Last week, Tupperware’s CEO and President, Laurie Ann Goldman, announced that the company was filing for bankruptcy as a result of several years of a “challenging macroeconomic environment”. Tupperware is a brand of food storage containers and kitchen equipment founded by Earl Tupper in 1942, with the purpose of helping “war-weary families save money on costly food waste”, according to the company’s website.
While the founders focus on reducing food waste and saving money continue relevant, I think that even the most ardent of Tupperware fans will admit that the company has failed to keep up with today’s health- and environment-conscious consumers.
On the health front, while a search a search of the company’s UK website (as of 22th September 2024) for “BPA-free” produces 13 results, this includes 3 different sizes of bread boxes and 3 different sizes of pantry boxes. That is, this health standard is not widely adopted across the product range, and certainly not in the main range of containers that we came to associate with the brand. Even the Tupperware UltraPro 2.0Litre Casserole Dish – a product that is supposed to be used in the oven – is made of plastic. It’s such a missed opportunity for the company to venture into other materials, as customers become increasingly aware of the health problems caused by plastic!
On the environment front, a search for “sustainable” produced 5 results, and a search for “recycle” produced zero. Thus, there is no evidence of a programme to either use recycled plastic, or to recycle old plastic containers.
There is also the problem that Tupperware is often associated with hoarding. If you search for #Tupperware on TikTok, for instance, you see videos like this one or this one, showings rows upon rows of plastic boxes. Not only is (Tupperware) hoarding an example of consumerism, it also goes against the clean and unencumbered lifestyle pitched by other brands, including that other classic brand, Stanley. Stanley imagery features customers using the product with friends, outdoors, while exercising and so on.
In summary, somewhere along the line, Tupperware abandoned the founder’s drive to help households save money by reducing food waste. Instead, it focused on finding more and more ways of using plastic in the kitchen. As a result, Tupperware has now been added to the list of companies that, like Kodak or Blockbuster, became too identified with a specific product formulation, and failed to adapt to new ways of addressing the core customer needs.
Ana Canhoto 
Fantastic take, and I definitely agree with your points on Tupperware’s downfall. If I may add, its multi-level marketing sales model (which worked in the 1950s and 1960s) failed to keep up with the times. Avon (and its Avon ladies) is another example of a company that uses this kind of sales strategy.
Gone are the days when companies would issue sales catalogs, preferring to go direct-to-consumer (DTC). Tupperware’s rivals Rubbermaid and Lock & Lock (from South Korea) have gone the DTC route, something that has worked for them.
LikeLike
I agree. And while Tupperware may have saved on commissions (to the sellers) and printing costs (of the catalogues) by going online, it also lost the recommendation system. For instance, in the UK version of the website, there aren’t reviews by product – there is only an overall page of reviews.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think Tupperwear is very much stuck in the past century. They were a “big brand” when I was a kid in the 70s but is now almost forgotten in my country. And yes, the whole plastic obsession didn’t help.
LikeLike
Would love to see an article on Coca Cola. Or have you already written one? Were they the ones who bought vitamin water?
LikeLike