KFC Sugar Tax Issue

emmajones1976

They already sold Coke though. This is rather different. Still, if the OP wants to waste her time dealing with Trading Standards (lol!) thats up to her.

pulliptears

I went to our local Theatre the other night.  First time since Covid.  Went to purchase a drink and some popcorn and surprise surprise, only bottles of Pepsi Max and other sweetener filled offerings.  I could have had water (thrilling), or as usual I could have drank myself into oblivion on any of the dozens of alcohol options offered.

In the end I had to leave, run to find a shop, then a cash point as the shop only accepted cash, and then run back to the theatre where I sat down just as the curtain went up.

I have emailed and complained, suggesting if they wont change the policy they might actually want to advertise it better rather than a simple" "Choose from our delicious range of drinks, ice-cream, snacks and sweet treats".

emmajones1976

They have a range of drinks from the sounds of it, so nothing inaccurate about it.

pulliptears

emmajones1976 said:

They have a range of drinks from the sounds of it, so nothing inaccurate about it.

Oh its you again.
Unsure why you keep returning to this thread other to be deliberately obtuse.
 Added to ignore for a much more pleasurable experience.  Suggest anyone else who's more interested in the thread than the wittering do the same.

emmajones1976

Having a different opinion isnt being "obtuse", btw

adamp87

I find it a bit baffling in all honesty. The ‘levy’ isn’t really that much to be honest & every company just puts it into the price of the sugar drink anyway.

I’m surprised that places like KFC just removed Pepsi altogether but I suppose you can argue it’s healthier in a way

sheramber

Retailers work on supply and demand. If the demand is for diet drinks they are not going to waste space and money stocking up on stocking non diet drinks.

The usual response is there is no demand for it.

bris

It's simple, like any business, and KFC is a big business it's all about the bottom line.

The sugar tax will cost them millions, so they weigh up the bottom line.

They simply work out whether the loss in revenue would be more than the sugar tax would cost.

The answer is clearly that most people will just accept the alternative, because they, well want a KFC.

The alternative would be to charge more for a non diet drink, people would just complain about that, two different prices for the same meal. That won't go down well as it's passing the tax onto the consumer.

jon81uk

bris said:

It's simple, like any business, and KFC is a big business it's all about the bottom line.

The sugar tax will cost them millions, so they weigh up the bottom line.

They simply work out whether the loss in revenue would be more than the sugar tax would cost.

The answer is clearly that most people will just accept the alternative, because they, well want a KFC.

The alternative would be to charge more for a non diet drink, people would just complain about that, two different prices for the same meal. That won't go down well as it's passing the tax onto the consumer.

Most other places do charge more for the sugary drink. 

It is the customer who must pay the sugar levy not the retailer.

so yes it is supply and demand, if not enough customers are buying the full sugar version they may swap it out, or decide that having more low sugar options is preferable but it’s not to do with the payment of the actual levy.

emmajones1976

Or, they dont want two different price points for postmix drinks so get rid of one of them.