Ankerkraut: What start-ups can learn from the controversial deal

Some of the outrage over Nestlé's Ankerkraut business may be inappropriate. But the start-up has only itself to blame. What other companies can learn from it.

Social networks are at least an idiosyncratic arena for discussion. There would actually be enough to talk about: War in Eastern Europe, the French seem to be seriously considering electing a right-wing extremist as president, and the German government, which has only been in office since the end of 2021, hasn't been able to get off the defensive for months, even thanks to the resignation of its family minister. But no, other things were discussed on the net this week. There were the love affairs of soccer player Mats Hummels, the RTL amateur theater "Die Passion" and just the takeover of the spice start-up Ankerkraut by the Swiss food company Nestlé.

The latter in particular is actually exciting, at least for the start-up bubble, as it is suitable as a lesson for other companies. It shows how one's own communication strategy can blow up in one's face. And that doesn't have to be the case.

The takeover by Nestlé led to rows and rows of influencers, previously a reliable marketing channel for Ankerkraut, leaving the company. For those who don't know, in certain circles Nestlé is considered the epitome of evil, a satanic Swiss octopus responsible for everything that goes wrong in the food industry.

Now, the criticism breaking in over Ankerkraut is somewhat benign. The Swiss are far from the only food giant to come under fire for its business practices. PepsiCo, the industry's number two by some metrics, has been accused in the past of its handling of water supplies at its production sites and its use of pesticides. Danone has faced accusations that it pays kickbacks to midwives to sell its baby food. And there have also been repeated scandals at Kraft Heinz and Mondelez. But none of these companies generates such a toxic reaction as Nestlé.

One could go on and on analyzing why the company's reputation is so in the cellar, even compared to the rest of the industry. But more interesting is the question of what start-ups can learn from the takeover by the food The essence is simple: marketing and cooperation must go together. If you present yourself as a good, nice, sustainable company, or if you rely heavily on influencers to sell your product, you can't cooperate with a company that is perceived as greedy, immoral or otherwise unclean. That's why founders sometimes have to bite the bullet and let money be money. Because it still makes a difference who it comes from. Otherwise, someone like the Ankerkraut founders will be accused of having sold their soul (as I said: a satanic image, including a Faustian pact).

Conversely: Those whose reputation is not the best anyway can choose their partners freely. Does anyone believe that food and meal delivery services like Gorillas, Flink or Delivery Hero are particularly decent companies? Anyone who takes a look at the conditions under which their drivers work can only deny that. Accordingly, however, the outrage is likely to be muted if one of these companies is now bought by Nestlé or a similar economic bogeyman.

How much does the episode hurt everyone involved? Nestlé, of course, will be heartily indifferent; at the company's headquarters in Vevey, a little more bad press is unlikely to draw anyone out from behind the stove. The Ankerkraut founders, on the other hand, can think about how they might be able to repair their long-built image. It is likely to be laborious. Because the pact with a metropolitan public obsessed with "good" consumption is also a Faustian one. Anyone who breaks the rules here quickly ends up in social media purgatory. The chance of redemption is slim.