Why Shell Struggles to Convert Customers

The bottom line up front

Shell's strategic problem is not recognition — it's conversion, and it's retention. With 73% aided awareness, Shell is the second most recognized brand in the U.S. gas station category, behind only 7-Eleven. But at 6.6% Mental Market Share — third in the category — it is failing to turn that name recognition into occasion-triggered recall. The awareness-to-MMS gap is the widest of any high-awareness brand in the set. And the barrier data makes the picture sharper still: Shell's own customers report higher friction on almost every experiential dimension than non-users do, by margins that are among the largest in the 30-brand set. Shell is retaining its customer base through proximity and habit, not through preference. When a better alternative appears on the route, those customers are primed to leave. The dual challenge — building occasion depth to convert awareness into MMS, and reducing the in-store friction that is quietly eroding existing loyalty — requires investment on two fronts simultaneously.

Where Shell Stands Against Other Gas Stations

Shell ranks #3 of 30 brands at 6.6% MMS, but the rank flatters the underlying position. Mental penetration of 58% and a network size of 7.6 place Shell meaningfully below the category's front-door brands — 7-Eleven (70% penetration, network size 11.0), Wawa (68%, 11.5), and Casey's (68%, 11.4) — while sitting alongside ExxonMobil and BP, which face an almost identical structural problem: high name recognition built over decades of forecourt dominance, occasion depth that never kept pace. Among those three oil-heritage brands, Shell holds the clearest margin. But it is a margin built on the same narrow foundation.

Shell's emotional connection score of 3.1 out of 7 places it in the upper middle of the category — and that nuance matters. It sits below the experiential leaders: 7-Eleven (3.6), Wawa (3.5), Costco (3.3), Sheetz (3.3), and Circle K (3.3). But it is approximately level with Casey's (3.1) — a brand with deep Midwest loyalty and a strong food program — and noticeably above ExxonMobil (2.9) and BP (2.8). Shell is not an emotionally cold brand. It carries more warmth than most pure fuel brands, likely reflecting decades of consumer familiarity. What it lacks is the kind of active preference — the "I specifically want to go there" feeling — that the top-tier experiential brands generate.

The mental advantage pattern maps Shell's strategic terrain precisely. The brand over-indexes on driving and noticing I'm low on fuel (+6.2 vs. category average), routine fill-up (+5.5), and rewards programs (+4.9). These are the occasions where Shell has earned genuine disproportionate share — primarily reactive, low-consideration fuel moments where familiarity wins. On the other side: feeling hungry but not wanting a full restaurant stop (-5.1), need something quick for lunch (-3.3), picking up food for a road trip (-3.0), wanting something quick to eat late at night (-2.8). Shell under-indexes on every food and c-store occasion in the set. It is not a brand that has made a deliberate trade-off. It is a brand that has not yet entered the c-store competitive arena at all..

What Moments Shell Owns in the Gas Station Category

Who Shell Is Winning And Losing

The high-income segment is Shell's most compelling competitive position — and its clearest growth foundation. MMS among $100k+ households reaches 9.4%, nearly four points above the under-$50k level of 5.8%. Network size among this group is 8.8 versus 7.2 among lower-income buyers. Affluent, selective fuel buyers are more likely to choose Shell — consistent with the brand's higher average price point, cleaner forecourt presentation, and rewards program appeal among consumers who are optimising for quality rather than cost. This is a real and defensible position.

The 35-44 cohort is Shell's strongest age segment, and it is the right one. MMS reaches 7.2% among 35-44 consumers, with mental penetration of 65% — the peak across all age groups. Network size is 8.7 among this cohort. These are peak-commuting, household-formation, highest-discretionary-spending consumers. Shell's concentration of strength here is a usable platform for building occasion depth if paired with the right in-store investment.

The 65+ collapse is the sharpest vulnerability in the age profile. Mental penetration falls to 46% among consumers 65 and older — a 19-point decline from the 35-44 peak. Emotional connection drops to 2.9 among this cohort. Among the age group that is most habitual, most brand-loyal, and least open to change, Shell has not maintained its resonance. This is a warning rather than an immediate crisis, but it is the kind of structural erosion that is costly to reverse once it deepens.

What's In the Way for Shell

Shell's barrier data is the most alarming finding in the analysis — and it is entirely invisible in category-level averages. Looking at barriers among Shell's own customers versus non-users reveals a pattern no other high-awareness brand shows to this degree. Shell users are significantly more likely than non-users to cite: limited hours (+11.8 percentage points), crowding and wait times at pumps or checkout (+11.6pp), route inconvenience (+10.0pp), difficulty getting in and out (+9.8pp), inconvenient location (+8.3pp), layout problems (+7.4pp), and high store prices (+7.5pp).

The interpretation is direct: Shell's customers are loyal despite friction, not because of preference. They stop at Shell because it is nearby, or because it is on the route, or because the habit was formed before a better alternative arrived. This is the most fragile form of brand loyalty in a category defined by convenience — it holds until something easier, cheaper, or better appears on the same stretch of road. Shell's challenge is not simply converting awareness into MMS; it is ensuring that the customers it already has do not defect to brands offering a less friction-burdened experience.

The price and experience friction are compounding. Shell users cite fuel prices as a barrier at 45% — above the category total of 40% — and in-store prices at 37%. For a brand that cannot credibly compete on price and has not built a c-store experience to justify a premium, this is a trap: too expensive to win on value, not differentiated enough to win on experience. The crowding and layout barriers (+9-12pp among users) suggest that Shell's busier forecourts are generating negative experiences that are not being offset by anything inside the store.

About this research

Morning Consult conducts over 30,000 daily proprietary surveys in 45 countries covering more than 5,000 brands and 50 economic indicators. 

Our category advantage research is aimed at understanding the needs driving consumers in your category — and how your brand can own more of them. This research is built on validated principles of brand-driven growth and powered by Morning Consult’s industry-leading sampling technology.

Measure the true drivers of brand strength

Capture both mental availability (the likelihood your brand comes to mind when consumers face a need or occasion) and emotional closeness (how strongly consumers connect with your brand), benchmarked against competitors.

Uncover Category Entry Points (CEPs)

Directly tied to mental availability, see the specific needs, occasions, and triggers that drive purchase decisions in your category, and how strongly your brand is linked to them.

Pinpoint growth opportunities

Direct investment toward the moments and consumer segments with the greatest potential to grow your brand.

Turn insights into action fast

Get survey results in 4–5 days through a centralized dashboard and short-form memo that equips stakeholders with clear direction on where and how to win.

Learn more