{"id":125363,"date":"2026-05-09T17:45:27","date_gmt":"2026-05-09T20:45:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ubirataonline.com.br\/ben-jerrys-sold-for-326-million-with-1-condition-the-new-owner-broke-it-and-now-the-co-founder-wants-it-back\/"},"modified":"2026-05-09T17:45:29","modified_gmt":"2026-05-09T20:45:29","slug":"ben-jerrys-sold-for-326-million-with-1-condition-the-new-owner-broke-it-and-now-the-co-founder-wants-it-back","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ubirataonline.com.br\/en\/ben-jerrys-sold-for-326-million-with-1-condition-the-new-owner-broke-it-and-now-the-co-founder-wants-it-back\/","title":{"rendered":"Ben & Jerry’s sold for $326 million with 1 condition. The new owner broke it \u2014 and now the co-founder wants it back"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>
gettyimages.com \/ Justin Sullivan <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

When Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield sold Ben & Jerry’s to Unilever in 2000 for a reported $326 million (1), they also extracted a promise that turned out to be the most consequential clause in the deal: The brand would retain an independent board of directors whose job was to protect its social mission, no matter who owned the company. (2)<\/p>\n

For more than two decades, that arrangement held. Until it didn’t.<\/p>\n

Must Read <\/h2>\n

By January 1 this year, Magnum \u2014 the ice cream conglomerate spun out of Unilever \u2014 had removed all of Ben & Jerry’s independent directors except for one Unilever-appointed director and CEO, Dairy Reporter noted. (3)<\/p>\n

The independent board sued, alleging the move directly violated the original merger agreement. (4) The Ben & Jerry’s Foundation subsequently won a court ruling to join that lawsuit after Magnum stopped providing it with approved funding, Vermont Business Magazine reported. (5)<\/p>\n

Cohen isn’t staying quiet.<\/p>\n

“We’re turning up the heat,” he told the New York Times. (2) He’s asked Magnum to sell Ben & Jerry’s to a values-aligned investor group, and threatened a boycott of all Magnum products \u2014 which include Breyers, Klondike and Talenti \u2014 if it doesn’t comply.<\/p>\n

What’s actually being disputed <\/h2>\n

The legal fight centers on a governance structure that was deliberately baked into the 2000 sale agreement. At the time of the acquisition, Unilever committed that Ben & Jerry’s would retain an independent board focused on “providing leadership for Ben & Jerry’s social mission and brand integrity,” FoodOnline reported. (6)<\/p>\n

Cohen and Greenfield said at the time they hoped the company would “continue to expand its role in society” under Unilever’s ownership. (6)<\/p>\n

Magnum has countered that it acted within its legal and contractual rights, arguing that the removed directors had become “ineligible” to serve \u2014 some due to exceeding term limits and others over alleged misconduct \u2014 framing this as different from outright removal. The independent board calls it a coordinated dismantling. (3)<\/p>\n

“This is about more than a contract,” Liz Bankowski, President of Ben & Jerry’s Foundation Board of Trustees, told Vermont Business Magazine. “It’s about whether a corporation can weaponize a governance structure and withhold funding when prior commitments and values become inconvenient.” (5)<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n