William Grant And Sons India Private Limited - Glenfiddich

Recommendation: Upheld | Medium: Suo Moto

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the advertisement. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail and submitted their response. The advertiser in their response stated that the advertisement does not promote alcoholic beverages or Glenfiddich whisky. The advertisement pertains solely to their brand line extension, “House of Glenfiddich – Art, Travel & Beyond”, positioned as a luxury lifestyle brand. The brand extension launched on March 31, 2023, operates through exclusive stores in India and an online platform, and continues to engage in art, travel, design, and experiential luxury. The advertiser further stated that, due to internal corporate policies, they are unable to provide details of advertising expenditure or the Advertising-to-Turnover Ratio, but submitted that the turnover documentation already provided demonstrates the legitimate market presence and sale of the brand extension. In support of their response, the advertiser submitted a CA certified year wise turnover for the brand line extension. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the YouTube advertisement. (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AKiDQr4Rz0Q) considered the complaint and the advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that the advertiser is promoting the brand line extension “House of Glenfiddich”, positioned as a luxury lifestyle brand, and present in the market for more than two years, having been launched in March 2023. The advertiser submitted a CA certificate providing year-wise turnover for the brand extension. Upon review, the CCC noted that the turnover figures for FY 2022–23, FY 2023–24, and FY 2024–25 are based on audited financial statements, while the turnover for FY 2025–26 (April 2025 to February 2026) is unaudited. The CA certified figures indicate that the brand extension has generated turnover; however, the CCC observed that it does not meet the scale required under the Brand Extension Guidelines to qualify as a valid brand extension. Regarding the requirement related to advertising spends, the CCC noted the advertiser’s response, wherein they stated that, due to internal corporate policies, detailed information on advertising expenditure or the Advertising-to-Turnover Ratio was not provided, but that the turnover documentation submitted reflects the brand extension’s market presence. The CCC referred to the ASCI Guidelines for Qualification of Brand Extension – Product or Service, which state: “The scale of advertising for such an extension should be proportionate to the sales of that extension. Hence, the Advertising budget for such a brand extension should not exceed 200% of sales turnover in year 1&2 of launch, 100% in year 3, 50% in year 4, and 30% thereafter. For this purpose, the advertising budget would include: Media spends across all media for the prior 12 months, Payments contracted to celebrities appearing in the ad and for brand endorsement, on annualised basis, Annual average of money spent on advertising production for the brand in the previous 3 years.” The CCC observed that the advertiser has not submitted details of the advertising budget or media spends for the relevant period, and no certification from an independent Chartered Accountant firm has been provided. Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the advertisement contravened Clauses 1(A)(I), 1(A)(II), 2, 2 (a) of ASCI Guidelines for Qualification of Brand Extension - Product or Service. This complaint was UPHELD.