Consumer goods markups

Part
01
of four
Part
01

Wholesale and Retail Markup Rates-Tampons

Using top manufacturer's annual reports to determine profit margins of the feminine care segment, we can assume that overall tampon markups for both retail and wholesale is 38%-48% including company profit and sales tax. Details of condom markups and tampon statistics have been provided below.

Summary of Early Findings

  • One article states the condom markup rates from wholesale to retail is 354%. However, this is going to greatly depend on the wholesale deal found and the retailer's pricing.
  • The markup from manufacturer to retail could be as high as 2,000% (UNPF data of 2.5 cents cost price up to 50 cents retail per unit).
  • Other sources corroborate the fact that manufacturing cost price of condoms is around 2-3 cents each. Wholesale markups vary depending on branded versus off-brand. One brand of condoms had a markup of 930% (3 cents manufacturing cost estimate to $279/1,000). Off-brand condoms have an estimated wholesale markup of 300% (2 cents manufacturing cost estimate to $60/1,000).
  • Retail markup is going to vary greatly, depending on volume and retailer. More bulk units will of course be cheaper. Planned Parenthood states condoms retail for "about a dollar each". If we assume this to be for national brands, this means markup is around 3,333% (3 cents estimated manufacturing costs to $1.00 each) from manufacturing cost to retail. If we use the $279/1,000 units wholesale, then retail to wholesale markup is around 358%, which matches data from a previous source.

Condoms

  • According to one article, the markup rate for condoms is 354%. For the Trojan brand, retail is reportedly $4.63 while wholesale runs at $1.02 for a pack of 3.
  • China Brands lists 100 condoms for wholesale of $1.09.
  • Reportedly, Costco only marks up its items 8-10%.
  • Information from the United Nations Population Fund is helpful in identifying 'true' prices, as this NGO is likely charged close to cost price. The UNPF purchases condoms at $0.025 apiece and it states the market value is $0.50. That's an incredible 20x in value.
  • Apparently, the manufacturing (cost) price for off-brand condoms is only 2-3 cents per unit.
  • One wholesale has 1,000 Trojan condoms for $279. This means they are being sold at $0.279 per unit, which is still a significant markup. However, off-brand condoms wholesale for as low as $60/1,000, which is $0.06 per unit.
  • An industry expert made a reference to manufacturer Karex previously selling their condoms at $0.03/ea, which represented 20% net profit. This fits in previous data that manufacturing costs are generally 2-3 cents each.

Tampons Market Costs

  • In general, 10% of the cost of feminine products goes to goods and services tax (GST). This is because the government considers feminine hygiene products as non-essential and, therefore, still charge tax.
  • In most states, customers pay 30-50 cents per box of tampons to state tax amounting to $100 to $225 during their entire menstrual lifecyle just in tax.
  • An estimate of $275 million per year is spent in tampon tax alone in the United States.
  • In 2015, a study was released that found that women's products cost an average of 7% more than men's products.
  • The United States charges 2x-6x more for feminine products than any other country, however, Mexico is expected to have the highest 5-year growth rate of 16.8% CAGR.

Tampon Mark Up Rate

  • After scouring industry reports, media publications, news articles, and company websites, we were unable to find any information that accurately provide precompiled mark up rates for tampons globally or by region. We then attempted to find the cost of manufacturing tampons to calculate the mark up value using the average retail cost of a box of tampons. This search did not provide any details either. Finally, we identified the top manufacturers of tampons globally. We then identified Edgewell Personal Care Co as a public company that provides financial data to the public. We used their 2018 annual report to determine the following data:
  • In 2018, Edgewell Personal Care Co generated global profit margins from feminine care products of 38%. In the same year, the feminine care segment represented 15% of the company's total revenue amounting to $351.6 million USD.
  • If we assume that the remaining revenue was lost due to operational costs, we can use the segment profit as a proxy we can assume that tampons are marked up by 38%. Unfortunately, there is no data publicly available to calculate markup value specific to retail and wholesale.
Part
02
of four
Part
02

Wholesale and Retail Markup Rates-Heart-Rate Monitors

The information regarding heart-rate monitors markup rates for retail and wholesale pricing was not available in the public domain. Markup rates were calculated using publicly available data for gross margins for companies operating in the heart-rate monitors market, as markup rates and gross margins are directly related based on accounting principles. Heart-rate monitors retailers are offering products to end consumers at a gross margin of between 35% and 71.8%, translating into a markup rate of between 70% and 140%, according to accounting principles.

Heart-rate monitors markup rates for retail

  • iRhythm is "a digital healthcare company redefining the way cardiac arrhythmia are clinically diagnosed by combining our wearable biosensing technology with cloud-based data analytics and machine- learning capabilities." The company's current market share of holter hear-rate monitors is 65% of the total global market.
  • iRythm's gross margin for all of its products is 71.8%.
  • Gross margin is defined as sales minus the cost of goods sold, with the margin percentage calculated as the margin divided by sales, while a markup is the amount by which the cost of a product is increased in order to derive the selling price. According to economic principles, to arrive at a 50% margin, the markup percentage is 100.0%, meaning that to arrive at a 71.8% margin, the markup percentage will be over 140%.
  • For Fitbit, one of the biggest players in the heart-rate monitors market, the gross margin is estimated to be 35%, translating into a markup percentage of around 70%.

Wholesale markup rates for retail

  • According to Shopify, one of the largest online platforms for e-commerce, it is estimated that the range at which companies sell products at a wholesale price is between 30 and 50% across all industries. This would correlate with a 60% to 100% markup percentage.

Research methodology

Wholesale gross margins were not available exclusively for heart rate monitors as part of company data, including iRythm, Fitbit, Garmin, Polar, Timex, and Omron. The reason why data wasn't available in market reports for those companies nor in the companies' annual reports is due to the fact that financial reports focus on statistics related to the end consumers, such as gross margin, for end products that are sold through traditional and e-commerce retail channels. Additionally, we looked at several market research reports on heart monitors, such as the one from Market Reports World, Marketwatch, and Transparency Market Research. Data which is publicly available from all reports focused on heart monitors and did not outline any financial data except for market size and CAGR. It is possible that the exact data required for wholesale and retail markup rates for each competitor in the market is available behind the paywall of those reports, however, this fact could only be confirmed by contacting the consultants that are in charge of publishing and distributing reports listed above. In order to provide the wholesale markup rates, we expanded our search to the overall e-commerce market and found statistics from Shopify which confirmed that across all industries, companies use the same range of gross margins for their products. We then used the same logic behind the correlation between gross margin and markup rates to calculate the markup rates for wholesale products.
Part
03
of four
Part
03

Wholesale and Retail Markup Rates-Baby Formula

While no direct information was available to explain the wholesale and retail markup rates for baby formula, either in the US or globally, a comparison of wholesale and retail prices of one product (Enfamil) may be useful, along with other helpful findings.

Comparison of Wholesale and Retail Price of Enfamil

Several large retailers advertise the prices of the baby formula products they sell. Current prices for Enfamil Neuropro powdered baby formula varied among the four retailers sampled and Enfamil's own website. Enfamil's website price was the most expensive.
  • On its own website, Enfamil listed the price of Neuropro this way: "Enfamil NeuroPro Sensitive, Powder 19.5 oz Tub 5 (4)stars$26.06 Subscribe (Save 10%), $28.95 [regular price], $29.99 formerly."
  • Walmart's online price was "Enfamil Sensitive Baby Formula, Easy to digest - Reusable Tub 19.5 oz, Average rating: 4out of 5 stars, based on 2 reviews Enfamil Sensitive Walmart # 574258300 $27.98, $1.44 / oz. Pack Size: Choose an option"
  • Costco's online price was "Enfamil NeuroPro Infant Gentlease Formula 20.5 oz, 6-pack 4.8 stars (93) Item 1360380. Your Price 149.99$ Price Per OUNCE: $1.22 Buy 2, Get $40 OFF $40 manufacturer's savings is valid 2/3/20 through 3/1/20. Must be purchased in increments of 2 to qualify. While supplies last." [$149.99 divided by 6 equals $24.99.] (6) 20.5 oz Containers. Non-GMO Formula.
  • Sam's Club online price was "Enfamil Neuropro Infant Powder 20.7 oz 2-pack, $44.98 $1.12/oz".
One wholesaler, Alibaba, advertised a wholesale price.
  • "Enfamil NeuroPro Infant Formula, Powder, 20.7 oz tub, FOB Reference Price: Get Latest Price >=500000 Pieces $5.99".
  • The differences are stark: $5.99 wholesale vs. $22.44 - $28.95 retail at discount stores as shown above. At its low end, that different appears to be a 274 per cent markup from wholesale to retail ($22.44 minus $5.99 = $16.45. $16.45 divided by $5.99 = 2.746) in the case of Alibaba and Costco.

Helpful Findings

  • According to one of the most recent (2019) market reports available, the companies with "the largest market share in the Infant Formula Manufacturing industry include Abbott Laboratories, Mead Johnson, Nestle SA and Perrigo Company PLC."
  • "Abbott Laboratories, which makes Similac, and Mead Johnson, which makes Enfamil, each control about 40 percent of the market. The Nestlé-owned brand Gerber holds a roughly 15-percent share."
  • Consumer Reports advised parents in 2016 to buy powdered infant formula instead of liquid formula because it is less expensive. "In our informal survey of stores around the country we found that Enfamil Premium Infant Formula, for example, cost 27 to 35 percent less than Enfamil Premium Ready-to-Feed formula, depending on store type."
  • The baby milk formula market is segmented in several ways. One is by the age of the baby: Infant Milk, Follow-on-Milk, Specialty Baby Milk, Growing-up Milk.
  • A New York Times investigative report in 2018 found that "Some $4.3 billion worth of infant formula was sold in the United States [in 2017], a vast majority of it in powdered form. Between factory and baby aisle, its cheap ingredients (dehydrated milk and vitamins) become steeply, even mysteriously expensive. Basic types run about $15 for a 12.5-ounce can, amounting to perhaps $150 a month for a fully formula-fed infant."
  • A 2014 investors' report found that "even though it has 20 times the revenue of Mead Johnson, Nestle has inferior margins. In fiscal 2013, Mead Johnson achieved a gross margin and an operating margin of 64% and 24%, respectively. Nestle delivered a gross margin of 48% and an operating margin of 14%."
  • An investigative report into infant formula pricing around the world stated that it was "the first investigation into the product range and price differences of infant formulas that the four largest BMS manufacturers (Nestlé, Danone, Mead Johnson Nutrition and Abbott) are placing on 14 global markets."
  • This investigative report compared prices of the same product in different countries. "...Aptamil Profutura 1 (Danone) is on sale in the UK, Germany and China. In the UK, it costs 13 GBP per 800g (around 17 USD); in Germany, it costs nearly 20 EUR for 800g (around 24 USD); whereas in China, it costs 365 RMB for 900g (around 55 USD). This product is one of the most expensive powdered cow’s-milk-based infant formulas available in the UK yet it costs more than three times the price in China."

Research Strategy

There were no publications available online that explained the practices of wholesale or retail markup rates for baby formula. Industry articles, marketing reports and forecasts, blog posts, and other types of sources were checked for explanations of wholesale and retail pricing, without success. Nestle's annual report for 2018 listed several kinds of margins (operating profit, trading operating profit, etc.), across its entire platform of brands, globally, but those figures cannot be applied to the infant formula products directly. Nestle also presents data on sales of its product segments and sales in its three world markets, but no specific information on the infant formula business was found in the annual report. The pricing apparently differs in every country where Nestle sells its infant formula.
Part
04
of four
Part
04

High-Tech Fertility Monitors-Consumer Perceptions

Consumer perceptions of high-tech fertility monitors can be better understood through the results of a study of women's perceptions, a blog review with pros and cons of five "best" fertility monitors, and insights from market research reports.

Consumer Perceptions Reported in a Study

One study of women's perceptions of high-tech fertility monitor apps was available online. The study was conducted by UK researchers under the auspices of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) and published in 2018.
  • Subjects were 240 women in Europe who volunteered to participate in the online research. Only 89 of 236 women reported that they used fertility monitor apps.
  • The study found that the 89 women used fertility monitor apps for four main reasons, plus "other". The four main reasons why women chose to use the high-tech fertility monitors and their apps were "(1) To observe [menstrual] cycle (n = 63, 72%); (2) To conceive (n = 30, 34%); (3) To inform fertility treatment (n = 10, 12%); (4) As contraception (n = 3, 4%)" [numeration added].
  • "A total of 11% of respondents reported ‘other’ reason for use. Some examples of these included: to be prepared for menstruation; to track hormonal acne and mood swings; monitoring successful conception; and trying to see patterns to link to other symptoms."
  • Seventy-three (73) of the respondents made open-text comments about the usefulness or lack of usefulness of the fertility monitor apps. These comments indicate some of the pain points, challenges, expectations, and other perceptions the women had of the monitors and apps. The comments included the following themes:
  • Useful: "Tracking helps to be prepared/plan around period, informative, Tracking of other function e.g. sleep, mood and see how it correlates to cycle, To maintain a history of cycles, Easy to store, access, share data, Predicts fertile days, can plan or avoid sex, Community provides reassurance."
  • Not Useful: "Inaccurate (usually reported in women with irregular periods), Upsetting and cause anxiety (usually in women who are having fertility difficulties), Reminders are annoying".
"When asked if they would make any changes to the apps they are using, 30 respondents provided suggestions." The Recommended changes to fertility tracking apps were coded by the researchers into 12 main themes:
  • "Eliminate ads, Add more mood choices, Make it easier to log data, More information (links to current research, relevant forums, fertility information, contraception information, general women’s health information), Improved accuracy, Features for someone going through fertility treatment, Add reminders, Add note-taking feature, More specialised recommendations, Link to other health apps, Manually adjust data, Change design" [numeration removed].
Of the 146 women who responded to the study and reported that they did not use fertility monitor apps, the reasons why included the following themes:
  • "Never knew about them, On contraception or not sexually active do not see the need, Haven’t found one to use that I like yet, Menopausal or sterilised, Do not trust them, Use a diary/regular calendar, Apps are not user friendly/do not like them, Terrible with technology/do not have phone storage space, Too stressful/too much pressure (for women trying to get pregnant)" [numeration removed].

Blog Review of "Best" Fertility Monitors

A blog post published in November 2019 by the Pay It Forward Fertility Foundation contained reviews of the five "best" fertility monitors. The post included pros and cons of the five fertility monitors. These pros and cons can be thought of as perceptions of the fertility devices. A summary of the pros and a summary of the cons are provided below:
  • Pros of one or more of the five monitors: "Makes predictions based on the most accurate sign of ovulation, Convenient and intuitive app, FDA certified, Comes with a rechargeable battery, Predicts up to 6 fertile days, Discreet design; can be carried around with ease, Provides accurate measurements, Affordable, Made of quality materials, Easy to maintain and user-friendly, Gives you up to 7 days of advance notice, Testing takes just a few seconds, Great for women with an irregular cycle, Quick and easy-to-take measurements, Has a built-in alarm to remind you to take the test, Stores your data for 6 months, Can be personalized, Tracks levels of two key hormones instead of LH only, Recommended by many specialists" [duplicate comments removed].
  • Cons of one or more of the five monitors: Works with only one marker of ovulation, A bit pricey for its functionality, Requires buying test strips, Has a bit noisy alert, Might be a bit complicated to use at the beginning, You need to input some data by yourself, Buttons are a bit small, Requires at least one month of use before it can give you precise data".

Insights from Market Research Report Summaries

Several fertility monitor market research studies offered for sale online included summaries of some data contained in the reports that were behind paywalls. These summaries included information from which can be inferred two challenges to marketing fertility monitors: price and efficacy. The inferences are presented below.
  • "Ovulation kits provide more accurate results than natural fertility testing techniques" and are "easier to use and less expensive than fertility monitors."
  • Women and physicians are becoming increasingly aware of "the benefits offered by ovulation monitors and fertility awareness methods (FAM) in successful conception among women...."
  • The "development of advanced low-cost devices" is likely to result in increased use in North America.
  • Ovulation kits that are low cost and high efficacy are preferred by many women because of these benefits.
  • Patients increasingly prefer home- and remote monitoring, e-commerce availability, confidentiality, ... accessibility of test results, and ... easy-to-use and accurate products."
  • Ovulation testing kits "rely on chemical parameters to predict the ovulation period such as the level of estrogen and luteinizing hormone (LH) in urine. However, these kits [can] have negative results due to interference of gynecological conditions such as polycystic ovarian disease (PCOD) and infections."
  • "Fertility monitoring devices ... offer more precise evaluation of the ovulation time in advance. Fertility monitoring devices work on the principle of the estrogen and LH level in urine, concentration of salts or electrolytes in saliva, basal body temperature, and other chemical and physical parameters."

Research Strategy

The lack of survey research into women's perceptions of high-tech fertility monitors led us to pursue other ways of finding information. In addition to the study discussed above, several other studies reported online were labeled "retracted" by the authors and were no longer obtainable. We looked for compilations of advantages and disadvantages, pros and cons, benefits, and similar approaches to the topic of consumer perceptions, but were unable to locate more scholarly research. Market research reports were another promising avenue of information on consumer perceptions, but the report findings were behind paywalls, so we were limited to the report summaries discussed above.
Sources
Sources

From Part 03
Quotes
  • "The companies holding the largest market share in the Infant Formula Manufacturing industry include Abbott Laboratories, Mead Johnson, Nestle SA and Perrigo Company PLC."
Quotes
  • "Enfamil NeuroPro Sensitive, Powder 19.5 oz Tub 5 (4)stars $26.06 Subscribe (Save 10%) $28.95 $29.99 formerly "
  • "Enfamil NeuroPro Sensitive, Powder 29.4 oz Refill Box (Case of 4) 5(4)stars $143.06 Subscribe (Save 10%) $158.95 $163.95 formerly Product Details "
Quotes
  • " Organic Infant Formula, Stage 1 21 oz Container Rated 4.67 out of 5 stars 42 ReviewsWrite a review $29.99 Made with organic lactose, prebiotics, and key vitamins and minerals, our Stage 1 formula is modeled after breast milk, so you can confidently nourish your little one's first year of life. See our Stage 1 Organic Infant Formula Feeding "
Quotes
  • "Enfamil Sensitive Baby Formula, Easy to digest - Reusable Tub 19.5 oz Average rating:4out of5stars, based on2reviews2 reviews Enfamil Sensitive Walmart # 574258300 $27.98$27.98 $1.44 / oz Pack Size: Choose an option"
  • "Happy Baby Organics Organic Stage 1 Milk Based Powder with Iron Infant Formula 21 oz. Tub Powder with Iron Infant Formula 21 oz. Tub Average rating:4.6out of5stars, based on122reviews122ratings Product Spec USDA Certified NON GMO Kosher Cleared by FDA Current Price$29.11- $113.92 2-day delivery Free pickup Show only Happy Baby items"
Quotes
  • "Enfamil NeuroPro Infant Gentlease Formula 20.5 oz, 6-pack ★★★★★ ★★★★★ 4.8 out of 5 stars. Read reviews for Enfamil NeuroPro Infant Gentlease Formula 20.5 oz, 6-pack 4.8 (93) Item 1360380 Your Price 149.99$ Price Per OUNCE: $1.22 Buy 2, Get $40 OFF $40 manufacturer's savings is valid 2/3/20 through 3/1/20. Must be purchased in increments of 2 to qualify. While supplies last. Terms & Conditions Shipping & Handling Included* Features: (6) 20.5 oz Containers Non-GMO Formula Easy-To-Digest Formula, For Easing Fussiness And Gas With MFGM And DHA "
Quotes
  • "Sam's Club price Non-GMO formula Complete nutrition for infants 0-12 Months Contains MFGM And DHA Makes 74 - 4 fl. oz. bottles Enfamil neuropro powder $44.98 $1.12/oz"
Quotes
  • "Powdered Formula Formula that comes in powdered form is the least costly type you can buy. In our informal survey of stores around the country we found that Enfamil Premium Infant Formula, for example, cost 27 to 35 percent less than Enfamil Premium Ready-to-Feed formula, depending on store type."
  • "Shop at mass merchandisers. In an informal survey of retailers around the country we found that in general, formula prices were lowest at mass merchandisers. For example, we found the following mean prices per ounce for Enfamil Premium Infant Powder: 84 cents at Costco, $1.04 at Walmart and Babies R Us, and $1.06 at Target. We found the highest prices at drugstores—a mean price per ounce of $1.14 at Walgreens and $1.16 at CVS. Supermarket prices were in-between, with a mean of $1.10."
Quotes
  • "alibaba wholesale prices Enfamil NeuroPro Infant Formula, Powder, 20.7 oz tub FOB Reference Price:Get Latest Price >=500000 Pieces $5.99 Lead Time: Quantity(Pieces) 1 - 50000 >50000 Est. Time(days) 7 Negotiable "
  • "Enfamil, 2 21.1oz containers sold together Enfamil PREMIUM Non-GMO Infant Formula for wholesale FOB Reference Price:Get Latest Price $4.26 - $5.32 / Carton | 2000 Carton/Cartons (Min. Order) Lead Time: Quantity(Cartons) 1 - 2000 >2000 Est. Time(days) 7 Negotiable"
Quotes
  • "Baby Infant Formula Key Market Segments: By Type Infant Milk Follow-on-Milk Specialty Baby Milk Growing-up Milk By Ingredient Carbohydrate Fat Protein Minerals Vitamins Others"
Quotes
  • "Some $4.3 billion worth of infant formula was sold in the United States last year, a vast majority of it in powdered form. Between factory and baby aisle, its cheap ingredients (dehydrated milk and vitamins) become steeply, even mysteriously expensive. Basic types run about $15 for a 12.5-ounce can, amounting to perhaps $150 a month for a fully formula-fed infant. Specialty recipes like EleCare can cost two or three times as much. Strict Food and Drug Administration regulations govern formula production, and three companies dominate. Abbott Laboratories, which makes Similac, and Mead Johnson, which makes Enfamil, each control about 40 percent of the market. The Nestlé-owned brand Gerber holds a roughly 15-percent share."
  • "During the ’80s, formula prices rose by more than 150 percent, vastly outpacing increases in milk costs. By the middle of that decade, formula was absorbing 40 percent of WIC’s food budget, prompting shortfalls that shunted many eligible families to a waiting list."
  • "In the ’90s, the Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust, Monopolies and Business Rights; the Federal Trade Commission; and attorneys general from 19 states pursued formula manufacturers for price-fixing and illicit marketing. Multimillion-dollar fines were assessed, but no firm admitted wrongdoing. Even today, formula prices bear the imprint of yesteryear’s state-enabled gouging; according to a 2009 report by the Notre Dame economist David Betson, “the WIC program accounts for 91 percent of the increase in the growth of real formula prices” between 1981 and 2002."
Quotes
  • "In April 2012, Nestle acquired Pfizer's infant-nutrition unit, making it the biggest player in the infant formula market. Pfizer's infant-nutrition unit generates approximately 85% of its revenues from emerging markets. It was the third- and fourth-largest player in the Middle East & Africa region and the Asia-Pacific region, respectively."
  • " even though it has 20 times the revenue of Mead Johnson, Nestle has inferior margins. In fiscal 2013, Mead Johnson achieved a gross margin and an operating margin of 64% and 24%, respectively. Nestle delivered a gross margin of 48% and an operating margin of 14%. Mead Johnson's superior profitability speaks volumes about its competitive advantages in the infant nutrition segment. "
Quotes
  • "There is huge disparity in the cost of infant formula both within and between countries. The largest four companies are charging high prices for their so-called ‘premium products’ – especially in the growing Asian markets, where there is fierce competition for market share. For example, in Indonesia, the cost of the most expensive first infant formula we found on the market – Enfamil A+ (Mead Johnson Nutrition) – is four and a half times that of the economy brand formula SGM Ananda Presinutri 1 (Danone). Comparatively, in the UK, the most expensive powdered infant formula we found (Apta-mil Profutura 1) is more than one and a half times the price of the least expensive (Cow & Gate First Infant Milk 1), both of which are manufactured by Danone."
  • "This report represents the first investigation into the product range and price differences of infant formulas that the four largest BMS manufacturers (Nestlé, Danone, Mead Johnson Nutrition and Abbott)are placing on 14 global markets. It should be noted that, during the course of our research, Mead Johnson Nutrition was acquired by Reckitt Benckiser (RB). As a result of this transaction, Mead Johnson Nutrition is now a division of RB and has added brands such as Enfa and Nutramigen to RB’s portfolio. "
  • "Manufacturers charge very different prices in different countries for the same brand of infant formula. For example, Aptamil Profutura 1 (Danone) is on sale in the UK, Germany and China. In the UK, it costs 13 GBP per 800g (around 17 USD); in Germany, it costs nearly 20 EUR for 800g (around 24 USD); whereas in China, it costs 365 RMB for 900g (around 55 USD). This product is one of the most expensive powdered cow’s-milk-based infant formulas available in the UK – yet it costs more than three times the price in China."
  • "Statements from BMS companies indicate that specialised infant milks are a profitable business. Mead Johnson, speaking to the US Securities and Exchange Commission, said: ‘We design several solutions infant formulas to address common feeding tolerance problems in normal infants, including spitting-up, fussiness, gas and lactose intolerance. We market our solutions infant formulas for mild intolerance such as Gentlease ... under the Enfa family of brands name. Solutions infant formula products comprised 16%, 18%, and 19% of our infant formula net sales for the years ended 31 December, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.’260"
  • "Chinese families are paying the most and UK families the least for similar products. In the UK, monthly costs can range from 38–61 GBP; in the US, 148–263 USD; and in China, 747–1,899 RMB. Comparing across countries highlights the stark contrast in the amounts families are paying to formula-feed their children.261"
  • "Our investigation also came across a report of a person who worked in Nestlé Bangladesh, which provides an interesting insight into Nestlé’s pricing strategies. According to the report, ‘Nestlé sets infant product prices in comparison to competitors like Biomil and Prima’ and sets prices of its ‘infant products slightly higher than the competitors, in order to maintain a perception of superior quality’.265 In addition, Nestlé also takes its own product range into account when setting prices, and sets different prices for products within the same range. ‘This type of pricing strategy aims to maximize the sales of different products and the price of one product impacts the price of another’.266However, as ‘Nestlé is perceived to have good brand value’, they price similar products higher than their competitors ‘to create a perception of superior quality’.26"
  • "We have identified companies’ very sophisticated use of market research and social media to study consumer preferences. Such research seems to primarily focus on consumer affordability and willingness to pay, as there is no clear scientific justification for the very large price differences observed within brands on each market and within brands across different countries. Although not specifically included in this study, anecdotal evidence suggests similar issues in the actions of smaller manufacturers."
From Part 04
Quotes
  • "The ovulation prediction kits market held the larger share of the global fertility testing devices market in 2015. This is because ovulation kits provide more accurate results than natural fertility testing techniques. In addition, these kits are easier to use and less expensive than fertility monitors. However, the fertility monitors market is estimated to grow at the higher CAGR from 2015 to 2020."
  • "A number of factors such as decline in fertility rate owing to the rising first-time pregnancy age and high prevalence of PCOS (polycystic ovary syndrome) among North American women, increasing awareness about the benefits offered by ovulation monitors and fertility awareness methods (FAM) in successful conception among women, and the development of advanced low-cost devices are expected to support market growth in North America. "
Quotes
  • "The global fertility test market is expected to reach 583.1 million by 2023 from USD 411.8 million in 2018, at a CAGR of 7.2%. Growth in the fertility test market can be attributed to factors, such as increasing first-time pregnancy age, launch of advanced, easy-to-use fertility monitors with high accuracy, and increasing awareness about fertility testing."
  • "The fertility test market is segment into 4 major segment: Product, Mode of purchase, application, end user and region."
  • "Based on product, the fertility test market is segmented into OPK, fertility monitors, and male fertility testing products. In 2018, the ovulation predictor kits segment is expected to account for the largest share of the fertility test market. The large share can be attributed to their low cost and high efficacy, high preference for these kits, and rising median age of first-time pregnancies in women."
  • "Based on mode of purchase, the fertility test market is divided into two segments—prescription-based and non-prescription/OTC-based. In 2018, the non-prescription/OTC-based segment is expected to account for a larger share of the market. The large share can be attributed to factors such as the increasing patient preference for home- and remote monitoring, e-commerce availability, confidentiality, & accessibility of test results, and growing initiatives taken by leading market players to develop easy-to-use and accurate products."
  • "On the basis of application, the fertility test market is segmented into female fertility testing and male fertility testing. In 2018, the female fertility testing segment is expected to account for a larger share of the fertility test market. The large share can be attributed to factors such as decreasing female fertility rates, availability of a wide range of fertility testing options, and high cost of IVF procedures."
  • "The fertility test market, by end user, is segmented into home care settings and hospitals, fertility clinics, and others. In 2018, the home care settings segment is expected to account for the largest share of the fertility test market. The large share can be attributed to the decline of fertility rates in women and men, increasing need for continuous monitoring of health conditions, and growing preference for home and remote monitoring."
  • "The North America region is expected to account for the largest share during the forecast period. The report covers the fertility test market across four key geographies, namely, North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, and the Rest of the World (RoW). North America is expected to dominate the global fertility test market in 2018. The decline in fertility rate, rising first-time pregnancy age, and high prevalence of PCOS (polycystic ovary syndrome) among North American women are few of the major factors contributing the large share of this regional segment. Additionally, factors such as the growing use of fertility monitoring devices for contraception, rising awareness about the benefits of ovulation monitors through social media, marketing campaigns, and e-commerce sites are increasing the adoption of fertility test in this region."
  • "Growth in the fertility test market can be attributed to factors such as the increasing first-time pregnancy age in women, declining fertility rate among men and women, growing number of women suffering from disorders such as PCOS, emergence of advanced ovulation monitors, and increased awareness of fertility testing in both developed as well as developing countries. On the other hand, the unproven accuracy of urine-based ovulation monitors in women suffering from PCOS and the lesser precision to confirm ovulation using ovulation predictions kits are the factors that are expected to restrain market growth to a certain extent in the coming years."
  • "Swiss Precision Diagnostics (Switzerland) held the leading position in the global fertility testing devices market. The company is one of the leading manufacturers and suppliers of fertility/ovulation tests for women. Clearblue is the flagship product of the company and has a very strong brand presence in countries such as the US, the UK, and Europe. Along with this, the company’s wide distribution network and innovative marketing strategies are the key factors contributing to its dominant share in the market. With the aim to maintain its dominant share in this highly competitive market, SPD focuses on product launches as its key growth strategy. "
  • " In 2017, Swiss Precision Diagnostics (Switzerland) launched its Clearblue Connected Ovulation Test System In 2017, NFI Consumer Healthcare (US) a division of Gregory Pharmaceutical Holdings (US) completed the acquisition of e.p.t over-the-counter pregnancy test kit brand from Prestige Brands Holdings. In 2017, Fairhaven Health (US), launched TempCue, a basal body temperature (BBT) thermometer. In 2016, Fertility Focus (UK) launched OvuSense App. "
Quotes
  • "Fertility monitors measure various body parameters, both physical and chemical, to predict the ovulation time in advance. An alternative method that is used to find precise time to conceive is ovulation testing kits. These kits rely on chemical parameters to predict the ovulation period such as the level of estrogen and luteinizing hormone (LH) in urine. However, these kits give to have negative results due to interference of gynecological conditions such as polycystic ovarian disease (PCOD) and infections. Fertility monitoring devices, on the other hand, offer more precise evaluation of the ovulation time in advance. Fertility monitoring devices work on the principle of the estrogen and LH level in urine, concentration of salts or electrolytes in saliva, basal body temperature, and other chemical and physical parameters."
  • "Technical advancements in fertility monitors such as connected devices, continuous monitoring, precise evaluation of the fertility period, and ease of operation in home use are likely to drive adoption of these monitors in the near future. Increasing prevalence of infertility and rising health care expenditure in developed as well as emerging markets are leading factors driving the fertility monitoring devices market. However, fertility monitoring devices are expensive as compared to widely available ovulation testing kits. Overdependence on ovulation testing kits and their wide availability across the globe are likely to restrain the global fertility monitoring devices market during the forecast period."
  • " In terms of product, the market can be classified into urine-based devices, saliva-based devices, basal body temperature-based devices, and others."
  • "Among these, urine-based devices work on the principle of the estrogen and LH level in urine, which makes them more accurate. During the ovulation period, the basal body temperature changes, which is measured by basal body temperature devices to predict the ovulation period. The others segment includes devices that use various body parameters such as perspiration, body temperature, and pulse rate to evaluate the fertility period. "
  • "Based on technology, the market can be classified into continuous monitoring devices and fixed-interval monitoring devices. Continuous monitoring devices are generally connected and wearable devices that continuously feed the data of body parameters such the basal body temperature. In terms of end-user, the global fertility monitoring devices market can be classified into hospitals, clinics, and home care settings. Ease of operation of advanced fertility monitoring devices is driving their adoption in home care settings."
Quotes
  • "The survey yielded 241 responses. We discarded one response so all sample demographics should be out of 240. We have doubled checked and they are all calculated out of 240. The mean age of the respondents was 29 years (range 18–61). The majority of respondents were educated to undergraduate level (n = 111, 46%) and were white (n = 220, 92%). Most of the respondents were from the UK (n = 195, 81%) although the survey received a global response."
  • "Age group (years)  17–24 115 (47.9)  25–36 88 (36.7)  37–42 16 (6.7)  43–48 5 (2.1)  49–54 9 (3.8)  55–61 7 (2.9)"
  • "Out of the 236 respondents to this section, almost two-thirds reported that they do not use FTAs (n = 146, 62%) and 38% (n = 89) reported using them. Of the 89 women who reported using FTAs, Clue was the most popular app as 12% (n = 11) of respondents reported using it. The average frequency of FTA usage was between 1 and 2 days a week (n = 18, 20%) and every few weeks (n = 35, 39%). Some women also reported using the apps several times a day (n = 5, 6%), about once a day (n = 14, 16%), 3–5 days a week (n = 12, 14%) and less often than every few weeks (n = 4, 5%)."
  • "From the survey data, four main motivations for the use of FTAs were: To observe cycle (n = 63, 72%); To conceive (n = 30, 34%); To inform fertility treatment (n = 10, 12%); As contraception (n = 3, 4%)."
  • "A total of 11% of respondents reported ‘other’ reason for use. Some examples of these included: to be prepared for menstruation; to track hormonal acne and mood swings; monitoring successful conception; and trying to see patterns to link to other symptoms. "
  • "Of the 89 respondents who reported using FTAs, 98% find the apps useful. There were 73 open text comments as to how and why the apps are useful/not useful."
  • "Responses to Q15 ‘Why do you find the app useful/not useful?’ coded into themes. ‘Useful’ Themes ‘Not Useful’ Themes Tracking helps to be prepared/plan around period Inaccurate (usually reported in women with irregular periods) Informative Upsetting and cause anxiety (usually in women who are having fertility difficulties) Tracking of other function e.g. sleep, mood and see how it correlates to cycle Reminders are annoying Notifications and reminders To maintain a history of cycles Easy to store, access, share data Predicts fertile days, can plan or avoid sex Community provides reassurance "
  • "When asked if they would make any changes to the apps they are using, 30 respondents provided suggestions."
  • "Recommended changes to FTAs coded into 12 main themes. 1 Eliminate ads 2 Add more mood choices 3 Make it easier to log data 4 More information (links to current research, relevant forums, fertility information, contraception information, general women’s health information) 5 Improved accuracy 6 Features for someone going through fertility treatment 7 Add reminders 8 Add note-taking feature 9 More specialised recommendations 10 Link to other health apps 11 Manually adjust data 12 Change design"
  • "Responses to Q18 ‘If you do not use FTAs, please explain why’ coded into nine themes. 1 Never knew about them 2 On contraception or not sexually active – do not see the need 3 Haven’t found one to use that I like yet 4 Menopausal or sterilised 5 Do not trust them 6 Use a diary/regular calendar 7 Apps are not user friendly/do not like them 8 Terrible with technology/do not have phone storage space 9 Too stressful/too much pressure (for women trying to get pregnant)"
  • "Follow-up interviews The follow-up interviews provided deeper insights. The themes that were identified highlighted that women seek FTAs with more accurate prediction methods and more information. Women felt FTAs offer the best method to track fertility because of the large amount of data they can store and the convenient accessibility that smartphones provide. There was a level of dissatisfaction when it came to design. Most women had suggestions about how to improve both the content and delivery of these apps."
  • "The main limitation of this study is that the sample size of the survey portion of the study is very small, even ignoring the fact that only 89 of the 241 respondents actually used an FTA. In addition, we cannot be sure that women’s attitudes to FTAs can be disentangled from their view of their effectiveness."
Quotes
  • "Mira Fertility Tracking Monitor This tracking device is among the best fertility monitors due to its ease of use and intuitive interface. The device tracks the levels of luteinizing hormone in your urine and predicts the ovulation and chances of conception based on this info. So, you just need to insert the test strip with a urine sample into the Mira analyzer and let it do the job. The analyzer will automatically sync the data with the app — available both on iOS and Android — and give you the ‘ovulation score’ to determine the success of your conception on any given day. Along with that, the Mira can predict your cycle based on gathered info and provide you with personalized fertility advice. Pros Cons Makes predictions based on the most accurate sign of ovulation Works with only one marker of ovulation Convenient and intuitive app A bit pricey for its functionality FDA certified Requires buying test strips Comes with a rechargeable battery Predicts up to 6 fertile days"
  • "Femometer Vinca Basal Thermometer for Ovulation The thermometer automatically activates when you pull the lid off and deactivates when you put it back, so it’s incredibly easy to use. Moreover, it’s pretty fast and sensitive: taking the measurements won’t require more than 30 seconds, and the device will detect even the slightest temperature fluctuations. A subtle lipstick-like design allows for easy carrying your device around and measuring the BBT when needed. Pros Cons Discreet design; can be carried around with ease Limited to measuring one parameter only Provides accurate measurements Has a bit noisy alert Affordable Made of quality materials"
  • "Ovacue Fertility Monitor uses saliva and cervical mucus testing to determine your fertile window. This eliminates the need for buying test strips — which is good for both your wallet and our planet — while still giving you the precise results you need. So, the monitor has two sensors, oral and vaginal, and detects estrogen-impacted electrolyte changes in the corresponding fluids. Pros Cons Provides accurate readings Might be a bit complicated to use at the beginning Easy to maintain and user-friendly On the expensive side Gives you up to 7 days of advance notice Testing takes just a few seconds Great for women with an irregular cycle"
  • "Lady Comp Fertility Computer This device allows you to track the basal temperature and has a 99.3% level of effectiveness. To take the measurement, you need to place the thermometer under your tongue. The manufacturer suggests that you need to take measurements every morning at about the same time. Also, there’s an M-button you need to tap when you have menstruation. Pros Cons Quick and easy-to-take measurements You need to input some data by yourself Has a built-in alarm to remind you to take the test Buttons are a bit small Predicts up to 6 fertile days Quite pricey Stores your data for 6 months Can be personalized"
  • "ClearBlue Fertility Monitor The device tracks the levels of estrogen and luteinizing hormone in your urine and can store up to 6 of your past cycles in its memory. This makes the Clearblue very suitable for women with irregular cycles, as well as for those whose cycle length slightly varies from time to time. The device itself has an easy-to-understand interface and convenient touch-screen, which makes it incredibly easy to use. Along with tracking your fertile window, it allows you to input the days when you have your period or had sex. So, eventually, you get a structured record which you can discuss with your gynecologist. Pros Cons Tracks levels of two key hormones instead of LH only Test strips are sold separately Can store up to 6 cycles in memory Requires at least one month of use before it can give you precise data Allows you to track your period as well Recommended by many specialists Suitable for women with irregular cycles "