|
|
Cadbury’s Hit by Salmonella Scare in the UK
Invite a Friend
Free Email Alerts
<<Previous
By July 01, 2006, the investigation by the FSA had extended to more Cadbury
brands, as it was believed that the base material that was infected was used to
manufacture a large number of Cadbury products at other plants located in
Birmingham and Bath.
|
|
Cadbury’s
image took another hit when the FSA reported that the company records
showed that Salmonella Montevideo strain contaminations had been
observed as early as 2002. The FSA also mentioned that it was not aware
of these incidents until its investigations in July 2006.
In the wake of the controversy, Cadbury pulled its ads off the air and
even withdrew its ads that were screened as part of its long-standing
sponsorship of the popular UK TV soap, Coronation Street.
There were also reports that there was confusion among retailers of how
the company would go ahead with its major brand launch of Cadbury Melts,
a new brand targeted at premium block chocolate segment, due to be
launched in August 2006. |
Analysts felt that the whole incident had raised questions
on the safety standards at Cadbury and could impact its sales in the short term.
They believed that this could turn out to be an opportunity for competitors like
Nestle and Master Foods who could take advantage of the situation and increase
their market share at the expense of Cadbury.
There was also the issue of the impact of this crisis on the company’s brand
image and reputation. A few experts said that this case showed that companies
could lose their reputations, carefully built over many years, within a short
span of time. Critics opined that Cadbury should have been more forthcoming to
the authorities and dealt with the crisis when it was discovered in January 2006
itself.
There were also questions raised about Cadbury’s just-in-time manufacturing
practices as tankers containing the base ingredient were dispatched and mixed at
other factories even before the ingredient’s quality test results were obtained.
Andrew Tector, head of the health department at Herefordshire council, said, “We
are looking at why their testing [procedures] were such that results come too
late. A tanker leaves every hour. Tests for faecal coliforms and salmonella come
back after 27-29 hours. [It] renders the test meaningless.”9
[9] Felicity Lawrence, “Salmonella outbreaks kept secret
by Cadbury in 2002,” www.guardian.co.uk, July 5, 2006. |
To download this micro case study (No. MCBE0004 ) click on the
button below, and select the case from the list of
available micro cases:
More Micro Case Studies
AIDS Drugs - Have Patent Rights Triumphed Over Patients’ Rights?
Fake CVs Roil the Indian Job Market
Pantaloon Forays into Insurance
Yahoo! and eBay’s Strategic Alliance
Intel and The Dell-AMD Deal
Apple Launches Fifth Avenue Retail Store
Exxon’s Problem of Riches
Microsoft Unveils IE 7 Beta
Department of Posts Targets Private Couriers
Google and Sony - Buzz Marketing ‘The Da Vinci Code’
Birlas Buy Tata’s Stake in “Idea Cellular”
Microsoft’s "People-Ready" Campaign - Targeting IBM ?
Google and the 'Click Fraud' Menace
Real Madrid’s ‘Galacticos’ Strategy: Losing Steam?
Bird Flu In India
The Death Of Aibo
The ‘Le Clemenceau’ Controversy
BPO’s Tap into Rural India’s Potential
Online Advertising In India - The MSN India And NDTV Media Tie-Up
The Pixar Buy - Disney’s Creative Mojo?
Labor Unrest At Toyota India
Coca-Cola Faces Another University Ban
|
More Classifications...