Jump to content

Recommended Posts

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Iceland does some OK stuff. Their milk is cheap.


Cheap milk shouldn't be viewed as a positive thing; it should be concerning. It certainly is to dairy farmers losing their livelihood. But, as long as the bargain-hunters of East Dulwich can have a nice chat with the friendly workers of Iceland whilst fuelling a demand for low-priced produce, who cares about those farming communities or ethics...?


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/25/observer-view-on-supermarket-prices-dairy-farmers

Perhaps it would be an idea for someone (Louisa I'm looking at you) to write to M&S HQ and tell them what great staff Iceland has, and ask whether they could do anything for them. I believe the staff have yet to be offered anything else within the Iceland empire.

EDLove Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Iceland does some OK stuff. Their milk is

> cheap.

>

> Cheap milk shouldn't be viewed as a positive

> thing; it should be concerning. It certainly is to

> dairy farmers losing their livelihood. But, as

> long as the bargain-hunters of East Dulwich can

> have a nice chat with the friendly workers of

> Iceland whilst fuelling a demand for low-priced

> produce, who cares about those farming communities

> or ethics...?

>

> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/

> 25/observer-view-on-supermarket-prices-dairy-farme

> rs


Iceland are unlikely to be getting their milk cheaper than other ? bigger ? retailers. They're just happier with a smaller margin at retail.


And milk production has had less and less to do with 'farming communities' for some while now.


By all means criticise the industry, but don't single out Iceland.

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> EDLove Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > rahrahrah Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Iceland does some OK stuff. Their milk is

> > cheap.

> >

> > Cheap milk shouldn't be viewed as a positive

> > thing; it should be concerning. It certainly is

> to

> > dairy farmers losing their livelihood. But, as

> > long as the bargain-hunters of East Dulwich can

> > have a nice chat with the friendly workers of

> > Iceland whilst fuelling a demand for low-priced

> > produce, who cares about those farming

> communities

> > or ethics...?

> >

> >

> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/

>

> >

> 25/observer-view-on-supermarket-prices-dairy-farme

>

> > rs

>

> Iceland are unlikely to be getting their milk

> cheaper than other ? bigger ? retailers. They're

> just happier with a smaller margin at retail.

>

> And milk production has had less and less to do

> with 'farming communities' for some while now.

>

> By all means criticise the industry, but don't

> single out Iceland.


Did you read the article?


'The ad puts Marks & Spencer at the top of the league, paying 78p for four pints to farmers for milk that costs 68p to produce. Sainsbury?s pays 72p for four pints while, at the bottom of the league, Lidl, Aldi and Iceland pay 56p to 59p. It?s not enough.'


I'm more than happy to criticise the other retailers but this thread is about Iceland...

EDLove Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But, as long as the bargain-hunters of East Dulwich can

> have a nice chat with the friendly workers of

> Iceland whilst fuelling a demand for low-priced

> produce, who cares about those farming communities

> or ethics...?




It's easy to have ethics when you're not on a tight budget.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> EDLove Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > But, as long as the bargain-hunters of East

> Dulwich can

> > have a nice chat with the friendly workers of

> > Iceland whilst fuelling a demand for low-priced

> > produce, who cares about those farming

> communities

> > or ethics...?

>

>

>

> It's easy to have ethics when you're not on a

> tight budget.


Mmm, this response seems a bit at odds with reports that, despite the economic downturn, the purchase of ethical products (like fair trade) and produce that is locally produced, is actually on the rise. Seems that less money doesn't necessarily mean that people are less considerate.

EDLove Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 'The ad puts Marks & Spencer at the top of the

> league, paying 78p for four pints to farmers for

> milk that costs 68p to produce. Sainsbury?s pays

> 72p for four pints while, at the bottom of the

> league, Lidl, Aldi and Iceland pay 56p to 59p.

> It?s not enough.'


I'd take an ad from one of the big retailers with a big pinch of salt. It's very likely to be a snapshot rather than anything that reflects long-term prices and like-for-like comparisons (as the ad itself admits when it says sourcing from co-ops might pay higher prices). The supermarkets play the same game with their 'cheaper than...' ads.

EDLove Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > EDLove Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > But, as long as the bargain-hunters of East

> > Dulwich can

> > > have a nice chat with the friendly workers of

> > > Iceland whilst fuelling a demand for

> low-priced

> > > produce, who cares about those farming

> > communities

> > > or ethics...?

> >

> >

> >

> > It's easy to have ethics when you're not on a

> > tight budget.

>

> Mmm, this response seems a bit at odds with

> reports that, despite the economic downturn, the

> purchase of ethical products (like fair trade) and

> produce that is locally produced, is actually on

> the rise. Seems that less money doesn't

> necessarily mean that people are less considerate.



I'm not talking about the people having to tighten their belts a bit, I'm talking about the people feeding their family on a shoestring.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> EDLove Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Otta Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > EDLove Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > But, as long as the bargain-hunters of East

> > > Dulwich can

> > > > have a nice chat with the friendly workers

> of

> > > > Iceland whilst fuelling a demand for

> > low-priced

> > > > produce, who cares about those farming

> > > communities

> > > > or ethics...?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > It's easy to have ethics when you're not on a

> > > tight budget.

> >

> > Mmm, this response seems a bit at odds with

> > reports that, despite the economic downturn,

> the

> > purchase of ethical products (like fair trade)

> and

> > produce that is locally produced, is actually

> on

> > the rise. Seems that less money doesn't

> > necessarily mean that people are less

> considerate.

>

>

> I'm not talking about the people having to tighten

> their belts a bit, I'm talking about the people

> feeding their family on a shoestring.


Seriously? You've decided to respond with an example of abject poverty, rather than the average East Dulwich consumer? Brilliant.


It's not unreasonable to suggest that people seriously think about why their milk/bananas/coffee/clothing is so cheap and try to make ethical decisions as a result. Yes, this is likely to be more difficult for those on very tight budgets but it certainly is realistic for the rest of the population.


Brand New Guy - The ad was endorsed by the National Farmers Union which also points out that only certain supermarkets have schemes in place that pay a sustainable price to farmers.

spider69 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> New residents in ED have their head up their arse

> that they have no idea of the real world.

>

> All they are worried about is how I can protect my

> over paid house,s value.

>

> Lets wish for a new financial crash and see how

> things change.



Yep, "lets wish for a new financial crash".... genius!

"New residents in ED have their head up their arse that they have no idea of the real world.

All they are worried about is how I can protect my over paid house,s value.

Lets wish for a new financial crash and see how things change."


Chip on your shoulder or what bro ?

I'm not convinced that Iceland is particularly cheap. It has a few very good value basics (milk being the main one), but actually a lot of the food is really poor value - heavily processed, high fat / salt. People are picking a couple of things Iceland do offer at a good price and making out like the whole operation is some kind of hero to people on a budget. I would say they're closer to a villain if anything. People on a budget don't need to be sold poor quality, bad value frozen meals - and this is Iceland's core business. M&S is arguably very similar in many ways (heavily processed, 'value added' (aka ripoff) ready meals) - but at least they're generally flogging the stuff to people who can afford to waste their money.


The caricature of Iceland as a life line to those on a budget doesn't stand up IMO. Lidl maybe, independent grocers and wholesale places certainly - Iceland - not so much.

Partially agree RRR. The core range of frozen convenience food is crap of course, but "value" is subjective.. huge "deep-pan" pizzas for ?1, chicken curry for ?1.50, etc. It's not hard to see why people short on money and time would buy this stuff.

r^3, I agree that cheap food doesn't have to be heavily processed and bad for your health, but to cook healthy cheap food is actually a pretty time consuming exercise, and not one that is easily carried out by e.g. shift workers with kids.


Iceland was done in by a demographic shift, some will feel they've lost a useful service, but presumably many more will be happy with M&S offerings (otherwise they'll quickly go out of business).

Sure, I accept what you're saying with regards the attractions of low price, poor quality processed food. But it comes at a pretty terrible cost to health. For that reason I'm not particularly keen to mourn Iceland's passing. That's not to say that M&S is much better.


As I said, if you were talking about the cheap wholesale places, or fresh food stalls (which are fairly abundant in Peckham) being forced out of business by 'gentrification', then I would be 100% with you.


Likewise Lidl - which does sell 'proper' food at low prices.

"I am no expert, but alas I suspect the staff will be buggered. Iceland is not being taken over by M&S, so TUPE Regulations probably won't apply."


I am also no expert, but TUPE is definitely not limited to corporate takeover situations, so Iceland staff should be getting proper advice.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sure, I accept what you're saying with regards the

> attractions of low price, poor quality processed

> food. But it comes at a pretty terrible cost to

> health. For that reason I'm not particularly keen

> to mourn Iceland's passing. That's not to say that

> M&S is much better.


.... btw, I do realise that this sounds a little sanctimonious. To be clear, it's not that I'm against people being able to make their own choices, or that I don't understand the pressures on someone working double shifts and juggling childcare on low pay. It's just that I can't find it in my heart to mourn Iceland.

Of course, I don't get the idea of mourning a branch of any particular big business either, but I think people were more mourning the loss of a service they used, rather than some emotional attachment to the idea of Iceland (in most cases). And I agree with you that the stuff like the frozen pizzas and a lot of ready meals etc isn't particularly healthy, but that's just symptomatic of the world we live in. Cheapest and most convenient food is processed, fatty and salty. It's interesting that the poorest are much more likely to be obese (a cursory Google will show various studies and newspaper articles to support this). The criticism levelled at Iceland as a purveyor of unhealthy food is probably correct, but Iceland is a symptom, not the cause.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hello! I would be keen to hear from parents of secondary-school age in state schools of the cost of school trips overseas. Particularly interested in Kingsdale and Charter but all examples welcome. many thanks!
    • Or the government have it wrong. Certainly picking a fight with farmers, the very definition of working people, is probably not going to end well. The problem here is that Labour hung their hat on not taxing "working people" which was clearly the output of some awful focus group and clearly not the term they wanted to use. They failed to properly qualify what a working person is and it is now coming back to haunt them because the very definition of a working person is anyone who is, well, working and that covers a whole gamut of people and salaries. Don't pick a fight with farmers if you have stated you aren't going after working people because public opinion will be against you. Farmers are the backbone of any country and work so hard and yes, there are some that are incredibly well off but the majority are not and farming is a trade that gets handed down through the generations. And farmers will make their case very public in ways other groups won't.   Labour's communication has been awful but they got a free pass before the election because everyone was so focused on how awful the Tories were. But now they are in power and they are tripping themselves up because in leadership you need more than soundbites.   The "Son of a Toolmaker" is the type of thing that haunts politicians until the end of their career. Clearly someone decided to detach Keir from his grammar school, university (including Oxford), legal career, knight of the realm background. His face when everyone laughed when he mentioned it during one of the pre-election debates was a picture. He is the son of a toolmaker but you look a bit silly when people then say yes but your dad ran a tool-making company...   Coming into power on a ticket of "look how they have been behaving" and then behaving in many ways the Tories were has been a disaster for politicians of all parties. The clothing funding and access to no.10 was just a nightmare for them and in these days where today's newspaper is no longer tomorrow's chip paper the comments made about Trump (which I am sure most people can agree with) are just embarrassing.   Winter Fuel Tax has been a disaster. Yes, there are many pensioners who don't need it but those aren't going to be the ones talking to the media about how awful the winter is going to be and people only remember those shouting the loudest.   The budget was an interesting one. I was watching Theo Pathitis on TV and he had swung from the Tories to Labour ahead of the election and was talking about the impact of the Employer NI and you could tell that he was very carefully choosing his words as he knew how hard this was going to be on business and what the implications are but clearly didn't want to be left with egg on his face as he was telling everyone to vote Labour ahead of the election.   Labour were, understandably, happy to right the massive wave of Tory discontent and pre-election all of the world's ills were down to the Tories. The first speech Starmer gave after winning spoke nothing about the previous government but everything about global challenges that were going to make it tough. The challenge for Labour is they convinced people that every problem was down to the Tories and that removing them would solve everything but things are not as straight forward as that. I senses things changing when they announced the 22bn blackhole and many people said...but 9bn of that are based on decisions you made in relation to public sector pay rises. Labour are finding out, to their cost, that being in opposition is easy. Being in power is not.          
    • Adsl over copper is not obsolete, these are lines that are fed on exchange only and are still being installed now and will be for foreseeable, they are being changed to sotap which is basically no dial tone and will be voice over internet 
    • Russia is the aggressor.they did have a second rate army most of it gone.why is putin so deluded .in that Russia can use chinese  Iranian  north Korean missiles drones to attack unkraine civilians city's energy facilties.they have escalated the war  by using north Korean soldiers in combat.but putting saids you are not allowed to fight back using other country's weapons in Russia long range missiles.unkraine have proved they are no push over.give them all the long range missiles they want to hit in side Russia hard .
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...