I think this is mostly snobbery.
I have done all of my food shopping at Aldi for years, and the quality is perfectly fine.
All Aldi are missing is the name brands that advertise on television, and good riddance to them I say.
I have done all of my food shopping at Aldi for years, and the quality is perfectly fine.
All Aldi are missing is the name brands that advertise on television, and good riddance to them I say.
One simple example that comes to mind: crisps. I don't know what they do with them, but they tend to be WAY overseasoned. And that applies to salt, pepper, paprika, etc. A significant amount their products have this problem.
Now whether that is worth a premium to you or not is a different discussion. An actual M&M still tastes better than their copycat equivalent. I'm not saying the mainstream brands are always good, definitely not, but I'm happy to pay for some of those things if the quality is better. Just like I don't mind paying for fresh fruit / veggies / meat / chicken etc.
Also, to add to that, the "house" brands (i.e. for milk / sugar / etc) of most more expensive supermarkets generally tends to not be much more expensive than Aldi.
It can easily taste better "than their copycat equivalent" while being much worse nutritionally and ingredients quality wise, so there's that.
Sort of like to many people a McDonalds meal tastes better than a three course meal at a great (not talking "fancy haute cuisine", just honest cooking) restaurant.
Not saying Aldi's M&M copy is better. Just that something as personal as taste is not a solid criterion for whether it's worse, better or equally well made.
You give too much credit to advertising and brand identity if you think "fake ariel" is something inferior to "real ariel", or that "real ariel" is something hard to achieve that means quality.
At least in Europe you have a chance to choose what you want: The classical premium brands, premium Lidl brand or cheap brands.