Branch Basics Consumer Study

Objective and context

Branch Basics Consumer Study set out to understand how US consumers perceive non-toxic, plant-based cleaning products. Across three questions, respondents consistently endorsed low-toxin, low-fume, unscented solutions for everyday cleaning-so long as performance is proven-and showed skepticism toward “plant-based” claims without clear evidence.

What we heard across questions

• Safety matters-if it works: Non-toxic and low-fume are priorities for routine cleaning, but cleaning power still wins for tough jobs. Respondents accept occasional use of harsher chemistries with mitigation (ventilation, gloves). Evidence: Ashley Goddard avoids strong scents for health and pet reasons; Deidre Cook uses “the tough stuff” sparingly for heavy jobs.
• Modest willingness to pay: Most will pay a 10–20% premium (or a small absolute amount) if efficacy is proven and formats stretch value (concentrates, refills). Richard Nelson: “10 to 20 percent … if it’s proven, lasts longer, or cuts plastic.” Budget ceilings are tight for some (e.g., Claudio Orozco’s $5–8/month).
• Fragrance aversion is widespread: Strong dislike of heavy perfumes and essential-oil “fog”; unscented or very light scent preferred (Richard Nelson: “Hard no on strong fragrances”).
• Hybrid usage is the norm: After switching, most find low-toxin/DIY covers ~80–90% of routine cleaning; they keep a conventional “heavy hitter” for baked-on grease, mildew, or disinfecting. Ashley Goddard: “Safer swaps handle 80–90 percent … I keep one heavy-duty cleaner for the truly gross jobs.”
• One-concentrate promise appeals-but trust must be earned: Consumers like the idea of decluttering and cost savings from a single non-toxic concentrate, yet doubt one formula can handle grease, scale, glass, and mildew without trade-offs. They want simple dilution, clear use limits, and proof (before/after demos, third-party tests) and disinfecting clarity.
• Format and clarity build confidence: Simple ingredient lists, measured caps, clear dilution cards, refill options, and surface-safety guidance (including septic-safe) are seen as practical trust-builders.

Persona correlations and nuances

• Small-space renters & younger adults (Brittany, Claudio, Ashley): prioritize unscented, compact concentrates; high price sensitivity; want simple, visible dilution and small, affordable refills.
• Stay-at-home parents/caretakers (Deidre, Desiree): child/pet safety and low-fume are non-negotiable; accept keeping a separate disinfectant for illness events.
• Higher-income rural homeowners with septic/well (Richard): demand septic/well-safe formulas, larger refills; skeptical of subscriptions and “plant-based” as a signal without evidence.
• Price-constrained users (Claudio): default to vinegar/baking soda and low-cost concentrates; premiums must be minimal.
• Hispanic/Spanish-speaking (Desiree, Claudio): value bilingual labels, simple dilution visuals, honest claims, and risk-free trials.

Recommendations

• Own the 80–90%: Launch an unscented multi-surface concentrate with two simple dilutions (Everyday; Glass/Floor), optimized to rinse clean in hard water. Avoid disinfecting claims unless registered; state limits plainly.
• Add targeted boosters: Offer a dedicated alkaline Degreaser and a citric-acid Descaler for heavy grease and mineral scale to address known performance gaps.
• Proof over perfume: Publish third-party tests and real-world before/after demos on grease, glass streaking, and hard-water soap scum. Include pH-at-use, ingredient transparency, and septic guidance.
• Packaging and usability: Provide a measured dosing cap, durable sprayer (standard + foaming), child-resistant concentrate cap, and a bilingual dilution card with water-hardness tips.
• Pricing and access: Communicate clear cost-per-use; offer a low-risk starter under $10 and transparent per-bottle math; no forced subscriptions; bilingual labeling.

Risks and mitigations

• Underperformance on heavy soils: Mitigate with boosters, honest scope, and side-by-side demos.
• Residue/streaking (esp. hard water): Optimize rinse profile; provide correct dilution tools and tips; test on glass/stone/stainless.
• Regulatory exposure on disinfecting: Avoid implied claims; provide guidance for separate disinfectant use.
• Fragrance sensitivity backlash: Keep unscented as default; tightly control VOCs; user-test any light-scent variant.
• Hardware failures: Vendor QA, life-cycle tests; include spare nozzle and fast replacements.

Next steps and measurement

1. Formulate and validate the unscented concentrate (two dilutions) and Degreaser/Descaler boosters; document pH, surface safety, septic compatibility.
2. Commission third-party testing on grease removal, soap scum/mineral reduction, streaking/residue, and VOC/odor; create plain-language proof assets.
3. Upgrade packaging with measured cap, durable sprayer, child-resistant closure, and bilingual dilution card; finalize EN/ES labels with “does/doesn’t do” clarity.
4. Set pricing architecture with a <$10 starter kit and transparent per-use math; enable optional subscribe-and-save only.
5. Pilot GTM across key segments (small-space renters, caretakers, rural septic) and iterate based on feedback.

• Starter-to-reorder conversion (60 days): target ≥35%.
• Residue/streak complaint rate: ≤8 per 1,000 orders.
• Demo page view-to-add-to-cart: ≥12%.
• Unscented mix adoption: ≥80% of orders.
• Perceived cost-per-use value: ≥75% agree post-purchase.