It is obvious McNeil has no intention of supplying low-carbers with the liquid form of splenda. I believe we have all tried to convince them with no luck.

How about moving beyond the McNeil Company and trying to persuade Tate & Lyle the amount of potential profit they are losing? For example, approximately 7000 people signed the petition to McNeil for liquid splenda. This conservatively amounts to 7000 potential customers. This would be approximately 7000 bottles of liquid splenda sold each month to these customers. If each bottle was sold for $20 with cost of $15, there would be a profit of $5.00 on each bottle. This amounts to $35000 profit a month. For one year, it is $420,000 per year. This is a low, conservative number.

Tate & Lyle Company may have no knowledge of McNeil's refusal to sell to the low-carbers. Maybe if they had knowledge, they would put potential pressure on McNeil. Of course, all this depends on the relationship between McNeil and Tate & Lyle, which I am not sure of.

I suggest forwarding the petition for liquid splenda to Tate & Lyle and start emailing them with requests for liquid splenda.

Danarobin5