Lidl announces major price slash with bakery products selling for even CHEAPER after scooping gong
BAKED goods at Lidl have been reduced in price, with some selling for as low as 29p.
These price reductions have come in celebration of Lidl being crowned the UK's number one in-store bakery.
4
They include range of the store's much-loved favourites, including their All Butter Pain Au Chocolat, Pastel de Nata and Chocolate Twist, which have been slashed to 69p from 75p.
Savings are across 11 of the bakery treats, as well as breads like the Petit Pain and White Crusty Roll now available at 29p each instead of 32p.
Nutty goods like the Pain Aux Raisin, Almond Croissant and Maple and Pecan Plait are also on sale for 69p.
The Apple Turnover will be available from tomorrow April 25, also for 69p.
Lidl's ranking as Britain's number one bakery store is according to an online survey carried out in February this year, where around 2,000 adults around the UK responded.
The accolade has come with increasing its popularity, even on TikTok as content creators have made Lidl bakery tasting videos for viewers.
Canadian influencer Matt Giffen captioned one TikTok video of him trying the pastries, writing: "Lidl bakery might've just changed my life forever."
"Lidl bakery" has also gained popularity on the internet, where Google searches for the term jumped 31% between February and March this year.
The supermarket chain is part of German multinational retailer The Shwarz Group, one of Europe and the world's largest food retailers.
Lidl currenty operates around 12,350 stores around the world, with goods distributions in 31 countries.
In 2023, the store achieves sales of 125.5 billion euros.
Petit Pain - £0.29
White Crusty Roll - £0.29
All Butter Croissant - £0.59
All Butter Pain Au Chocolat - £0.69
Pain Aux Raisin - £0.69
Chocolate Hazelnut Croissant - £0.69
Chocolate Twist - £0.69
Almond Croissant - £0.69
Maple and Pecan Plain - - £0.69
Pastel de Nata - £0.69
Apple Turnover (available from April 25) - £0.69
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
27 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Lidl recall warning as food may contain pieces of metal
The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has warned anyone who has purchased the recalled item not to eat it. The recall affects Lidl's Harvest Basket Hash Browns. The impacts hash browns come in packs of 750g, have a best before date of May 24, 2027, and a batch code of 5144L. Thursday 12 June: @LidlGB recalls Harvest Basket Hash Browns because they may contain pieces of metal #FoodAlert — Food Standards Agency (@foodgov) June 12, 2025 An FSA spokesman said: 'Lidl GB is recalling the above product. A point of sale notice will be displayed in all retail stores that are selling this product. 'This notice explains to customers why the product is being recalled and tells them what to do if they have bought the product. 'If you have bought the above product, do not eat it. 'Instead, return it to your nearest store for a full refund. For further information contact customer care on or 0203 966 5566.' Recommended Reading: A Lidl spokesman added: 'If you have bought the above product we advise you not to eat it. 'Customers are asked to return this product to the nearest store where a full refund will be given. 'We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your cooperation.' What is a product recall? If there is a problem with a food product that means it should not be sold, then it might be 'withdrawn' (taken off the shelves) or 'recalled' (when customers are asked to return the product). The FSA issues Product Withdrawal Information Notices and Product Recall Information Notices to let consumers and local authorities know about problems associated with food. In some cases, a 'Food Alert for Action' is issued. This provides local authorities with details of specific actions to be taken on behalf of consumers.
Reuters
39 minutes ago
- Reuters
Google takes a gamble in class action jury trial over cell phone data use
June 4 (Reuters) - Class actions rarely go to trial, which is why a case against Google is proving to be an outlier. The tech giant is defending itself before a jury in Santa Clara County, California, superior court in an $800 million lawsuit, opens new tab by Android smartphone users who say Google misappropriates their cellphone data. A jury of eight women and four men was seated on Tuesday in what lawyers say is expected to be a three-to-four-week trial, with opening statements kicking off on Wednesday. The stakes are high, but the class, which includes an estimated 14 million Californians whose mobile devices use Google's Android operating system, is in some ways just an appetizer. The same plaintiffs lawyers from Korein Tillery; Bartlit Beck and McManis Faulkner are litigating a parallel case in San Jose federal court covering Android users in the other 49 states, with billions of dollars in alleged damages. The plaintiffs in court papers say that even when their phones are turned off, Google causes Android devices to surreptitiously send information over cellular networks 'for Google's own purposes,' including targeted digital advertising. These transfers improperly eat up data that users purchase from their mobile carriers, the plaintiffs allege. Google spokesperson José Castañeda said the claims 'mischaracterize standard industry practices that help protect users and make phones more reliable,' he told me. 'We look forward to making our case in court." A unit of Mountain View, California-based Alphabet, Google has a well-used playbook for settling class actions. Earlier this week, for example, the company agreed to pay $500 million to resolve shareholder litigation — a move that comes on the heels of a $50 million deal in May to resolve class-wide allegations of racial bias against Black employees and a $100 million payout in March to a proposed class of advertisers who claimed they were overcharged for clicks on ads. So why is Google taking this case to trial? In court papers, Google's outside counsel from Cooley argue that Android users incurred no actual losses, and that consumers consented to Google's so-called 'passive' data transfers via terms of service agreements and device settings. The lawyers also dispute the fundamental premise of the case: that cellular data allowances can be considered 'property' under California law and subject to conversion, a civil cause of action that involves taking a person's property without permission. When the 'rhetoric and hyperbole are set aside, Plaintiffs' theory is revealed as little more than a (misguided) product design claim — not wrongful conversion,' defense counsel wrote. The Cooley team, which includes Whitty Somvichian, Michael Attanasio, Max Bernstein and Carrie Lebel, declined comment. The plaintiffs sued Google in Santa Clara County Superior Court in 2019, asserting that they have a property interest in their cellular plans' data allowances, and that each quantum they pay for has a market value. They don't object to data transmissions when they're actively engaged with Google's apps and properties, like checking email or playing a game. But they say Google never told them it would avail itself of their cellular data when they weren't using their phones to send and receive a range of information on their usage. 'The upshot is that these phone users unknowingly subsidize the same Google advertising business that earns over $200 billion a year,' plaintiffs lawyer George Zelcs of Korein Tillery said via email. In addition to injunctive relief, the plaintiffs want Google to reimburse them for the value of the cellular data the company consumed. Per person, the amount is modest – 1 to 1.5 megabytes of data each day, the plaintiffs estimate. To put that in context, Americans used just over 100 trillion megabytes of wireless data in 2023, my Reuters colleagues reported. But with a class period dating back to 2016, the totals add up quickly. In court papers, Google lawyers sound almost incredulous at the amount of the claimed nationwide damages, which they say runs in the tens of billions — more than the $7.4 billion Perdue Pharma settlement for the opioid crisis, they note. "Plaintiffs cannot show remotely commensurate harm to the class," they wrote. In denying Google's motion for summary judgment in May, Judge Charles Adams allowed the plaintiffs' claim for conversion to go forward, ruling there are triable issues of material fact for jurors to decide. While Adams said no direct state law precedent exists as to whether cell phone data is property, he pointed to a decision, opens new tab by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year in the parallel federal class action, Taylor v Google. In that case, U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia DeMarchi in San Jose sided with Google and dismissed the complaint, opens new tab with prejudice in 2022, only to be reversed and remanded on appeal. The appellate panel in an unpublished decision ruled that the plaintiffs plausibly alleged they incurred damages when Google used their cellular data. Adams in a pre-trial order set some limits on what the lawyers will be allowed to argue to the jury. Plaintiffs may not suggest Google engages in "surveillance" of Android users, he wrote, or that the data transfers are a privacy violation. As for Google, Adams said, it 'must not present evidence or argument suggesting that this case is 'lawyer driven' or was 'invented' by Plaintiffs' counsel.'
Powys County Times
an hour ago
- Powys County Times
Lidl recall warning as food may contain pieces of metal
Lidl is recalling one of its products because it may contain pieces of metal. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has warned anyone who has purchased the recalled item not to eat it. The recall affects Lidl's Harvest Basket Hash Browns. The impacts hash browns come in packs of 750g, have a best before date of May 24, 2027, and a batch code of 5144L. Thursday 12 June: @LidlGB recalls Harvest Basket Hash Browns because they may contain pieces of metal #FoodAlert — Food Standards Agency (@foodgov) June 12, 2025 An FSA spokesman said: 'Lidl GB is recalling the above product. A point of sale notice will be displayed in all retail stores that are selling this product. 'This notice explains to customers why the product is being recalled and tells them what to do if they have bought the product. 'If you have bought the above product, do not eat it. 'Instead, return it to your nearest store for a full refund. For further information contact customer care on or 0203 966 5566.' Recommended Reading: A Lidl spokesman added: 'If you have bought the above product we advise you not to eat it. 'Customers are asked to return this product to the nearest store where a full refund will be given. 'We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your cooperation.' What is a product recall? If there is a problem with a food product that means it should not be sold, then it might be 'withdrawn' (taken off the shelves) or 'recalled' (when customers are asked to return the product). The FSA issues Product Withdrawal Information Notices and Product Recall Information Notices to let consumers and local authorities know about problems associated with food. In some cases, a 'Food Alert for Action' is issued.
