Bottle war erupts anew

Strategists huddle over large maps to plan sales blitzes. Ships steam into far islands with corporate flags hoisted and advertising guns blasting. Trucks roll out in the dead of night onto designated sari-sari store targets. Spies report on enemy management maneuvers. Foot soldier-salesmen are under orders to capture markets.

The bottle war has erupted anew between old protagonists. On one side is Danding Cojuangco, called "Boss" by troops in the beverage giant San Miguel Corp. On the other is Lucio Tan, "Kapitan" of Asia Brewery. Already there have been casualties-drinkers in Caloocan poisoned by a mysterious Mata Hari.

The fight is over the right to use the shape of a bottle that is claimed exclusively by La Tondeña Inc., a distillery bought by SMC years back and renamed recently as Ginebra San Miguel. Alongside it is the use of the term "ginebra", Spanish for gin which also has long entered the Filipino lexicon.

Ginebra San Miguel, whose foremost brand goes by the same name, has won the first battle. A Mandaluyong court last week temporarily restrained Tan’s Tanduay Distillery from using the bottle shape and the new brand called "Ginebra Kapitan." The judge will hear Tanduay’s side on Monday on why the order should not be imposed. Yet it is already in force.

Not to be outdone, Tanduay filed a P112-million damage suit. It already has produced thousands of bottles and labels for the brand that it says is designed to give consumers a wider choice of drinks. Priced P4 less per bottle than Ginebra San Miguel, Ginebra Kapitan broke into the market weeks ago in Northern Luzon with 40,000 cases a month. Ranged against Ginebra San Miguel’s one million cases a month, Tanduay cries that its fight is against monopolism and for free enterprise.

The competing bottles look only slightly similar. In the same way that beer bottles are translucent for preservative purposes, the gin bottles are transparent so that buyers can easily check for purity of content. But Ginebra San Miguel’s bottle has an ordinary tin cover or tansan, while Ginebra Kapitan’s has a white plastic resealable cap. San Miguel’s label is predominantly red; Kapitan’s is blue.

The tiff over the "ginebra" tag can set precedents in future branding. But Tanduay says history backs its right, just like any newcomer, to use the generic term for gin. Records of the Bureau of Patents show that while La Tondeña registered the name Ginebra San Miguel as far back as 1945, it disclaimed the word "ginebra" apart from the way it is presented in the label. In subsequent patent renewals and variations in 1985, 1992 and 1996, La Tondeña likewise disclaimed the generic word. It also laid no claim for color of bottle and label. For, Ginebra San Miguel came not only in the small 350-ml rounded bottle, popularly called bilog by drinkers, but also in the 800-ml square shape known as cuatro cantos. Tanduay will use La Tondeña’s own patent papers to prove that it is not infringing on any copy-right.

Although a dwarf compared to San Miguel Corp. and Ginebra San Miguel, Tan had never been perturbed by similarities in bottle shapes and labels. When his Asia Brewery was about to launch its first product Beer Hausen in the late ’70s, Tan simply grinned and bore it when San Miguel Corp. preempted his patented bottle shape with a new brand called Gold Eagle. After all, Beer Hausen’s label was red, while Gold Eagle’s was gold and blue. Besides, Tan shrugged back then, that’s part of free competition.

But when Asia Brewery launched Beer na Beer five years ago, San Miguel Corp. cried foul and claimed exclusive use of the bottle shape and the term "beer" for its pale pilsen. An expensive court battle ensued. Asia Brewery won when the judge declared that "beer" is generic and cannot be patented by any brewer. It would have been ridiculous had the ruling been otherwise. Brewers around the world would have been barred from breaking into the Philippine market with brands that carried the term "beer." As to the shape of containers, the fight over bottles seemed futile since brewers were turning to tin cans that looked alike save for the labels.

The beer war had taken off from a similar fight over sodas. Coca Cola for a time had disputed Pepsi’s use of the term "cola" – but lost. Businessmen today eagerly are awaiting if the Mandaluyong court will reverse jurisprudence in the war over "ginebra".

* * *

Damned-if-you-do-and-damned-if-you-don’t is how Efraim Genuino describes his job as chairman of the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp. (Pagcor). He must increase earnings to plunk more cash into charity, education and sports development. But if he tries to open new casinos, religious leaders mechanically jump on him. And when he loses revenues due to conditions beyond his control, like the SARS scare, he is pilloried as well.

Through all this, Genuino can only present his accomplishment record. In 2001, Genuino’s first year as chief executive, Pagcor posted total income of P17.5 billion, 19.4 percent higher than the previous year’s P14.6 billion. In the following year, it chalked up P20.2 billion, for which the Securities and Exchange Commission ranked it No. 1 profit earner in 2002.

Maintaining that top slot and competing against other Asian gaming firms is a tough act. When the severe acute respiratory syndrome spread across Southeast Asia, foreign tourists, on whom Pagcor relies for the big bucks, dwindled. Yet Genuino was able to keep its shortfall at five percent when other Asian casinos came close to bankruptcy.

Genuino did all this by shifting from gaming to entertainment, and cutting costs. Not a few Pagcor oldtimers naturally lost their clout and started botching about his changes. But Genuino only shrugs and quotes management expert Peter Drucker: "Effective leadership is not about making speeches or being liked; leadership is defined by results, not attributes."

* * *

E-mail: [email protected]