Colgate v. Procter & Gamble Company

With the help of an Analysis Group team, Procter & Gamble (P&G) prevailed in litigation involving false advertising claims. Plaintiff Colgate-Palmolive alleged that P&G's comparative advertisements for its teeth-whitening products, Crest Whitestrips® and Crest Night Effects™, contained misleading and disparaging statements about Colgate's Simply White® and Simply White® Night. Colgate sought damages of between $79 million and $81 million from reduced product sales and profits. Colgate said its damages were calculated under two scenarios: in the first, P&G reduced its advertising budget by the amount it spent on comparative ads; in the second, P&G spent its entire television advertising budget on noncomparative ads. Under the direction of Senior Advisor Keith R. Ugone, an Analysis Group team evaluated Colgate's econometric model and claimed-damages calculations by analyzing A.C. Nielsen scanner data and CMR media-related data. Team members, including Managing Principals Marc Van Audenrode, Maureen Chakraborty, and Lauren Kindler and Principals Jimmy Royer and Na Dawson, demonstrated that Colgate's model contained serious flaws, rendering its damages estimates unreliable. The team was retained by P&G's counsel, the law firms of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP and Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP. Following a three-week trial, the jury rejected Colgate's claim that P&G's comparative advertising contained misleading whitening efficacy content, and awarded no damages to Colgate.