That's actually absurd. Unilever IS a food company and is constantly selling off its entire food business because it imagines it wants to be a mini-Procter&Gamble.
•
33
•
@Soprano As far as I have seen, there is a very high margin on Knorr products. Of course, the trend is towards healthy food. But on the other hand, things always have to be quicker. But it's still strange what's happening at Unilever. To get rid of traditional brands like Knorr and Langnese.
••
@Tenbagger2024 They've been doing it this way for years. Before the ice cream business, they got out of spreads. Before that, the tea business. Before that, the fish business. I'd like to hear them explain their model, because from the outside it just looks like they're always selling off their silverware, but then they don't do anything worth mentioning with the billions.
••
@Soprano But that's the case with many of the consumer goods giants. The CEOs are constantly changing and with them the strategy. Everyone wants to reinvent the wheel. At Nestlé, the silverware Galderma was sold off. And now Loreal is happy. That's why I'm not invested in the giants. Driven by high raw material prices, which can no longer be passed on 1:1 to the beleaguered consumer. Consumers are also increasingly turning to the discounters' own brands. How do you think Nestlé and Unilever will be affected by oil prices and fertilizer prices? That's why I'm rather cautious about the consumer giants
•
11
•
@Soprano I worked for Unilever for a long time until the ice cream separation. It is no secret internally and externally that Unilever has wanted to become a drugstore group for years. With the appointment of CEO Fernando Fernandez, it was clear in which direction it was going. He is an absolute drugstore enthusiast and immediately started with the spin-off from ice cream - it was only a matter of time before it was food's turn.
•
11
•@Nuqqx That was also my assumption. Thanks for confirming it. The only question is why. The drugstore segment certainly has higher margins, but are you really so well positioned there? In the cosmetics sector in particular, you can only go for mass-produced goods and can't really play in the interesting "luxury segment".
The detergent segment seems to be solid, but I don't know whether it's enough to be a good washing powder company.
In the food sector, I have always seen Unilever at the top together with Nestle. In the drugstore sector, I think there's a lot of competition and it's stronger. The sector is much more competitive with Procter & Gamble, Loreal, Henkel, Beiersdorf etc. etc.
The detergent segment seems to be solid, but I don't know whether it's enough to be a good washing powder company.
In the food sector, I have always seen Unilever at the top together with Nestle. In the drugstore sector, I think there's a lot of competition and it's stronger. The sector is much more competitive with Procter & Gamble, Loreal, Henkel, Beiersdorf etc. etc.
••
@Soprano I think you overestimate the food segment and underestimate the drugstore segment.
Margins in food were always under pressure. Just take "Kartoffel mal Anders" as an example, it sold like hot cakes everywhere, but the margin was so damn bad that Unilever simply sold it and the Unox brand at the same time. Wet sauces were exactly the same, first Hollandaise (except for Lukull, because that's another "premium" variant) and then the pasta sauces.
Especially in the drugstore sector, premiumization in recent years has made it clear that you can sell items more expensively and pack less in - win / win. That year, I think Dove was named cheat pack of the year and people still bought it.
At least 3 price categories were introduced in almost every brand and enormous margins were achieved as a result.
Unilever also owns some luxury brands in skincare, makeup and haircare.
Margins in food were always under pressure. Just take "Kartoffel mal Anders" as an example, it sold like hot cakes everywhere, but the margin was so damn bad that Unilever simply sold it and the Unox brand at the same time. Wet sauces were exactly the same, first Hollandaise (except for Lukull, because that's another "premium" variant) and then the pasta sauces.
Especially in the drugstore sector, premiumization in recent years has made it clear that you can sell items more expensively and pack less in - win / win. That year, I think Dove was named cheat pack of the year and people still bought it.
At least 3 price categories were introduced in almost every brand and enormous margins were achieved as a result.
Unilever also owns some luxury brands in skincare, makeup and haircare.
•
11
•@Nuqqx Hm, yes, I don't know. As I said, the margin thing makes sense. But that's why competition is much tougher in the drugstore sector.
I just somehow have the feeling that the expertise and brand portfolio speak more in favor of food.
The fact that you can just raise prices doesn't necessarily show market power, but rather the low level of consumer competence. The fact that there was no outcry may have been less because people are still convinced by the product than because they simply didn't notice it.
I think the really good brand visibility in the drugstore sector is positive. The products are well-known and have a strong presence on the shelves. That's on the plus side.
On the other hand, if you take a closer look at the brands, they often don't have such strong customer loyalty. The best example is duschdas. With their "3 in 1", they appeal to a target group that says it doesn't matter what you wash yourself with, the main thing is clean. People for whom hair care is important buy shampoo, conditioner and hair mask and swear by brand XY. I think Axe is still a good cash flow machine, but also more for people who say "the main thing is to smell good" with the Chocolate fragrance, which last had a lot of hype 15 years ago and has since lost a lot of market share to Old Spice.
I just somehow have the feeling that the expertise and brand portfolio speak more in favor of food.
The fact that you can just raise prices doesn't necessarily show market power, but rather the low level of consumer competence. The fact that there was no outcry may have been less because people are still convinced by the product than because they simply didn't notice it.
I think the really good brand visibility in the drugstore sector is positive. The products are well-known and have a strong presence on the shelves. That's on the plus side.
On the other hand, if you take a closer look at the brands, they often don't have such strong customer loyalty. The best example is duschdas. With their "3 in 1", they appeal to a target group that says it doesn't matter what you wash yourself with, the main thing is clean. People for whom hair care is important buy shampoo, conditioner and hair mask and swear by brand XY. I think Axe is still a good cash flow machine, but also more for people who say "the main thing is to smell good" with the Chocolate fragrance, which last had a lot of hype 15 years ago and has since lost a lot of market share to Old Spice.
••