'No added sugar' water won't wash with complaints board

An advertising industry regulator has pulled the carpet from under a high-profile "sports water" brand by ruling against television advertisements claiming it contains "no added sugar".

The Advertising Standards Complaints Board has upheld a complaint by Frucor Beverages against two advertisements on radio and television for a rival manufacturer's product, Charlie's Sportswater.

In the television advertisement, former All Black Marc Ellis, one of the founders of the Charlie's company, says: "Charlie's Sportswater - no added sugar or artificial sweeteners - guaranteed."

Mr Ellis, a director of the company, told the board through lawyers that the claim of no added sugar "constitutes Charlie's Sportswater's distinctiveness".

He said "no added sugar" did not mean a product contained no sugar, and consumers understood that "no added sugar" meant a product probably had natural sugar in it.

But Frucor said the clear overall impression of the advertisements was that Charlie's Sportswater contained no sugar, when its label showed it actually contained 3.2g/100ml from natural sugars in apple juice added to the water.

Although it emphasised the key difference between its sports water and others was "no added sugar", adding fruit juice was nutritionally no different to adding cane sugar.

"Charlie's contains the highest sugar level of any sports water currently on the market," Frucor said.

The complaints board's panel said consumers of sport waters would be aware of the addition of fruit juice contained natural fruit sugars, as would diabetics.

So the advertisements did not breach standards of social responsibility.

But the two specific advertisements about which Frucor complained both made references to sports water as "water", and such references could give the impression that Charlie's Sportswater, like pure water, did not contain any sugar.

"In respect of those two advertisements, the panel rules that through implication and ambiguity, they would be likely to mislead consumers," the board said.

The ruling is expected to be seen in the industry as a pipe-opener for the main event - later this month the Commerce Commission will rule on the claims juice manufacturers can make on their labels.

At the heart of the investigation is the question of whether manufacturers adding water to concentrates can claim their juice is "pure".

The New Zealand Juice Association has sought clarification of food regulations in the wake of Charlie's promoting its orange juice as the only one available that is "100 per cent pure" in a tetra carton, because all the others have concentrate in them.

The Charlie's company was formed by Mr Ellis and orange juice pioneer Stefan Lepionka, and has claimed that consumers are being misinformed when "100 per cent" is wrongly used, and alleged that the Juice Association is prepared to ignore its own rules on labelling.

Mr Lepionka has claimed an alarming number of association members trade in breach of Commerce Commission fair trading guidelines, which state: "Squeezed should only be used for not-from-concentrate juices".

- NZPA