MMC clears ice-cream monopolies
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE MONOPOLIES and Mergers Commission has given the all-clear to the ice-cream distribution methods used by the market leaders, Birds Eye Walls and Nestle, writes Mary Fagan.
The MMC said that the practice of supplying freezers to retailers on terms that excluded other products did not hurt competition or consumers' choice.
Its report said that Birds Eye Walls had a monopoly over the market for 'impulse' ice-cream and lollies - bought for immediate consumption, usually from smaller shops. A complex monopoly was held by Birds Eye Walls, Nestle and Mars with a total market share of wrapped impulse products of 88 per cent.
However, neither monopoly was deemed to act against the public interest.
The report was attacked by the Consumers Association, which believes that buyers of ice-cream pay more than is necessary and are deprived of choice.
The findings were also attacked by Mars, which allows retailers to stock other products when it provides a freezer. Simon Bullmore, managing director of Mars Confectionery, said: 'For the MMC to conclude that freezer exclusivity does not operate against the public interest is astonishing.'
John Sharpe, chairman of Birds Eye Walls, said the report proved that there was no need to change the system.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments