Reported Sainsbury’s–Morrisons talks renew supermarket merger debate

Discussions ended earlier this year, the Guardian reports. A separate proposal covering Aldi and Lidl’s land agreements does not establish that a supermarket merger would win approval.

Exterior of a Sainsbury's Local at Euston Station in London.
File photograph of a Sainsbury’s Local at Euston Station in London, taken on 27 August 2014. Hugh Venables (resized and converted to WebP). CC BY-SA 2.0.
LinkedInPostEmail
Save for later

Sainsbury’s held talks about merging with Morrisons between November 2025 and February 2026 before withdrawing, the Guardian reported on 8 October. The disclosure has renewed debate about consolidation among Britain’s supermarkets, where any combination would raise questions about competition, prices and shoppers’ choice.

The newspaper says the discussions emerged this week. Its account does not establish a signed agreement, a current formal offer or a timetable for a transaction. Suggestions that Asda or Morrisons could eventually disappear remain industry forecasts, rather than announced decisions about either brand.

According to the Guardian, price demands were understood to have prompted Sainsbury’s chief executive, Simon Roberts, to walk away. That is the newspaper’s account of private negotiations; no direct company explanation or response is established in the reporting cited here.

What a Sainsbury’s–Morrisons combination could involve

The potential scale is substantial. The Guardian reports that Sainsbury’s has about 600 supermarkets and almost 900 convenience stores. Morrisons would add approximately 500 supermarkets and 1,600 convenience stores, although those figures establish neither an integration plan nor any proposed closures.

Using market figures presented in the report, the two businesses together would account for 23.6% of UK grocery sales, compared with Tesco’s 27.8%. A combination of Sainsbury’s and Asda would represent roughly 26.7%. These are illustrative additions of market shares, not forecasts or regulatory conclusions.

The Guardian attributes figures putting Morrisons sixth, with an 8.4% share against Lidl’s 8.7%, to Worldpanel by Numerator. It also reports that less than one percentage point separates Aldi and Asda. The underlying measurement period is not specified in the article, limiting how precisely those figures can be dated.

Industry sources interviewed by the newspaper described informal discussions involving Asda, Morrisons and Sainsbury’s and suggested talks could restart. Those assessments do not establish that negotiations have resumed. The report identifies purchasing, property management and aligning supplier terms as possible sources of savings, without a quantified commitment or demonstrated reduction in grocery bills.

Morrisons’ food-processing operations add another complication, the Guardian reports. Selling those operations to specialist suppliers is presented as a possible scenario, not an announced disposal programme. The newspaper also describes debt-servicing costs and intense competition as pressures on the business.

Bernstein analysts told the Guardian that greater scale could improve Sainsbury’s ability to compete with Tesco, while warning that “the risk of distraction for Sainsbury’s would be high”. Both the potential advantage and that warning concern a hypothetical transaction.

What the Aldi and Lidl land-rules proposal changes

A separate competition proposal has become part of the debate. On 7 August, the Competition and Markets Authority provisionally proposed bringing Aldi, Lidl GB and Lidl NI within the Groceries Market Investigation (Controlled Land) Order 2010. The rules restrict land agreements that can prevent rival supermarkets opening nearby.

In its August announcement, the CMA said the proposal concerned restrictive covenants and exclusivity arrangements. The order already covers Asda, Co-op, Marks and Spencer, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Waitrose. Extending it would subject the discounters to those land restrictions too.

Aldi and Lidl were originally excluded as limited-assortment discounters. The CMA’s provisional findings cited their geographic coverage, stores larger than 1,000 square metres, full grocery ranges and direct purchasing from suppliers. It noted that a full grocery range could still involve less choice within individual categories.

CMA executive director Juliette Enser said the proposal aimed to protect supermarket choice and prevent large chains blocking nearby rivals. The August announcement anticipated final decisions in autumn; the Guardian’s October report says a ruling is expected this month. Neither establishes that a final decision has been issued.

Clive Black of Shore Capital, identified by the Guardian as Sainsbury’s broker, said the preliminary position meant “the shape of the pitch has adjusted a little”. That is an assessment from an analyst with a commercial affiliation. The land-order proposal itself grants no permission for a supermarket merger.

Why the blocked Asda deal still matters

The CMA blocked Sainsbury’s proposed merger with Asda on 25 April 2019, finding likely harm to competition nationally and locally. Its decision cited higher prices, reduced quality or choice, or a poorer shopping experience. Those findings concerned that transaction, not a potential Morrisons deal.

The inquiry explicitly considered increased competition from Aldi and Lidl and still found serious concerns. It also examined the companies’ promised price cuts, concluding that the merger was more likely overall to raise prices. Discounters were therefore already part of the earlier assessment.

The 2019 findings extended beyond supermarket shelves to online delivery choices and more than 125 locations where the chains’ petrol stations competed nearby. For the newly reported talks, effects on jobs, store closures, supplier payments and consumer prices remain unestablished.

Sources and context

AI-assisted article checked against the listed sources. NewsJaws did not conduct interviews or attend the reported events.

About NewsJaws Desk

AI-assisted reporting and explainers reviewed against the linked source documents. No claim of on-scene reporting or original interviews.