Why So Little Candy Variety? Blame the Chocolate Oligopoly

Three companies dominate the candy market, preventing newcomers with new products from ever making it to store shelves

  • Share
  • Read Later
Dan Goodman / AP

"Fun Size" and "Mini" candies for Halloween.

Roaming the candy aisle of my neighborhood Safeway around Halloween is a dizzying encounter with choice. Or so it seems.

I counted over 40 different brands of candy but it turns out almost all of them are produced by one of three companies: Hershey, Mars, and Nestle, with a specialty product or two by Ferrara and Palmer’s Company. The vast bulk of the $2 billion spent nationally on candy this season – whether bought in Alabama, Oklahoma, Montana or Maine – will end up in the coffers of two, maybe three companies.

It wasn’t always so. Through the 1960s America’s candy market was largely regional. “You ate the candy that was produced in your town,” recalls Dave Wagers, owner of the Idaho Candy Company, one of a dwindling number of independent candy makers in the country. Candy was a sprawling and diverse industry at that time, run by confectionery tinkerers who tirelessly stirred and tweaked to dish up new sweets. To distinguish their creations, producers pegged treats to national sports stars, disgraced politicians, or even the local preacher. There was the Winning Lindy bar for Charles Lindbergh, the Dr. IQ bar for a ’30s radio quiz show, and the Oh Henry! bar named after the guy who moved barrels of corn syrup at one manufacturer’s candy plant.

But the diversity didn’t last, as the bigger players began eating up their smaller rivals. Hershey bought up Reese’s in 1963, a prelude to later purchasing Twizzlers and Almond Joy. Nestle followed suit, snapping up brands like Goobers, Baby Ruth, and Wonka Bars. The companies that escaped or resisted the buying spree found themselves now competing with fattened giants. In one instance, the Heath Bar – enormously popular by the late 1970s – caught the eye of Hershey, which asked for rights to produce the candy. When Heath declined, Hershey bought the original recipe from another company and introduced the Skor Bar to compete head-on. Heath Bar sales fell, and the company struggled until it was acquired, first by a Finnish company and then, ultimately, by Hershey.

This pattern of consolidation has helped thin the market down to around 150 candy producers today. From those 150, Mars and Hershey control around 75 percent of the national chocolate market, and 60 percent of the US candy market overall.

Their size tilts the playing field, enabling them to dish out huge sums in “slotting fees” for shelf space, ensuring that you’ll see the same pattern of brands prominently displayed in any Wal-Mart, Giant, Kroger’s, or 7-11. Retailers, too, have consolidated dramatically, empowering chain stores to demand discounts and deals from candy makers, terms independent producers can’t afford.  “We’re lucky to get one or two boxes in the store, and that’s only in areas where we’re well known,” says Wagers of the Idaho Candy Company, whose business has gone from producing 50 different types of candy over the years to four today.

Steve Almond, author of CandyFreak, says bringing a new candy bar to mainstream markets as an independent producer today is “virtually impossible.” His book – born of an obsessive love for Caravelle, a candy bar that was discontinued when he was in high school – tours the surviving businesses behind America’s candy bars of yore, trying to uncover what changed and why. The barriers today, he learned, are formidable. “I’d have to have billions of dollars just to be able to scale up enough to make a decent quality bar at a competitive price. Then I’d have to worry about getting the word out about the bar, and getting it widely distributed,” he said. “And if it posed any threat to the Big Three, they would do what giant companies do: buy me out, or bury me with competitive pricing, or [by] introducing a similar bar.”

Russ Sifers is the owner of a candy company near Kansas City that makes Valomilks, vanilla milk chocolate cups of semi-liquid marshmallow, created in 1931 under his great-grandfather. Sifers says he’s long considered introducing a line of dark chocolate Valomilks but doesn’t believe today’s market structure gives him a real shot. “I’m fighting for my life getting one item on store shelves, how the hell am I going to get two?” he said.

Ruing the disappearance of a diverse candy market isn’t just nostalgia. Fewer people concocting means dominant players have fewer reasons to innovate. Earlier this month the industry buzzed over the major news of the season: in January Hershey will introduce Lancaster, bags of caramel soft crèmes that will come in three flavors. It’ll be the first new and original candy – not acquired, not spun-off an existing brand – the company has brought to market in 30 years.

If we want a healthier, more diverse market—and more variety in our Halloween buckets—we could start by reviving some of our antitrust laws, which we traditionally used to create a level playing field among companies, regardless of size. Enforcing current laws – whittled down by federal courts – won’t do much to dent the dominance of Mars and Hershey or the massive retailers, but it could curb their ability to throw their weight around at the expense of the independents.

Lina Khan is a policy analyst for New America’s Markets, Enterprise, and Resiliency Initiative. This article was originally written for weeklywonk.

0 comments