MAM
Hindustan Unilever Q2 FY2025 sees 4 per cent decline in PAT amid competitive pressures
Mumbai: Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL), one of India’s largest fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) companies, faced a mixed financial performance for the quarter ending September 2024 (Q2 FY2025). While the company managed to maintain a stable revenue flow, posting a modest 2 per cent year-on-year growth, its profit after tax (PAT) took a hit, declining by 4 per cent compared to the same quarter last year. This marked a challenging period for the consumer giant as rising input costs and sluggish consumer demand weighed down its profitability.
The financial results released on 23 October 2024, indicate that HUL’s revenue from operations stood at Rs 15,319 crores, up from Rs 15,027 crores in Q2 FY2024. However, the company’s Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortisation (EBITDA) margins saw a slight contraction. EBITDA for the quarter came in at Rs 3,647 crores, marking an 80 basis points (bps) decline to 23.8 per cent from 24.6 per cent in the same period last year.
A key highlight from the results was the dip in PAT to Rs 2,612 crores, down from Rs 2,717 crores in Q2 FY2024, representing a 4 per cent decline. This drop was driven by multiple factors, including escalating material costs and competitive pricing pressures in key segments like personal care and home care. Additionally, the company faced an exceptional restructuring charge of Rs 16 crores during the quarter, further compressing net earnings.
HUL’s executive director and company secretary, Dev Bajpai, commented on the results, stating: “While we continue to deliver on our commitment to revenue growth, profitability challenges are real. We are focused on operational efficiencies and agile strategies to navigate the cost pressures.”
The company’s Home Care division reported a sales increase to Rs 5,737 crores, while Beauty & Wellbeing achieved sales of Rs 3,323 crores. Yet, Personal Care and Foods & Refreshment segments faced marginal declines, with Personal Care revenue dropping to Rs 2,412 crores.
In a bid to reward shareholders, HUL declared an interim dividend of Rs 19 per equity share and a special dividend of Rs 10 per share for FY2025, totalling Rs 29 per equity share. The record date for the dividend is set for 6 November 2024, with the dividend payout scheduled for 21 November 2024. Despite the decline in PAT, HUL’s strong cash flow allowed it to maintain its dividend policy, signalling confidence in its long-term growth strategy.
The FMCG giant remains cautiously optimistic about the future. The company continues to emphasise innovation, digital transformation, and a consumer-centric approach to fuel long-term growth. Commenting on the company’s outlook, MD & CEO Rohit Jawa said: “Our investments in innovation and sustainability are non-negotiable as we focus on both protecting margins and driving top-line growth in the challenging macroeconomic environment.”
Looking forward, HUL’s ability to manage costs and drive sales growth in a competitive market will be crucial. With consumer preferences shifting and economic pressures persisting, the company must stay agile and innovate to regain momentum in the upcoming quarters.
MAM
Brands push beyond compliance as trust takes centre stage
ASCI AdTrust Summit 2026 spotlights shift from legal checks to credibility.
MUMBAI: In a world where a disclaimer can be legally sound yet socially suspect, brands are learning that compliance may tick boxes but trust wins markets. At the inaugural ASCI AdTrust Summit 2026, a panel on “Beyond Compliance: The New Currency of Trust” unpacked a growing industry reality: the gap between what the law permits and what consumers accept is widening and fast.
Moderated by Meenakshi Ramkumar of National Law School of India University, the discussion brought together leaders across law, marketing and academia to examine how brands must evolve in a digital ecosystem increasingly shaped by scrutiny, scepticism and speed.
Ramkumar set the tone by highlighting a critical shift, advertising today operates in the same digital space that fuels misinformation, scams and fake news, making credibility harder to establish. “The challenge is not just about what brands do, but the broader context of low institutional trust,” she noted, adding that when violations go unchecked, trust erodes not just in brands but in the regulatory system itself.
This vacuum, she said, has given rise to consumer activism from boycotts to social media backlash as a parallel accountability mechanism.
For Amit Bhasin, Chief Legal Officer at Marico, the distinction was clear, legal compliance is non negotiable, but insufficient. “Compliance is the minimum threshold. The real challenge is staying aligned with changing consumer expectations,” he said.
He pointed to how advertising narratives have evolved from traditional depictions of gender roles to more shared responsibilities reflecting a broader societal shift. “Earlier, it was fine to show one person doing the household work. Today, that may not land well. Consumers expect brands to reflect reality,” Bhasin observed.
He also highlighted internal debates where campaigns that may be legally permissible are still rejected for being culturally insensitive, noting that responsible advertising often requires asking uncomfortable questions before the public does.
If compliance is the baseline, reputation is the battlefield.
Bhasin noted that reputational risk has become a far greater concern than legal exposure, particularly in an era where campaigns can be dissected within hours online. “Earlier, a controversial ad might invite a newspaper editorial. Today, within hours, you’re at the centre of a storm,” he said.
Brands, he added, now evaluate campaigns through a dual lens legal viability and reputational vulnerability with the latter often proving more decisive.
From a healthcare perspective, Satish Sahoo of Cipla Health underscored the complexity of operating within fragmented yet stringent regulatory frameworks, spanning drugs, food, cosmetics and Ayush. “Anything under a drug licence is the most tightly regulated,” he said, adding that this necessitates proactive, not reactive, compliance.
He shared an example from the oral rehydration salts (ORS) category, where Cipla resisted the temptation to position products aggressively despite competitive pressure. “Our product is WHO compliant, and our communication reflects that. We chose not to blur the lines, even if others did,” he noted.
The long term payoff, he suggested, lies in credibility built over consistency, not quick wins.
Yet, as Harsha N of National Law School of India University pointed out, even perfect compliance does not guarantee trust. Drawing from historical and modern examples from exaggerated product claims in the 1800s to contemporary environmental and health advertising, he argued that legal frameworks often lag behind consumer expectations. “A brand can be fully compliant and still be perceived as misleading,” he said, citing instances where fine print disclosures fail to reach or convince the average consumer. He added that larger companies carry a disproportionate responsibility to set ethical benchmarks, even in areas where the law remains silent.
The conversation also turned to digital advertising, where the challenge extends beyond content to how ads are experienced. From algorithmic targeting to personalised messaging, brands now operate in an environment where regulation struggles to keep pace with technology.
Sahoo noted that social media has amplified awareness, with influencers and consumers increasingly scrutinising product claims and calling out inconsistencies. “Awareness has gone up dramatically. People are questioning what goes into products and what brands are saying,” he said.
The role of self regulatory bodies such as Advertising Standards Council of India also came under the spotlight.
Harsha acknowledged that while SROs play a crucial role, they are not immune to criticism, particularly around perceived conflicts of interest and enforcement gaps. “SROs have a higher threshold of responsibility not just to interpret the law, but to anticipate societal expectations,” he said.
He added that failures in self regulation often push the burden back onto government intervention, underscoring the need for stronger, more proactive oversight.
One of the more nuanced debates centred on whether building trust comes at a cost. While Sahoo acknowledged that quality and compliance can increase costs, he argued that companies must absorb them as part of their long term strategy.
Bhasin, however, framed the challenge differently not as cost, but as competitiveness in a market where not all players play by the same rules. “The real tension is when others cut corners and you choose not to,” he said.
The panel concluded with a call to embed trust into business metrics.
Sahoo suggested that organisations must go beyond revenue targets to include consumer equity and trust based KPIs, ensuring that ethical considerations are not sidelined in the pursuit of growth. “Trust sounds abstract, but it can translate into measurable consumer equity,” he said.
As the discussion wrapped up, one message stood out: the rules of advertising are being rewritten not just by regulators, but by consumers themselves. In an ecosystem where attention is fleeting and scepticism is high, brands that merely comply may survive, but those that build trust are the ones that endure.
