Ben & Jerry’s brand could be ruined if it stays under the ownership of Magnum, warned the company’s co-founder. In an interview with the BBC, Ben Cohen said the ice cream maker would be destroyed as a brand if it remains tied to its parent company, highlighting ongoing tensions over its ability to pursue social activism and maintain an independent board.
The remarks come as Magnum Ice Cream Company (TMICC) begins trading on the European stock market, marking its separation from Unilever.
A Magnum spokesperson stated the firm aims to strengthen Ben & Jerry’s “powerful, non-partisan values-based position in the world.”
Ben & Jerry’s was sold to Unilever in 2000, a deal that allowed the brand to keep an independent board and decision-making authority over its social mission. Since then, clashes with Unilever have intensified, and Magnum has inherited that conflict.
In 2021, Ben & Jerry’s declined to sell products in Israeli-occupied territories, prompting Unilever to sell its Israeli operation to a local licensee. In October, Cohen claimed the brand was prevented from launching an ice cream expressing “solidarity with Palestine.”
Ahead of the spin-off from Unilever, Magnum said Anuradha Mittal, chair of Ben & Jerry’s board since 2018, no longer met the criteria to serve—an assessment from an internal audit according to Magnum. Magnum added that the audit revealed “a series of material deficiencies in financial controls, governance and other compliance policies, including conflicts of interest,” and that trustees had not fully addressed these issues.
Mittal told Reuters the audit was a manufactured inquiry designed to discredit her and argued that this move wasn’t just an attack on her but an undermining of the board’s authority by Unilever.
The BBC contacted Ben & Jerry’s for comment on Mittal’s statement.
Cohen asserted Magnum has no right to determine the board chair’s identity and argued that Magnum is unfit to own Ben & Jerry’s if it tries to replace the chair. He urged either for the brand to be owned by investors aligned with its mission or for Magnum to back the independent chair.
Before the spin-off, Reuters reported Mittal saying she had no plans to resign. Cohen remains a Ben & Jerry’s employee and a prominent spokesperson, warning that current ownership risks eroding loyal fans.
If Magnum continues to own the company, Cohen warned, not only could the values be lost, but the brand’s very essence could disappear, turning the beloved ice cream into a less distinctive product and eroding market share.
Magnum’s chief executive Peter ter Kulve told the Financial Times that the founders are in their seventies and will eventually need to pass the baton to a younger generation. Jerry Greenfield, Cohen’s co-founder, left the company in September after decades, expressing concerns about the stifling of its social mission.
Cohen criticized the situation as “absurd” and framed it as a matter of upholding values and honoring a legally binding agreement. He also argued that Magnum investors are paying a premium for Ben & Jerry’s because of its loyal following, and warned that destroying the brand’s values could erode that following and reduce market share.
Magnum stated Ben & Jerry’s is not for sale and that the brand’s social mission has always been respected.
The demerger has positioned Magnum as the world’s largest standalone ice cream business, with its primary shares opening around €12.20, slightly below the expected €12.80 reference price, and recovering modestly by close of trading.
