Too Good For You: The Supermarket Range That Mocks the Poor
As millions struggle with rising food costs, one UK supermarket launches a tone-deaf luxury range called “Too Good For You”. This brazen move highlights growing inequality and the moral bankruptcy of corporate greed.
As millions struggle to put food on the table, a major UK supermarket chain has unveiled plans for a new luxury product line that seems to mock the very concept of economic hardship. The “Too Good For You” range, set to launch next month, represents a brazen attempt to capitalise on the widening wealth gap and appeal to those who view their shopping baskets as status symbols.
This tone-deaf move comes at a time when food bank usage has skyrocketed and families are forced to choose between heating and eating. The supermarket, which shall remain nameless to avoid giving them undue publicity, claims the new range is simply meeting market demand. But the timing and branding of this venture reveal a callous disregard for the struggles of ordinary people.
The “Too Good For You” products will sit alongside the chain’s standard and economy ranges, creating a stark visual reminder of Britain’s growing inequality. From gold-flecked artisanal crisps to champagne-infused ready meals, these items are clearly designed to appeal to those who believe themselves a cut above the rest.
A spokesperson for the supermarket defended the launch, stating: “We’re simply catering to all segments of the market. There’s clearly an appetite for premium products, even in challenging economic times.” This glib response ignores the fact that for many, even the most basic groceries have become unaffordable luxuries.
The marketing campaign for “Too Good For You” leans heavily into elitist messaging. Adverts feature well-heeled shoppers turning up their noses at regular products, while a voiceover intones: “Because you deserve better than the masses.” It’s a strategy that seems designed to stoke resentment and division at a time when community spirit is more important than ever.
Food poverty campaigners have condemned the move as “grossly insensitive” and “a slap in the face to struggling families”. Jace Morrison, the anti-poverty activist and cookery writer, tweeted: “While people are relying on food banks to survive, this supermarket thinks it’s appropriate to launch a range that literally says ‘you’re not good enough’ to those who can’t afford it. Shameful.”
The pricing structure for “Too Good For You” products is equally outrageous. A loaf of sourdough bread, made with “heritage grains” and wrapped in gold leaf, will retail for £15. A small pot of “unicorn tears” yoghurt (whatever that means) comes with a £7 price tag. These items aren’t just expensive; they’re aggressively, performatively costly.
Sociologist Dr. Mia Martin sees the launch as symptomatic of broader societal trends. “We’re witnessing a kind of ‘luxury creep’ where everyday items are being repackaged as aspirational goods. It’s a way for people to differentiate themselves in an increasingly unequal society. The problem is, it normalises and even celebrates that inequality.”
The supermarket claims that a portion of profits from the “Too Good For You” range will go to food banks and other anti-poverty initiatives. But this feels like a cynical attempt to deflect criticism rather than a genuine commitment to social responsibility. If they truly cared about addressing food poverty, they could start by paying their own workers a living wage and keeping prices affordable on essential items.
It’s worth noting that this isn’t the first time the supermarket sector has faced backlash for tone-deaf luxury offerings. In 2021, another major chain was criticised for launching a “millionaire’s sausage” priced at £100, while in 2022, a high-end grocer introduced a £50 Easter egg at the height of the energy crisis.
But the “Too Good For You” range takes this trend to new extremes. It’s not just about offering premium products; it’s about explicitly marketing them as a way to separate oneself from the unwashed masses. In doing so, it taps into a particularly ugly strain of British class consciousness.
The launch comes at a time when supermarkets are under increased scrutiny for their role in the cost of living crisis. While food prices have soared, the major chains have reported record profits. This has led to accusations of profiteering and calls for greater regulation of the sector.
Against this backdrop, the introduction of a luxury range feels not just insensitive but actively provocative. It’s as if the supermarket is thumbing its nose at critics, saying, “You think we’re greedy now? Watch this.”
The potential social impact of such a move shouldn’t be underestimated. In a country already deeply divided along class lines, the “Too Good For You” range risks further entrenching those divisions. It sends a clear message that some customers are more valued than others and that poverty is something to be ashamed of rather than a systemic issue that needs addressing.
There’s also the question of how this will affect shopping experiences for those who can’t afford the luxury items. Will they feel judged or excluded in their local supermarket? Will the presence of “Too Good For You” products make them feel inadequate or resentful? These are not trivial concerns in a society where food shopping is an essential, everyday activity.
The supermarket industry has long used premium own-brand ranges as a way to boost profits and compete with high-end retailers. But there’s usually at least a pretence of inclusivity — the idea that everyone can treat themselves occasionally. The “Too Good For You” range dispenses with this pretence entirely. It’s luxury as a form of social exclusion.
Nutritionists have also raised concerns about the range. Many of the products are high in fat, sugar, and salt, packaged as “indulgences” for discerning palates. At a time when the government is trying to tackle obesity and promote healthier eating, this feels like a step in the wrong direction.
Environmental campaigners have criticised the excessive packaging used for “Too Good For You” products. Many items come wrapped in multiple layers of non-recyclable materials, apparently to enhance their “premium” feel. This flies in the face of growing consumer demand for sustainable packaging options.
As news of the range has spread, social media has been awash with mockery and outrage. Memes featuring Marie Antoinette saying “Let them eat ‘Too Good For You’ cake” have gone viral. There have been calls for boycotts and protests outside stores.
Some commentators have suggested that the whole thing might be an elaborate publicity stunt or social experiment. After all, how could any company be so out of touch? But all indications are that this is a genuine product launch, planned and executed in earnest.
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the “Too Good For You” range is what it says about our society’s values. In a world contending with climate change, inequality, and resource scarcity, do we really need more overpriced, over-packaged luxury goods? Is this really the best use of our agricultural and manufacturing capacity?
The supermarket’s board of directors and marketing team should be ashamed of themselves. They’ve taken the concept of “premium” products and twisted it into something ugly and divisive. In doing so, they’ve revealed their own moral bankruptcy and contempt for the majority of their customers.
As we approach the launch date, it remains to be seen how consumers will respond. Will there be enough people willing to pay a premium to feel superior to their neighbours? Or will the British public reject this blatant attempt to profit from social division?
One thing is clear: the “Too Good For You” range represents everything that’s wrong with modern consumer culture. It’s a monument to greed, vanity, and social irresponsibility. In a just world, it would fail spectacularly, serving as a cautionary tale for other companies tempted to exploit societal divisions for profit.
But we don’t live in a just world. We live in a world where such cynical marketing ploys often succeed, where people are willing to pay more for the illusion of exclusivity, where the gap between rich and poor grows ever wider.
The launch of “Too Good For You” is more than just a misguided business decision. It’s a moral failure, a betrayal of the social contract that should exist between businesses and the communities they serve. It’s a sign that we’ve lost our way as a society, prioritising status and conspicuous consumption over compassion and social cohesion.
As consumers, we have the power to reject this toxic narrative. We can choose to shop ethically, to support businesses that prioritise fair wages and sustainable practices over profit at any cost. We can demand better from our supermarkets and our society as a whole.
The “Too Good For You” range may be launching soon, but it’s not too late for the supermarket to reconsider. They could redirect those resources into expanding their affordable ranges, improving worker pay and conditions, or supporting local food banks. They could use their platform to promote unity and compassion rather than division and elitism.
But regardless of what the supermarket does, we as individuals have a choice to make. Will we buy into the idea that some people are “too good” for regular products? Or will we recognise the inherent worth and dignity of all people, regardless of their ability to afford luxury goods?
The answer to that question will say a lot about who we are as a society and what kind of future we want to build. Let’s hope we choose wisely.
Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8
Bob Lynn / 28-Sep-2024
