The original analogy is pretty disingenuous and conveniently ignores a crucial detail: in the cereal example Kroger (presumably) still gets paid when the discou

The original analogy is pretty disingenuous and conveniently ignores a crucial detail: in the cereal example Kroger (presumably) still gets paid when the discounted box of cereal is sold. Whereas what they're asking for is the equivalent of Cheerios demanding to be placed on Kroger's shelves while cutting Kroger out of the transaction entirely. Why would Kroger ever agree to that?