Indeed some commentators seem to be at risk of becoming Fruit and Nut cases following the Cadbury board’s backing for the Kraft deal. There have been calls for the UK government to step in to Keep Cadbury British and warnings that the company’s brands and paternalistic Quaker heritage are at risk.
Cadbury is not the crown jewels or Buckingham Palace, and surely does not represent God, Queen and country – it is a maker of chocolate, when I last looked.
And don’t these union jack flag wavers drive German cars to Irish pubs for Belgian beers, then travel home and grab an Indian curry or a Turkish kebab on the way, to sit on Swedish furniture and watch American shows on a Japanese TV.
Is it because the Brits love their Milk Tray?
Or is it because the ‘oversexed, overpaid, overfed and over here’ yanks should not be allowed to come in and get their greedy, capitalistic and non-altruistic paws on a national treasure.
Public company
The confectionery company is listed on the London Stock Exchange, is publicly traded and therefore can potentially be bought by any company of any jurisdiction.
The Cadbury board said it would take an offer over 800 pence to bring the company to the table. Kraft paid up and the board agreed a merger. Business is business for Cadbury as well as Kraft.
Perhaps if the company had never been floated on the stock market it would still be independent. The great granddaughter of company founder George Cadbury called the buy out by a ‘plastic cheese company’ a ‘horror story’. But the Cadbury family sold up and thus forfeited their rights to direct the company.
Were there similar cries of anxiety over brand identity to be heard from these Keep Cadbury British advocates when UK companies similarly bought up US companies?
Moreover, wasn’t the French government mocked in the UK for being protectionist when it threatened to change the law to prevent PepsiCo taking over Danone?
Shareholder identity
And how British is Cadbury? Firstly, it has nearly 40,000 employees outside of the UK and is the second biggest confectionery company in the world after Mars.
If the flag wavers took a quick peek at Cadbury’s shareholder register they would see that three out of the top 10 investors are US institutions, with New Jersey-based Franklin Mutual Advisers the largest shareholder, at 7.67 per cent.
And while I am at it, most of the top 10 Cadbury shareholders are also investors in Kraft, which underscores the fact the investors are focused on hard nosed business practices and surely puts the lid on the notion than the founding Quaker ethics still inform company strategy.
There has been much spewing and spluttering that debt ridden Kraft will have to cut corners and shed UK jobs which were secure under an allegedly more employee friendly Cadbury.
But what of the cost cutting moves by Cadbury in 2007 when it shut factories, made job losses and relocated production to Poland? Where were the Quaker ideals then?
Kraft has insisted that production will remain in Britain and the US firm has even said it will try to save the factory near Bristol that Cadbury was planning to shut.
Ethical decisions
And to return to those altruistic aspirations that the fans of Cadbury keep harping on about: In terms of making difficult ethical decisions, it could be argued that the firm has a tendency to drag its heels, only jumping when it makes sound financial sense to do so.
Their transition to Fairtrade in 2009 was at a time when the world market price for cocoa was above the Fairtrade minimum, so it was a relatively inexpensive decision for Cadbury to make. This was in sharp contrast to 2000 when the Fairtrade minimum was over twice the world market price.
Meanwhile, Kraft has pledged to keep Cadbury's sourcing commitments.
Brands at risk claims
Creme Eggs – how will you eat yours in the future?
Apparently with Philadelphia light in the centre, argue the dissenting voices. But, wait a sec, Kraft has invested in the iconic Cadbury brands through the £11.7bn acquisition, and for a profit orientated company the usual line is ‘if it works don’t fix it.’
There is no benefit for the US food group in seeing a successful brand fail.
A ‘nasty’ foreign company knocking on the door does not have to mean corporate death for firms being swallowed up by the larger organisation. Belgium’s Interbrew acquired Britain’s Bass 10 years ago, and there were concerns at the time of the takeover about brewery closures but Bass beer continues to be brewed in Burton-upon-Trent, and the ailing formerly UK owned Mini has gone from strength to strength under BMW.
Is it death by cheese then for the beloved Dairy Milk and Curly Wurly? Not if Kraft does the maths. Cadbury is dead. Long live Cadbury.
5 comments (Comments are now closed)
It couldn't be different, could it?
It is not Kraft that is taking Cadbury from UK. It was Cadbury´s board of directors that sealed it when they demerged the Beverage business instead of seeking for organically built growth . Cadbury will survive under Kraft's wings at the long run anyway. What will surely fade off is the group of people that managed the company for the last 4 years. This group has got rid of beverage branch of Cadbury Schweppes as it was the reason of all problems on earth. However, the beverage business was exactly what kept 'bids' away. Unfortunately, they were unable to see that. They went for quick money and easy growth and Kraft is 'getting" Cadbury in a similar negotiation. No shame on that. However, if Cadbury had tried to develop both branches of its business (Confectionery and Beverages) with a more professional approach, with its feet on the ground and with real improvement of its management and operational systems, the story would be very different now. A strong, independent and diversified Company protected from undesired bidders. So, Cadbury was taken from UK in the recent past with no participation of Kraft. It all happened in the Cadbury's Headquarters with no external help.
Report abuse
Posted by Luiz M. Garcia
26 January 2010 | 17h38
Hear, hear! (2)
PS. And what's so great about Cadbury-branded chocolate (almost completely banned from being called chocolate by the European Commission because of its high vegetable oil and low cocoa content)?
Maybe now we shall see more of the confectioney products of the quality Continental producers Kraft owns.
My only concern is the huge extra debt Kraft has taken on to finance the deal. Now THAT is a risk.
Report abuse
Posted by Dori Schmetterling
26 January 2010 | 15h09
Hear, hear!
I absolutely agree with the article and "Done to Cadbury as Cadbury has done to others".
Anything else is unthought-through jingoistic claptrap.
Report abuse
Posted by Dori Schmetterling
26 January 2010 | 15h01
Done to Cadbury as Cadbury has done to others
It has to be said that Cadbury has only had done to it that which Cadbury had done to so many other foreign owned businesses over tha last 15years. Cadbury (Cadbury Schweppes as it was) was one of the most active confectionery businesses on the aquasition road: Poulain(F); Adams(USA); Wedel(PL); Orangina (F) and many others. Likewise Cadbury did not hold back when it came to the divesting itself of old traditional British names to foreign businesses, selling Schweppes to Cocoa Cola for example, or moving British jobs to cheaper manufacturing countries - production of all Somerdale and some Irish lines being moved lower cost manufacturing base in Poland.
Cadbury management are big boys playing a big boys game..they knew what the stakes were.
The Cadbury brand however will survive and Kraft clearly see the value in it. I only hope the UK jobs are seen as key to that success,
Report abuse
Posted by Richard Duncan
25 January 2010 | 18h57
Cadbury
Good emotional article and response to a lot of other emotionable twaddle. We live in a global economy and company ownership is not usually an issue. Brand name changes are more important & emotional - Opal Fruits and Marathon being examples!. Sure, the Rowntree name has also now disappeared, but as all chapters start and finish, the overall content & pedigree of the UK confectionery industry story remains.
The Cadbury brand will continue to thrive although I find it hard to see how Kraft will recoup their investment in anything less than very long term. The UK is currently a low cost producer and therefore investment in Somerdale, Bourneville etc makes good sense - especially as the UK is a prime consumer home market. Kraft will bring marketing expertise and open new market opportunities quicker than Cadbury could, so although I err on the side of Warren Buffet, I think Kraft may well prove a few people wrong and also for certain will do a better job than the existing senior board at Cadbury, who capitulated far too esily.
Report abuse
Posted by Tony Mycock - HB Ingredients Ltd
25 January 2010 | 14h38
Read all comments (5)