A coalition of shareholders has delivered sharp criticism to Magnum Ice Cream Company regarding its management of the Ben & Jerry’s brand and its commitment to social causes, according to a shareholder letter obtained by Reuters.
The investment group, which controls approximately 1.3% of Magnum shares while overseeing billions in assets, is demanding the company clarify its plans for preserving Ben & Jerry’s board autonomy and release separate financial performance data for the brand.
This shareholder pushback highlights the ongoing difficulties Magnum faces with Ben & Jerry’s, a brand known for its outspoken political positions. The ice cream company became independent when it separated from consumer products conglomerate Unilever and went public in December.
Throughout its history under Unilever ownership, Ben & Jerry’s leadership and founders frequently disagreed with corporate executives over the brand’s political and social positions. Since the spinoff, Magnum has moved to diminish the authority of Ben & Jerry’s autonomous board, shrinking it to only two people. Previous board members are now fighting back against these changes.
The May 1st correspondence, delivered to Magnum’s leadership before their May 7th shareholder meeting, was spearheaded by NorthStar Asset Management and voiced serious worries about Magnum’s stewardship of Ben & Jerry’s, warning it could harm both business performance and company worth.
“They’ve dismantled the brand’s social mission which, for us as investors, is the brand equity,” Whitney Nguyen, director of impact research at NorthStar, told Reuters.
When Unilever purchased Ben & Jerry’s in 2000, the acquisition terms provided the Vermont-based brand with unusual independence, including its own governing board, while protecting its social activism and philanthropic activities. Unilever maintains a 19.9% ownership stake in Magnum today.
“While we respectfully disagree with the characterisation presented by NorthStar, we are always happy to engage with shareholders and look forward to doing so,” Magnum, which also owns brands like Wall’s and Cornetto, said in a statement.
“We remain committed to having a Board, led by an Independent Director, to continue its role of helping guide the social mission and brand integrity, alongside the CEO.”
Unilever representatives chose not to provide comment on the matter.
The tensions between Ben & Jerry’s and its corporate parent escalated in 2021 when the Vermont company, known for flavors ranging from Caramel Chew Chew to Bohemian Raspberry, announced it would cease sales in Israeli-occupied West Bank territories.
As the corporate separation neared completion, Magnum declared that the chairperson of Ben & Jerry’s independent board was unsuitable for the position, subsequently alleging serious professional misconduct.
The investor coalition is seeking detailed explanations of how Magnum intends to respect the Ben & Jerry’s independent board arrangement, requesting complete disclosure of legal obligations and pending court cases.
“We are concerned that this independent board agreement has been consistently and systematically disregarded,” stated the investor correspondence, which also received backing from the influential Dutch Association of Investors for Sustainable Development (VBDO).
NorthStar, which focuses on socially conscious investments, warned that Magnum’s approach to Ben & Jerry’s could make other brands hesitant about potential acquisitions by either Magnum or Unilever.
“The acquisition agreement has been systematically violated — from overriding board decisions, firing the chair and members who disagreed, to censoring the very social mission they were contractually obligated to protect,” Nguyen said.
“This is a significant governance failure that erodes shareholder trust and sets a deeply concerning precedent for every brand within the Magnum and Unilever portfolio.”
