An increasing number of quick-service chains have turned to taste tests recently in an attempt to give their ad campaigns a little more zest.


But some experts warn that such tactics could end up leaving a bad taste in consumers’ mouths if not executed carefully. 


Wendy’s promoted its new Natural-Cut French Fries by advertising its victory over McDonald’s fries in a national taste test. Meanwhile, sister chain Arby’s conducted its own taste test for the Market Fresh Grilled Chicken and Pecan Salad sandwich and wrap, offering one free to consumers and then asking them to compare it to Subway’s Orchard Chicken Salad sub by voting for their favorite in a Facebook poll.


In the chicken segment, Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen declared a taste-test victory over KFC last month, only to see Church’s Chicken bring up another taste test in commercials claiming to beat Popeyes in a matchup of spicy fried chicken.


The free exposure for competitors’ products and confusion arising from competing claims pose risks for taste-test advertising as significant as the rewards they could bring when done right, marketing experts said.


Dan Dahlen, managing director of Columbus, Ohio-based Restaurant Marketing Team, said taste tests can create immediate interest and spike short-term sales, but wind up sacrificing a more effective message over the long haul. 


“I understand why we’re here,” he said, “and it could be for all the wrong reasons. It’s … doing whatever [it takes] to quickly turn around sales.”


Aiming high


Wendy’s same-store sales for the first quarter ended April 3 were flat in the United States but ticked up slightly in April, which Wendy’s/Arby’s Group chief executive Roland Smith said resulted in part from the chain’s new French fries.


“In April we promoted our new sea salt fries,” Smith said during the company’s earnings call. “McDonald’s fries had been considered the gold standard in QSR, so we believe this is a huge win that will pay dividends over the next several years.”


Gary Stibel, founder and chief executive of Westport, Conn.-based New England Consulting Group, said Wendy’s ads touting the brand’s taste-test win over McDonald’s were a “sorely needed” response to McDonald’s steady performance.


“Wendy’s ads are very persuasive and deliver an important message most people don’t know — that their fries taste better than McDonald’s and presumably better than Burger King’s,” Stibel said. “It’s giving the consumer permission to believe it. They’re not just saying, ‘Trust me,’ because they’re advertising the fact that they have sea salt.”


But Dahlen said restaurants risk downplaying their brands in comparative ads by mentioning competitors by name — especially since so often it’s smaller brands trying to steal share from the biggest chain in their segment.


Chains can’t avoid those problems by inventing a generic competitor to stand in for “the brand that shall not be named,” because confusion could still result. Years ago Domino’s Pizza advertised its Oven Baked Subs against Subway’s sandwiches, but the pizza chain’s commercials made fun of a straw man.


“Domino’s compared itself against some yellow sub shop called Wrong Way,” Dahlen said. “But people knew it was Subway and so were doing the mental exercise of, ‘Oh, they’re talking about Subway.’ In that case, you’re trying to talk about your product, and they’re not listening.”


However, he said, Subway’s commercials showing people popping buttons and breaking hammocks by getting fat off generic fast food work without name-dropping competitors.


“It’s ‘us versus them,’ with ‘them’ being all of QSR,” Dahlen said. “It’s clear they’re talking about burger, pizza and chicken joints.”


Who’s really No. 1?


Quick-service chicken chains now have a case of “us versus them versus them.” Last month Popeyes reminded consumers about its taste-test win over KFC’s Original Recipe Chicken in August 2010 with a new buy-one-get-one offer. But then Church’s declared victory over Popeyes in yet another taste test, this time focused on spicy fried chicken.


All the competing comparisons are muddling Popeyes’ and Church’s claims to better taste, Dahlen said. 


“It creates confusion, and at the end of the day, the consumer’s going to be the judge,” he said. “Somebody needs to step out of that glut and take a leadership role and say, ‘Enough.’”


The logjam of chicken chain claims reminded Dahlen of the burger wars in the early ’80s in which he competed as a marketing executive at Wendy’s. Burger King claimed its Whopper was preferred to Wendy’s and McDonald’s signature burgers, he said. McDonald’s stayed above the fray, while Wendy’s hit back with the famous “Where’s the Beef?” campaign. After Wendy’s fought off the taste-test ads, all three chains got back to talking about themselves, he said.


“It does show the power of making the right comparison at the right time,” Dahlen said. “If there’s a glut of comparative ads with the top three pointing fingers at each other, it’s confusing. Then the taste-test ads can be just as ineffective as anything else.”


Stibel said taste-test claims can cause skepticism as well, because consumers are much more savvy about advertising.


“Today we’re marketing to marketers,” he said. “Men and women have been to focus groups and know that even the president uses them. They get it.”


That’s why Domino’s effected a sales turnaround in 2010 with an honest campaign in which the brand admitted consumers didn’t like its old pizza, Stibel said.


“They compared themselves to themselves and bought credibility by saying their pizza was bad,” he said. “They then delivered with a product superior to what Domino’s had been. Too much restaurant advertising is soft and warm and cuddly, and nobody remembers whom it’s for.”


Contact Mark Brandau at mark.brandau@penton.com.