Ben Cohen has a message for the big corporation that acquired his ice cream brand 25 years ago: If you truly care about us, set us free.
The co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s is attempting to gather similarly minded investors to acquire the brand from Unilever as the large European consumer company gets ready for sale. divest its frozen dessert holdings . Both scenarios—a full initial public offering (IPO) for all of Unilever’s ice cream businesses, or selling off Ben & Jerry’s as a standalone entity—would conclude one of the most contentious partnerships in the business world.
In the year 2000, Unilever embraced us as we were," Cohen stated. "But now our paths have diverged. All we want is for them to release us from this partnership.
Even as a breakup approaches, salvos between Ben & Jerry’s independent board and the brand’s parent company continue to fly: Lawsuits. Arguments over whether to criticize the Trump administration. Unilever’s ouster of Ben & Jerry’s CEO —allegedly over the brand’s social activism.
A significant part of the conflict arises due to the unconventional acquisition deal between Unilever. hit upon Ben & Jerry’s in 2000 .
Cohen, who co-founded Ben & Jerry’s in 1978 alongside his friend Jerry Greenfield, expressed hesitation when potential buyers showed interest in acquiring the company. However, Unilever proposed structuring an agreement that would permit Ben & Jerry’s to maintain an autonomous board capable of making decisions related to its social objectives and promotional strategies. According to this arrangement, the owners of Ben & Jerry’s do not have the authority to dismiss their independent board members. agreement stands Even in case of a sale or spinoff.
We invested an enormous amount of time and effort into crafting and negotiating that document," stated Cohen, who is currently 74 years old. "Without that agreement, Ben & Jerry’s would have ceased to exist by this point and would merely be another ice cream label.
The start of the conclusion
Unilever states that its connection with the independent board of Ben & Jerry’s started deteriorating in 2021, when Ben & Jerry’s stopped selling its goods in Jewish settlements In the Israeli-controlled West Bank and disputed East Jerusalem, stating that selling there went against their principles.
Last month, in a legal submission, Unilever stated that this choice had significant repercussions for the corporation: " numerous states determined Unilever was not compliant with their anti-boycott, divestment, and sanctions regulations, resulting in several lawsuits both within the U.S. and Israel, allegations of antisemitism, stringent penalties, as well as substantial sell-offs amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Unilever shares."
Unilever Sold the Ben & Jerry’s operation in Israel To its Israeli distributer, this agreement permits the ongoing sale of the ice cream brand across Israel and the West Bank. Following this, Ben & Jerry’s proceeded with the arrangement. took legal action against its own parent company Claiming that Unilever breached the acquisition pact, which assigned the brand primary oversight of its social mission.
Unilever stated that they have collaborated with the board for over twenty years to uphold the brand's social mission. However, in recent times, Ben & Jerry’s has aimed to champion "highly contentious and divisive issues" that could potentially jeopardize both Unilever, Ben & Jerry’s itself, as well as its staff members.
Ben & Jerry’s maintains that social justice and human rights are fundamental aspects of its identity, and believes that its customer loyalty stems from the company’s strong stance on progressive causes.
They understood exactly what they were acquiring back in 2000," stated Shahmeer Halepota, the attorney representing Ben & Jerry’s independent board, referring to Unilever. "This situation is akin to purchasing SeaWorld and then complaining about it being too watery.
In their most recent legal action against Unilever, Ben & Jerry’s claims that they intended to publish a post on Inauguration Day when President Trump took office. This post was set to highlight various policies they felt could be jeopardized under the incoming administration, such as the minimum wage and initiatives aimed at addressing climate change. However, according to the lawsuit, the head of Unilever’s ice cream division prevented Ben & Jerry’s from releasing this statement.
Even after four decades of advocating for progressive social causes and critiquing the policies of the Trump administration, Ben & Jerry’s stated in the lawsuit that criticism of Trump had become off-limits for their brand known as 'Peace, Love, and Ice Cream,'
Ouster of a CEO
The ice cream company claimed in a legal document filed in March that Unilever was at fault. violated the conditions of its purchase contract By dismissing Ben & Jerry’s CEO David Stever without involving the brand’s independent board, Unilever stated they had made multiple attempts to communicate with the board regarding the CEO’s position.
Cohen and Greenfield, who are no longer members of the board, wrote a letter to Ben & Jerry’s employees supporting Stever. Cohen remains an employee of the company, and joined dozens of Ben & Jerry’s staff in a walkout protesting Stever’s ouster.
Unilever recently unveiled the name of its soon-to-be spun-off ice cream business. It won’t be named after Ben & Jerry’s, but rather Magnum, another brand in the group. Together, Unilever’s ice cream brands last year generated 8.3 billion euros, equivalent to about $9 billion, in revenue.
Unilever states that Ben & Jerry’s holds a significant position within the ice cream industry and is not being sold as a standalone brand. Cohen admitted that attempting to locate sympathetic investors to support the acquisition of Ben & Jerry’s is quite challenging.
Ben & Jerry’s operates as a business driven by principles," Cohen stated. "Given that businesses hold immense power within our society, they also bear significant responsibilities towards it.
Send your letter to Natasha Khan. natasha.khan@wsj.com
