Iconic fizzy drink brand to launch alcoholic cans for the first time
AN iconic fizzy drink brand is launching a range of alcoholic drinks for the first time.
Ka is known for its fruity, Caribbean-inspired soft drinks, often found in supermarkets and corner shops.
1
It's now bringing out four new alcoholic mixed drinks which are sure to be popular over the summer.
They will come in the flavours Black Grape, Fruit Punch, Pineapple and Karnival Twist.
Each of the drinks will have Ka's popular flavours mixed with Caribbean white rum.
The 330ml cans will be sold for £2.79.
The soft drink version is usually sold for between 60p and 80p. They launched in Wholesalers first and will be landing on convenience store shelves next week.
AG Barr, which owns Ka, said the new range was aimed at shoppers"looking to spontaneously grab drinks - whether en route to a social occasion, to be enjoyed at the park, or at a festival with friends".
And with the weather heating up ahead of this weekend, it's perfect timing.
Forecasters have said parts of southern England, including London, could see temperatures reach 28C on Friday evening.
Numerous brands have been racing to bring out new alcoholic canned drinks for the summer.
Shoppers have been going wild for the latest collection of tinnies from M&S, which include favourites such as mojitos, pina coladas and cosmos.
Why Guinness tastes better in Ireland
There's also a mint and elderflower Hugo Spritz and a Limoncello Spritz.
Meanwhile Lidl is selling pre-mixed cocktail cans for the bargain price of 89p.
They include flavours like the Bitterol Spritz, Strawberry Daiquiri, Mojito and Pina Colada.
Rival Aldi brought out a similar range starting at 99p.
Their tinnies include Hard Seltzers and Spicy Margaritas.
How to save money buying alcohol
Alcohol can be pricey if you're planning a party or hosting an event but there are ways to cut costs.
It's always important to drink responsibly, here, Sun Savers Editor Lana Clements share some tips on getting booze for the best price.
Stocking up can mean big savings on drinks, especially if you want to buy wine or fizz.
The big supermarkets regularly offer discounts of 25% when you buy six or more bottles of wine. The promotions typically run in the lead up to occasions such as Bank Holidays, Christmas and Easter.
If you know you are going to need booze later in the year, it can be worth acting when you see offers.
Before buying your preferred drink make sure you shop around to find the best price – you can use a comparison site such as pricerunner.com or trolley.co.uk.
Don't forget that loyalty cards can unlock better savings so make sure you factor that in too.
If you like your plonk, wine clubs can also be a good way to save money and try new varieties. You'll usually have to pay a membership fee in return for cheaper price so work out if you will be buying enough to make the one off cost worthwhile.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
The City's U-turn on WFH tells you everything you need to know about bad bosses
Barclays has taken overflow office space in Shoreditch. HSBC, having decided to relocate from Canary Wharf to new headquarters near St Paul's, is looking for extra room, including moving some workers back to Canary Wharf (and has told staff that their bonuses could be cut unless they're back in the office). JPMorgan and BBVA are finding accommodating everyone a tight squeeze. And BlackRock is also struggling to fit in all its staff. Some City firms are using a booking system, which sees those who wish to come to the office having to reserve a slot, such is the demand for desks. After three years, Citigroup has shut its Malaga outpost, billed as providing a better work-life balance for the bank's analysts, and steered its staff to London. What distinguishes all these financial corporations and others is that they claim to only recruit the brightest and the best. They make fortunes from advising the rest of us, along with businesses and governments, how to manage our affairs. On deals, they take command, devise strategy, issue orders and tell those involved how to behave. Yet when it comes to their own internal management, they are all over the place. We've seen it before, of course – the sector is littered with numerous instances of banks and investment houses being penalised huge sums for their poor conduct or for showing a lax attitude to other people's money. Frequently, they've set out on one course only to change direction, usually at a substantial cost in both money and people. Their approach to working from home (WFH) and remote working shows a herd instinct – something of which they are often guilty. If their customers did the same, these companies would be the first to complain and criticise. This is the most stark example of the confusion that rages around hybrid working, certainly in Britain. A recent study by King's College London found that Britain is the remote-working capital of Europe, with UK employees WFH 1.8 days a week on average – a number that is well above the global average of 1.3 days, and the highest in Europe. Globally, only Canadians average more days a week at home, WFH for 1.9 days. Dr Cevat Giray Aksoy, associate professor of economics at King's and lead economist at the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development, says: 'Remote work has moved from being an emergency response to becoming a defining feature of the UK labour market.' Dr Aksoy, who also advises the House of Lords on policy regarding the implications of remote working for productivity and labour markets, adds: 'This shift is forcing businesses, policymakers and city planners to reimagine everything from office space to transport to regional growth.' But is it? While his study may point to Britain being out in front or lagging, depending on how the figures are viewed, growing apocryphal evidence indicates something different. The City, for one, is signalling 'enough'. Stockbroker Panmure Liberum, reports the Financial Times, has joined Deutsche Bank in barring staff from working at home on consecutive Mondays and Fridays. UBS has told its folk they must be in on either Mondays or Fridays or both, as one of their three mandated days in the office. Broker Peel Hunt insists on four days a week in the office, while traders at Man Group are up to five. Santander views five days as the default option. Goldman Sachs regards WFH as an 'aberration'. JPMorgan chief Jamie Dimon, probably the most influential banker on the planet, argues that remote working allows 'bad habits to develop'. Where the City leads, like it or not, the rest of the country, business and organisation-wise, tends to follow. Brightmine, which studies HR practices, claims that 15.1 per cent of UK companies have reduced their WFH hours. Slowly but surely, the TWaTs – those who go in on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays – have begun to retreat. What began as a temporary solution to Covid and morphed into a trend, then a stampede, is coming to an end. Commuter numbers are edging towards their pre-pandemic levels. There will be those who resist, and there are bound to be lingering pockets of refuseniks, but by and large, Britain will fall into line. Maybe not reaching all five days, but the number WFH will be lower than it is currently, and will no longer be an outlier. It was predictable, and the banks for one should have seen what was likely to happen. After all, that is what they do, paying huge sums to smart graduates and deploying state-of-the-art technology to forecast the future. Seemingly no amount of qualifications from Stanford and MIT, no brilliant algorithms or AI, no 'thought leadership' gleaned in sessions at Davos or elsewhere, prepared them. This, too, in spite of the refusal of the mighty Goldman and JPMorgan's Dimon to play ball. If they had only stopped to think, it would have been obvious. Those super-smart hires are also intensely ambitious. How you get ahead, anywhere, is by standing out, making the boss sit up and notice. It's by showing that creative spark, which often results from being in the right spot at the right time. Convenient as they may be, the stultifying environments of Zoom or Teams, or even the sunny delights of Malaga and the Costa del Sol, are not that place. Ours – again, like it or not – is a globally connected world where commerce and trade are concerned. Nowhere more so than in banking. Why should workers in London, or the UK, operate to a different standard from everyone else? It does not make sense. At present, many employers are on the cusp; they are playing a balancing game. They are keen to not dissuade, and some Gen-Z and millennial employees expect to have the option to work from home. For now. But as they see those who spend more time in the office forging closer relationships with the chiefs, and winning promotions and higher salaries, it is surely a matter of when, not if, that changes.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Starmer and Reeves are back from the brink – here's what they must do next
Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves admitted mistakes had been made during the government's difficult first year when she addressed a private meeting of the parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) after announcing her spending review. Her audience knew what she meant: her catastrophic decision on the pensioners' winter fuel allowance. Reeves was more honest in private than she is in public. Even after their spectacular U-turn, she and Keir Starmer insist last July's decision was right at the time. In her defence, the chancellor said Labour had been out of power for 14 years and in office for one – an admission, perhaps, that ministers must learn on the job. She won a good reception at the PLP for her £113bn boost to investment projects and her framing of her review, first made in The Independent, as 'Labour's choices'. But Reeves' plea for Labour MPs to 'get out and sell' the spending programme in their constituencies landed badly with some in her audience. On Westminster's summer party circuit, they grumbled about a lack of salesmanship from both Reeves and Keir Starmer. These critics have a point. Neither the prime minister nor the chancellor is a natural storyteller. They sometimes look like technocratic automatons as they prioritise the 'stability' they offered after Conservative chaos over their election-winning pitch of 'change'. Although the social democrat Reeves is more ideological than the arch-pragmatist Starmer, many Labour backbenchers complain she has become a prisoner of 'Treasury orthodoxy'. The double act of PM and chancellor works better when they complement each other. Tony Blair was a good communicator and Gordon Brown the brains behind New Labour's strategy and domestic policy. The relationship between David Cameron and George Osborne was similar, and without the corrosive personal tensions between Blair and Brown. Crucially, Blair and Cameron had a story to tell. Today, even some Starmer allies admit privately he has yet to articulate a coherent narrative about his and his government's purpose. However, ministers and Labour backbenchers sense the spending review marks the overdue start of such a process. They detect an important shift – from a technocratic approach towards Labour's traditional goal of social justice: the winter fuel U-turn, an extension of free school meals and a £39bn boost for affordable housing. The biggest symbol of this change of tack will be measures to combat child poverty in the autumn, likely to include lifting the two-child benefit cap. That would be a break with the opinion poll-driven approach of Morgan McSweeney, Starmer's chief of staff. Although the cap is supported by the public, sometimes politicians have to lead public opinion rather than merely follow it. Aides insist Starmer's pragmatism is an asset that gives him the flexibility to try different approaches if Plan A doesn't work and to correct mistakes. But the absence of an ideological anchor can be a liability. To see off the real threat from Nigel Farage, Labour will need more than attacks on Reform UK; it will require a positive vision based on Labour values to woo centre-left voters. A crusade against child poverty will unite the Labour Party, while welfare cuts divide it. Soft-left ministers have a spring in their step: 'Things are moving in the right direction,' one told me. Indeed, the spending review was not dictated by 'Treasury orthodoxy' and the short-termism which often results in cutting investment projects to balance the books. Reeves addressed at least some of the long-term challenges facing the country. Labour's poor results in last month's local elections in England encouraged the rethink. They proved that caution isn't working. What is needed now is not old Labour but bold Labour. That will require more boldness and honesty on taxation. It's an open secret that, barring an economic miracle, Reeves will have to raise taxes in her autumn Budget. Significantly, she is not ruling it out, reverting to the formula Labour used before last year's election: there's nothing here (in the manifesto/spending review) requiring higher taxes. It's the politicians' old, disingenuous friend of 'no plans" used before Reeves raised taxes by £40bn in her first Budget. Starmer and Reeves should prepare the ground now by making the case for higher taxes to deliver better public services and the higher defence spending needed in the dangerous new world of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. If they don't, the vacuum will be filled by months of damaging headlines predicting which taxes Reeves will raise – many of which will turn out to be wrong. If Starmer and Reeves don't make the case, a right-dominated press will blame the inevitable tax rises on Labour economic mismanagement. There is another story to tell. Although the public tend to prioritise avoiding tax increases over investing in public services, Labour can win the argument by exposing the fantasy economics of Reform and Tory plans to cut taxes and raise spending. Brown won such an argument when he raised national insurance to fund the NHS in 2002. Reeves' fiscal rules can provide the 'stability' and tax rises the 'change.' Labour must deliver both. Ministers need to start the debate on tax and spending that the country should have had before last year's election. Now.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Labour ‘staking everything' on billions in investment to reverse UK's decline
Labour is 'staking everything' on using billions of pounds of investment to reverse Britain's decline, Angela Rayner has said, promising people would feel the housing crisis ease by the end of the parliament. The UK housing secretary is now in a race to persuade housing associations to take on social housing projects, with nearly £40bn for affordable and social homes to be spent over 10 years, the culmination of lengthy negotiations with the Treasury. She admitted it was the start of a long road to attract associations under huge financial pressures to invest again in social housing. Many are turning down opportunities from developers when they offer section 106 homes as part of their social housing obligations. Rayner said it was still unclear whether the majority of the homes would be for social rent. 'We're prioritising social rent,' she said. 'Now we've got to go away and do some of the work with the social landlords. 'The priority of this government is to significantly increase the amount of social rents that are available because that is a real pressure point. I've got 164,000 children in temporary accommodation. You can do the maths on that. That is a hell of a lot so I need a hell of a lot of social homes.' The housing secretary admitted she had once had significant doubts about the government's ability to hit its 1.5m homes by the end of the parliament – which she still described as a 'stretch target'. It is a pledge that industry experts have suggested cannot be met. She said: 'We know the only time that Britain has built at that sort of level is the post-second world war era and that was with massive amounts of social housing. At the beginning, when we inherited the £22bn black hole, we had meetings and I said: 'let's reassess this, are you sure we're going to be able to do this?'' Rayner said there had been no cabinet split over the resolve to try to meet it. She said: 'They were absolutely clear that we've got to at least start to turn the tide on the housing crisis we've got.' But the deputy prime minister said young people in insecure tenancies or on the social housing waiting list would not immediately begin to feel the effects of the investment. She said: 'I think that would be a challenge because there's 1.4 million people on the social housing list, but what I can guarantee is that we'll have the biggest wave of social housing and affordable housing in a generation. Yes, we will see an improvement, but I won't solve the housing crisis that has been over a decade in the making within a couple of years, but I will get us on a very steep trajectory to the solution of it, and it will make a difference to people, this parliament.' Rayner also promised that allowing social landlords to raise rents by 1 percentage point above inflation for the same period – a key demand of housing providers – should begin to bring improvements in the often abysmal standards of socially rented homes and said the renters' rights bill should do the same for private tenants. The minister, who grew up in social housing while raising her son while she was a teenager, said she had recently visited a friend from school in horrendous living conditions. Rayner said: 'She couldn't use three rooms. It was a private landlord and she was frightened to raise it because the house would get condemned and then she'd not be able to live there with her kids, and the kids went to the local school. 'And she was paying ridiculous [rent]. I mean, she'd switched the kettle on and the washing machine would come on. The electrics were what I would consider to be really dangerous. And so I'm acutely aware that people have got really terrible living standards and they're too frightened to raise the concern for even low-level repairs that people need. 'They're really worried about the landlord having more power and then they'll just throw them out on a no-fault eviction. And that's why we've brought in the renters' rights [bill] because we want to give people more protection so that they can challenge and get these repairs done.' Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Rayner said two-year-old Awaab Ishak, who died because of the mouldy conditions in his council flat, was always on her mind. She said: 'We've got to do this as a matter of urgency because we've already had one young child tragically die because of the living conditions they were in.' The housing ombudsman said recently that 'simmering anger at poor housing conditions' could boil over into social tension. Rayner said she was acutely aware too of the frustration of the younger generation, unable to buy a home or a social tenancy, with costs rising amid a decaying public realm and public services. 'It does worry me,' she said. 'This is a generation that has not been given those opportunities, whether that's through not having the industrial strategy, not having the investment in our public realm and public services. 'We're doing that downpayment of investment now … whether that's through the energy transition, which will bring us security as well for our energy needs, whether it's the defence spending, which again is about security but will create thousands of skilled jobs. The construction industry, which means that those jobs will be available for people. 'It's a government that's going to do the hard yards to transform our economic outlook into the future.' Another cost expected to increase significantly as a result of the spending review is council tax. It is expected to rise by 5% a year to pay for local services, though at councils' discretion. Councils will receive a 1.1% increase in grant funding, but the spending review assumes spending power for councils would rise by 2.6% because of council tax rises. For many councils, that small increase will still mean running an austerity-level service, even if billions are being spent on long-term infrastructure. Rayner is a self-described 'creature of local government' and said it was the start of a long process of easing the pressures. But she admitted it would be 'challenging' for councils, even with the 5% rise. Rayner said: 'I completely understand what the councils have been through during the austerity years and you can't undo 14 years in 10 months. But we've listened and we're starting to do the recovery phase.'
