R.C. Bigelow, Inc.

125%

100%

112%

100%

Age 45+25% above U.S.

average

. . . from mid-sized households

Households of 2 - 4 persons

12% above U.S. average

161%

100%

150%

100%

. . . Well Educated/High Income

College Graduates

62% above U.S. average

Income $75M+50% above U.S.

average

Bigelow Consumers are ...

119%

100%

124%

100%

121%

100%

. . . in predominantly upscale areas

Urban Elite/Affluent

19% above U.S. average

Suburban Elite/Affluent

24% above U.S. average

Affluent/UpscaleTowns

21% above U.S. average

136%

100%

134%

100%

119%

100%

… spread nationwide; especially strong in West/Northeast

Pacific36% above U.S.

average

New England24% above U.S.

average

Mountain21% above U.S.

average

Bigelow Tea represents 45% of Flavored Tea segment

Source: ACNielsen Specialty Tea Category, 52 w/e January 12, 2002

Bigelow Flavored Teas

Bigelow Tea represents 17% of Herb Tea segment

Source: ACNielsen Specialty Tea Category, 52 w/e January 12, 2002

Bigelow Herb Teas

Source: ACNielsen Specialty Tea Category, 52 w/e January 12, 2002

Bigelow Tea represents 18% of the Green Tea segment

Bigelow Green Teas

Iced teas attract consumers to to the specialty tea category during summer months

Primarily focused in southern markets but sold to Stop & Shop, Tops and Giant banners on an in/out basis

Bigelow Iced Teas

New product that now has 35% distribution and leverages

the Bigelow name to a new category

Unit volume has increased by 58.5% over the latest 52 week period

Bigelow Honey unit sales are up 49.8% in Ahold Nielsen

Markets over the latest 13 week period

Source: ACNielsen Honey Category, 52 w/e September 29, 2001

Bigelow Honey Spreads

Bigelow Dessert Coffees and Estate Teas

1992$574.7

Specialty Tea accounts for 46.2% of the Total Tea Bag Category and has increased

83% since 1992!

2000$727.1

$ 390.9

$ 183.8

$ 391.0

$ 336.1

Source: ACNielsen Total US 52 weeks ending 12/12/92 vs. 12/30/00$ volume is in Millions

Total Tea Bag Category

Black Tea68.0%

Specialty Tea32.0%

Black Tea53.8%

Specialty Tea46.2.%

Bigelow Food Service

Bigelow Leads the Market in Foodservice

Traditional Foodservice Office Coffee Service Market

Based on 2000 Poll of 100 top distributors Based on survey of top 10 Vend/OCS Distributors

The Bigelow Individual Foil Teabag works in Restaurants and Offices, as well as in Retail!

Bigelow71%

Lipton19%

All Other10%

Lipton3%

Bigelow89%

All Other8%

Listing of Hotels Where Bigelow is the Exclusive “Specified” Specialty Tea

Manufacturing As a Component of the Connecticut Economy

Establishments 5,657

Employment 239,720

Production Workers 144,707

Total Annual Payroll ($billion) 10.7

Average Hourly Wage ($) 16.47

Value Added ($billion) 27.1

Value of Shipments ($billion) 45.8

Total Capital Expenditures ($billion) 1.7

Manufacturing Remains a Vital Component of Connecticut's Economy

0 20 40 60 80 100

Merchandise Exports

New Patents Issued in CT

State Corporate Income Tax

Industry Sales

Personal Income Tax Revenues

Salaries & Wages

Value Added/Output

Employment

Establishments

States Sales & Use Tax

Percent of Connecticut Total

Output V. Employment

Index of Real Manufacturing Output and Employment, 1977-1999

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

Ind

ex

(197

7=1.

0)

GSP

Employment

Connecticut Manufacturing Employment Relative to the U.S. 1999-200147

1.09

1.10

1.11

1.12

1.13

1.14

1.15

1/1/1999 Apr Jul Oct 1/1/2000 Apr Jul Oct 1/1/2001 Apr Jul Oct

Employment Multipliers

Industry SectorEmployment Multiplier

Manufacturing 2.88

Finance, Insurance and Real Estate

2.48

Transportation, Communication and Utilities

2.42

Trade, Wholesale and Retail 1.55

Services 1.69

Government 1.48

Manufacturing Employment by Industry, 1999

Transportation Equipment

22%

Fabricated Metal Products

17%

Machinery9%

Miscellaneous6%

Electric Equipment6%

Printing5%

Plastics & Rubber5%

Food3% All Other

10%

Chemical8% Computer &

Electronic Products9%

Segmentation

Competitive Ranking

WorkforceProductivity

Technology

Quality of Life

PhysicalInfrastructure

Economic Structure

Cost

2002

2001

2000

1992

Weak StrongAverage

Competitive Strength