If a major supermarket came out with it's own label formula, would you buy it?

[pseudoname]

I have been wondering this for a couple weeks.

Say market it between 30 - 70% of what branded formula costs these days, would you buy it? Of course it would meet UK/EU guidelines but I should think that would be no barrier to production.

[hocuspontas]

You'd never know if it was of Nestle origin though. Own brand stuff is made by the giants but just repackaged isn't it? I know when I worked for Tesco in the 80s their own brand of beans was made by Heinz.

[Housemum]

Personally, even if a supermarket undercut the big names, my gut feel would be that I would trust the names that have been around for years, and I suspect a lot of others do likewise. I gave DD1 SMA because that's what I'd been given as a baby. With DD2 I BF'd for 6 months, then waivered over HIPP as it was organic, but went for Cow&Gate Organic (don't think they do it any more?) as it was a known name. DD3 was BF until 11 mths, again went for SMA for top-ups towards end of BF until on cow's milk fully as it was going back to what I "knew".

[Housemum]

SMA and Cow and Gate are not Nestle owned. C&G/Aptamil are part of the same company, SMA are separate.

[pseudoname]

Yes, I was thinking of the thing that you'd never know if it was made by nestle. I think currently some store brand cereals are made by the evil empire. I don't know for certain though.

Which is why I linked earlier to the PBM website. They already have an european production arm and are deffo not nestle.

I agree that a lot of people will buy a certain formula because it was what their MW/mum/sis/friend recommended/saw the old Tin in dad's shed with nails in it or what they were fed. Lately in the US with the economic recession a lot more people are turning to store brands and there have been some stories reaching to press of mothers in the US watering down formula to make it go further. This in itself is a good reason to bring down the price of formula in the 'West'.

[TrillianuptheAstra]

I'd do the same as I would for any branded/non-branded decision: look at the ingredients (if listed) then see if I/whoever was consuming the stuff liked it. Then if there was little/no difference or no preference I would choose the cheaper one.

Do baby milks not have ingredients and nutrtional info listed then?

[hunkermunker]

Sainsbury's used to make one...

[Penthesileia]

Formula is massively overpriced given that the milk powder used to produce it is essentially a by-product of the dairy industry, and costs very little indeed. What's even more outrageous is that the dairy industry in the EU is already hugely subsidized. So the producers of formula convert a very "cheap" substance, unwanted milk, into an extremely expensive one.

Gabrielle Palmer is, as usual, extremely eloquent on the (frequently hidden) economic and environmental costs of the formula industry. It's shocking, actually. She's demonstrated, for instance, that the EU effectively ends up paying Nestle (a Swiss company, and not even in the EU ) to produce formula.

[sabire]

You can tell formula is massively overpriced just by looking at the quantity and quality of the marketing involved in selling it. I'm thinking - the websites, the give away cuddly cows, the help-lines, the prime time tv advertising, widespread magazine advertising, the free journals for health professionals, the reps, the booklets, the sponsorship deals (thank you BLISS for cancelling your recent sponsorship deal with C&G - just sorry it took vigorous protest from activists and midwives to shame you into turning the money down.... )

[frasersmummy]

This question made me think

I mean I buy a lot of own brands .. and often think its just the brand name produt with a different label on the outside.

But when it came to feeding my baby I went with a name I knew and trusted at the time and if own brands had been around I would probs have stuck with that choice

That said I dont why I would think eg Tesco formula would be any more of a worry than Tesco beans.. I guess its a case of wanting the best for my child if not for me

Of course the other thought is that those of us who choose to ff are given a choice of a few in hospital and they do say you shouldnt change formula unless really necessary so unless your local mat unit bought at sains/tescos then you would be stuck

[AnarchyAunt]

"they do say you shouldnt change formula unless really necessary"

'They' [the formula companies] say that to keep you buying their brand as opposed to any other! I know HCPs/MILs etc expound the theory but thats just because its been accepted as fact when it isn't.

They are all much of a muchness. They all have to have the same nutritional content by law and any fancy shmancy extras (immunofartis anyone?) are not necessarily a good thing.

[SueW]

Hunker everyone's ignoring us!!

[Housemum]

I'll speak to you! Actually, I can't remember supermarket formula - obviously it passed me by in a blur (and as DD1 born in 1993 I'm sure I'd have seen it unless it was only around for a couple of years after her)

[SomeGuysLikeItUpTheArse]

In other countries formula manufacturers sell cheap and expensive brands. So in a poor village in Indonesia you would likely find only Lactogen, a Nestlé milk sold for about £1 per box.

Go to a city however, and you will find Nestlé NAN as well, at about £5 per tin, and also an array of competing products, all boasting of their antibodies and such like. I'm not sure of the difference, but I suspect the cheapo brand lacks the buzzwords they claim to put in the expensive one (DHA, RHA, bollocks, bollocks, bollocks).

I don't really know if an 'own label' 'extra value' brand would be worse or not, but the reason I think they don't have on is because discounting of baby milk is forbidden, because it's a form of promotion. In the third world there's basically nothing to stop the likes of Nestle pushing people onto formula feeding, causing many many thousands of babies to die each other through poor sterilisation of feeding bottles, and as a result they are able to do what you are suggesting - push cheap milk to the poor (which is obviously profitable at the price, otherwise they wouldn't do it) and then try and persuaded the middle classes that actually their more expensive brand is worth the extra £££ because it will make baby more intelligent/stronger/taller/whatever.

Basically the free market marketing of baby milk demonstrates that price differentiation is used to sell the product to people who would otherwise breast feed (because it's cheaper), so the bottom line is that any discounting is a bad thing.

[AnarchyAunt]

SomeGuys - they do that to a degree in this country. Nutricia is the parent company behind both Cow&Gate and Aptamil.

Interestingly in this country Aptamil (the more expensive formula) is the one most heavily promoted to women who started off BF, and also to HCPs. The price differentation is used to make it seem like a premium and more scientific (ie better) product, which plays on women's feelings if they have had to use formula when they wanted to BF. The slogans they use ('closest to breastmilk') encourage the idea that it is somehow 'better' than others even though it can't be that different by law!

The law doesn't allow discounting in this country, however selling formula at a permanently low price is acceptable. If it was not so heavily advertised (through follow-on, sponsorship, gifts to HCPs etc) that would cut costs.

SueW and Hunker I am listening! I wonder why Sainsburys discontinued it but assume it was due to bad publicity?