Now there have already been promises that Ben and Jerry's "Social Flavor" will be maintained (and not be retired like "Cool Britannia") in whatever deal that might transpire but I've been wondering if that will really redeem things.
I mean, if you buy a product from a company, you are supporting that company. And you are supporting that company's parent company.
So, if you have a sip of Guinness stout, you are ultimately supporting the London based conglomerate Diageo - which also owns Burger King and Pillsbury. I don't know about you, but that really tainted the Guinness "brand" for me. Now I know that I am not supporting some Irish institution of brewing craftsmanship but am instead supporting an institution that creates Whoppers, pre-fabricates cookie dough, and bullies Ben and Jerry's
(Pillsbury owns Haagan-Dazs which in the eighties tried to pressure grocery stores to exclude ice cream from a particular Vermont based ice cream company. A guerilla media campaign called "What's the Pillsbury Dough-Boy Afraid-Of" halted the pressure tactic. You are going to have to trust me on this one: I couldn't find any supporting documents on the web)
But who am I fooling? I mean, the world seems thoroughly nonplused by those Sprite 'Ignore Large Brand Name Advertisers - Obey Your Thirst' anti-ads even though the fact that Coca-Cola owns Sprite is hardly unknown.
Oh well, all I know is this: this Ben and Jerry's buy-out would have never happened if they had made me CEO.