It’s two big conglomerates battling over money. This doesn’t benefit consumers, it benefits the two giants.
If Carrefour gets a good deal by using it’s shear scale, it will compete with smaller retailers who can’t force a better deal. If it’s doing this to Pepsi, imagine what it does to smaller business and farmers etc.
If Pepsi gets their price rise it’ll increase its profits.
If they compromise halfway, consumers will ultimately still lose out.
Basically prices will still go up and the supermarket will get a wider profit margin to smooth things over so consumers will still get a brunt of the price increase.
It’s two big conglomerates battling over money. This doesn’t benefit consumers, it benefits the two giants.
If Carrefour gets a good deal by using it’s shear scale, it will compete with smaller retailers who can’t force a better deal. If it’s doing this to Pepsi, imagine what it does to smaller business and farmers etc.
If Pepsi gets their price rise it’ll increase its profits.
If they compromise halfway, consumers will ultimately still lose out.
It pushes own brand which has much better margin.
How aren’t lower prices a benefit for consumers in principle? (Leaving aside specific questions about health and that Pepsi is overpriced anyway.)
Basically prices will still go up and the supermarket will get a wider profit margin to smooth things over so consumers will still get a brunt of the price increase.
Thanks, I see my misunderstanding now. You’re saying that this doesn’t push down prices far enough, not that there isn’t any benefit.