Would Gü’s sale to Mars or Unilever smother it?
12th August

An article in this week’s Grocer suggests that Gü puddings might be about to sell to Unilever or Mars. A few unnamed pudding experts think the brand will lose its innovative spark in the move. To be transparent, jkr work for both companies, but is this fair?
It’s probably true that buying in new brands is a very cost effective and entrepreneurial way for massive companies to operate – the brands have been developed outside the usual processes which means they have probably been given a bit more latitude (and a bit less process) to develop some engaging quirks. However, the real issue is what happens next – Ben and Jerry’s seems from the outside essentially unchanged but hasn’t the marketing muscle of Unilever enabled the brand’s vibrant sustainability initiatives? It’s also a brand which continues to do gloriously daft things with new flavours (see above their van promoting a new “turn the pot upside down” line).
Similarly, when Mars bought Seeds of Change they also bought Howard-Yana Shapiro, who has taken the brand’s commitment to sustainability into a Mars global commitment to sustainable coco. Never mind “small and nimble” – it’s a thirty year plan and as bold as strategy gets – and it’s the scale of Mars that enables it. So far from smothering innovation on acquisition, giant companies can actually be great at absorbing the expertise they buy.
From a design perspective brand equities are typically in place by time of a sale – Ben and Jerry’s (or Green & Blacks, or The Body Shop) have all kept their design feel post acquisition quite happily. And under Dairycrest, the Rachel’s Organic redesign post sale really improved its look and feel. In terms of Gü’s equities, they strike me to be centred around a great name and sexy photography rather than a focus on innovation, and this photography can be easily copied, which might be the brand’s Achilles heel…

I wonder if the real story is being passed over here? Is Gü’s sale (and the sales decline in Innocent to take another example) not indicative of the “mass premium” trend getting squeezed in the current climate? Perhaps the times call for brands with more mass appeal, which is something both Mars and Unilever are really rather good at.


No Comments
Post a Comment