Saturday, August 17, 2019

Kraft and Cadbury Merger Essay

What is the role of the government in this merger? What is the impact on the shareholders, what are their thoughts about it and is it a successful merger or not. Other than Kraft and Cadbury four aspects of doing business internationally has been discussed and their influence in an international business career. 1. 1 How and why Kraft identified Cadbury as a potential partner? On 19th January 2010 Kraft the American Giant, acquired Cadbury the most popular and one of the most selling brand in chocolates for $11. 5bn. The reason for Kraft to identify Cadbury as its potential partner and even after Cadbury rejected its first bid on 7th September 2009, and then came up with a higher bid, was that Kraft wanted to bring in the most loved British Chocolates to USA, because the chocolates that America produces are only loved by American’s and are not so loved around the world, while they targeted the British company because they make better chocolates plus they wanted to get into the British market and to get into the British market remaining into the food industry they could not identify a better option than acquiring Cadbury by merging these two companies one they capture the British market of dairy food plus they introduce their products into Britain and the Cadbury products into USA having the plus points of both cultures. Expected benefits Kraft is the second largest Food beverage company in the world, which produced revenue of 49. billion USD in the year 2010 (Kraftfoodscompany, (2011) and is operating in more than 150 counties worldwide and has an Employee number of around 100,000. Where as Cadbury on the other hand is the second largest Confectionary Company in the world, which produced revenue of 5. 38 billion USD in the year 2008 (Cadbury annual report, 2008) and has a very strong hold in Asia Pacific and Latin America and has an Employee number of around 70,000. When these two giants combine, one American Giant and other British Giant, they both can conquer the food industry if they both are managed well. In 2010 Kraft already made revenue increase of 0. 7 billion USD from 2008 to 2010 after the take over of Cadbury (CNN, 2011). Kraft and Cadbury can both work very well and can avail a lot of benefits from each other provided that both them work together, because Kraft has its own management too large in scale and Cadbury as well. 1. 3 Synergies for both companies involved? After the merger of Kraft and Cadbury, both companies are expected to have revenue synergies and have an increase of the net revenue of up to 5% or more. They are targeting the long-term output for it. Which as a result will increase the net revenue. The combined company (Kraft and Cadbury) is targeting to increase their per share cost in 2011 of approximately $0. 05 and on the basis of cash. These two companies combined can make a lot of revenue. Parliament publication, 2012) Other than that Cadbury has other channels of gaining revenue like gas filling stations, corner shops which are well being forced by Cadbury and on the other hand Kraft has a strong hold on supermarkets and groceries. As they are merged now the overall distribution will be higher for Kraft and Cadbury and their revenue will increase. Both of the companies has opposite markets that they have captured for Cadbury they have a large influence in Asia, Africa, Mexico and Turkey and for Kraft they have more influence in Brazil and China. By combining together they both can capture almost every market around the globe. The total value of the British chocolate confectionery sector amounts to approximately EUR 3. 9 billion. In the UK, the parties’ activities overlap only in the markets of tablets and pralines. Kraft is active in tablets and pralines mainly with its brands Milka, Toblerone and Terry’s chocolate Orange, and Cadbury with its brands Dairy Milk, Roses and Green & Black. (http://ec. europa. eu/competition/mergers/cases/decisions/m5644_20100106_20212_en. pdf page 9 ) (Kraft Foods Official 2011 Report) 1. 4 The risks associated with the choice of acquisition as an approach to this particular ‘partnership’ The first and last risk which is associated with this particular partnership is of keeping their word. The official position of the Fairtrade Foundation is the following: â€Å"The Fairtrade Foundation is very proud of our relationship with Cadbury, and what we have achieved together, including the conversion of Cadbury Dairy Milk to Fairtrade in the UK and Ireland in 2009, now being extended to three other international markets – Canada, Australia and New Zealand. This has had a tremendously positive public response, and is delivering major benefits to cocoa farmers in Ghana, quadrupling the amount they are able to sell on Fairtrade terms in 2010, compared to 2008. The Fairtrade Foundation and Cadbury have a shared vision for the future, and there are contractual commitments in place, which will form part of any intellectual property transfer between Cadbury and Kraft in any takeover. We believe that the progress we have made together in strengthening cocoa farmers to deliver long term sustainability of the cocoa supply chain, along with a fast growing level of consumer demand for Fairtrade products, not just in the UK but globally, present a unique and compelling case for continuing to pursue the Cadbury commitment to their Cocoa Partnership and to Fairtrade, and taking it even further in coming months and years. † Treehugger, 2012) According to the Official Statement, they will perform Fairtrade for both the companies and Kraft confirmed that it would uphold Cadbury’s commitments to Fairtrade which were that: †¢ Dairy Milk will continue to be Fairtrade in the UK and Northern Ireland and in three more markets, Canada, Australia and New Zealand by early 2010; †¢ Green & Black’s (which is owned by Cadbury) will move its entire range to Fairtrade by the end of 2011. (http://www. publications. parliament. uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmbis/234/234. df ) But no one is quiet happy with the outcome of the merger. Because Kraft did not really act upon what they stated to do before the merger, expression of the former first Minister of Scotland Jack McConnell asked Kraft in the Scottish Parliament to Honour the Fairtrade Part of the deal, he said â€Å"There have been concerns expressed for many years that Kraft has never shown any enthusiasm for fair trade and therefore this must be under threat as a result of the takeover. † (Treehugger, 2012). Warren Buffett isn’t too keen now either. Discussing the CEO of Kraft, he said â€Å"She thinks this is a good deal, I think it’s a bad deal. † Mind you, he is probably not worrying about the fairtrade aspect. Cadbury’s 6,000 UK workers are also worried, because it is a hi risk for the workers to now work at Cadbury under the American Management which has already influenced the Cadbury management. 1. 5 Feasible alternative? The most feasible alternative to Kraft for Cadbury was Hershey Chocolates, which is also an American Chocolate brand. In 2009 before the hostile takeover of Cadbury by Kraft, Cadbury talked to Hershey personal to include themselves in the bid so they can recommend Hershey over Kraft to its shareholders and are taken over by Hershey, but unfortunately Hershey did not want to be the part of the bidding war over Cadbury with Kraft because Hershey is its self weighing up. Even for Kraft Hershey was a good alternative over Cadbury because both are American Companies and would understand eachother easily rather than taking over a company is a completely different region, Ferrero maker of Rocher chocolate and Nutella is also a very good alternative for Cadbury but at the time of bid according to Trevor Datson the spokesperson for Cadbury said the company had no comment. No one at Ferrero was immediately available for comment. Involvement of National and corporate cultures Neither is the Nation nor the Corporate section is happy with the merger of the both companies, because for public there is a fear of cutting off more than 6000 jobs is Britian and more than 46,000 globally so people working at Cadbury are really afraid to work at it and other than employees the Corporate personal are also in fear of that the world leading brands like Dairy Milk, Flake and Wipsa are at risk with this merger and the shareholder are also not very happy with the $11. 5 bn deal. Critical Evaluation of both the companies about this Partnership Both of the companies had their own management and their own way of doing business around the world. As Kraft is majorly dairy products maker and is being loved by that around the world. Where as Cadbury is also a very well known name in the chocolate industry, because a lot of people in United Kingdom and at other major parts of the world such as Asia and Africa Cadbury is really loved for chocolate. As through the analysis this is a very hostile takeover i. e. , between Kraft and Cadbury, after taking over Cadbury Kraft accepted some of the points that they will do and keep is at it is and after that takeover they did not manage to fulfill those commitments which lead to misunderstanding between these two companies after their merger. As Kraft agreed that they will stick to Faretrade organization and to keep the same cocoa supplier as Cadbury had before and before the merger Cadbury was to close one of their plants but after merger Kraft did not do so and now they are facing these problems which are not very good in the long run for both of the companies. Involvement Of the Government In this hostile takeover not just the employees and shareholders but also the government, had and also has issues with this mergers. With the merger of Kraft Foods and Cadbury a number of important issues have bin highlighted in the way through which the foreign takeovers of UK companies are conducted.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.