Is Cadbury-Kraft a Good Marriage?

Is Cadbury-Kraft a Good Marriage?

Like most marriages today..........For a litttle while.

IMO, Companies the size such as Walmart, Kraft, they keep growing will eventual impode. Because the type of business plan it use for growth, may not be the same as a business plan to maintain it.

So if the company is to survive extreme internal changes will have to be made, such as selling off.

p911

I think it's a case of a giant company buying up 'class' for the hell of it and greedy short termist shareholders falling for it hook line and sinker. I expect that longterm the shareholders who sold out would have been better holding on.
I fear for the workforce.
Can't you see it even now?...some 'new broom' manager who has no idea of the company's history or ethos ramming some transatlanic mangement speak down the throats of an increasingly alienated workforce which has probably been decimated by the time he arrives to 'motivate them'...makes me sick to my craw, coming over here with their shiny suits, and their MBA's, probably don't know a chocolate bar from a cow pat, but they've been to the seminars and married the bosses daughter, or maybe it will be some Euroaccountant from Swizerland with all the charm of a microwave oven.
<click...rant mode off>
Del

!!!!!!! RAPE !!!!!!!!!! said the cadbury bunny

As long as my Cadbury easter eggs don't taste like macaroni and cheese and my macaroni and cheese is not chocolate brown I don't care.

We coudn't giveadamn about your "don't care" attitude .
Del

FINE. BE THAT WAY. LIKE I CARE ANYWAY!

someone step on your tail?

My opinion is that this particular merger STINKS!!!!!!

Brands and company ethics and even the culture will be replaced by a "world brand" that is sufficiently neutral to be accepted across the globe.

This will be quickly followed by a "standardisation" of product to maximize profit for shareholders that will completely forget the customers.

Personally I feel that the Kraft brand in Australia has already been so corrupted that it now has no advantage over the generic items that are on the shelf. They have moved from a quality product and chosen to compete in the bottom end of the market.

I suppose it will leave a new niche for a quality supplier to move in and get the cream that is available.

The merger will now almost certainly pull the other into the same hole and we'll end up eating stuff that tastes more like compounded cooking chocolate and be told "that's good".

"Click : rant button off" (Yes Dell the world is changing and not all change is for the better.

I don't like it...They will mess around with the ingredients to make it 'more profitable'...change the slogan from "A glass and a half of milk" to "A half a glass of milk" and most people won't notice the difference...

Del
_{(If you don't get it re-read the title)}

And now we face the moral dilemma. If we truly feel this strongly about the merger, do we buy shares so that we can gain by the inevitable profits?

Or are we truly Engineers who will sit by the side knowing the inevitable outcome, but too shy to take the financial risk? Doomed to follow the path dictated by logic and build our resources by our own means instead of exploiting others!

By the way, Kraft in Aus was a quality supplier of spreads and high end condiments.

Hmm, Kraft is a huge entity, look at the brand names they now own, Nabisco, Tang, Toblerone, Milka, and of course Vegemite, plus others. Now look at the number of factories, down to two plants in Australia. What happened to Lanes biscuits in oz?

There is a lot outsourced, which seems to be a trend now. With global markets the way they are it really is only a simple dollars thing to relocate a production line to Asia, China or Dubai.

In all fairness I guess it is just progress for western companies and not just a Kraft plan, but one many companies look at.

Kraft can be more of a facilitator also. Alot of the brands (a portion of or more) are manufactured by their competitors under contract.

p911

Im less worried about Cadbury merging with Kraft then I am Cadbury merging with Kraft's parent company, Altria Group Inc (a.k.a Phillip Morris).

I can see it now - the TV commercials for Cadbury Easter Eggs will feature animals in bunny ears going "Bawk Bawk Bawk *COUGH COUGH COUGH* Bawk"

Kia ora,

in New Zealand Cadbury has already taken a major hit by moving manufacture overseas (mostly Australia where their chocolate doesn't really make the grade), they resized the pack to make it look bigger but the amount of chocolate went down (do they think consumers are stupid?). This has hurt Cadbury to the benefit of the local manufacturer Whittakers, who have expanded their range (and profits considerably I suspect). This will continue if Cadbury continues sourcing product overseas especially if it comes from sources such as China, where the food supply cannot be trusted to be free from corruption (take the melamine in milk issue for example). Cadbury's name is moving away from being a trusted family product here in NZ.

Agreed. Before the "resize" by the Cad, the Whitty chocolate had to be discounted to sell over here. I could get all teh quality choc I wanted.

Now, the Whittakers is sold out the day it hits the shelf.

Hmmmm, Maybe buy shares in the Whitty one!

Interesting that none of you have mentioned the financial side. The report I heard said Cadbury's had a good balance sheet, whilst Kraft's had a distinctly rosy* hue. The reason given for the merger was that Kraft was seeking to darken its balance sheet and make its shareholders happy again.

Just like the Glazer brothers buying ManU and dumping all their existing loans on the football club...

*as in red

actually I have been following it for quite a few months, why do you think Kraft pursue it. Kraft was crying that it was over valued, and Cadbury felt it was worth it.

In my earlier post, I was not kidding about corporate rape.

Sorry p911, must have missed that in the read through.

I think your description is right on the mark.

Kraft isn't the only company to do this. there was a spate of them in the 80s, certainly in the UK, I presume elsewhere too. Hanson was well known for it, so they were most put out when, on buying Imperial Tobacco Ltd, they discoved that ITL had floated off its pension fund as a separate company, to protect its pensioners. The last act of a firm that had retained its family values and care of the workforce.

Hanson had asset striped and pension fund plundered a number of companies upto that date.

they discoved that ITL had floated off its pension fund as a separate company, to protect its pensioners

Pen$ion$ is what had fueled Hostile take-overs back in the 70's. It was a company cash for it to do what ever the company pleased and a Hostile take-over had no committments. I do believe the government stepped in to stop that.

I do believe the government stepped in to stop that.

About the time this happened - there had been a spate of such takeovers. I think the law came in just after this deal. It was in about 1988.

For myself, the Kraft/Cadbury merger is a bad marriage. I do eat candies and particularly chocolates. I did eat Cadbury's products. I will not be eating any of Cadbury's products in the future.

Kraft is a company which is a part of a conglomerate that promotes, distributes and sells harmful addictive substances, cigarettes and other tobacco products. I cannot, in good conscience support such a company.

Kraft is part of the Altria group which is Philip Morris Tobacco Company hiding under a harmless sounding name, so that it cannot directly identified.

I will not be eating any of Cadbury's products in the future.

No worry, after Kraft, Cadbury will no longer exist with the exception of the name.

Kraft is a company which is a part of a conglomerate that promotes, distributes and sells harmful addictive substances, cigarettes and other tobacco products.

Its not Phillip Morris fault, Phillip Morris is supported by suicidal fools

p911