How much criticism can Kraft shrug off?
Powerful brands can survive a good deal of battering.
Some would say that the US food giant Kraft is putting to the test - with the controversial manner in which it bought Cadbury - the extent to which consumers may turn against the products of a company perceived to have done the wrong thing.
MPs on the business select committee today concluded that Kraft had "acted both irresponsibly and unwisely" by first promising to keep open Cadbury's Somerdale factory while endeavouring to buy the confectionary maker and then promptly changing its mind once the deal had been done.
This, said the MPs, had damaged Kraft's reputation in the UK and soured its relationship with Cadbury employees.
Kraft has tried to mend its image with a series of commitments, to always produce the totemic Dairy Milk in the UK, to avoid further plant closures for a couple of years, and to protect staff pensions, among other things.
These promises will need monitoring, say the MPs.
But monitoring in one thing; enforcing is quite another.
The point is that Cadbury is now merely one important part of a huge, sprawling international conglomerate.
And Kraft will grin and bear the criticisms. How else to interpret the decision by its chief executive, Irene Rosenfeld, not to woo MPs by refusing to give evidence in person to them?
What would hurt much more would be any sense that all those positive qualities associated with Cadbury's illustrious history as a highly responsible employer - qualities which have burnished its brand for consumers - were being erased by the negative publicity generated in recent weeks.
Kraft's owners, which include Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, would not be best pleased if the company failed to nurture what most would describe as Cadbury's rare and precious assets.