Silent Uprising – Consumers Take On Big Retail
It started as a single day of protest in Croatia—but within a week, consumers across Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, and Slovenia joined a region-wide boycott, refusing to spend money at major retailers. Their message is clear: corporate profiteering and unchecked price hikes will no longer go unchallenged.
With some governments supporting the movement and others remaining silent, the boycotts have disrupted businesses and policymakers alike. Supermarkets have seen record-low sales, economists are noting, and politicians are feeling the heat. But is this just a temporary show of consumer frustration, or is the Adria region witnessing the rise of a lasting economic protest movement?
From Isolated Protest to Regional Disruption
Croatia’s protest that set off a wave
The catalyst for the movement came from Halo, Inspektore, a Croatian consumer advocacy group that, on 24 January, urged shoppers to stop spending for a full day in protest against corporate price hikes
The premise was simple: if businesses wouldn’t lower prices, consumers would show them the consequences. Few expected the impact to be immediate.
But by the end of the day, Croatian shopping centres reported a 53% drop in sales, a figure that sent shockwaves through the economy.
What started as a Croatian protest quickly spread across the region, with consumer groups in Serbia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Slovenia following suit just a week later.
COUNTRY BREAKDOWN
CROATIA
January 24: First consumer action begins
SERBIA
January 31: Movement expands, gas stations affected
BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA
January 31: Mass participation, banks targetedd
MONTENEGRO
January 31: Government support, Chamber of Commerce opposition
NORTH MACEDONIA
January 31: Unusual political unity, strong retail effect
SLOVENIA
January 31: Retailers remain silent, uncertainty ahead
The Financial Shockwave Retailers Feel the Impact
Croatia (24 January)
The epicentre of the movement, where Halo, Inspektore launched the first 24-hour boycott of major retailers. The result? A massive 53% drop in revenue for shopping centres and supermarkets.
The success prompted continued boycotts, expanding into gas stations, delivery services, and banks.
Serbia (31 January)
Amid ongoing political protests and rising inflation, consumers refused to shop at five major retail chains. Although the boycott had no official government backing, it was strongly supported by consumer associations and trade unions. Retailers reported 30–40% lower sales, making it one of the most successful economic protests in Serbia’s recent history.
Bosnia & Herzegovina (31 January)
A country known for low wages and high living costs, Bosnia saw one of the highest participation rates, with 90% of consumers supporting the boycott. The government has yet to respond, but retailers have already hinted at potential price adjustments.
Montenegro (31 January)
The only country where the Prime Minister openly supported the boycotts. While this boosted consumer participation, the Chamber of Commerce and Consumer Association opposed it, arguing that price regulation should be left to market forces. Despite this, estimates suggest 40–50% fewer purchases were made on boycott day.
North Macedonia (31 January)
A rare moment of political unity, as both the ruling party and the opposition backed the boycotts. Reports suggest major supermarket chains lost nearly half their usual revenue, signalling one of the most financially damaging boycotts in the region.
Slovenia (31 January)
Public support remains high, though the movement is less structured than in Croatia or Serbia. Retailers have remained silent, and no official statistics on sales loss have been published yet. However, local economists predict that if retailers fail to respond, Slovenian consumers may intensify their boycott strategy.
A Market in Crisis—What’s Next for Businesses and Governments?
A silent register, a loud message
The numbers are staggering. Over the course of a few days, supermarkets across the Adria region saw sales plummet at unprecedented levels.
In Croatia alone, where the boycott began, revenue dropped by 53%. Retailers in Serbia and Montenegro reported 30–50% fewer transactions, while in Bosnia & Herzegovina, an overwhelming 90% of consumers participated in the economic protest.
At first, businesses underestimated the scale of the disruption. With no street protests, no banners, no slogans, there was no traditional sign of unrest.
But the quiet registers told a different story—one that retail executives, economic analysts, and politicians could no longer ignore.
The Voices Behind The Boycott
Consumers, businesses, and politicians speak out
A consumer revolt years in the making
For years, rising costs in the Adria region were met with shrugged shoulders and quiet grumbling. But something about this moment felt different.
“We are not asking for miracles—we just want fair pricing,” said a Serbian activist from Efektiva, one of the most vocal consumer advocacy groups in the region.
Efektiva played a key role in mobilising Serbian consumers, calling for strategic non-spending days to pressure retailers into fairer pricing practices. The approach worked—estimates show that during the Serbian boycott, retail transactions fell by 30–40%, marking one of the largest consumer-driven economic protests in the country’s history.
In Bosnia & Herzegovina, the scale of participation was even more striking. Over 90% of consumers joined the boycott, making it one of the most widespread economic protests the region has seen. While Bosnian officials have remained silent, retailers are now hinting at potential price adjustments—an early sign that the movement may have lasting effects.
A Divided Political Response
Faced with mounting pressure, governments across the region reacted in sharply different ways.
In Croatia, Prime Minister Andrej Plenković cautiously acknowledged the impact of the protest, suggesting it could influence future policies on price regulation. His words were carefully measured, signalling an awareness of consumer frustration but stopping short of promising immediate action.
“This is a significant message from our citizens,” Plenković stated. “We will take it into account as we consider future measures to regulate price increases on essential goods.”
While Croatian officials leaned toward diplomacy, Montenegro’s government took a far bolder stance. Prime Minister Milojko Spajić openly supported the boycott, framing it as a necessary act of consumer empowerment.
“I support this movement because it shows that Montenegrins will no longer accept arbitrary price hikes,” Spajić declared. “We must ensure fair competition and transparent pricing for all.”
Spajić’s position placed him at odds with the Montenegrin Chamber of Commerce, which opposed the movement, arguing that price regulation should be left to market forces rather than public protest. The conflicting viewpoints underscored a regional debate that is far from over.
Serbia – Government response:
Context: Unlike Croatia, the Serbian government did not officially respond to the boycott. However, consumer organisation Efektiva led the charge in mobilising protests, making it one of Serbia’s most significant consumer-driven actions in recent years.
North Macedonia – Political parties (VMRO-DPMNE & SDSM):
Context: In a rare moment of political unity, both the ruling VMRO-DPMNE party and the opposition SDSM publicly endorsed the boycotts, recognising their significance in addressing cost-of-living concerns.
What Happens Next?
For years, shoppers across the Adria region have quietly accepted rising prices. Complaints filled social media, family conversations revolved around shrinking paychecks, and frustration simmered beneath the surface. But until now, there had never been a clear, collective response.
This movement changed everything.
What began as a one-day experiment in Croatia has forced businesses to reconsider their pricing strategies, led politicians to publicly acknowledge consumer frustration, and ignited discussions on economic activism across the region. The question that remains is: Was this a single act of defiance or the start of a long-term transformation in consumer behaviour?
Will the Boycotts Continue?
Across the region, consumer advocacy groups are already planning the next steps. In Croatia, Halo, Inspektore has suggested that supermarkets and banks could face regular non-spending days if price adjustments aren’t made. Meanwhile, Serbia’s Efektiva is calling for an expansion of protests beyond grocery chains, warning that banks, telecom providers, and even fuel companies could be next.
“We proved that we have power,” says a spokesperson from Efektiva. “The next step is making sure businesses know this wasn’t a one-time stunt.”
The momentum is real, but sustaining it will be a challenge. Consumer movements are notoriously difficult to organise on a long-term basis—protests may start strong, but without concrete results, public enthusiasm often fades. For this movement to endure, shoppers will need to see tangible victories.
Will Businesses Adapt or Resist?
Retailers are facing a difficult decision: lower prices to regain consumer trust, or hold firm and risk long-term damage to their brand reputation.
So far, reactions have been mixed. Some companies, including Kaufland and Konzum, have already announced price freezes on key products, a move seen as a direct response to consumer pressure. Others, however, remain silent, hoping the outrage will fade before they have to act.
“Businesses that ignore this movement are gambling with their future,” warns an industry analyst in Slovenia. “Consumer trust, once lost, is extremely difficult to regain. If companies don’t make changes, they may see permanent shifts in shopping behaviour.”
Will Governments Step In?
With boycotts disrupting retail markets across multiple countries, some governments may soon face an unavoidable question: Should they intervene?
In Croatia, Prime Minister Andrej Plenković has acknowledged the movement but has stopped short of promising legislative action. In contrast, Montenegro’s Prime Minister Milojko Spajić has openly backed the boycotts, stating that the public has every right to demand fair pricing. North Macedonia’s ruling and opposition parties both endorsed the movement, marking a rare moment of political unity in the country.
If public pressure continues, new legislation could emerge—including stricter price-monitoring laws, anti-profiteering regulations, or even tax incentives for retailers that keep prices stable. But such measures will require political will, and as history has shown, governments are often slow to act unless the pressure is relentless.
REACTIONS
Consumer Voices
Serbia – Consumer activist
“We are not asking for miracles—we just want fair pricing.”
Context: The consumer advocacy group Efektiva played a major role in mobilising Serbian consumers against high prices. Public participation was significant, with 30–40% drops in retail sales reported.
Bosnia & Herzegovina – Public sentiment
Context: Reports confirm that over 90% of Bosnian consumers supported the boycott, making it one of the most widely endorsed economic protests in the region. While the government has yet to respond, retailers have begun considering price adjustments.
Business & Retail Responses
Croatia – Anonymous supermarket CEO
“We have not seen such a large-scale, coordinated consumer movement in decades. We are monitoring the situation carefully, but prices also depend on global supply chains and inflation, not just retailer policies.”
Context: Supermarket executives in Croatia have acknowledged the impact of the boycott but argue that pricing is influenced by broader economic conditions beyond their control.
Croatia – Major retail chains (Kaufland & Konzum)
Context: Following the boycott, both supermarket chains announced price caps on several essential products to address consumer concerns and prevent further loss of business.
Montenegro – Chamber of Commerce & Consumer Association
Context: The Montenegrin Chamber of Commerce and Consumer Association opposed the boycott, stating that price regulation should be left to market forces rather than government intervention or consumer protest.