We are independent restaurant and bar owners, operators, and workers from across the United States. Our businesses, and the communities we serve, depend on fair, competitive, and functioning food supply chains.

Today, those supply chains are already under strain. Food costs are high, margins are razor thin, and too many of us are struggling to stay open. In this environment, competition among suppliers is not a luxury; it’s the difference between staying open and closing for good.

That is why we strongly oppose Sysco’s proposed acquisition of Restaurant Depot.

This is not a routine business deal. It is the largest foodservice distributor in the country attempting to acquire the largest cash-and-carry wholesale supplier that independents rely on as an alternative. We rely on the fact that they compete.

When delivery prices rise, we shift to Restaurant Depot. When warehouse prices increase, we lean on delivery. That tension keeps prices in check, and is one of the only forms of leverage small, independent businesses have in a supply chain dominated by large corporations. If this merger proceeds, that leverage disappears.

Under unified ownership, there is no longer any reason for these two channels to compete. Instead, they will operate with a single profit motive – to benefit Sysco. Over time, that means fewer discounts, higher fees, and steadily increasing costs that we cannot pass on without losing customers.

For our businesses , already operating on razor-thin margins, small cost increases can be the difference between staying open and closing our doors. The consequences extend beyond our businesses. Independent restaurants are the primary customers for small farms, local producers, and regional food suppliers – businesses that don’t sell into large national distribution systems. When we close, those relationships disappear. Local food systems weaken, regional economies shrink, and entire supply chains become unstable and less resilient.

This merger threatens the stability of the food system itself.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Restaurant Depot served as a critical backup when traditional delivery systems were overwhelmed. Because it operated independently, it provided an alternative way to access food and stay open. If absorbed into Sysco, that independence is lost. A single disruption –a cyberattack, labor issue, or supply shock – would now impact both our delivery and warehouse purchasing options,  with no fallback. This level of fragility should concern anyone responsible for protecting the public interest.

We believe this merger clearly raises concerns that antitrust law is meant to address. Under Section 7 of the Clayton Act, mergers that may substantially lessen competition or tend toward monopoly must be blocked. The Federal Trade Commission has applied this standard to Sysco once before and we urge them to do so again.

The same logic applies here—more strongly. This merger does not just remove a competitor,  it eliminates the only meaningful pricing check that independent restaurants have, replacing competing supply channels with a single dominant player.

In many regions, especially in dense metropolitan areas, Restaurant Depot is the only practical cash-and-carry option. Losing it as an independent alternative means losing competition altogether..

We are not asking for special treatment. We are asking for a fair market: the ability to negotiate, to choose, and to operate without being subject to unchecked pricing power from a single supplier.

Independent restaurants and bars are small businesses. We employ millions of people, support local farms, and serve as gathering places in communities across the country. When we close, those communities lose more than a place to eat, they lose jobs, culture, and economic stability.

For all of these reasons, we urge the Federal Trade Commission to stop this merger.

Protect competition. Protect independent restaurants. Protect our communities.