The two giant food retailing chains - Coles and Woolworths - are in constant battle with the big food brands to convert sales to their own house brand generic copy of those products. Questions are now being asked about the ethics used in these battles.
One of the tactics used is to try and mimic the packaging of the brand product. Packet size and colour are used to imply that the products may be identical, but there is no obligation for the actual ingredients to be a direct copy. The main purchase appeal is that the generic product is usually somewhere between twenty and thirty percent cheaper than the brand product.
The Supermarket chains have many tactical ploys to influence the buyer's choice. Shelf space at eye level is considered a huge advantage in gaining buyer's attention. This is a constant bargaining point in sales negotiations, and often is gained by a brand that is heavily advertising it's product on TV - with reference to the chain as a stockist.
The two retail giants have " make or break " power on the fate of individual food manufacturers. If they decide to discontinue presenting a manufacturers product on their shelves, the remaining market segment available in smaller grocery chains often makes continued manufacturing uneconomic - and that product is discontinued.
It seems that the growing power of these two food retailers is relentless - and they no longer restrict their operations to food. They have become the major retailer of petrol across the Australian landscape - and their tentacles are fast enveloping hardware, insurance - and they are eyeing the lucrative pharmaceutical industry.
It seems to be a question of " when is such power - too much power ? "
Perhaps a time for legislation to convert "ethics " into " Law " - and curb excess !
No comments:
Post a Comment