Abstract

The case “Amul vs. Kwality Walls – Ice Cream Ad War” talks about the repercussions of the controversial TVC and print media ads put up by Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation (GCMMF), makers of Amul ice cream. The ads prompted Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL), makers of ‘Kwality Walls’ frozen dessert and ice creams, along with Vadilal Industries Ltd. and Vadilal Diary International Ltd. to file a case in the Bombay High Court against Amul for product disparagement. HUL and its co-petitioners later won the case, thus preventing the controversial ads from being aired. The case starts off with a description of the controversial ads, which mainly talked about ice creams being a healthier option than frozen desserts. The case also delves into the reasons that prompted Amul to air the ads and the benefits it intended to gain from it. The case then highlights how the ad war was in reality a disguise for an ongoing brand war between HUL and Amul for market share in the ice cream market.

Learning Objectives

The case is structured to achieve the following Learning Objectives:

• Analyze the different forms of advertising appeals
• Explore the advertising ethics involved in comparative advertising
• Scrutinize the elements in an advertisement that could lead to product disparagement
• Evaluate the impact of ads in raising consumer awareness

Keywords

Amul; Kwality Walls; Brand War; Ad War; Advertising Laws and Ethics; Comparative Advertising; Disparaging Advertising; Consumer Awareness; Advertising Appeals; Product Disparagement; Brand Positioning; Brand Strength; Market Competition; Court Case; Labeling