Ad description

A direct mailing stated "half term HALF PRICE on selected toys from 16th October to 4th November 2012".  A number of product images were displayed with the original price crossed out and the sale price listed below.  At the bottom of the mailing, text stated "All products are subject to availability while stocks last".

Issue

The complainant, who had tried to purchase the Happy Land Village, challenged the availability of the advertised products, because she had found that it was out of stock, along with a number of other products featured in the ad.

Response

Early Learning Centre Ltd (ELC) told us that during the October 2011 'half term half price' promotion, the HappyLand Zoo, which was the only HappyLand product included in the promotion that year, had shown a sales uplift of 773%.  They advised that, based on that information, they had estimated that sales of the HappyLand range of products would increase from a base level of 450 units per week on average, to 3800 units per week, but that sales had in fact increased to 9846 units per week, which was an uplift of 2138%.  They said sales were monitored by their merchandising and allocation teams and that, where stock was available, the allocation team would move it around daily, but that on that occasion the stock sold through so quickly that there was no additional stock to move around the channels. They confirmed that the mailing in question had only been sent out once on 15/16 October and that their website had been amended after the product went out of stock. They said they would be using data from the October 2012 'half-term half price' promotion when planning their promotional activity for the 2013 autumn/winter season and that they did not want to disappoint their customers.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted that ELC had based the estimated demand for HappyLand products on a previous 50% off promotion, which had also taken place over October half term, and that the increase in demand had been significantly higher during the 2012 promotion than it was in 2011.  Because we accepted that the mailing had only been sent out once, prior to the start of the promotion, and we considered that ELC had acted reasonably in estimating demand based on data from a similar promotion that had been run the previous year, we concluded that they had made a reasonable estimate of demand and that they had held sufficient stock to meet that expected demand.

We investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules  3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.  (Misleading advertising),  3.27 3.27 Marketers must make a reasonable estimate of demand for advertised products.  (Availability) and  8.2 8.2 Promoters must conduct their promotions equitably, promptly and efficiently and be seen to deal fairly and honourably with participants and potential participants. Promoters must avoid causing unnecessary disappointment.    8.9 8.9 Phrases such as “subject to availability” do not relieve promoters of their obligation to do everything reasonable to avoid disappointing participants.  and  8.10 8.10 Promoters must be able to demonstrate that they have made a reasonable estimate of the likely response and either that they were capable of meeting that response or that consumers had sufficient information, presented clearly and in a timely fashion, to make an informed decision on whether or not to participate - for example regarding any limitation on availability and the likely demand.  (Sales promotions) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.1     3.27     8.10     8.2     8.9    


More on