Posted by Sheila Shayon on September 18, 2014 03:57 PM
Steadfast retailing rivals Target and Walmart came together earlier this month under one uniting topic: sustainability. The pair co-hosted the Beauty and Personal Care Products Sustainability Summit in Chicago alongside Forum for the Future to help "improve sustainability performance in the personal care and beauty industry."
"We think it's the right time to have a discussion" and come to a collaborative point of view, said Christina Hennington, Target's SVP of health and beauty, the Chicago Tribune reported, adding the demand for such products over the last five years "has been staggering," but, "it's a complicated value chain."
Target has seen a 20-percent growth in natural and organic products, which 97 percent of its shoppers purchase in some form or another. Walmart, meanwhile, created a sustainability index for hundreds of product categories and has pushed its suppliers to eliminate or reduce 10 toxic chemicals from beauty products, household cleaners and cosmetics. Similar commitments have been made by Avon and Procter & Gamble.
“We need to move faster toward that goal because the expectations are changing,” said Rob Kaplan, Walmart’s director of product sustainability. “We’re looking for our suppliers to demonstrate voluntary leadership and to make commitments and to move from a conversation to action.”Continue reading...
Posted by Mark J. Miller on August 14, 2014 11:41 AM
Health bars claim to be good for everyone, but that's not the case when it comes to trademark claims.
KIND has taken Clif Bar to court, claiming that the latter’s new Mojo bars bear a little too much resemblance to their own packaging, Lexology reports. Clif, of course, “disputes that the packaging of KIND bars is distinctive,” the site notes. KIND asked the court to temporarily stop Clif from selling the Mojo bars, which are packaged in a clear wrapper, like KIND bars, while the suit is underway, but the court has declined. KIND has appealed that decision.
While the court discovered that Clif marketers thought the KIND packaging was “best in class” when the Mojo design was created, it also found that a few other health bars had similar designs and that consumers weren’t confused about whether they were buying a KIND bar or not when they purchased a Mojo bar.Continue reading...
Posted by Dale Buss on February 13, 2014 09:27 AM
Comcast acquires Time Warner Cable in mammoth deal as it eyes Netflix turf.
Apple says it doesn't procure blood metal and talks about launching updated TV set-top box.
Walmart sees pitchman Mike Rowe come to defense of retailer on social media.
GM recalls 600,000 older vehicles to replace ignition switches.
Avon nears bribery settlement.
Cisco sees growth hit by sagging tech demand.
Fiat taps Sean "Diddy" Combs to tout 500 line worldwide.
Ford reveals GPS privacy practices.
Intuit sees Super Bowl ad pay off.
Kind sues Clif Bar in nutrition bar packaging dust-up.
Lexus keeps crown in J.D. Power reliability survey.Continue reading...
chew on this
Posted by Dale Buss on November 6, 2012 05:08 PM
For a while, the notion of regulating genetically modified organisms (better known as GMOs) included in food seemed like a good idea, and anti-Big Food advocates in California attracted a lot of support in a state where residents like to be on the cutting edge of just about everything. Calfornians have never minded serving as a bellwether on new regulatory initiatives that end up sweeping the rest of the country, such as automotive emissions.
But the closer today's vote on Proposition 37 loomed, the more that initial support of the idea waned. And this U.S. Election Day, even backers of the anti-GMO initiative seemed resigned to its defeat, although it's still being closely watched. (Update: Prop 37 was indeed defeated at the polling booth.)
What happened? Well, a combination of huge contributions by moneyed CPG brands battered Prop 37's drive to label GMOs in a massive advertising and PR blitz with a "No on 37" drive. And backers of the added regulation alleged dirty tricks by the competition as they sought to sway voters (despite scientific evidence to the contrary) that GMO-containing products are hardly the stuff of "Frankenfood" that really harms consumers.Continue reading...
chew on this
Posted by Dale Buss on September 17, 2012 01:11 PM
The vast majority of American consumers don't care whether their foods contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Food executives and think tanks will tell you that and cite, for example, how Indiana local bakery Aunt Nellie's bombed when it introduced a specifically labeled "non-GMO" bread a couple of years ago.
But California isn't most of America, with a more health-conscious outlook than most states. That's why mainstream food companies are in a hot and heavy contest against GMO opponents over Proposition 37, The Right to Know Genetically Modified Food Act, a piece of state legislation that, if passed in November, would require GMO-containing products to disclose that on labels, and make California the first state to mandate genetically modified food.
Similar to what happened to automakers after California took an extreme position on cutting emissions, essentially imposing that higher standard on cars sold all over the country, food and beverage companies are concerned that California will serve as a bellwether in GMO labeling regulation as well.
In a particular bind in this fight are the many mainstream food conglomerates that now own organic brands, which by definition don't include GMOs: Kellogg, owner of GMO poster brand Kashi; General Mills, owner of the Cascadian Farm, Muir Glen, Larabar and Food Should Taste Good brands; Coca-Cola, owner of Odwalla and Honest Tea; PepsiCo; and Dean Foods, owner of Horizon Organics.Continue reading...