And why do you assume that the mere fact of 'having a contract' translates into profitability, especially with recent prices of oil?
GREAT COMPANIES MAKE MISTAKES. There are NEVER guarantees of profits.
Just look at Target in Canada where they wrote off only $7 billion. A GREAT COMPANY made a HUGE mistake.
Or Mattel that bought Kevin O'Leary's Company (Shark Tank) for over $3 billion and had to write the entire investment off.
Or Quaker Oats buying Snapple and writing off billions.
THERE ARE NEVER ANY GUARANTEES OF PROFITABILITY. The Sonoco deal is a deal to supply feedstock, but it is certainly no guarantee of profitability especially from a rookie management made up of a lawyer, a doctor and a crook.
And my guess is that the acquisition will be yet another company with no history of profitability.
I still remember signing a toy license agreement for The Simpsons at the height of their popularity early on. I thought it was a slam dunk winner. It was a total bust and I wrote off a lot of money.
I also remember Kenner and Mattel writing off millions with their Superheros/Superman license. Then when the first Batman movie with Jack Nicholson was about to air they all passed on the toy licenses because of how bad Superman(Chris Reeves) did. And what happened? Batman was a major hit. One of my biggest successes ever.
The moral of the story - no guarantees of any profits anywhere simply by signing an agreement.
So NO - SONOCO IS NOT HUGE or even proven as a winner as yet!