On January 6, Nestlé S.A. issued a recall notice for specific batches of infant formula products across 31 countries and regions globally. The recall was prompted by concerns that arachidonic acid (ARA) oil ingredients supplied by a vendor might contain Bacillus cereus toxins, substances that can cause digestive issues such as diarrhea and vomiting. As the world's largest ARA supplier, DSM-Firmenich, released a clarification statement, market focus rapidly shifted to the leading domestic ARA supplier and STAR Market-listed company, Cabio Biotech(Wuhan)Co.,Ltd.. The capital market reacted swiftly, with Cabio Biotech's stock price plunging over 13% at the open on January 8, hitting an intraday low of a 14.15% decline, and ultimately closing down 11.91%. The repercussions of this recall event quickly rippled across the industrial chain, with the reaction in the Chinese market being particularly intense. On January 6, Nestlé China followed up by announcing a voluntary recall of the affected products, encompassing 41 batches sold via cross-border e-commerce channels imported from Europe and 30 batches sold domestically. In total, 71 batches of products across at least 15 different infant formula series under the Nestlé and Wyeth brands were implicated. Although Nestlé emphasized that it had not received any reports of adverse reactions and that the affected products accounted for far less than 0.5% of its annual sales, the high sensitivity of Chinese consumers to infant formula safety triggered market volatility that exceeded expectations. A Nestlé service provider in Jiangxi province revealed that many regions were experiencing a wave of returns for non-affected batches, while competitors were seizing the opportunity to pressure distributors and capture market share. For Cabio Biotech, the impact of this incident strikes directly at the core of its primary business. Public data shows that Cabio Biotech is the largest domestic supplier of ARA products and a significant player in the international market. In its 2024 financials, its ARA business generated revenue of 390 million yuan, constituting a substantial 70.27% of its total revenue, with a gross profit margin as high as 44.08%. The ARA business can be described as the company's "revenue anchor." More critically, Cabio Biotech maintains long-term cooperative relationships with major dairy corporations involved in this incident, such as Nestlé and Danone, with some client partnerships spanning over a decade, and its products are sold in more than 30 countries and regions. Although Cabio Biotech responded on January 7, stating it had been notified by Nestlé and was verifying the raw materials, with test results still pending, market anxiety has been fully unleashed. After all, in the infant food sector, once a safety issue is confirmed, rebuilding brand trust is nearly impossible, and the cost for brands to switch suppliers is far lower than the cost of repairing their brand image. The chain reaction within the industrial chain has further intensified the pressure on Cabio Biotech. Following the exposure of the recall, numerous dairy companies, including Danone, FrieslandCampina, Junlebao Dairy, Yili Group, and Mengniu Dairy, rushed to issue clarification statements, distancing themselves from the implicated supplier. Danone explicitly stated it did not use ARA ingredients from Nestlé's affected supplier; Junlebao Dairy disclosed that its ARA suppliers are Roquette and Runke Biology; Yili Group emphasized that the ARA powder it uses is not the same type as the implicated ingredient. These statements not only highlight the substitutability of ARA suppliers but also hint at the customer attrition risk facing Cabio Biotech. The opportunistic expansion by competitors has worsened Cabio Biotech's predicament. As an established giant in the ARA field, DSM-Firmenich, while clarifying that the implicated ingredients were not supplied by them, explicitly stated that "due to the incident's impact, demand for our company's ARA ingredients has surged, and we will fully coordinate production capacity to meet market demand." In reality, a complex relationship of both competition and cooperation has long existed between Cabio Biotech and DSM-Firmenich. DSM once dominated the market through patent protection, while Cabio Biotech rapidly expanded internationally following the expiration of those patents. The two parties are direct competitors yet also have a procurement cooperation agreement, which has been extended until 2026. For Cabio Biotech, the core challenge is to prove product safety and stabilize customer relationships. For the entire industry, this incident necessitates a re-examination of the critical importance of supply chain security and risk management. (Note: This article was created with the assistance of an AI tool and does not constitute investment advice.)
Comments