

Sweet innovations excite the most

First, let’s tackle the big question – exactly how interested are Gen Z in new food and drink products? To get a handle on this, we asked them how likely they would be to try a new innovation across seven different categories. 

In every category, the respondents were far more likely to say they would try something new, than not. This is true for both the US and the UK. This indicates strong overall interest in new food and drink products, however, there was some notable variation in interest across the categories…not all F&B innovations are created equal!

Sweet treats and fast food have the most pulling power; 51.3% of American Gen Z, and 54.1% of British Gen Z say they are ‘very likely’ to be tempted by something sugary. Meanwhile, 51.5% of US respondents, and 46.9% of UK respondents are highly likely to try a new fast food offering. 

Here’s how the rest of the categories shaped up (percentage of respondents ‘very likely; to try):

US

Soft drinks: 45.5%
Cereals: 42.8%
Savoury snacks: 39.0%
Alcoholic beverages: 23.0%
Plant-based foods/milk: 21.6%

UK

Soft drinks: 45.3%
Savoury snacks: 42.1%
Cereals: 28.9%
Alcoholic beverages: 23.8%
Plant-based foods/milk: 17.8%

So, a lot of consistency in the overall order of the categories between US and UK (just with cereals holding much lower interest in the UK) – yet also with big differences in levels of interest in each category (>45% for soft drinks, down to 18-22% for plant-based products). 

This is why we run research; to explore, uncover and learn, then figure out where to look and what to do next.

Also within those results, it’s interesting to note that Gen Z are not that adventurous when it comes to alcoholic drinks, but that’s probably down to the fact that young people are less likely to be drinkers than their older counterparts. This would also explain their higher interest in soft drink innovations.

Why is newness so attractive?

We wondered what drives a young person to want to try new food and drink products – is it an internal drive (for them) or external (for how they seem to others)? Or are they actually trying to use their purchasing power to change the status quo or conflate category trends with other motivations and needs, for example by buying products that are more environmentally friendly?

So, we researched that too! According to our respondents, the answer is that they simply want to discover something they might like; 78.4% of Americans and 70.35% of Brits say this. Young people are open to new experiences and apparently have a natural curiosity – this doesn’t necessarily mean they’re fickle and won’t stick with something they like, but it does mean they’re a good audience for brands to target with new innovations. 

Only 4.0% of Americans and 5.0% of Brits admit that the main reason they would try a new food or drink product is to fit in with or impress their peers. This could be higher in reality but peer pressure simply isn’t stated as a major motivator. 

Other reasons to try a new product include ‘to improve my diet or wellbeing’ (US: 12.8%, UK: 17.8%), suggesting that health claims and packaging/promotions that promote health-related messages could help generate interest among this age group. Meanwhile, we see less interest in buying new products to drive environmental or social change; only 4.4% (US) and 6.0% (UK) buy for this reason. 

Novelty is not the be all and end all

Newness might be attractive, but just how important is it when Gen Z are making purchasing decisions? Does it outweigh other factors? We asked respondents to rank the importance of five factors when considering whether to buy a food or drink product.

US results:

It should come as no surprise that price came out as most important (by some margin) in both markets. The Gen Z demographic are not going to pay over the odds for the sake of novelty, particularly in the current economic environment. 

In fact, ‘innovativeness/uniqueness’ (the original subject and hypothesis for this Attest Investigates) was deemed only the fourth most important factor in the UK, and in the US, it was last. 

UK results:

On the other hand, ‘perceived quality’ was ranked second in both countries, suggesting that rebranding existing products could have more profitability than bringing new ones to market. Indeed, the attractiveness of packaging was ranked the third most important factor in the UK (fourth in the US), proving that Gen Z buy with their eyes. 

Intent is high, but so is inflation

Gen Z, as we’ve seen, have a high openness to new food and drink products. If they see a new product on the supermarket shelves, they’re likely to want to try it, but the realities of the economy are that they might not be able to afford to. 

In our recently released US and UK Food & Beverage reports, we found that many shoppers are sticking to a tight budget when they go food shopping. Right now, trying something new is a risk that cash-strapped consumers are probably less likely to want to take. This data certainly seems to back that up, with 83.2% of US Gen Z and 81.4% of UK Gen Z stating that the rising cost of living is having a medium to big impact on their likelihood to try new food and drink products. 

It’s fair to say that ‘newness’ could actually be a bad thing in the current economic climate – unless you can undercut (or at least match) incumbent products on price. This is something brands should certainly bear in mind, perhaps delaying plans to develop and launch new products until the economy is on firmer footing.

What are the latest food trends for US Gen Zers?

Get the latest data on how Gen Z is thinking, shopping and eating with our new research results

See the trends

The post Is ‘newness’ important to Gen Z in food and drink products? appeared first on Attest.

Inflation is putting household budgets under huge strain, and consumers are having to make some tough choices. We know from our UK and US inflation sentiment trackers that people are cutting back even on essential items like food and fuel… so, then, what can brands do to become indispensable at this time?

We decided to investigate this by asking 500 consumers in both the US and UK what brands they’ll be sticking with during the cost of living crisis – and then exploring their reasons why. By looking at the roots of their brand loyalty, we’ll uncover how other brands can also become indispensable to their consumers. Read our findings below or dig into the data for yourself.

Three key takeaways were: 

1. Inflation is leading to wide scale behavioral change that’s putting brand loyalty on the line, with a lot of relationships and patterns in flux right now. 
2. Most consumers have at least one brand they don’t want to switch from despite inflationary pressures.
3. The longer the relationship with a brand, the greater the commitment but true customer understanding can supercharge loyalty. 

Brands are at high risk at a time of dramatic change 

To put the scale of the problem into perspective, we first asked respondents if they were changing their shopping habits to save money because of inflation. In the UK, the chief behavioral change is switching to cheaper brands, which 62.4% of consumers say they are doing (versus 53.2% in the US). 

In the US, we see people are most likely to be reducing the frequency of non-essential purchases, so buying less rather than buying cheaper (57.4% of Americans are doing this versus 55.6% of Brits).

We also see a significant amount of shoppers in both nations simply stopping buying certain things or cancelling services, which is bad news for any brand producing non-essential products. Just over half of Brits say they are doing this, versus 48.2% of Americans.

Our favorite brands

With so many people changing their purchasing habits to save money, we wanted to know, are any brands sacrosanct? How many consumers have such a level of brand loyalty that they wouldn’t consider buying a cheaper alternative? Which brands maintain loyalty, against all costs, inflation and new pressures? 

The UK demonstrates more brand loyalty than the US, with 78.6% naming a brand they’re wedded to (versus 69.4% in the US). However, we still see a notable percentage of people in each nation who show no commitment to any brand. 

Now let’s take a look at the brands consumers were most likely to name… In the UK, the top five were Heinz, Nike, Tesco, Coca Cola/Coke and Netflix. 

In the US, the top five brands were Nike, Amazon, Tide, Coca Cola/Coke and Adidas. It’s interesting to note that two brands – Nike and Coca Cola – make it onto both nation’s must-have lists. The strength of feeling for Nike, in particular, is impressive, with the footwear brand coming out yards ahead of the others. We’ve explored previously what makes Nike’s marketing so effective at building brand loyalty.

Loyalty is built over time

It won’t come as any comfort to young brands that the core reason for consumers to stick with a brand through difficult economic times is the length of their relationship with it. Nearly half of Americans and 43% of Brits said their favorite brand was indispensable to them because they’d been buying it for a long time. 

So if loyalty is built over time, what can you do to fast-track it? This comes down to the strength of your product and the value it offers. Half of Americans say a brand that offers excellent value is indispensable, while 33.8% of Brits say the same. This isn’t just about being the cheapest; it’s heavily tied to quality, as highlighted by the next most important factor: superiority. Just over 39.0% of Americans and 36.6% of Brits say their favourite brands are superior to competitors.

Having to be better than the rest is a tall order – famously, there are no simple shortcuts to generating brand loyalty. But there are two other reasons that people remain loyal to brands, which provide additional goals to aim for. A significant 39.0% of Americans, and just over a quarter of Brits, say they’ll stick with brands that improve the quality of their lives. Meanwhile, 21.4% of US consumers, and 12.8% of UK shoppers, say a brand that forms part of their identity is one that’s indispensable to them.

By gaining a deep understanding of what makes your consumers tick, and what their most important needs are (hello, consumer research!), you’ll be able to hone your unique value proposition, brand image and messaging. Ultimately, this will help your brand to become an integral part of their lives more quickly. 

There’s more data for you to delve into in the full US survey and UK survey, and if you want to find out how to become indispensable to your customers then get started with a free survey below..

Got something you want to investigate? Do it now, for free!

You can run a free 5-question survey to get the answer to your burning question.

Ask now!

The post How can a brand become indispensable? appeared first on Attest.

When it comes to choosing snacks for our kids, parents on both sides of the pond are faced with an amazing array of choices. Healthy options aren’t always easy to spot, so how exactly do they make their buying decisions?

Focusing on the parents of children aged five and under in both the US and UK, we fired up the Attest platform to find out what snacks they buy for their kids, how much they spend, how often they make purchases and the other factors that influence their decision.

Three key takeaways were: 

1. Quality, nutritional value and price are the most important considerations for parents. Americans are much more emphatic about these criteria than Brits. 
   
2. American parents have more nuanced needs when it comes to information about ingredients, whereas Brits tend to focus on low sugar content.
   
3. Brits are more reliant on in-store information about kids’ snacks, while Americans are much more influenced by online sources and social media.

You’ll find a bite-sized digest of our findings below, but if you want to tuck into the full data you can find the US survey and UK survey. 

Quality, nutritional value and price are key for all parents

Parents in both the US and UK rated quality, nutritional value and price—in that order—as being the top three considerations when purchasing snacks for their kids. Each of these factors was rated as either ‘important’ or ‘very important’ by the vast majority of parents, but there are some interesting contrasts between the two nations.

American parents were much more likely to answer that quality was ‘very important’ (52.0%) rather than ‘important’ (37.9%), while in Britain these options were reversed, with 37.3% of parents rating quality as ‘very important’ and saying ‘important’. Similarly, Americans attach more significance to nutritional value than Brits, with 48.5% rating this as ‘very important’ in contrast with 32.3% of Brits. 

Competitive pricing is also a big consideration for parents, scored as ‘important’ or ‘very important’ by 82.2% of Brits and 80.6% of Americans. Again, those in the US were more inclined to say that this factor was ‘very important’ (39.4% vs 28.0%).

Low sugar is high priority, but US messaging needs nuance

Nearly two-thirds (64.0%) of parents in both the US and over three-quarters (75.2%) in the UK opt for kids snacks that have a low sugar content. However, there is evidence to suggest that American parents are more ingredient—and diet—conscious than their British counterparts. 

More than 46% of US parents said that they chose snacks with added protein, compared to just 16% in the UK, while whether or not a snack was organic was important to 44.5% of Americans but just 27.8% of Brits. Added fiber was on the minds of 35.4% of US parents compared to 24.2% of parents in the UK, while three times as many Americans were interested in whether a product was vegan (18.9% vs 6.2%).

Brands should take note of the regional differences highlighted by this question when designing their packaging; while focusing on low sugar levels will resonate with British consumers, messaging for a US audience needs to hit on a wider range of themes and buying factors. 

Brits prefer in-store shopping, Americans influenced online

There was a marked difference between the frequency with which parents in the US and the UK bought snacks for their children: more than one in five (21.6%) Americans bought kids snacks every day, while far fewer (4.8%) of Brits did the same. 

British parents were more likely to buy snacks for their kids in stores (86.2% vs 71.1%), while a significant number of American parents bought from grocery delivery apps (15.8% vs 9.0% in the UK). In-store promotions are the number one way Brits gain information about kids’ snacks, at 41.2%, compared to the 27.9% who draw this information from friends and family. 

The influence of social media and online sources in this category was relatively insignificant in the UK, with a total of 21.2% of parents gathering snack-related information through these channels. In the US, nearly double the number of parents (40.6%) gain their information in this way, ahead of the 26.9% who receive information from friends and family and the 19.5% who got it through in-store promotions.

Interestingly, very few parents get their information from company websites (4.8% in the US, 2.6% in the UK) which suggests brands could do more in this area, perhaps through improved SEO or by placing scannable QR codes on packaging, for example.

There’s more data for you to chew over in the full US survey and UK survey, and if you want to find out how to satisfy your customers’ hunger then get in touch…

See what Attest can do for you

Speak to our team to understand how we can help you to get high quality insights from your target audiences, fast.

Book a demo

The post Kids’ snacks: What are parents looking for? appeared first on Attest.

Who doesn’t love the convenience of having items delivered to their door? And the regular treats provided by D2C subscription brands have seen the sector surge in popularity in recent years.

However, providing high-quality products at a reasonable price on a regular basis is a challenge. Delivery charges are one especially tricky part of the equation—it’s a cost manufacturers and retailers have no choice but to pay, but thanks to the likes of Amazon Prime consumers have become used to paying little or nothing for receiving good ordered online. 

We questioned consumers in the US and UK to find out exactly how important delivery fees—or lack thereof—are when choosing which D2C subscription brands to sign up to.

If you want to interrogate the data for yourself, then you can do so using our insights dashboard.

• US Survey
• UK Survey

And read on for our report of the results. 

Top 3 takeaways from the research

1. How much importance you attach to delivery charges depends on your age. Respondents in the 18-25 age group—Generation Z—are least bothered. 
2. Certain categories are more price sensitive than others. People expect lower delivery charges for toiletries & cosmetics than they do for clothing & shoes. 
3. Americans are more prepared to pay for delivery than Brits, but location matters. In the UK rural consumers are most swayed by free delivery, while those in western and West Coast US states are most likely to cite this as the key factor in their decision.   

Results

Value for money is the top concern for consumers

When asked to choose from a list which factors they find important when signing up to a subscription, consumers in the UK chose ‘offers value for money’ as their top concern (73.2%), followed by ‘easy to pause or cancel’ (58.8%), with ‘free delivery’ coming in third (55.4%). Respondents in the US agreed that value for money was the most important factor (62.3%), but chose free delivery in second place (59.5%). 

UK results:

US results:

There are some interesting generational differences when we dig a little deeper. When we asked how important free delivery was to them, respondents aged 18-25 were least bothered—in the US, 78.8% in Generation Z said it was either very important or important, and this rose to 81.7% in the UK. American Boomers consider free delivery most important (94.1%) but—perhaps surprisingly—in the UK, Millennials score higher than any other generation at 93.4%.

The lesson here for D2C brands is that free delivery has broad appeal to all age groups in an increasingly cost-conscious world. By minimizing delivery charges brands have a better chance of being perceived as offering value for money. 

UK consumers expect delivery baked-in to subscription price

We asked respondents how much they would be prepared to pay for delivery for different types of subscriptions. In the UK, the point at which most consumers would be put off signing up was between £2 and £3 across all categories, but cheap or free delivery was especially important for subscriptions to food & drink, hobby-related products, personal care/health products, and cosmetics. It seems that in the UK, consumers expect delivery to be bundled-up in the overall price of the D2C experience (and that any additional delivery charges are minimal).

In the US, respondents were more likely to accept higher delivery charges, with $5 proving to be the threshold. But there were still significant numbers of people willing to pay more than $5 for delivery. Food & drink commands the most at 18%, followed by personal care/health & fitness (14.4%), and clothing & shoes (14.2%).

On the other hand, only 7.6% of people would pay over $5 for the delivery of bags & jewlery, and 7.2% for kids’ products. Toiletries & cosmetics is another price-sensitive category, with 4.8% of people not prepared to pay for delivery at all. Understanding category sensitivity is valuable for D2C companies while living costs are rising and consumer willingness to pay may be falling.

Regional variations show that location matters 

When you break down the results by region there are some notable variations. Those in the Western US and West Coast states rank free delivery as being even more important than value for money when considering a subscription service (60.5% vs 57.0%). However, respondents in the Northeastern states were most likely to declare free delivery as being ‘very important’ to them at 65.2% vs the national average of 60.4%. 

US results:

UK results:

In the UK, free delivery is especially important to people in Wales (96.0%), Scotland (95.0%), the West Midlands (93.3%) and the North East of England (100%). Ignoring tired stereotypes; this is useful information about where D2C brands and companies cannot and should not make changes that pass-through delivery costs.

It’s evidently also important for D2C subscription brands to consider regional variations when expanding their service so they can balance the costs of the increased mileage against the varied expectation of free delivery.  

If you want to delve deeper into the research then feel free (you’ll find the US Survey here and the UK Survey here) but if you want to find out how Attest can help you deliver what your customers really want then get in touch. 

Got something you want to investigate? Do it now, for free!

You can run a free 5-question survey to get the answer to your burning question.

Ask now!

The post Delivery fees – or delivery for free? appeared first on Attest.

As the world slowly returns to normal, what’s the state of the on-demand groceries industry? What do consumers want from these services—and how can brands make sure they deliver?

To find out, we used Attest to question consumers in the UK and US. You can dive into the data yourself with our insights dashboard. 

• US Survey
• UK Survey

And if you’d like our summary of the findings then sit back and we’ll bring it straight to your door (no delivery charge!)…

Top 3 takeaways from the research

1. Challenger brands are struggling to break through. Brand awareness among newer market entrants is low compared to Uber Eats (US & UK), Deliveroo (UK) and Instacart (US). Just like 2017-19’s mattress wars, it’s not just expensive to play the game, it’s almost prohibitively expensive to enter the game at all.
2. Users of on-demand grocery delivery services prioritize convenience and speed. Sustainability and the working conditions in the ‘gig economy’ are big news in the media, but not significant factors in most customer-level decision-making.
3. Delivery cost is a major driver—and a key deterrent. Low delivery cost is an important priority for many users, while many potential customers are put off by high delivery costs. 

Results

Big names dominate unprompted awareness

It’s unsurprising that mega supermarket brands and major players in on-demand delivery figure so prominently in consumers’ consciousness. Years of growth—and vast streams of external investment and new funding, to act ahead of that growth—work wonders for brand equity. 

When asked to name the brands that come to mind when thinking about on-demand grocery delivery, Americans were most likely to cite Instacart, Walmart, Uber Eats and DoorDash (however, despite DoorDash’s industry domination, they aren’t the clear leaders in consumers’ eyes). While in the UK, the responses Uber Eats, Deliveroo, Tesco and Asda were most common. 

Since supermarkets are such a fixture of consumers’ lives, perhaps newer grocery delivery brands could explore partnerships as a way to establish themselves in the market. That’s how Ocado—now a giant of global grocery technology and robotics—started in life: an exclusive 2002 partnership with Waitrose (that’s one of the UK’s most upmarket supermarkets). 

And when we followed up with a list of grocery delivery brands (excluding supermarkets), the dominance of the incumbents becomes even starker. A massive 90.6% in the UK were familiar with Uber Eats and 88.8% with Deliveroo, while Uber Eats (86.2%), Instacart (78.2%) and Postmates (56.4%) were most dominant in the US. 

There’s then a huge void in awareness to the next most-recognized brands, where we start to see the new grocery delivery challengers. 

In the UK, Getir took the challenger top spot (23.5% of respondents recognize the name), followed by Gorillas (22.5%), Zapp 10.6%, Jiffy (7.0%), Beelivery (6.8%), Gopuff (5.6%), Weezy (4.6%) and Fancy (1.0%). 

In the US, Gopuff is the leading challenger with 24.6% knowing the name, followed by Getir (23.5%), Gorillas (7.6%), Jokr (6.4%) and Fridge No More (5.8%). 

All of this goes to show the size of the task that challenger brands are up against. It’s hard (and expensive) to get to just 1.0% awareness, and a daunting task to cross that awareness void to compete with the dominant incumbents at >50.0% awareness. Working on levels of unprompted awareness should be a priority for new market entrants. 

Is it even possible to break through over time? In a word, yes. 

Getir and Gorillas are engaging in extensive venture capital fundraising to break into the delivery top-tier. 

Gousto wisely plays the long game by being more data-driven and taking aim more accurately than its competitors. 

Emma even managed to come through mattress wars with less damage than many others, by discovering real customer needs in each target segment, exploring new channels, and being smart with pricing.

Make it easy, but make it snappy

The features considered most important to existing users of on-demand grocery delivery platforms were ‘quick delivery’ and ‘low delivery costs’ in both countries. Much less significant to users are sustainable products and packaging, which came bottom of the rankings on both sides of the Atlantic. 

Introductory offers clearly work well in this sector: 28.1% of Brits and 23.3% of Americans said they first used a service for this reason. Of those who had never used an on-demand grocery delivery service before, ‘money off your first order’ was the most popular answer when asked what might encourage them to start, backed by 44.8% in the UK and 34.5% in the US.  

Delivery fees could be make-or-break

We already know that low delivery costs are important to existing users, and around half of non-users (50.2% in the UK and 48.9% in the US) say that cheaper delivery costs could persuade them to use these services for the first time. In the UK, delivery fees are the joint top reason people don’t order on-demand groceries, and delivery fees ranks second in the US. 

Interestingly, Americans attach much more importance to doing their shopping in person compared to Brits. More than half of Americans (57.3%) say they’ve been held back from ordering on-demand because they prefer the experience of in-person shopping. A smaller (but still significant) 38.2% of Brits said the same. 

It’d be wise for on-demand brands to drill down into what it is about in-person shopping people relish—is it the abundance of choice, the social aspect, the muzak? Guess what—market research can reveal the answers…

There’s a real challenge for brands here: keeping delivery costs low while covering costs and making some margin at the same time. A classic answer here is to shift the ‘rent’ in the value chain—where delivery companies would make less money from consumers, and more money from restaurants or partnerships.

If we continue to see huge amounts of new funding that fuels new entrants, this sector will remain hotly competitive. If that funding falls away, we’ll start to see a different form of competition for the first time; based on better serving customer needs (rather than just spending as fast as possible, to grow as fast as possible). 

This research shows some of the gaps and the basis of competition—from real consumer preferences and demand—that will dictate who wins or loses. That’s where research becomes powerful: unlocking who will win next, and why.

You can find out more about this research through our insights dashboard (US results and UK results), and if you want to know more about how Attest can help you use data to make great decisions—and then deliver on them— get in touch!

See what Attest can do for you

Speak to our team to understand how we can help you to get high quality insights from your target audiences, fast.

Book a demo

The post Are on-demand grocery brands delivering? appeared first on Attest.

Read our full summary of the results below, but if you’d like to get stuck into the data yourself then feel free to fire up our insights dashboard.

• US results
• UK results

Top 3 takeaways from the research

1) The number one reason for canceled subscriptions is expense and value for money—62.8% in the US and 68.8% in the UK said this. This shows that brands need to think hard about what the right price point is, how value is communicated and how consumers perceive value-for-money.

2) Consumers want to get something for free when signing up to a D2C subscription service but are realistic in their demands—44.2% of Americans would prefer 1-3 months free, while only 25.8% want 4-6 months free. Brands should be careful not to be under- or (more importantly) over-generous.

3) A significant number (34.7% in the US and 30.8% in the UK) give up subscriptions as they feel they no longer need or want the items they receive. This shows brands must sell to the right customers with the right mutual expectations, not just any customers.

Results

It’s all about value-for-money

When asked what the most important factor was in considering a new D2C subscription the top answer was ‘lower prices’, selected by 48.1% of US respondents and 50.5% of respondents in the UK. 

The same answer also came out top in the list of factors that would convince respondents to re-subscribe to a service they had previously canceled (50.8% in the US vs 55.9% in the UK). 

And if you needed any more persuading that price point is the key factor, the top reason given for canceling in both territories was expense—cited by 62.8% in the US and 68.8% in the UK. Remember: price is both a push and a pull factor.

My suggestion? Ask your target audience how much they would be prepared to pay for your product or service, and how they reach that decision (therefore uncovering how consumers think about value-for-money, which is therefore precisely how brands should think about value-for-money). That should help you find the magic number quickly, based on knowing the ‘why’ behind consumer decisions. 

Don’t give everything away for free

Free or cheaper delivery was also a popular answer among potential subscribers, but what I found most interesting was that consumers don’t necessarily want too much for free. 

When given the option of ‘1-3 months of free products’, ‘4-6 months of free products’, or ‘6+ months of free products’, the 1-3 months answer was most popular for both US and UK respondents. This was true of both first-time subscribers and re-subscribers. Surely that’s ridiculous, right?!

[screenshot of US vs UK answers for Q2 and Q4, focusing on the ‘free product’ selections]

There’s obviously a sweet spot for brands to find here—a free gift or introductory offer will certainly appeal to consumers, but there’s no need to destroy profit margins by giving too much away. Consumers actually don’t want or trust huge amounts of ‘free’. Phrases like “Why are they just giving this away?” and idioms like “No such thing as a free lunch!” come into play. 

Consumers see through marketing tactics, and prefer mutual value exchange over ‘just free value’. So you really can put customers off by giving them too much for nothing. Would you accept heavily discounted or free sushi? …that’s the effect at play here.

It also shows that customers recognise the value of the free gifts they receive, which brings me to my next point. One of the most common reasons for canceling subscriptions was cited as ‘didn’t need/want the products any more’—30.8% of UK respondents and 34.7% of US respondents said this. 

Brands might not think this is something they can do much about, but perhaps it shows that there is an ongoing educational aspect required by subscription brands. Pertinent reminders of the value of subscription products could help cut unsubscriber numbers down significantly. 

Acquiring new customers is expensive, and if individuals cancel or churn inside their CAC (customer acquisition cost) payback period (how long a customer relationship is required to break-even on that CAC), then all of the marketing, branding, product and shipping effort was wasted.

Very simply, many D2C companies can do an even better job at precluding churn and saving costs, by focusing on customers that really need their products (and are therefore less likely to churn).

Clearly, there needs to be room for experimentation that unlocks new consumer groups and growth, but that experimentation needs to be accurate, measured and contained. As ever, understanding what consumers really want—which groups are more/less likely to love and need your product, and getting inside the root causes of winning/losing with each demographic—that’s the key to success.

There’s also the ethical point here around not encouraging people to become customers when they don’t truly want or need what you offer. While your ‘total subs’ numbers might sound impressive, why isn’t customer retention your most important metric?

Wait! Come back!

One particularly fascinating insight cropped up in the question about what brands could do to stop subscriptions being canceled. Pricing and free products scored highly, but it seems customers also want to feel like the brands they subscribe to actually listen to them. 

On both sides of the pond, a significant number of respondents (12.2% UK vs 13.0% US) said that brands could have stopped them unsubscribing by speaking with them to make sure their concerns were addressed. You should never underestimate the power of having a direct conversation with your customers.

Interestingly, this tactic is more likely to be well received by males than females in the UK—15.5% of men said it would persuade them compared to 9.7% of women—while in the US this response resonates equally well with both genders.

I recently moved from one pasta subscription box (Nonna Tonda), to another (Pasta Evangelists), simply to compare the experiences. Nonna Tonda asked for feedback, and patiently waited for me to come back. Pasta Evangelists (Barilla) never asked, and didn’t know what was happening (or perhaps their analytics are so accurate, that they can just assume!). 

The two differences in approaches were noticeable; Nonna Tonda knew the story of the cancellation, and believed that their product head-to-head would win me back (it did… no special offer or ‘churn avoidance’ intervention required!).

Of course, another great way to speak directly to your target customers is by using the Attest platform. You can find out more about this survey through our insights dashboard (US & UK), and if you want to know more about how Attest can help you use data to make great decisions, get in touch!

And the D2C insights don’t stop here! In our recent D2C Digest: Subscriptions issue you’ll learn about the demographics and categories with the biggest growth potential, what consumers want from subscription brands and hear from top brands with great D2C success stories. 

2023 US consumer trends report

How can you prepare your brand for the rocky year ahead? Using Attest data from 2,000 US consumers, we’ve identified the top 18 trends to know.

Read now!

Direct-to-consumer Digest

This issue of the D2C Digest is all about product subscriptions, exploring how the subscription market is currently faring, as well as the outlook for 2022.

Get your copy now!

The post Why subscribers cancel—and how to win them back appeared first on Attest.

Why do people buy clean deodorant, and which factors most compel people to choose one emerging product over another?

We’ve run a survey of U.S. consumers to gather a clearer view of their thoughts and opinions about clean deodorant. There’s a summary of the results below, but if you want to have a nose around the full data then no sweat! You can find everything in our public insights dashboard.  

Top 3 takeaways from the research

1) The most important factor when it comes to purchasing clean deodorants is product effectiveness, while reviews and recommendations are least important. This is something brands running customer advocacy and referral programs should definitely note.

2) There’s a slight gender divide when it comes to what makes an ‘effective’ deodorant. Men care more than women about using a product that smells nice, while women are most concerned that the deodorant should confidently last all day. 

3) Aluminum is the ingredient buzzword to avoid. Respondents are emphatic about this being the one ingredient they don’t want to see in their clean deodorant. 

Now let’s get right into the juicy data!

Results

Product effectiveness and ingredients are most important

We’ve found that ‘product effectiveness’ is the most important consideration for those purchasing clean deodorant, with 56.9% putting this in first or second place—no great surprise perhaps. However, in a very close second place is ‘ingredients’—55.8% of respondents said it was one of their top two concerns. 

The fact that ‘ingredients’ ranks so high as a determining factor shows there’s clearly a high level of existing knowledge about harmful ingredients among clean deodorant buyers—people know what ingredients they do and don’t want. It’s key for brands to remember that there’s an important knowledge-building phase customers need to go through before they’ll buy.

Working our way down the list of purchase considerations we can see that ‘price’ came third. A massive 90.4% of respondents said that the price point of clean deodorant was either ‘very important’ or ‘important’ to them—they clearly aren’t prepared to pay over the odds for clean deodorant. 

Something that ran counter to my expectations was ‘reviews/recommendations’ coming out bottom of the list—just 2.9% ranked this as their most important factor—when we hear so much about how important advocacy and word-of-mouth are to consumers across other sectors, notably in other environmentally conscious and/or D2C categories. Perhaps this is down to the fact that deodorant is a highly personal product—perhaps consumers are less likely to value the opinions of others and prefer to base their purchases on their own experiences, preferences and private habits. 

Brands that place high importance on word of mouth and customer advocacy might want to re-evaluate their strategy. This especially applies to multi-product brands, where clean deodorant is just one of several products under one brand—this product works differently!

Men want scent; women want endurance

Respondents’ answers to the question on what criteria defines an effective deodorant also came as a surprise in this research. While I’m not amazed that men and women didn’t see eye-to-eye in terms of the most important factor—men selected ‘eliminates odor’ as their #1 while women chose ‘lasts all day’—I certainly raised an eyebrow when I saw that men were more concerned than women about having a product that ‘smells good’ (61.6% vs. 53.5%).

This challenges some stereotypes, and also underlines a key learning for brands selling products that target specific genders. Times change and so do attitudes—marketers should never be afraid to ask questions to validate (or disprove) a gut feeling. It might even open the door to enormous success, as our customer Bloom & Wild found out when they researched a hunch of theirs and delisted red roses for Valentine’s Day!

Aluminum is the ingredient consumers most want to avoid

The growing interest in clean deodorant shows that consumers are increasingly concerned about using products that don’t contain chemicals that could harm their health. They also know what it is that they want—or rather what they don’t want — when it comes to certain ingredients. The most commonly cited ingredient that our respondents wanted to avoid was aluminum, while alcohol also ranked highly in respondents’ answers. It’s fascinating to see just how high consumer awareness is, across this range of harmful or disagreeable ingredients.

Looking at the packaging for many of the most commonly purchased products in this category, the top 5 best-known brands all make very clear reference to their aluminum-free formula. There are evidently ingredients that Americans want to steer clear of, so brands would do well to listen to customer concerns in this area—especially with products that target women.

Females actually ranked ingredients as being more important than product effectiveness—37.4% vs. 28.1%  for men—with this preference most pronounced among respondents from Gen Z.

The squeezed consumer 2023

Want a snapshot of today’s consumer? Find out how Americans are coping with inflation, and what’s changed since autumn 2022.

Read now!

The post How to kick up a stink with clean deodorants appeared first on Attest.

As a scientist, I am obsessed with experimentation, empiricism and using data to make decisions. We’ll delve into all things consumer research to lift the lid on the most important unknowns for brands, as requested by you!

Introduction

As cryptocurrencies continue to make waves around the world, is it time for traditional banks and financial institutions to offer customers greater access to crypto features and services? 

To find out if consumers have the appetite for this—and if not, why not?—we asked a nationally representative sample of 1,000 Americans for their views on banks offering crypto options. 

Over on the Attest dashboard you can see the full results from this financial market research, break it down with the demographic filters and run significance tests to check for headline differences. 

Top takeaways from the research

To whet your appetite, here are four top takeaways from this research:

1. Nearly half (49%) of people would at least consider switching to a bank that offers crypto products. 
2. Lack of knowledge and trust are still key reasons people aren’t yet ready to invest in crypto.
3. Despite males being more likely than females to invest in crypto, females show higher levels of trust (and potential for market growth) in the world of crypto.
4. …but, when asking real consumers to rank key bank features, investment in stocks and crypto came bottom in our list of importance. This is all very interesting, yet not a priority for many.

Results

Crypto isn’t a top requested feature overall

Which features do people most want from their financial services provider(s)? Asked to rank key bank features, investment in stocks and crypto came bottom in our list of importance: a sizable 39% placed this in last position. A signal here of crypto’s still-emerging status. 

What are people’s top bank features? The overall ranking of features was:

• No hidden fees
• Zero ATM fees
• Easy money-transfers to friends/family
• A 24/7 dedicated support
• High-yield savings account options
• Budgeting tools
• Easily invest in stocks & crypto

In line with some other Attest Investigates on other topics recently, consumers often value the simple things—and we can clearly see that there’s great opportunity for financial services providers to do those simple things better (before getting jazzy with new, cool and sexy things like crypto investing).

Lack of Information is a key crypto deterrent 

We asked how often, if at all, people purchase with or trade cryptocurrencies. Of the 34% who said they don’t invest, their top reason is lack of information (45% selected this). Lack of trust and fear of losing money are also key factors, with 39% and 31% choosing these respectively.

This echoes trends we’ve seen in previous research on ‘How US consumers will be won over by cryptocurrencies’, which highlights lack of knowledge as a key reason people have for not investing in or using cryptocurrencies. This is something crypto providers must tackle if they stand any chance of bringing the format truly into the mainstream.

In this new research we also found that lack of disposable cash might also be holding people back. We asked ‘Under what circumstances would you most consider investing in cryptocurrencies?’, and the top response was ‘If I had extra money every month to invest’. Could this open the door to offers like new customer cash incentives for using banks’ crypto features—borrowing some market expansion and marketing tactics from players like Hello Fresh (and their famous ‘$35-50 off your first box’ promotional cards)?

Big opportunity for banks to include crypto features on apps

If banks started adding crypto investment options to their existing product sets, would this help consumers dip their toes into the crypto waters? It appears so, with nearly half (49%) of people saying they’d be likely or very likely to use or try a feature like this. 

On the other side of the crypto coin, almost a fifth (19%) say they’re unlikely or very unlikely to use this feature. That’s also a significant amount of unwilling customers—not something for banks to ignore. But I’m sure the fact that half of people are interested in this will come as welcome news to Commercial and Product leaders of financial institutions. 

There’s also the potential to win over currently indifferent consumers with a feature like this. A third (33%) of respondents are neither likely or unlikely to use an in-app crypto feature, and when we filter the results to see how these particular respondents answered the rest of the survey, we see that they over-index for lack of knowledge as a key deterrent—49% chose this, compared with 45% overall. Certainly an opportunity here to win over the neutrals with that all-important education.

Bringing it all together

Something of a consistent theme we see in a lot of research is that lack of knowledge is a primary factor holding back growth for many new products and services. And we see this most emphatically for financial services—people are (likely) rightly cautious about adopting new offerings when their financial wellbeing is at stake. 

Our new crypto research here has only emphasized this—it’s up to brands to make sure their market education and marketing campaigns are genuinely informative and easily understood by a mainstream audience, especially when it comes to opening-up new products, concepts, ideas and addressable markets.

And although we’ve found that explicit appetite for crypto tie-ins with incumbent banks is relatively low, we also found that there’s a pretty huge group who might value and use these features. Educating consumers in the processes, benefits and risks of crypto is crucial, because the growth potential is massive… so, are you listening, banks… and what are you going to do about this?!

Fintech Digest

Download our digital magazine for the latest fintech insight, interviews and more. The consumer trends and business stories you need to know for fintech success.

Get your copy now!

The post Should banks offer crypto products? appeared first on Attest.