Podcast consensus

Points of consensus

▶From 1900 until November 1969, Hershey maintained a fixed price of five cents for its chocolate bar, managing inflation by progressively reducing the bar's size.Apr 2026

▶In November 1969, Hershey simultaneously doubled the price of its chocolate bar to 10 cents and restored its size to its original 1.25 ounces.Apr 2026

▶The Hershey Company had a strict no-advertising policy until the 1970s, when it launched its first campaign in direct response to competitive pressure from Mars.Apr 2026

▶By 1969, Hershey's standard chocolate bar had been reduced to half of its original 1.25-ounce weight from 1900.Apr 2026

Points of debate

▶Hershey's market position is portrayed as both a near-monopolist that set the national taste for chocolate and as a primary wholesale supplier to over 40,000 regional candy makers in the 1920s, indicating a complex role as both a brand and an ingredient provider.Apr 2026

▶The relationship with Mars is shown to have evolved from a partnership, where Hershey supplied capital and chocolate for M&M's and Mars was its largest customer, to an intense rivalry that led to Hershey losing its number one market position in 1973.Apr 2026

▶Hershey's first advertising campaign in the 1970s is described as being initiated due to competitive pressure from Mars, but also as being prematurely halted after two years due to profit pressures from high commodity prices, showing conflicting external forces influencing its strategy.Apr 2026

▶While Hershey lost its position as the number one candy company in America to Mars in 1973, current claims suggest the two companies now hold nearly equal domestic market share at approximately 24% each, indicating a long-term market rebalancing.Apr 2026

Key themes

▶Pricing Strategy and 'Shrinkflation'Apr 2026

For nearly 70 years, Hershey's core strategy was to maintain a stable five-cent price point for its flagship chocolate bar. To counteract inflation and rising commodity costs, the company systematically reduced the product's size, a practice now known as shrinkflation, effectively halving the bar's weight by 1969.

This long-term adherence to a fixed price point, while initially a powerful market position, ultimately made the company vulnerable to competitors who were more flexible and aggressive with their own pricing and sizing strategies.

▶The Rivalry with Mars Inc.Apr 2026

The claims detail a dramatic competitive shift where Mars Inc. surpassed Hershey as the top U.S. candy company in 1973. This was precipitated by Mars's aggressive response to Hershey's 1969 price increase, superior operational capabilities like commodities trading, and a product portfolio with a lower cost of goods sold.

Hershey's loss of market leadership highlights the risks of strategic complacency and demonstrates how a competitor's operational efficiencies can translate directly into a durable market advantage.

▶Strategic Inertia and Resistance to ChangeApr 2026

Hershey operated for decades with a strict no-advertising policy, only abandoning it in the 1970s due to direct competitive threats. Even then, the successful campaign was quickly cancelled due to short-term profit pressures, indicating a deep-seated resistance to modern marketing and strategic investment within the company's leadership.

This cultural aversion to advertising and modern business practices like sophisticated commodities trading represented a significant strategic vulnerability that its rival, Mars, fully exploited.

▶Evolution of Market DominanceApr 2026

Initially, Hershey was the only scaled chocolate producer in America, allowing it to define the nation's taste and act as a primary supplier to thousands of smaller candy makers. Over time, its dominance eroded, transforming the market into a duopoly where it now shares roughly equal domestic market share with Mars.

The narrative shows a classic business arc from near-monopoly to intense competition, suggesting that an early mover advantage is not permanent without continuous innovation and adaptation to the competitive landscape.

Source episodes

Sentiment over time

Not enough data for timeline

Changes over time

1900-1969

Hershey maintained a five-cent price for its chocolate bar by progressively shrinking its size from 1.25 ounces to about half that weight.

1920s

The company established itself as the primary wholesale supplier of chocolate to over 40,000 regional candy bar makers across America.

November 1969

Facing spiking commodity prices, Hershey abandoned its 70-year pricing strategy, doubling the price of its bar to 10 cents and restoring its original 1.25-ounce size. This move triggered a 'price and size war' with Mars Inc.

1970s

Under pressure from Mars, Hershey began advertising for the first time in its history. However, the successful campaign was halted after just two years due to profit concerns.

1973

Mars Inc. surpassed Hershey to become the number one candy company in America, marking a major shift in the competitive landscape.

Present Day (as per claims)

In the U.S. market, Hershey and Mars are positioned as direct competitors with each holding approximately 24% market share.

Suggested prompts

How did Hershey's long-held policy against advertising impact its brand equity and ability to compete with Mars in the long term? &nearr;What were the cascading effects of Hershey's decision in November 1969 to abandon its 70-year pricing and sizing strategy? &nearr;To what extent was Hershey's loss of market leadership in 1973 a result of operational deficiencies, such as the lack of a commodities trading department, versus strategic marketing failures? &nearr;How did Hershey's early role as a primary chocolate supplier to the industry shape its competitive landscape and eventual rivalry with companies it once supplied? &nearr;

Key concepts

Pricing Strategy 7 ep Product Size & Shrinkflation 8 ep Competition with Mars 6 ep Advertising Policy 4 ep Market Position & Share 6 ep Commodity Prices 4 ep Operational Efficiency 2 ep Supplier Relationships 3 ep

Report last updated: Apr 8, 2026

Get started free

Back to Entities Intelligence Report