BBB National Programs Archive

NAD Examines Kraft Claim, Following Unilever Challenge

New York, NY – April 16, 2009 – The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus has determined that Kraft Foods Global Inc., has provided a reasonable basis for the claim “ “All-Out Squeeze,” made for its Kraft All-Out Mayo, Real Mayonnaise; Kraft All-Out Light Mayo, Reduced Fat Mayonnaise and Kraft Miracle Whip.

NAD, the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum, examined the claim following a challenge by Unilever United States.

Unilever contended that the “All-Out” brand name implies that no measurable residue will be left in the advertiser’s bottles after normal use, and, since consumers will not be able to expel 100 percent of the product from the “All-Out Squeeze” containers, the brand name constitutes a false and misleading claim.

The advertiser argued that the “All-Out” claim is qualified by the phrase “Great Taste, Less Waste” adding that, when viewed in context and coupled with common consumer experience with such products, a reasonable consumer will not interpret the “All-Out” claim to mean that literally 100 percent of the mayonnaise will be expelled from the container.  Instead, the advertiser argued, the reasonable consumer will expect that more of the mayonnaise will come out of the “All-Out” container than other mayonnaise squeeze containers.  NAD agreed with the advertiser. 

In reaching this determination, NAD reaffirmed its general rule with respect to product names: absent extrinsic evidence that consumers have been confused or misled, NAD is reluctant to require an advertiser to change the name of a product simply because a challenger speculates that it might be misleading. In addition, NAD has recognized that reasonable consumers appreciate the hyperbolic nature of many product names.

NAD noted in its decision that neither party submitted consumer perception evidence regarding the consumer takeaway from the challenged claim. NAD, therefore, used its own experienced judgment to determine the reasonable messages conveyed by the advertisement. 

In support of its “All-Out” claim the advertiser submitted an evacuation study conducted in February 2007 before the launch of the “All-Out Squeeze” line.  The evacuation test data demonstrates that the advertiser’s squeeze packaging systems achieve evacuation rates of approximately 96 percent to 99 percent, which means that approximately one-third of a tablespoon to 2 tablespoons of product were left in the container.

In addition, the advertiser noted that an independent and comparable evacuation test of the Hellman’s “Easy Out!” squeeze package concluded that only about 89 percent of the mayonnaise could be evacuated from that package. 

The challenger did not provide NAD with any criticisms of the advertiser’s testing, but submitted its own evacuation testing demonstrating that both the Kraft 24-ounce “All-Out Squeeze” and the Hellman’s 24-ounce “Easy Out!” bottles achieved evacuation rates of 95 percent. 

The challenger was unable to show that the advertiser’s evidence was materially flawed, or, that it had more reliable evidence demonstrating a different result.  For all of these reasons, NAD concluded that the advertiser provided a reasonable basis for its “All-Out Squeeze” claim.

Kraft, in its advertiser’s statement, said the company appreciates NAD’s careful consideration of this matter.  “We are gratified that NAD has found that Kraft’s laudatory All-Out Squeeze brand name is properly qualified and supported.  Kraft is a strong supporter of the self-regulatory process and thanks NAD for its efforts,” the company said.