Cynical, I know, but: What if WalMart’s announcement makes food pricier?
When WalMart announced yesterday that it was going to abolish the price differential between healthy and unhealthy food, it didn’t explain any specifics about how that might happen. Corby Kummer over at the Atlantic wrote:
The announced target for added sugars will disappoint many who would like sodas and soft drinks abolished, and the soft-drink question came up immediately (okay, I was the first question on the first conference call, and I brought it up). Sodas are turning into a third rail, and her reply deftly avoided it. Consumers already know they can buy diet soda, [the VP doing a press call] said. When they buy candy or cake (she didn’t mention soda—that came under “choices” they know are already available), they want to have an occasional indulgence. “Our focus,” she told me, “is where the customer doesn’t expect added sugar: flavored milks and puddings, fruit juice and canned fruit, breakfast items like muffins, granola, and French toast.” In a second conference call she ticked off more items, and added that breakfast pastries, breads, crackers, cottage cheese, and yogurts are often sources of hidden sodium and sugars. Dr. John Agwunobi, the company’s vice president of health and wellness added that another of the company’s promises this morning is to eliminate the price difference in reduced-fat, reduced-sugar, and whole-grain items, so that these will not cost more more than ones with higher fat and sodium, (emphasis added) as is often the case now. (This equaling of price does not mean, as some have hopefully thought, that Walmart will make healthier options less expensive than less-healthy ones. Dream on!)
This got me thinking: There are two ways to eliminate the price difference between things. Make one more expensive, or the other less — or, a third way, a little of both. It will be interesting to see which strategy wins out.
