The decision Nestlé to prematurely terminate the Savory brand licensing agreement with the Unifood group has opened a new chapter in the ice cream parlor sectorThe move directly affects the operation of the chain that, until now, exclusively exploited the historic ice cream brand in Chile through its subsidiary Ice Cream SpA.
The agreement between the parties was signed until 2027, but The Swiss multinational has chosen to terminate the relationship prematurely, citing significant contractual breaches., in a context where Unifood is going through a complex financial situation and is immersed in judicial reorganization processes.
A contract broken prematurely and why Nestlé has taken this step
According to sources familiar with the process, Nestlé sent the letter of unilateral termination of the contract last week.Ice Cream SpA has been instructed to begin removing Savory's logo and signage from all its locations in the coming days. This move accelerates the end of an alliance that, in theory, still had about two years remaining.
The heart of the conflict lies in the fact that, according to the multinational, Ice Cream would have violated at least two key clauses of the license agreementOn the one hand, there is the insolvency of Unifood's subsidiary, which has already received a formal liquidation request from one of its suppliers. On the other hand, there is the alleged damage to the image of the Savory brand stemming precisely from that financial and management crisis.
Nestlé's arguments also include the behavior of its sales network: The contract stipulated that the licensee would increase the number of Savory stores in the countryBut instead of that expansion, several points of sale have closed in recent times, which would have aggravated the discomfort of the brand owner.
At the same time, The Swiss company has already begun the search for a new restaurant operator to take over the operation of Savory. and allow us to revitalize this distribution channel, both in physical ice cream shops and in the sale of products such as popsicles and cones.
Insolvency, debts, and a reorganization that never quite takes shape
The contract termination cannot be understood without considering Unifood's financial context. The holding company, which includes Ice Cream, the fast food chains Pollo Stop and Pedro, Juan y Diego through Cuatro SpAIt has been subject to various judicial reorganization processes for more than a year to try to straighten out its accounts.
In that framework, Unifood secured reorganization agreements for several of its companies, including Ice Cream SpAThe company refinanced liabilities of approximately 45.000 billion Chilean pesos. It attributed its crisis to the combined effects of the social unrest and the pandemic, which severely impacted consumption and the restaurant industry.
Only in the case of Ice Cream, The debts exceeded 15.000 billion pesos at the time of requesting reorganization.Among the main creditors are major financial institutions such as Scotiabank and Banco Santander Chile, as well as Nestlé Chile itself, which underscores the magnitude of the outstanding commitments.
The already delicate financial balance was strained even further when DPS, a supplier specializing in disposable food packaging, sued Ice Cream for breaching the Judicial Reorganization AgreementAccording to the complaint, seven of the first installments of the agreed payment plan were unpaid, accumulating a debt of around 275,6 million Chilean pesos.
Ice Cream responded by opposing the legal action and arguing that is pushing for a modification of the reorganization agreements This is in order to sell certain assets, adjust payment schedules, and, in theory, improve the recovery of debts owed to creditors. The company maintains that the creditors' committee is aware of various due diligence processes being carried out by third parties interested in potential acquisitions.
Unifood's strategy: to sell Ice Cream with the active Savory license
Within this complex scenario, Unifood's roadmap involved selling Ice Cream SpA while maintaining the license to use the Savory brand.In fact, the company itself had already revealed a few months ago that it was actively working on the possible divestment of this business unit as a way to complete its reorganization processes.
In July, representatives of the group explained that Selling Ice Cream was seen as the clearest alternative to successfully complete the restructuring.According to those statements, the option had been studied in detail and was in a decisive phase, with advanced negotiations with potential buyers interested in acquiring the ice cream parlor chain.
However, sources close to the case indicate that That preliminary agreement reportedly fell through in recent weeks.leaving Unifood to search for other opportunities to divest itself of the supply chain and obtain fresh resources to meet its financial obligations.
The problem for the holding company is that Nestlé's decision to terminate the license reduces the appeal of Ice Cream as an asset for sale.With the loss of the right to operate Savory, the value of the unit is affected, as any new owner would have to negotiate again with the brand owner or reorient the premises towards another brand.
Despite this shift, people familiar with Unifood's position indicate that The company intends for the license agreement to be fulfilled until its original expiration date.That is, for up to two years. That would be one of the keys to the legal and commercial battle that is now unfolding between the Chilean group and the Swiss multinational.
Unifood's response and the clash of positions
Unifood's reaction to the alliance's breakdown was swift. In statements to the business press, The group said it received the notification of early termination of the contract "with great surprise". sent by Nestlé, expressing its disagreement with the timing and manner in which the decision was made.
The company has insisted to the multinational that Any sale of Ice Cream should be geared towards maximizing recovery for employees and creditors.This aligns with the objectives of the ongoing judicial reorganization processes. In this regard, it underscores the importance of an orderly and coordinated transition with the appointed administrator.
Unifood has publicly expressed its desire that Nestlé should reconsider its position and collaborate in a structured sales process., which will allow the continued operation of the ice cream shops while the transaction is finalized and the best possible outcome is ensured for all affected parties.
At the same time, The holding company argues that the lack of full compliance with the reorganization agreements can be remedied. through extensions and adjustments, powers that belong to the creditors' committee. According to the company, this body is aware of the steps being taken to modify the payment plan and facilitate the entry of new investors.
In parallel, the tension between the parties has shifted to the reputational and contractual realm: Nestlé argues that Ice Cream's financial crisis damages Savory's imageMeanwhile, Unifood argues that a hasty exit from the brand could worsen the situation for workers and suppliers, adding more uncertainty to an already under immense pressure.
A gastronomic holding company in full transformation and an impact that transcends Chile
The case of Savory and Ice Cream is part of the recent evolution of Unifood, a gastronomic conglomerate originally developed by the Chilean businessman Jacques AlbagliIn 2016, the Mesoamerica investment fund, based in Costa Rica and whose main contributor is the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan, acquired 75% of the group, and four years later, in 2020, it took the remaining 25% held by the founding partners.
With that operation, Unifood consolidated a relevant position in the restaurant and fast food marketmanaging well-known brands such as Pollo Stop, Pedro, Juan y Diego, and the Savory ice cream shops, as well as the XS Market chain of stores. In total, the group operated more than 250 points of sale and had more than 2.200 employees.
The break with Nestlé, therefore, It's not just a one-off disagreement about a trademark license.Rather, it's an episode that affects the holding company's overall strategy and its ability to continue competing in an increasingly demanding environment. The loss of Savory hits one of the most visible pillars of its business and adds pressure to the rest of the brands in its portfolio.
From a broader perspective, Nestlé's move also reflects the sensitivity of large multinationals to the control of their brands.Especially in a global context where reputation, the financial stability of local partners, and strict adherence to expansion conditions are critical elements. These types of decisions, even when made in specific markets like Chile, are closely watched in other regions where the company operates under licensing agreements or similar partnerships.
For the European market and for Spain, where Nestlé maintains a consolidated presence in categories such as dairy, coffee, chocolates and ice cream under different brands, Cases like Unifood serve as a reference for the company's policy regarding its business partners.While not a local conflict, it does send a signal about the importance the group places on solvency, growth capacity, and the protection of its brands in any territory.
What's at stake is The future of a chain of ice cream shops that has historically operated under the Savory brand, the fate of hundreds of workers, and the balance between the interests of Nestlé, Unifood, and its creditors.While the Swiss company seeks a new operator to relaunch the brand, the Chilean holding company is trying to buy time to sell Ice Cream under the best possible conditions and complete its reorganization without relinquishing the licensing rights that, on paper, remained valid until 2027.
