sample="quota" bates="510325833" isource="rjr" decade="1990" class="ui" date="19920104" R. JR CONFIDENTIAL PRODUCT RESEARCH REPORT January 4, 1992 BIAD #92-31973 To: Mr. Barry Saintsing Mr. L. J. Inman From: Anita Scism TOBACCO ALTERNATE FILLER SUBSTITUTE QUALITATIVE VARIABLE SCREENING REPORT Copies to: R&D Library BIAC File Route to: Ms. C. S. Hunter Ms. M. C. Swaim Published by the Business Information and Analysis Department, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. USA, Winston Salem NC 27102. TOBACCO SUBSTITUTE FFNM85 SAVINGS QV'S Management Summary BIAD 92-31973 Background R&D is investigating tobacco substitutes as an alternate filler for the savings brands. Several types of puffed grains have been explored and internal testing has indicated that puffed rice toasted to match the color of tobacco has the most potential for development. Because this alternate filler is 80-90% starch and does not contain nicotine, products with puffed rice have been found to increase smoothness and decease harshness. An additional advantage of tobacco substitutes is the substantial cost savings. Because of its very large filling capacity, considerable reductions of tobacco filler is possible. The raw material cost for rice is $.25 to $.50 per pound compared to approximately $4.00 per pound for G19, and $2.00-$4.00 for tobacco; With a 5% inclusion rate of puffed rice, tobacco weight reduction could be as high as 6 to 12%. Objective The objective of this test is to provide initial consumer direction for development of alternate fillers for Savings brands. R&D is particularly interested in the effects of three different levels of tobacco substitute (1%, 5%, 10%). Key Findings ACCEPTANCE For %70+ and mean thermometer, the Control and the 5% prototype were rated superior to the 10% prototype. Also, for %70+, the Control was rated higher than the 1% product. ATTRIBUTES There were no differences across products for strength and tobacco taste. However, the 5% product had an advantage of less harshness and a better aftertaste than all other products (the control, 1% and 10% prototypes.) For smoothness, the control and the 5% prototype were parity, and both were smoother than the 1% and 10% prototypes. The 10% prototype burned more quickly (a disadvantage) than all other products tested. Also, the 5% prototype burned more quickly than the control. Conclusions/Recommendations Prototype C (with 5% rice substitution) has the potential to maintain parity with the control for acceptance supported by parity on strength, tobacco taste, and smoothness perceptions. Additionally, the 5% product decreases harshness and leaves a better aftertaste -advantages versus the control. R&D is conducting a risk assessment (per PRISMS) to determine if the rice filler substitute can be mixed in with G-13 or even completely replace G-13. Anita Sciscm Business Information Analysis Department