Kraft are purely motivated by the bottom line on their balance sheet (which is a good way to run a company) whilst Cadbury's adopted the same attitude but more paternally and have been reluctant to send production abroad to Eastern Europe etc.. In spite of everything that Kraft has spouted to gain ownership of Cadbury's (for which they paid over the odds) they will need to pay back a huge loan and I will publicly state here that there will be many Cadbury job losses in the UK during the next few years as production is transferral abroad and it is not as if Kraft have no track record in this (. If/when this does happen the irony of RBS (funded by the UK taxpayer) lending Kraft the money, will not escape me.
'Kraft have also promised to keep a facility open that Cabbury's was due to close, so I'd say this is a good deal all round'..(form a previous thread)....if you believe that you will believe that the moon is made from green cheese. The Keynsham facility, which I know well, is a bit of an anachronism and does not fit into Kraft's philosophy in any shape or form. Kraft know that the Keynsham's production would be much, much cheaper in the Czech Rebulic or in Poland.
Incidentally, have we any British-owned manufacturing companies left to sell?
We all regret this take over but the UK is a major investor in US companies, too - eg Unilever took over Ben and Jerry's Ice cream and Bestfoods, and in the captalist "free economy" we live in , it is very difficult to prevent such mergers.
GANDALF <|:-)> is probably right in what he thinks lies ahead for Cadbury`s,the shareholders take their quick buck,and another great British company most were proud of joins the plasticated American food chain.
Just to play devils advocate; does it really matter which 'country' owns a company?
I can understand that people care about where the manufacturing takes place, but it doesn't matter whether the company is American, British, German or Polynesian, almost all companies are shifting manufacturing to the lowest cost country.