With the unrelenting television chef Jamie Oliver as its talisman, the anti-sugar lobby was likely to score a victory sooner or later. Its persistent campaigning against all things over-sweet has been heard by chancellor George Osborne, who will impose a tax on sugary drinks from 2018. Critics - both those with and without a direct interest - question why only the soft drinks market was targeted, as too much chocolate and cake also contribute to obesity. But away from the justice argument, the question boils down to how attractive are those companies subject to the levy as investments, or whether alternative plays on the beverage industry should be sought.
Fizzed up
Looking at the share price movement of the soft drinks makers on Wednesday 16 March - otherwise known as Budget day - you could almost pinpoint the moment Mr Osborne said "sugar levy" at the despatch box as he delivered his announcement in Parliament. Vimto maker Nichols (NICL) was the hardest hit, with the stock dropping about 8 per cent on the day. Investors in rival group Britvic (BVIC) seemed less concerned judging by the 1 per cent fall. However, this may be because the chancellor name-checked its Robinsons brand as one which had actively removed added sugar from its recipes. Tonic maker Fevertree (FEVR) has remained largely unscathed even though its products would trigger the tax in their current format. Irn-Bru maker AG Barr (BAG) felt the ripples of Mr Osborne's move, too - recent results from which can also be read in this issue.