A National Advertising Review Board Panel Recommends Ashland Discontinue Claims

Print this Article | Send to Colleague

A National Advertising Review Board (NARB) panel has recommended that Ashland Inc. discontinue two advertising claims for Valvoline motor oil, including claims that Ashland offers the industry’s first and/or only engine guarantee and that only Valvoline guarantees engines for up to 300,000 miles.

The claims at issue were initially challenged by Pennzoil-Quaker State Company, doing business as SOPUS Products, before the National Advertising Division (NAD) of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. NAD found that Ashland provided a reasonable basis to support its claims that Valvoline’s guarantee is "the industry’s 1st and ONLY Engine Guarantee." NAD recommended that Ashland modify its "Valvoline Engine Guarantee" headline to more accurately reflect that the guarantee is limited, and Ashland did not appeal that recommendation.

Pennzoil-Quaker State appealed NAD’s findings to NARB, the appellate unit of the advertising industry’s system of self-regulation.

The NARB panel reviewed the challenged claims, which appeared in media releases and print, broadcast and point-of-sale advertising. Challenged claims included:

• Only Valvoline guarantees your engine for up to 300,000 miles
• Valvoline is introducing the first engine guarantee up to ... 300,000 miles
• On May 28th, Valvoline will introduce the industry’s 1st and ONLY engine guarantee
• The Industry’s ONLY Engine Guarantee!

In its analysis of the evidence, the panel noted that both the Valvoline Engine Guarantee and the Pennzoil-Quaker State warranty essentially cover the same "oil-wetted" parts for the same amount of time.

The primary difference between the two programs is that the Pennzoil-Quaker State program requires a showing that failure of the "oil-wetted" part was due to improper lubrication, while the Valvoline Engine Guarantee program requires a showing that failure of the "oil-wetted" part was not due to other engine systems or causes.

The panel determined that the difference between the two programs was neither significant nor consumer relevant. Further, the panel found that differences between the two programs were not appropriately conveyed by Ashland’s claim that it is the only motor oil manufacturer offering an engine guarantee.

The panel noted that NAD had earlier recommended Ashland "modify the headline, ‘Valvoline Engine Guarantee’ to more accurately reflect the fact that the guarantee is limited, a finding Ashland did not appeal.

"It is important that Ashland both conspicuously disclose the limitations and conditions of its guarantee and also avoid any implication that it is providing a guarantee for the entire engine," the panel stated.

Ashland, in its advertiser’s statement, said "Valvoline will incorporate these recommendations in revising its practices and has discontinued use of first and only claims in future advertising and promotional materials."