I've read some tosh in my time, but the Kraft/Cadbury story in this week's Mail on Sunday plumbed new depths of inanity.

In the MOS story, a "senior executive within Cadbury" suggested that Kraft is looking to "push Cadbury chocolate to the back of the shelf and then, eventually, off it".

The exec added: "Kraft doesn't have loyalty to the Cadbury brand and it didn't buy the company to promote its products in Britain. They bought Cadbury for its distribution network in India, where there are a billion consumers."

To be fair to this "senior" Cadbury source, it's not clear why Kraft would want to spend millions advertising Milka or developing Milka chocolate buttons and other parallel products to CDM.

And Americans are sometimes guilty of cultural imperialism. But if Kraft CEO Irene Rosenfeld really spent £12bn pursuing Cadbury, only to dump the brand, that would cap even Quaker's $1.7bn acquisition of Snapple in 1993 as the worst deal in the history of grocery (Quaker sold it three years later for $300m).

And Rosenfeld is no Quaker.