Shoppers pay £275 more at the tills as food prices continue to climb
Closely-watched data released by market research firm Numerator, formerly Kantar, show grocery inflation reached 5.2 per cent in the four weeks to 13 July, marking their highest level in 18 months.
It chimes with the latest CPI reading showed an uptick in inflation from 3.4 to 3.6 per cent between May and June, driven primarily by rising fuel and food prices, according to the Office for National Statistics.
With the average household spending £5,283 on food every year, the latest rise could add £275 to bills if their habits stay the same, Numerator said.
The figures suggest shoppers are trying to shield themselves from the worst of the price hikes by opting for own-label products, which now outpace brands, growing by 5.6 per cent versus 4.9 per cent.
'These inflationary worries aren't just changing what we buy, but how we prepare it too,' says Fraser McKevitt, head of retail and consumer insight at Worldpanel.
'We often see people choosing to make simpler meals when they are trying to save money, and today, almost seven in ten dinner plates include fewer than six components.'
The figures come just a week after figures from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) showed a rebound in retail sales, up 3.1 per cent year-on-year in June.
While food sales increased 4.1 per cent, it said it had been driven mainly by food inflation, with non-food sales rising just 2.2 per cent.
Cost-conscious consumers are driving sales at discount retailers like Aldi, where sales increased by 6.3 per cent bringing its market share to 10.9 per cent, just behind Tesco, Sainsbury's and Asda.
Lidl reached a record high market share at 8.5 per cent having attracted half a million new customers to its stores.
Tesco retains the top spot with a market share of 28.3 per cent as sales grew by 7.1 per cent, while Asda continued to lose ground with a market share of 11.8 per cent.
Cost-cutting might be high on the agenda for some consumers, but the hot weather means some categories are seeing an uptick in sales.
Iced coffee sales were up by 81 per cent, while kombucha drinks doubled their sales over the last four weeks compared to 2024. Sales of ice cream and sorbet soared by 33 per cent.
'Innovation is absolutely vital to help grocers keep up with new trends and make sure they're meeting shoppers' needs as behaviours and priorities shift,' says McKevitt. 'The drinks aisle in particular seems to be offering up plenty of inspiration.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
Famous Philly cheesesteak under threat as costs continue to spiral
The rising cost of beef is putting pressure on Philadelphia's iconic cheesesteak industry, with one prominent restaurateur expressing concern over the impact on his business and customers. Ken Silver, president of Jim's South St., notes that the price of beef from his supplier has climbed by approximately $1 per pound compared to a year ago. This recent hike follows a "crazy" roughly 50 per cent increase when his establishment reopened in 2024 after a fire. US beef prices have been steadily rising for the past two decades, a trend attributed to a tight supply of cattle coupled with sustained consumer popularity for the meat. 'Our strategy right now is just absorbing the price and hoping that we see a reduction after the summer months are over, the grilling season and all the rest,' Silver said Wednesday. He said a cheesesteak sandwich at Jim's South St. costs $13.49, up from $11.49 in 2022, when the popular eatery was forced to close for nearly two years because of a fire. Cheesesteaks typically are made with thinly sliced beef, cheese and onions, though other toppings are possible, too. For consumers, the average price of a pound of ground beef rose to $6.12 in June, up nearly 12% from a year ago, according to U.S. government data. The average price of all uncooked beef steaks rose 8% to $11.49 per pound. 'We've taken a hit, profitability-wise, just to maintain what our customers would expect to get when they come to us: a reasonably priced cheesesteak of the best quality they can find," Silver said. If supply costs don't ease, Silver said he might have to raise menu prices or declare a market price, which fluctuates and is commonly associated with seafood. 'I really hate to do that,' said Silver, whose father started the business in 1976. A customer, Bryan Williams, suggested a price hike wouldn't discourage him from placing an order. 'That's just how things are going lately,' he said. 'There's really nothing that they can do about it.'
Reuters
28 minutes ago
- Reuters
EU backs potential counter-tariffs on 93 billion euros of US goods
BRUSSELS, July 24 (Reuters) - The European Union's member countries voted on Thursday to approve counter-tariffs on 93 billion euros ($109 billion) of U.S. goods, which could be imposed should the bloc fail to reach a trade deal with Washington, EU diplomats said. The 27-nation bloc's executive European Commission had said on Wednesday its primary focus was to achieve a negotiated outcome with Washington to avert 30% U.S. tariffs that U.S. President Donald Trump has said he will apply on August 1. The Commission said it would press on in parallel with plans for potential countermeasures, merging two packages of proposed tariffs of 21 billion euros and 72 billion euros into a single list and submitting this to EU members for approval. No countermeasures would enter force until August 7. So far the EU has held back from imposing any countermeasures, despite Trump's repeated announcements of tariffs, the broadest of which have been postponed. EU member states authorised the first package of countermeasures in April, but these were immediately suspended to allow time for negotiations. The EU and United States appear to be heading towards a possible trade deal, according to EU diplomats, which would result in a broad 15% tariff on EU goods imported into the U.S., mirroring a framework agreement Washington struck with Japan. Trump would still need to take any final decision. Under the outlines of the potential deal, the 15% rate could apply to sectors including cars and pharmaceuticals and would not be added to long-standing U.S. duties, which average just under 5%. There could also be concessions for sectors such as aircraft, lumber as well as some medicines and agricultural products, which would not face tariffs, diplomats said. Washington does not, however, appear willing to lower its 50% tariff on steel. ($1 = 0.8501 euros)
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain's pension crisis is about to get even worse
The Government's review of pensions is asking some of the right questions. Top of the list is the age at which they should start to be paid. It is not a given that the state should fund the last third of someone's life, regardless of need. That is a choice, and a recent one. When the Old Age Pension began in 1909, it was paid from 70 and you had to have lived in the UK for 20 years and to be of 'good character'. It was means-tested, too – you needed to earn less than £21 a year to qualify. So, Liz Kendall, the Work and Pensions Secretary, is right to look first at the state pension age. And right to commission a report on the proportion of adult life spent in retirement. When the modern state pension was introduced in 1948, a 65-year-old could expect to receive it for just 13 years, about a sixth of their life expectancy. She is right, too, to investigate ways to boost pension savings – 8pc of earnings is not enough – and to broaden the number of people putting money aside for their retirement. Only half of working-age people are doing that, a fifth of the self-employed and fewer still of some ethnic minorities. That's not good. As ever, when it comes to pensions policy, there is also a have-cake-and-eat-it problem. The Government spends about 5pc of GDP on pensions – more than £120bn last year – but it persists with the fantasy that the amount paid to pensioners can rise into the future by the highest of earnings, inflation or 2.5pc. The triple lock is unaffordable. The unavoidable truth about pensions is that small changes in a range of unpredictable variables make a big difference when they are compounded over the decades that we now expect to live after we have stopped working. This is true for the good changes that government policy and personal choice can deliver. And for the bad ones that we can't do much about. That's why the Government is asking only some of the right questions. There are others it needs to address, all of which are difficult. The biggest pensions challenge may well be one that no one is talking about. This all became abundantly clear to me recently when I helped a colleague out with a deceptively simple question. He wanted to know what rate of investment return he needed to aim for in order to achieve the comfortable retirement he was hoping to enjoy. To answer that, I employed my pathetically rudimentary Excel skills to build a spreadsheet with a few variables that we could play with until we arrived at a plausible plan. I plugged in how much he had saved; how much he intended to put aside in future, and for how long; when he planned to wind down into semi-retirement and when he would stop completely; when he would take the state pension; and the return he would aim to achieve on his investments both before and after he stopped working. I ran the numbers from his current age of 52 until, with luck, he turns 90. Crucially, I had to make some quite big assumptions, the most important of which were that the triple lock would continue throughout his life and that the Bank of England would succeed in hitting its 2pc inflation target. By tweaking all these variables and assumptions, we were able to monitor their impact on the cumulative size of his pension pot. As you might expect, saving more for longer in an only moderately inflationary environment ended well. Working for a bit longer made a big difference. Accepting a lower income in retirement helped. None of this is rocket science, and probably doesn't require a Pensions Commission to confirm. That said, I was surprised by some of the things we discovered. One was the remarkable power of starting early. The principal reason that my colleague was pleasantly surprised by his required rate of investment return was that he had spent the previous 30 years studiously paying into his company pension, supported by a generous employer. The first additional question the Government needs to find an answer to is how to get young people engaged with their pensions. It may be boring, but it is not as boring as being old and poor. The second thing the spreadsheet taught us was the power of delay. Working just a few more years, even in a part-time capacity, can transform the arithmetic of our pension savings. Paying in for longer and taking out for less time, together with a few extra years of compound investment growth, is a magical combination. Find what you enjoy and keep doing it. But the biggest eye-opener for me was the devastating impact of even a modest uptick in inflation. A quick and easy way to make your money run out is to stop work and then try to maintain your standard of living by increasing the amount you draw down from your pension in line with rising prices. For my colleague, nudging up the assumed inflation rate from 2pc to 3pc was the difference between a £700,000 pension pot at the age of 90 and running out of cash completely a couple of years earlier. The pensions crisis that no one is talking about, therefore, is on the face of it nothing to do with pensions at all. Yes, more people need to save more, to start earlier and to carry on for longer. The Government has a role to play in encouraging all of those. But it, and the Bank of England, has an even bigger task. To keep inflation at a level where it doesn't blow our plans out of the water.
