Unilever (ULVR)

[Gengulphus]

As i explained,I am simply stating that I do not believe it is possible to successfully and profitably produce Magnum ice-cream or Cif cleaner or Pot Noodles globally with net zero C02 emissions and no pollution. I suspect it simply cannot be done. It has not been done so far, that is for sure.

Yes, you successfully demolished that idea before, and you're now just stomping on the remains. But it's a straw man of your own devising, not a proposition anyone else has put forward.

Gengulphus

[JoyofBricks8]

I only wish it were a straw-man.

https://rebellion.earth/the-truth/demands/

This calls for net zero emissions before 2025.

If the Extinction Rebellion protests prevail and their demands are met, that places the likes of Unilever on a very tight timescale to achieve total decarbonization of their Uk activities, 25 years ahead of the current legal deadline for UK net zero. Just 6 years to achieve the impossible.

Essentially any manufacturing currently performed in the UK by Unilever would need to be offshored to a location without a law restricting GHG emissions. The logistics will be challenging.

Our company was already threatened with effective ejection from UK facilities in 2050 by the Climate Change Act 2008 amendment. Now XR pose a rapidly emerging serious threat to Unilever's UK business and the jobs of Unilever workers in the UK. Unilevers UK manufacturing facilities would become stranded assets requiring accounting writeoff.

Notrmally when a company is facing a legal threat, it lobbies hard against it. Are we seeing opposition to this agenda from Unilever? Not at all.

[Arborbridge]

If the Extinction Rebellion protests prevail and their demands are met, that places the likes of Unilever on a very tight timescale to achieve total decarbonization of their Uk activities, 25 years ahead of the current legal deadline for UK net zero. Just 6 years to achieve the impossible.

Wow, that's one heck of an "if" you are using there!

Arb.

[JoyofBricks8]

You have read Taleb, right? Fat tails, black swans?

You couldnt describe this as a black swan because it is a very visible risk. It is high impact, but low probability, but:

We can demonstrate that powerful people are "bending with the prevailing political gales, rather than risking being broken by them", on environmental matters. Unilever have given us a good example of that upthread, with their plastic greenwash.

We know that there is a substantial public protest demanding Net Zero 2025.

We know that Parliament is currently chaotic and the law is in flux in many areas.

We are not seeing Unilever take defensive measures to lobby against business unfriendly change.

There is thus a non-zero probability that the protest succeeds in shifting the Overton window sufficiently to speed up decarbonization. Maybe even gains a concession on timing.

After all the government has set the direction of travel on this already with Mrs Mays amendment to the Climate Change Act. "What does it matter if they move the timings to the left and look like a champion of the environment in the process?" the MPs may say. And billions of pounds of Unilever shareholder value could go up in a puff of hot air.

[Gengulphus]

I only wish it were a straw-man.

https://rebellion.earth/the-truth/demands/

This calls for net zero emissions before 2025.
...

On an appropriate board and in an appropriate thread, yes, it would not be a straw man. But this board is about Unilever and we're discussing Unilever's and their management's responses to environmental concerns, not Extinction Rebellion and their agenda. Unilever haven't suggested producing "Magnum ice-cream or Cif cleaner or Pot Noodles globally with net zero C02 emissions and no pollution" or anything like it, nor has anyone (other than you) on this thread, so your raising that idea in this discussion and demolishing it is a classic straw man.

Notrmally when a company is facing a legal threat, it lobbies hard against it. Are we seeing opposition to this agenda from Unilever? Not at all.

You do realise that not all lobbying is publicly visible, don't you? And that a lot of lobbying is done through industry associations and other similar organisations? The fact that you don't see Unilever lobbying against Extinction Rebellion doesn't necessarily mean it isn't happening. Nor does the fact that what they are saying in public is spun to appeal to the current public mood - that's par for the course and what I would expect of any big company (though note that what I would expect and what I would like in an ideal world are not the same thing!).

And normally when a company is not facing a legal threat, it doesn't waste too much time and energy on it - and Extinction Rebellion's agenda is not yet a legal threat (it might become one, if e.g. a government proposed the Bill they want, but it isn't one yet). This applies especially when the lobbying concerned would be done in public and can be expected to be unpopular with the public.

Gengulphus

[JoyofBricks8]

As if by magic:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/20 ... s-bid-win/

Tis almost as if they read these boards.

The new CEO is clearly indicating his business plan is going to put woke political gestures over profitability. Don’t they get it? If something is selling and making money, what’s the problem? Oh: it’s not woke enough for snowflake millennials. Best stop making all that money.

They say a good business is one that can be run by idiots because sooner or later one will be in charge.

Unilever: This appointment is your chance: Show us what a good business you are.

[monabri]

"Almost two-thirds of so-called “Generation Z” consumers, typically those shoppers born between 1995 and 2010, research the origins of a product before deciding whether to buy it or not, according to data experts Kantar."

I wonder how many 9 years do research? ....I also question that ~66% of "Gen Z" do any serious research before deciding to buy.

[Dod101]

I have not responded to JofB8. I suggest that he is simply stirring things up. The general sentiment was aired in the summer if I remember correctly and he needs to read the Unilever website rather than believe everything he reads in newspaper reports.

I have five granddaughters born in the time cited and I am almost certain that they do not research the origins of a product before deciding to buy it or not. I will though ask them.

Dod

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

"Almost two-thirds of so-called “Generation Z” consumers, typically those shoppers born between 1995 and 2010, research the origins of a product before deciding whether to buy it or not, according to data experts Kantar."

I wonder how many 9 years do research? ....I also question that ~66% of "Gen Z" do any serious research before deciding to buy.

Have to say, some do, my friend... My 17 year old.

* She sent off for metal reusable straws
* She only buys soaps, cosmetics that havent been animal tested. The kids share with each other the various brands and shops that quality etc.
* Shes just gone vegan etc.

The mainstream media are predictably behind the curve. Most this "research" is basically on snapchat and instagrams networks of the young uns.

Old "haters" may sneer but these are future shoppers and investors. On R4s "Money box" program last week, they ran a feature all about growth in ethical investments, pensions , green bonds and stuff. It may not be big at the moment but I guess it will build momentum.

Back to subject of my OP, yeah sure, what Jope was proposing could well be risky for ULVR. Maybe it will backfire? Or perhaps they've read the writing on the wall. Because its not just our kids, there's been surveys over Stateside, with many Young Republican voters starting to reject DJT, over the climate. I don't have the source to hand but its out there. China and India big Asian powerhouses of growth eh? But with increasingly populated cities who knows when their kids will start to get pi$$ed off too?

Matt

[JoyofBricks8]

I was rather under the impression that one of the attractions of Unilever was the boost it was going to get from a growing consumer class in the developing world, keen to buy Unilever’s branded goods as an aspirational purchase.

Now we have a boss who is turning away from all that, and appears to be targeting a narrow subset of rich environmentalist Western millennials.

Doesn’t look like a big opportunity to me. It looks like a case of wishful thinking. Unilever are getting woke. Will they go broke?

[JoyofBricks8]

Moderator Message:
RS :I have deleted the text of this post. These boards are for financial posts only. In fact any post directly attacking another poster or his family is not wanted on any board here.

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

Have to say, some do, my friend... My 17 year old.

* She sent off for metal reusable straws
* She only buys soaps, cosmetics that havent been animal tested. The kids share with each other the various brands and shops that quality etc.
* Shes just gone vegan etc.

The mainstream media are predictably behind the curve. Most this "research" is basically on snapchat and instagrams networks....

I hope she scrubs the lumen of those metal straws well every time. Biofilms can be nasty. Perhaps she may wish to do some actual hands on research by taking a hacksaw to an old metal straw and checking out the microbial wonderland lurking within.

She will of course be refusing modern medicine too, as that is based on animal testing. And no plastic tubes or helpful animal tested antibiotics after ingesting them thar microbes...

Or is she merely posing as a paragon of eco virtue?

I think the reality is most woke millennials are mere posers, and that pose will get dropped when it comes to putting Magnums, Domestos or PG Tips in the shopping basket.

The only "reality" I'll comment is the one in which you dont turn MY DAUGHTER into the object of your vitreol, but instead upon the generation she just happens to be a member of and the response as gradually being adopted by business.

FWIW Katie doesnt buy ULVR brands.

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

This is exactly why I reported JoBs original post. His tone suggests a personal crusade against my childrens generation and the green movement, instead of having objectively dissecting the meaning of Alan Jope's statement, i.e the appreciation of a changing consumer base and gradual transitioning of their offerings, with regard ULVR.

Perhaps the current board of ULVR are stupid. Perhaps Alan now takes LSD and ignores all analysis presented by his various reports.

What about comments more about "ULVR" and "news", than digs at the Greens, and the *perceived* hypocrisy of the XR movement?

[JoyofBricks8]

Have to say, some do, my friend... My 17 year old.

* She sent off for metal reusable straws
* She only buys soaps, cosmetics that havent been animal tested. The kids share with each other the various brands and shops that quality etc.
* Shes just gone vegan etc.

The mainstream media are predictably behind the curve. Most this "research" is basically on snapchat and instagrams networks....

I hope she scrubs the lumen of those metal straws well every time. Biofilms can be nasty. Perhaps she may wish to do some actual hands on research by taking a hacksaw to an old metal straw and checking out the microbial wonderland lurking within.

She will of course be refusing modern medicine too, as that is based on animal testing. And no plastic tubes or helpful animal tested antibiotics after ingesting them thar microbes...

Or is she merely posing as a paragon of eco virtue?

I think the reality is most woke millennials are mere posers, and that pose will get dropped when it comes to putting Magnums, Domestos or PG Tips in the shopping basket.

The only "reality" I'll comment is the one in which you dont turn MY DAUGHTER into the object of your vitreol, but instead upon the generation she just happens to be a member of and the response as gradually being adopted by business.

FWIW Katie doesnt buy ULVR brands.

Fair enough, I could probably have phrased much better, I concede! I will limit pointing out millennial foibles to the general, rather than the specific.

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

I hope she scrubs the lumen of those metal straws well every time. Biofilms can be nasty. Perhaps she may wish to do some actual hands on research by taking a hacksaw to an old metal straw and checking out the microbial wonderland lurking within.

She will of course be refusing modern medicine too, as that is based on animal testing. And no plastic tubes or helpful animal tested antibiotics after ingesting them thar microbes...

Or is she merely posing as a paragon of eco virtue?

I think the reality is most woke millennials are mere posers, and that pose will get dropped when it comes to putting Magnums, Domestos or PG Tips in the shopping basket.

The only "reality" I'll comment is the one in which you dont turn MY DAUGHTER into the object of your vitreol, but instead upon the generation she just happens to be a member of and the response as gradually being adopted by business.

FWIW Katie doesnt buy ULVR brands.

Fair enough, I could probably have phrased much better, I concede!

No worries!

I do my fair share of "going off half cocked" too

I will limit pointing out millennial foibles to the general, rather than the specific.

A ha! Even better idea. Talking about ULVR specific i.e. the management and their perceptions, their past, present, and *potential* futures brands, in a ULVR thread. And general millennial foibles in a PD thread, and don't you worry, I've plenty of criticisms of my daughters' bunch too, but then again we were all teenagers once upon a time.

Good day to you,
Matt

[Dod101]

I trust Unilever to have a fair idea of what is going on in the consumer marketplace. Jope is not proposing to sell all the apparently offensive brands overnight but is simply talking of general aspirations I think. Millenials in general will probably grow out of their current obsessions as real life hits but I guess to have that interest is up to them. In the meantime if you are a consumer in India or the third world in general you may have more pressing matters on your mind.

Dod

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

For my own (FA) records I decided to look at ULVR a bit today. Not regards a buy or a sell, I'm content to hold all our shares. Mainly cos it's on my todo list and besides due to the level of grottiness outside, garden maintanence projects will take a back seat today.

Anyway I googled "Unilever investor relations" to grab a bunch of ARs and obv. I went to https://www.unilever.com/investor-relations/. The first imagery I get to see portrays something called "OMO".

I google "unilever OMO",

https://www.unilever.com/brands/home-care/omo.html

earlier on last week, tey are (my opinion) merely telegraphing a slight (ok! thats subjective) change in brand focus.

[TheMotorcycleBoy]

This sustainability + ULVR thing aint new. This is ULVRs FY2014 report:

https://www.unilever.com/Images/ir_unil ... 557_en.pdf

Load it and do a search for the word "sustainable". The board are obviously? ramping this effort up now, presumably after market analysis reflects growing segment of consumers (e.g. Gen. Z or millenials whatever you call em) are shopping more selectively.

Surprised none of you old timers didn't recognise/recall/remember this.

[idpickering]

Third quarter highlights; https://www.unilever.com/Images/ir-q3-2 ... 203_en.pdf

[Dod101]

Third quarter highlights; https://www.unilever.com/Images/ir-q3-2 ... 203_en.pdf

Thanks Ian. Jope is not saying much at this stage but the message is clear enough surely, that they are doing well and on target.

As to the Motorcycle boy and others, 'sustainable' as been in Unilever's vocabulary for some years now and I think we have allowed ourselves to be distracted by JofB8. Unilever did not get to be where they are without knowing a lot about their markets and how to succeed in them. I am quite relaxed about them and indeed wish all my shares were like them.

Dod