Document KJNb1vKv9BRE951nj2J4r3n66

WORM 1 /p t /X .. .. National Lead Company Advertising Department New York VSf'Pi. I ^ /olyi SUBJECT DATE TO FROM L.I.A. White-Lead Advertising Campaign June 22, 1938 Ur. F. W. Rockwell, President William Knust IN REPLY TO You asked me to give you a memorandum on the co-operative advertising campaign for white-lead which it is proposed the Lead Industries Association sponsor. The plan is to spend $250,000 each year for three con secutive years in national magazines with the object of increasing the gross tonnage of white-lead used as a paint pigment. The cost of the campaign is to be apportioned among miners, smelters and corroders as indicated on the at tached sheet. In 1937, National Lead Company*s domestic shipments of white-lead were 54,119 tons (42,793 lead-in-oil; 11,326 dry lead) exclusive of sales to other corroders including DuPont. On this basis, our contribution toward the cam paign, at the $1 per ton assessment rate, would be $54,000 roughly. The proposal offers us an opportunity to be relieved of a substantial part of the burden of publicizing white-lead which we have carried practically alone and I am in favor of taking advantage of it provided advertisements can be designed which will not: (1) hold the threat of driving more tonnage away from lead-in-oil than would be gained in mixed paint; (2) antagonize grinders to the extent of forcing reprisals. After all, our lead-in-oil business is several times our dry white-lead business. Further more, as a company we have other interests besides whitelead to protect. On account of these two necessary restrictions, I am not very confident that it is going to be possible to produce an industry campaign which will accomplish a great deal in the direction of expanding dry white-lead sales. It Is hard to ride two horses. Nevertheless, I am for the Ur. F. W. Rockwell -2 6/22/38 proposal. In my opinion, the expenditure can be justi fied on the ground alone that white-lead needs ad ditional national advertising to maintain the position of lead-in-oil against competition. I think I would cast my vote for the proposed campaign even if it were found necessary to take the $54,000 re quired for our share from the Dutch Boy budget. On the other hand, I cannot recommend any such action. In my estimation, our present effort in magazines is already trimmed pretty fine. As you know, it permits of no farm-paper and only a very limited amount of business-paper advertising. Then, as will be recog nized, the industry's advertising can never be a direct substitute for Dutch Boy advertising. One simply pro motes a paint ingredient. The other also sells a brand. We still have the prestige of the Dutch Boy, and all that it means to the Company, to consider. 0000-NLI-000020775