I recently stumbled upon a video detailing the collapse of a prominent, 34-year relationship between a master chocolate manufacturer and one of the nation’s largest retailers. It came as a shock—not just because I had missed the initial reporting (which appeared as a deep-dive exclusive in the Financial Mail in late April 2026), but because of the sheer speed of the fall.
As someone who has spent a career in business journalism and corporate sustainability, this story is a loud “danger signal.” It is a sobering reminder of how quickly a decades-long partnership can dissolve into liquidation when a supplier becomes too dependent on a single, powerful customer.
The Expertise SA Cannot Afford to Lose
I have always felt a sense of pride that South Africa was home to a chocolate-making business of this caliber. Founded in 1987 by a Belgian master chocolatier, this business brought world-class expertise to our shores. Their facility was a testament to what local manufacturing could achieve, producing nearly 80 tonnes of chocolate a week at its peak.
For over 30 years, this supplier and their primary retail customer were synonymous. The manufacturer produced the heart of the retailer’s confectionery range. However, this success came with a hidden cost: concentration risk. When one customer accounts for roughly half of your turnover, the relationship is no longer a partnership; it is a dependency.
The Exclusivity Trap
The friction reportedly began when the supplier sought to diversify. They acquired a second factory to supply other major supermarket chains—a move that, from a business continuity perspective, was incredibly smart. You should never put all your cocoa beans in one basket.
However, the retail giant reportedly viewed this expansion as a threat to their “proprietary expertise.” When the supplier refused to shutter the second facility and limit their growth, the relationship soured. Orders were slashed, a massive hole opened in the budget, and by April 2026, the manufacturer was forced into liquidation.
The Ethics of Power in Retail
This story doesn’t make the food manufacturing or retail landscape look good. It raises serious questions about Supplier Relationship Management (SRM) and true sustainability:
- Sustainability is more than “Green”: True corporate sustainability must include the economic resilience of the supply chain. If a retailer’s demands force a loyal 34-year partner into bankruptcy, can we really call that an ethical partnership?
- A National Loss of Skill: South Africa has very few independent, large-scale chocolate factories. While we have global giants and small boutique artisans, losing a mid-sized technical powerhouse hurts our national manufacturing base.
- The Warning Signal: For every local manufacturer, the message is clear: Tread carefully. When your customer becomes your “everything,” you lose the power to say no.
A Hope for a “New Formation”
Despite the liquidation, there is a glimmer of hope. In South Africa, liquidation often leads to a sale of assets. My hope is that the brand, the master-chocolatier techniques, and the beloved product lines can emerge in a new formation—perhaps under a structure that allows for more independence and a broader customer base.
As I sit here with a box of chocolates I recently bought—likely some of the last stock to leave that factory—I am reminded that business is about more than just contracts and exclusivity. It is about the ethics of how we treat those who help build our brands.
In this economy, we need more local experts, not fewer. We must ensure our retail giants nurture that expertise rather than stifling it.
Key Takeaways for Suppliers:
- The 30% Rule: Aim to never let one customer dictate more than 30% of your revenue.
- Exclusivity is a Cage: Ensure exclusivity clauses have clear “sunset” dates or allow for non-competing growth.
- Continuity is Diversification: A “Plan B” customer isn’t just a backup; it’s your primary defense against a relationship breakdown.
