Starbucks to pay $2.79 billion over bagged coffee dispute
Is gaining production control worth a $2.79 billion dollar settlement? For Starbucks, it may just be.
November 14, 2013 at 06:29 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Gaining control of your company's entire production process can often be a huge boost to business. But is it worth a breach of contract, resulting in a $2.79 billion dollar settlement?
For Starbucks, it may just be.
An arbitrator ordered Starbucks to pay the exorbitant sum to Mondelez International Inc. on Nov. 13, settling a dispute over the company's bagged coffee business. Through the terms of the settlement, Starbucks owes Mondelez $2.23 billion in damages and $557 million in interest and attorneys' fees. The coffee maker said in a statement that it has adequate cash and borrowing capacity to cover the payment.
The original suit arose in 2010 after Starbucks wished to end its partnership with Mondelez, then Kraft Foods International, which had been the company's bagged coffee distributor. Kraft, however, rejected Starbucks' $750 million offer to terminate their agreement. Starbucks then attempted to wrest control of distribution anyway.
According to Kraft's filing in 2010, revenue from the Starbucks bagged coffee segment of the company grew from $50 million at the start of their arrangement to $500 million in 2010. Since then, the segment has grown even larger, outgrowing other segments of the Starbucks brand thanks to developments such a K-Cups.
David Tarantino, an analyst at Robert W. Baird & Co. in Milwaukee, said in a research note obtained by Bloomberg that the new Starbucks revenue “would not have been possible without ending the Kraft arrangement.” He also claimed that the segment should continue to grow for “above-average pace for an extended period.”
Thanks to this strong growth, analysts believe, the payout for Mondelez in the case turned out to be higher than expected. Still, Starbucks is happy to have the litigation behind it. Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz said on a webcast after the case that the company was “building a multibillion-dollar global consumer packaged business. We now have the flexibility and the freedom to control our own destiny.”
For more big litigation news, check out these InsideCounsel stories:
Gaining control of your company's entire production process can often be a huge boost to business. But is it worth a breach of contract, resulting in a $2.79 billion dollar settlement?
For Starbucks, it may just be.
An arbitrator ordered Starbucks to pay the exorbitant sum to
The original suit arose in 2010 after Starbucks wished to end its partnership with Mondelez, then Kraft Foods International, which had been the company's bagged coffee distributor. Kraft, however, rejected Starbucks' $750 million offer to terminate their agreement. Starbucks then attempted to wrest control of distribution anyway.
According to Kraft's filing in 2010, revenue from the Starbucks bagged coffee segment of the company grew from $50 million at the start of their arrangement to $500 million in 2010. Since then, the segment has grown even larger, outgrowing other segments of the Starbucks brand thanks to developments such a K-Cups.
David Tarantino, an analyst at Robert W. Baird & Co. in Milwaukee, said in a research note obtained by Bloomberg that the new Starbucks revenue “would not have been possible without ending the Kraft arrangement.” He also claimed that the segment should continue to grow for “above-average pace for an extended period.”
Thanks to this strong growth, analysts believe, the payout for Mondelez in the case turned out to be higher than expected. Still, Starbucks is happy to have the litigation behind it. Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz said on a webcast after the case that the company was “building a multibillion-dollar global consumer packaged business. We now have the flexibility and the freedom to control our own destiny.”
For more big litigation news, check out these InsideCounsel stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAlabama Man Arrested After Causing Bitcoin Price to Surge, Then Plummet After Fake SEC Tweet
3 minute readHunter Biden Sues Fox, Ex-Chief Legal Officer Over Mock Trial Series
Judge Sides With McDonald's In Attorney-Client Privilege Dispute With Former Executives
4 minute readMarriott's $52M Data Breach Settlement Points to Emerging Trend
Trending Stories
- 1A&O Shearman Adopts 3-Level Lockstep Pay Model Amid Shift to All-Equity Partnership
- 2A RICO Surge Is Underway: Here's How the Allstate Push Might Play Out
- 3The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 4Data-Driven Legal Strategies
- 5Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250