The Journal.: Smucker, Trader Joe's and a Battle Over PB&Js

Date: October 28, 2025
Hosts: Ryan Knudsen & Jesse Newman

Episode Overview

This episode delves into the escalating legal clash between food giant J.M. Smucker (maker of the iconic Uncrustables) and Trader Joe’s over their competing crustless peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. While the battle is superficially about a frozen snack, the hosts reveal a deeper struggle for control and influence within American grocery stores: the rise of private label (store brand) products and the mounting pressure they put on traditional name brands.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. PB&J Taste Test & Setting the Scene

• Ryan Knudsen conducts a playful PB&J “interview” with his 2-year-old son, Bedford, comparing Smucker’s Uncrustables with Trader Joe’s lookalike. Bedford’s verdict? “Same.”
• Insight: Even experts (aka toddlers) can’t tell the difference—illustrating why food conglomerates feel threatened by similar, lower-cost store brands.
• “Are these sandwiches the same or different?” — “Same.” (Ryan Knudsen & Bedford, 01:11)

2. Why Smucker is Suing Trader Joe’s

• Smucker alleges that Trader Joe’s private label sandwich is an “obvious copycat” infringing on Uncrustables’ trademark—specifically the shape, the crimped edges, and even the packaging.
• Details Sought by Smucker:
  • Complete halt of Trader Joe’s sandwich production
  • Destruction of all infringing products and materials
  • Monetary damages
• “They say they want Trader Joe's to deliver up to Smucker for destruction all products, containers, labels, packaging, wrappers… Need I go on?” (Jesse Newman, 13:42)

3. The Evolution of Private Label Brands

• Past Stigma: Store brands once carried a reputation for being inferior “knockoffs”—plain packaging, low quality, a choice of necessity not preference.
  • “The Perception was that they were knockoffs, cheap generics that were less good quality…and I always envied the kids who had national brands like Coke and Pepsi and Twinkies. Like, I thought they were rich.” (Jesse Newman, 05:45)
• Modern Appeal: Retailers like Trader Joe’s, Aldi, and Costco have transformed store brands into desirable, high-quality, even trendy alternatives.
  • Packaging is fun and eye-catching.
  • Products are often seen as cool, especially among millennials and Gen Z.
  • Rising inflation and financial pressures boost their attractiveness.
• “Stores have really changed their goal with their own brands...now it’s not just to copy or emulate national brands, but it’s to beat them.” (Jesse Newman, 07:16)

4. A Battle for Power: Market Share & Perception

• Shift in Consumer Habits: Private label products now account for 20% of all store sales—a growing slice markedly nibbling away at established brands.
  • “One in $5 that a consumer spends at a store is on a private label product...There’s a feeling that they are very much in ascendance.” (Jesse Newman, 08:52)
• Big Food’s Defensive Moves: With sales threatened and brands struggling to remain relevant, major food companies have increasingly turned to lawsuits as a line of defense against copycat products.
  • Recent lawsuits referenced:
    • Lululemon vs. Costco (yoga pants)
    • Mondelez vs. Aldi (cookies)
  • “One response that the big brands are having...is that they’re suing.” (Jesse Newman, 09:13)

5. What's at Stake for Smucker?

• Uncrustables is a near $1 billion brand, critical to Smucker’s strategy—especially after recent financial strain (e.g., $5 billion purchase of Hostess).
• The company “has a lot to protect.”
  • “Uncrustables has to keep working for Smucker. They're going to try to pull out all the stops to protect their business.” (Jesse Newman, 10:54)
• Trader Joe’s has not publicly responded to the lawsuit.

6. The Broader Trend: Lawsuits as a New Norm

• Smucker’s aggressive defense isn’t isolated—similar intellectual property fights are breaking out across industries, reflecting how seriously established brands take the private label threat.
• Private brands now carry cultural cachet, with younger consumers especially enthusiastic about “house brands.”
  • "And so...it's really just another sign of trouble for big food companies...They are fighting fires on so many fronts and most importantly, people are buying less of their products." (Jesse Newman, 14:45)
• At heart, it’s about maintaining relevance and control as shoppers’ habits and allegiances shift.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Big food companies are worried that store brands are going to eat their lunch.” (Jesse Newman, 02:17)
• “The thing that used to be a stigma has almost completely flipped onto its head.” (Ryan Knudsen, 08:09)
• “They're not just afraid of being copied—they're also afraid of being replaced.” (Ryan Knudsen, 15:11)

Key Timestamps

• 00:05 — PB&J taste test with Ryan’s son, Bedford
• 01:44 — Framing the legal fight: Smucker sues Trader Joe’s
• 04:15 — Definition and history of private label/store brands
• 06:13 — Transformation of store brand reputation in the 1990s and 2000s
• 08:26 — The impact of inflation and the surge of store brands
• 09:13 — Big brands increasingly sue over intellectual property
• 10:19 — The strategic importance of Uncrustables to Smucker
• 12:34 — Smucker’s legal targets: not just Trader Joe’s
• 13:38 — Smucker’s demand: total destruction of Trader Joe’s PB&J’s
• 14:08 — The trend: lawsuits beyond frozen sandwiches (yoga pants, cookies)
• 15:11 — Broader significance: big food's precarious position in the market

Conclusion

This episode uses a delightfully nostalgic product—a PB&J sandwich—to tell a much deeper story: a fundamental shift in American grocery aisles, where once-maligned store brands are now prestigious, popular, and a real threat to the giants of “Big Food.” The Smucker vs. Trader Joe’s battle is about much more than one snack; it’s about generational change, competition, and the brands’ struggle to stay relevant in the face of evolving consumer tastes.