Video: Aldi’s Swap & Save ad which the ASA has banned.
The TV ad featured a woman claiming to save £45 in a week by swapping from her regular supermarket to Aldi. Text on the screen stated that “88 out of 100 people saved” when they tried the swap and save challenge and asked “Could you Swap and Save?”
Asda questioned whether the ad could deceive consumers because it claimed the basis of the comparison was unclear, the products selected in the comparison could give Aldi an advantage, the type of products could not be verified and the data period was out of date. It also challenged whether the ad implied savings achieved in one month could be repeated in another month, a claim it believed could not be substantiated.
In defence, Aldi said it had extensive discussions with Clearcast and its ad agency McCann Manchester in order to comply with ad regulations. Aldi claimed the comparisons were “objective” and as “fair as possible” and there was no reason to suggest savings were not typical and could not be repeated.
However, the Advertising Standards Authority upheld all Asda’s complaints and banned the ad. In future, Aldi will have to make clear the basis for its comparisons and provide substantiation for savings claims made, as well as providing full details of the comparison either on a website or via a postal address that viewers can write to.
Aldi says it is “disappointed” by the ASA’s decision but that it remains “confident it offers some of the best value and lowest prices in the UK”.
An Aldi spokesperson says: “It is no surprise that other supermarkets are trying to find issue with our campaign as we continue to impress shoppers with both the price and quality of what we sell.
“We remain committed to honestly telling people they can swap to Aldi and save money on their grocery shopping.”
The Aldi ruling is latest is a series of tit for tat complaints from supermarkets over their rivals’ price comparisons.
Earlier this week, Sainsbury’s won the right to a judicial review of the ASA’s ruling that Tesco’s campaign for its Price Match scheme were not misleading.