The 'Meal Deal Market'

Loyalty as Leverage

Loyalty schemes have become a powerful tool for retailers to target customers and drive sales, many of which are used to gain savings on Meal Deals.  A GCVA study revealed that 88% of supermarket retail consumers are using loyalty schemes for their essential shopping needs. Whilst customers are given the opportunity to ‘opt out’, retailers rely on the concept of FOMO assisted by up-marketing savings gained from schemes to persuade consumers to sign up.

This system functions as a mutual services exchange. Customers get savings, while retailers gain loyalty and consumer data. However, such schemes blur the line between marketing and surveillance, exemplifying what US social psychologist Shoshana Zuboff has termed an ‘uncontract’. Zuboff’s concept refers to a new mode of covert contractual agreements that cannot be humanely accounted for. In the context of loyalty schemes, supermarkets exploit consumers’ trust and loyalty ‘agreement’ by offering them a choice of paying a higher price, or forfeiting their data.

Recent CMA (Competition and Markets Authority) reports have circulated findings that major retailers such as Sainsbury’s and Tesco are artificially inflating non-member prices to make their loyalty price appear more attractive. The inquest has fuelled a major journalistic debate online, as writers interrogate the ethical boundaries of these practices and their implications for consumer autonomy.

The Role of Social and Mass Media

The meal deal thrives on visibility. Social media content via popular outlets like TikTok and Instagram all assist retailers in maintaining cultural relevance. Supermarkets have leaned into this momentum by crafting specialised ad campaigns.

Tesco’s ‘Your Best Combo, Made Better’ campaign demonstrated how mass media and digital storytelling have evolved to sustain the Meal Deal’s cultural relevance. In emphasising the deal as reflective of the consumer’s persona, Tesco effectively fuels the social product of the Meal Deal to encourage online media commentary and comparison. Similarly, TikTok creator ‘Beccaeatseverything’ has accumulated over 500 000 followers by consuming, ranking, and posting every Meal Deal sandwich for her viewers.

Other users have even developed interactive filters that randomly generate a Meal Deal combination, inviting people to post their results online. These trends illustrate how the meal deal operates as both a marketing device and a social currency. Through the interplay between brand and audience, brands such as Tesco can leverage user-generated content as a form of organic promotion, though it raises ethical questions about influencer transparency and consumer manipulation.

Whilst cost continues to dominate headlines, the parallel discussion concerns whether the Meal Deal offers ‘cheap fuel’ or ‘balanced nutrition’.

A deeper analysis of Sainsbury’s yoghurt pot crisis reveals the tension between supermarkets framing of healthy choices within a system that prioritises profit margins and impulse buying.

In lieu of social media arguments supporting healthy ‘main’ options, Coogan raises an important point.

'If I wanted to be healthy, I simply would not be getting a meal deal in the first place. A meal deal is about getting cheap, dirty fuel into the broken-down rental car that is my body – not making smart, healthy-conscious choices’ - Ryan Coogan, The Independent

Coogan’s commentary speaks for a broader cultural cynicism: the idea that the meal deal design is fast yet nutritionally compromised. Whilst supermarkets promote their offerings as balanced combinations, research from the British Nutrition Foundation Action on Salt suggests otherwise. A 2023 analysis found that over 70% of pre-packed sandwiches and snacks in popular Meal Deals exceeded recommended salt or fat levels. Research also found that despite nearly two thirds (63%) of snacks having some form of nutritional or health-based message in the product description, 70% of them would score as a HFSS food (products High in Fat, Salt and Sugar).

Whilst these marketing claims are legal, they have been shown to be misleading to consumers by creating a ‘health halo’ that discourages the scrutiny of nutritional labels. This contributes to a national rise in obesity, which carries heavy economic and health implications. Educational articles sanctioned by Elearn College highlight that Obesity-related illnesses place a heavy burden on the NHS, with an estimated annual cost of 6.1billion GBP. By contributing to the obesity crisis, Meal Deals indirectly contribute to further financially crippling the NHS. The long-term costs of treating related illnesses are thus argued to outweigh the short-term savings offered by meal deals.

The environmental cost of single-use pre-packaged meals continues to be an increasingly urgent debate.

The Material Change Index found that 51% of food and drink items in supermarkets were packaged in plastic that could be replaced with more environmentally friendly materials, majority of which came from ready-made meals and meal kits (90%).

In response to growing consumer pressure, major retailers launched zero-waste schemes. Notably, Sainsbury’s and Tesco introduced take-back schemes in 2024 that aimed to encourage consumers to return single-use plastic for recycling. However, independent investigations suggest that these initiatives fall short of their claims.

Research by non-profit organisation Everyday Plastic and the Environmental Investigation Agency UK (EIA) tracked 40 bundles of soft plastic packaging at Tesco and Sainsbury collection points to analyse the recycling progression between July 2023 and February 2024. Results found that 70% of waste that reached an unknown destination was burnt, not recycled. Campaigners and organisations are now urging the government to support a 40% cut in global plastic production by 2040.

Food waste represents a deeper layer of this problem. Pre-packaged meals must comply with rigid freshness standards, resulting in significant daily disposal rates of unsold products. According to Waste Managed, the retail sector in the UK contributes around 270 000 tonnes of food waste each year, with only 7% of food surplus being redistributed.

To mitigate this, supermarkets are partnering with charities and redistribution networks to help donate unsold but edible food to communities in need. Tesco and Aldi have partnered with Neighbourly to distribute millions of meals to vulnerable communities. Despite these efforts, programmes are consistently implemented reactively rather than in prevention, addressing waste only after it has occurred.