Beyond the Obvious: Future Innovations in Sports Nutrition

Abstract

The global proliferation of sports nutrition brands is emblematic of the size of consumers seeking enhancements through this class of ingestible products. However, a nearly ubiquitous theme of commonality is shared by these products: the compositions are often close to identical, differing only by amount and description, with ancillary alterations in fl avor or packaging. How many branched chain amino acid or whey protein compositions can be birthed? The future of sports nutrition will continue to witness the penetration of multinational (food, beverage, and pharma) brands entering the fray through acquisition, and patent fi lings, which may foster a generic storm or heightened innovation. What remains most compelling is the opportunity for true innovation and pioneering to disrupt the highly duplicative sports nutrition product landscape. Such adventurous excursions may include systematic research/innovation programs that provide novelty, compelling proof of concept, and "real-world" utility; implementation of research methods that provide direct, inferential insights into the bioavailability and metabolism of bioactives; and novel protein/amino nitrogen sources that mimic the biological effects of whey protein.

On consumers’ use, brand preference and equity of sports nutrition products

“…in brand management studies (Buil et al, 2013;Davcik et al, 2015;Lehmann et al, 2008). While future research is needed to compare the applicability and multi-dimensionality of other brand equity models in such a competitive niche market, similar as, for example, Washburn and Plank (2002) did for co-branding, one could also include a more diverse portfolio of sport/nutrition products beyond those legally defined as foods intended for sportspeople (Kreider et al, 2010), such as novel sport foods (Almada, 2015) dietary supplements (Knapik et al, 2016;Molinero and Márquez, 2009), or even energy drinks (Holehonnur et al, 2009). Furthermore, the variations in the impact of the brand equity dimensions provided indications of differences in marketing/segmentation strategies, which could be validated in future research.…”