Ad description
A website for Simba Sleep, www.simbasleep.com, seen on 26 July 2023 included several webpages for the “Simba Hybrid Mattress”, “Simba Hybrid Pro Mattress”, “Simba Hybrid Luxe Mattress” and the “Go Hybrid Mattress”. Each product page had a crossed-out price alongside a lower price in bold.
The crossed-out reference price for the “Simba Hybrid Mattress” was £1,249. Next to it was a lower price in bold of £749.40.
The crossed-out reference price for the “Simba Hybrid Pro Mattress” was £1,759. Next to it was a lower price in bold of £1,055.40.
The crossed-out reference price for the “Simba Hybrid Luxe Mattress” was £2,409. Next to it was a lower price in bold of £1,445.40.
The crossed-out reference price for the “Go Hybrid Mattress” was £2,399. Next to it was a lower price in bold of £1,439.40.
Each product listing stated a savings claim of 40%.
Issue
Emma Matratzen GmbH challenged whether the crossed-out reference prices and associated savings claims were misleading.
Response
Simba Sleep Ltd said they had conducted a review of their promotional pricing strategy. They explained that they offered products at the relevant price for a period of time to establish that price as the genuine selling price.
Simba Sleep provided sales data for the Simba Hybrid Mattress, Simba Hybrid Pro Mattress, Simba Hybrid Luxe Mattress and the Go Hybrid Mattress from 26 January 2023 to 26 July 2023. They said the pricing data for the first three mattresses in April and May 2023 were broken down into the three variants of the product; namely, the GRS, non-GRS and Stratos version, which related to the mattresses having cooling properties or an anti-allergenic mattress cover, which were new products that launched.
Simba also said they were committed to complying with the CAP Code and had taken steps to amend their approach to future promotions.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA considered that consumers would understand that the crossed-out prices represented the usual selling prices of the products at the time the ad was seen. We considered that they would understand the 40% savings claims to represent genuine savings against those usual selling prices. We understood that the price referenced for the Simba Go Mattress was in relation only to that mattress, and that the prices referenced in the ad for the Simba Hybrid Mattress, Simba Hybrid Pro Mattress and the Simba Hybrid Luxe mattress were for the GRS-versions of the products which were mattresses with an anti-allergenic cover. However, we considered it was not clear from the ad to which version of the mattress the price related.
We assessed the sales data provided by Simba Sleep for the GRS-versions of the Simba Hybrid Mattress, Simba Hybrid Pro Mattress and the Simba Hybrid Luxe Mattress, since those were the versions of the mattresses that appeared in the ad, alongside the respective price claims. We also assessed the sales data for the Simba Go Mattress, which did not have multiple versions.
We received pricing data for the GRS-versions of the Simba Hybrid Mattress and Simba Hybrid Pro Mattress, which covered a period of 97 days, and the GRS version of the Simba Hybrid Luxe Mattress which covered a period of 98 days. As the GRS-versions of the mattresses were introduced at different times, there was a slight discrepancy with the pricing periods for those mattresses. We were also provided with pricing data for the Simba Go Mattress, which covered a period of 182 days. Additionally, the data also showed the number of unit sales for each mattress at its promotional price and reference price.
We then assessed the data provided to us. Both the GRS version of the Simba Hybrid Mattress and the Simba Hybrid Luxe, were sold at the reference price as quoted in the ad for 51 days each, and then at the discounted price (£749.40 and £1,445.40 respectively) for 51 days, over the pricing period. The GRS version of the Simba Hybrid Pro Mattress was sold at the reference price for 50 days, and at the discounted price of £1,055.40 for 51 days. The Simba Go Mattress was sold at the reference price for 74 days, and then at the discounted price of £1,439.40 for 106 days. The data showed that for all three of the GRS-versions of the mattresses, the prices fluctuated between the reference price and the promotional price for a period of seven days at a time. Starting from when the GRS-versions were introduced, they were sold at the promotional price for seven days, then at the higher reference price for seven days, returned to the promotional price for seven days, and was then sold at the higher reference price, which was repeated over the pricing period the data covered.We considered that two of the four mattresses - the Simba Hybrid Pro Mattress and the Simba Go Mattress - had been sold at the lower promotional price for longer than at the reference price quoted in the ad, and that Simba Sleep had therefore not established the higher price as the usual selling price of those mattresses. The other two mattresses - the Simba Hybrid Mattress and the Simba Hybrid Luxe Mattress - were both sold at the promotional price and the reference price for the same length of time (51 days each). Similarly, we considered Simba Sleep had not demonstrated that the reference price was the usual selling price of those mattresses. We also considered that the price fluctuations between the reference price and the promotional price, where it was sold at the reference price and the promotional price for seven days at a time, would likely affect consumers’ perceptions of the value of the offer, and whether the claimed saving was genuine.
We next considered the number of unit sales for the four mattresses sold at the reference prices as quoted in the ad in comparison to the number sold at the promotional prices over the pricing period supplied for each mattress. The data showed 35 units of the Simba Hybrid Mattress were sold at the reference price and 1,283 units were sold at the promotional price. Of the Simba Hybrid Pro mattress 44 units were sold at the reference price and 1,516 units were sold at the promotional price. Whilst 46 units of the Simba Hybrid Luxe Mattress were sold at the reference price and 1,014 units were sold at the promotional price. Lastly, two units of the Simba Go Mattress were sold at the reference price and 18 units when at the promotional price. We considered that the unit sales data did not therefore demonstrate that there were significant sales at the higher selling price outside of the times the mattresses were sold at a promotional price, which was relevant in establishing whether the higher prices were the usual selling prices.
Notwithstanding that, we understood that the GRS-versions of the three mattresses were only released in April and May 2023, and that they had not been sold before that. The CAP Code allowed marketers to sell products at introductory prices which were lower than the subsequent usual selling price. However, it had to be clear that the lower price was an introductory price, rather than a discount against a price that had been established as the current usual selling price. As referenced above, we considered that the data supplied was insufficient to demonstrate that the reference price was the usual selling price. Also, we further considered that the ad did not make clear that the lower price for the GRS-versions of the mattresses were introductory offers, rather than implying they were discounts against the usual selling price, which we considered was misleading and therefore a breach of the Code.Because consumers were likely to understand that the savings claims in the ad represented genuine savings against the usual selling prices of the products, and because the evidence did not substantiate the savings claims in the ad or demonstrate that the higher reference prices were the usual selling prices of the products, we concluded those reference prices and associated savings claims were misleading.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation) and 3.17 (Prices).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Simba Sleep Ltd to ensure their future savings claims did not mislead and to ensure they substantiated savings claims against the usual selling price of their products.
