Raley’s is closing more grocery stores in California, and the latest confirmed shutdowns stretch from Brentwood to Petaluma to Los Gatos. For shoppers, that means fewer neighborhood options for buying everyday staples, prepared foods, and pantry basics over the next several months.

Which Raley’s and Nob Hill stores are closing

The Raley’s Companies told Progressive Grocer in an August 24, 2026 report that three closures were recently announced in Brentwood, California, Elko, Nevada, and Petaluma, California. For California shoppers, the confirmed dates are November 3, 2026, for the Raley’s at 2400 Sand Creek Road in Brentwood, and January 26, 2027, for the Raley’s at 157 North McDowell Boulevard in Petaluma.

Progressive Grocer also reported that Nob Hill Foods in Los Gatos is set to close in June 2027 after the company chose not to renew its lease. The source did not give a street address for that store in its closure report, though Raley’s own store locator lists a Nob Hill Foods in Los Gatos at 15710 Los Gatos Boulevard.

These closures follow other store shutdowns earlier in 2026. Progressive Grocer reported that Raley’s had already ended operations at stores in Roseville and Antioch, and that its Nob Hill Foods store in Mountain View closed on May 29. The company did not release a full statewide list in the source material tied to the latest announcement.

What Raley’s says is behind the shutdowns

Raley’s said the closures reflect local market conditions and the long-term financial sustainability of each location. In comments published by Progressive Grocer, the company said the decisions were difficult but part of how it evaluates where to invest, serve communities, and support employees over time.

The same report said the company does not describe the move as a broad retreat from California. Instead, it presented the closures as store-by-store decisions. That aligns with reporting in the NewsBreak reference source, which said spokesperson Chelsea Carbahal pointed to competition, changing shopping habits, and pressure on store traffic and sales.

Progressive Grocer also placed the closures in the context of broader grocery competition. Its report cited Coresight Research, which found that traditional grocers are competing not only with one another, but also with mass merchants, club stores, dollar stores, and faster-growing digital grocery sales. For shoppers, that helps explain why a chain can close some stores while still keeping other banners and markets in place.

What comes next for shoppers and for the company

Even with these closures, Raley’s is still planning at least one new California store. Progressive Grocer reported that the company expects to open a 40,000 square foot Raley’s O-N-E Market in Madera in spring 2027, and said the opening is part of the same case-by-case investment approach behind the closures.

Additional reporting from The Business Journal said the Madera project broke ground in June 2026 at Riverwalk at Riverstone, a larger 61,000 square foot retail expansion. That report said the store is expected to be the first full-service grocery store in the Riverstone master-planned community.

For current shoppers in Brentwood, Petaluma, and Los Gatos, the practical takeaway is simple. The closure dates now publicly tied to those stores are November 3, 2026, January 26, 2027, and June 2027. The company said it is focused on supporting team members, customers, and communities through the transitions, but it has not released further customer guidance in the sourced reports about transfers, replacements, or service changes for those specific California locations.

A Tennessee Checkers and Rally’s franchise operator filed for Chapter 11 on October 28, 2026, and the case could affect restaurants tied to a broader four-state portfolio. So far, the filing points to one named debtor, not the national burger chain, and it does not by itself confirm a shutdown across all of the operator’s restaurants.

What the bankruptcy filing says

Federal bankruptcy records show Global Midsouth Holding Corp. filed for Chapter 11 protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Tennessee on October 28, 2026. The case is listed as No. 26-25929 and was assigned to Judge M. Ruthie Hagan. According to the petition details cited in court record databases and followup reporting, the filing came one day before a scheduled foreclosure auction connected to a Jackson, Tennessee, restaurant property.

Chapter 11 is a reorganization process, not a Chapter 7 liquidation. That distinction matters for customers and workers because a Chapter 11 case can give a business time to address debts while continuing to operate. At this stage, the court filing does not establish that the Jackson restaurant has closed, and it does not announce a chainwide shutdown.

Reporting based on the petition says Global Midsouth listed about $1.9 million in assets and about $1.3 million in liabilities. Revenue listed in the filing was reported as $860,000 in 2024, $800,000 in 2025, and $582,000 in 2026 through the October 28 filing date. The same reports said the petition included unsecured obligations to the Tennessee Department of Revenue and Madison County Waste Disposal, while total liabilities extended beyond those line items.

Why the “up to 16 locations” claim needs context

The number drawing the most attention is 16, but that figure needs careful framing. In July 2025, Checkers and Rally’s announced that Sedrick Turner, president of Global Midsouth Corporation, had acquired two Alabama restaurants, one in Huntsville and one in Tuscaloosa. Brand and trade publication reports said those additions expanded Turner’s portfolio to 16 Checkers and Rally’s restaurants across Alabama, Missouri, Mississippi, and Tennessee.

That earlier 16-store figure described Turner’s broader operating footprint at the time. It did not say all 16 locations were part of the later Tennessee bankruptcy filing. The current Chapter 11 case names Global Midsouth Holding Corp. as the debtor, and publicly available reporting has not confirmed that every restaurant in Turner’s four-state portfolio entered bankruptcy.

The Alabama locations named in the 2025 ownership announcement were 4000 University Drive in Huntsville and 521 15th Street in Tuscaloosa. Beyond that, a full location-by-location list tied to the Tennessee case has not been released publicly. That means customers should be careful about assuming a specific restaurant is affected unless the company, the court, or the franchisor confirms it.

What customers and local communities know now

For now, the clearest confirmed Tennessee city in the case is Jackson, because the reported foreclosure action involved a property there. The foreclosure notice tied to the reporting said a sale had been scheduled for October 29, 2026, at the Madison County Courthouse in Jackson. The Chapter 11 filing generally pauses collection activity while the case moves forward, but the case docket summary available publicly does not spell out operating plans for each restaurant.

Just as important, Checkers Drive-In Restaurants, the franchisor behind Checkers and Rally’s, is separate from Global Midsouth Holding Corp. The current bankruptcy filing does not indicate that the national company filed for Chapter 11. No companywide list of restaurant closures, no employee layoff count, and no confirmed closure dates for individual locations were announced in the source material reviewed.

For diners, that leaves a practical takeaway. Restaurant status is still a location-by-location question unless a specific store is named in court papers or by the company. For home cooks and families who use fast food as a backup meal option, it is worth checking individual store hours before making a trip, especially in Jackson and in markets connected to Turner’s Alabama, Missouri, Mississippi, and Tennessee portfolio.

A big frozen turkey needs more lead time than many holiday cooks build into the calendar. USDA food safety guidance shows that a 20 to 24 pound bird can take 5 to 6 days to thaw in the refrigerator, which means waiting until Thanksgiving week can be too late for a Thursday meal.

Refrigerator thawing takes the longest, but it is the safest method

The USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service says there are three safe ways to thaw food: in the refrigerator, in cold water, and in the microwave. For whole turkey, the refrigerator method is the slowest, but it keeps the bird at a safe temperature while it thaws and gives cooks more flexibility once the turkey is ready. FSIS also says a thawed turkey can stay in the refrigerator for 1 to 2 additional days before cooking.

That timing matters most with larger birds. USDA guidance says to allow about 24 hours for every 4 to 5 pounds of whole turkey in the refrigerator. Broken out by weight, a 4 to 12 pound turkey takes 1 to 3 days, a 12 to 16 pound bird takes 3 to 4 days, a 16 to 20 pound bird takes 4 to 5 days, and a 20 to 24 pound turkey takes 5 to 6 days.

The refrigerator also needs to do its part. FSIS says refrigerated foods should be kept at 40°F or below, and cold air needs to circulate to help keep food safe. That means an overpacked holiday fridge can work against the thawing plan, especially when a large turkey is sharing space with side dishes, desserts, and leftovers in progress.

Cold-water thawing is faster, but it needs attention

Cold-water thawing can save the day if the turkey is still frozen and the holiday is close, but USDA guidance comes with clear conditions. FSIS says the turkey should be thawed in cold water, not warm water, and the water should be changed every 30 minutes. The bird should also be wrapped securely so water cannot leak through the packaging.

The timetable is much shorter than refrigerator thawing. A 4 to 12 pound turkey takes 2 to 6 hours in cold water, a 12 to 16 pound turkey takes 6 to 8 hours, a 16 to 20 pound bird takes 8 to 10 hours, and a 20 to 24 pound turkey takes 10 to 12 hours. That makes the method practical for a last-minute fix, but not a hands-off one.

USDA says food thawed by the cold-water method must be cooked immediately after thawing. That rule is important because the faster method can let parts of the turkey warm more quickly, reducing the margin for safe holding. In other words, cold-water thawing is a same-day move, not a thaw-now, roast-tomorrow plan.

Why the kitchen counter is not a safe shortcut

FSIS says food must be kept at a safe temperature while thawing. Once frozen food gets warmer than 40°F, bacteria that may have been present before freezing can begin to multiply. That is why the agency says turkey should never be thawed on the kitchen counter, in hot water, outdoors, or in places like a garage, basement, car, dishwasher, or porch.

For home cooks, the biggest mistake is often treating thawing like a small prep step instead of part of the cooking schedule. A heavy frozen turkey is not something to pull out a day or two ahead and hope for the best. The safe plan is to count backward from the meal date using the turkey’s weight, then choose the refrigerator or cold-water method based on how much time is left.

However the bird is thawed, the final safety step is the same. FSIS says a whole turkey is safely cooked when the internal temperature reaches 165°F in the innermost part of the thigh and wing and the thickest part of the breast. That gives cooks a clear finish line after the thawing math is done.

Coffee prices moved down sharply in October 2026, even as the broader grocery bill kept climbing. New Consumer Price Index data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics showed one of the clearest examples of how a single food category can break away from the overall pattern in the supermarket.

What the October CPI showed for coffee

The Bureau of Labor Statistics released its October 2026 Consumer Price Index on November 10. In that report, the food at home index, which tracks grocery prices, rose 0.4% for the month. At the same time, the agency’s beverage materials including coffee and tea category fell 2.4%.

Coffee stood out even more in the detailed tables. The CPI category for roasted coffee fell 4.6% in October, a much steeper drop than the overall grocery index and a bigger decline than the broader nonalcoholic beverages and beverage materials category, which slipped 0.3%. The figures come from the national CPI for urban consumers, which measures average price movement across categories rather than the shelf price at any one store.

The BLS tables indicate that the 4.6% drop in roasted coffee was the smallest monthly change ever recorded for that series, meaning it was the biggest monthly decline in the data set. That makes coffee one of the most notable food price moves in the October report.

For shoppers, that does not mean every bag, can, or pod on every shelf got cheaper by the same amount. CPI tracks category-level price movement across sampled items and markets, so a strong national decline can still show up unevenly from one retailer, brand, or region to another.

Why grocery indexes and coffee prices can move in opposite directions

A monthly grocery index is a weighted average, not a scorecard showing that every item moved together. In October, the overall food at home index rose 0.4%, but that total reflects a mix of gains, declines, and flat readings across many categories in the same basket.

That helps explain why shoppers can feel pressure in one part of the store even while another section eases. Coffee is a specific product group inside a much larger grocery measure that also includes meats, dairy, cereals, produce, snacks, and other pantry staples. If several larger or rising categories increase at the same time, they can push the total grocery index up even when coffee drops sharply.

The same October release showed the full food index rose 0.5%, with food away from home, a category that includes restaurant meals, rising alongside groceries. That broader mix matters because household food spending is spread across many purchases, not just beverages.

For home kitchens, the practical takeaway is simple. A falling coffee index may help breakfast costs for some households, but it does not automatically offset higher prices elsewhere in the cart. The CPI is best read as a map of broad price direction, not a promise that every receipt will look lower next month.

What this means for shoppers watching the coffee aisle

If you buy whole bean, ground, or canned coffee regularly, October’s CPI suggests some relief reached the national market. The report does not name brands or chains, and it does not say where discounts showed up most. Still, a 4.6% monthly decline in roasted coffee is large enough to stand out in a period when many food categories have stayed firm or moved higher.

That matters because coffee is a frequent, repeat purchase in many homes. Even a modest price break on a weekly staple can be noticeable over time, especially for households that brew daily and buy larger containers. The effect will depend on what type of coffee you buy and whether your store adjusts prices quickly.

The report also offers a useful reality check for anyone trying to track food inflation from a single item. One month’s movement in coffee does not rewrite the bigger grocery story, and one grocery total does not explain what happened to every product on the shelf. October’s numbers show both things at once: coffee got cheaper in the CPI, while groceries overall still moved higher.

That split is why food inflation stories often feel different from day-to-day shopping. National data can point to real relief in one category without signaling broad relief across the whole store.

The FDA is proposing the first update to U.S. infant formula nutrient standards in nearly 30 years. The October 29 proposal would revise or reaffirm parts of the federal rules that govern what must be in formula sold in the United States.

For families, the move matters because those rules set the baseline for nutrients in a product many babies rely on every day. The agency also released new contaminant testing information and said most sampled formulas showed low or non-detectable levels for the chemicals it measured.

What the current standards cover

Under existing federal law and FDA regulations, infant formula sold in the United States must contain 30 required nutrients. The rules set minimum levels for all 30, and maximum levels for 10 of them, according to the FDA and a 2025 Federal Register notice seeking information on formula nutrients.

The FDA said its new proposal is the first phase of a broader review of those requirements. In this round, the agency would update or reaffirm specifications for eight of the 30 required nutrients, and it would also change the units of measure for two nutrients.

According to the FDA’s proposed rule materials, the changes are meant to reflect current scientific evidence on infant nutritional needs and safe intake levels. The agency specifically said the current U.S. specifications reflect the science available when they were established, and that newer research and international standards are now part of the review.

Why FDA wants more input

The FDA said it is seeking comment not only on the eight nutrients in the proposal, but also on nutrients that are not currently required and are commonly added by manufacturers. In its notice, the agency specifically asked for input on arachidonic acid, known as ARA, docosahexaenoic acid, known as DHA, and L-carnitine.

That request does not mean those ingredients are becoming required now. It means the agency is gathering evidence and public input as part of a longer rulemaking process that could lead to future proposals.

The proposal is tied to Operation Stork Speed, an HHS and FDA initiative announced March 18, 2025. FDA materials describe that effort as a plan to expand options for safe, reliable, and nutritious infant formula for American families, and the agency’s infant formula homepage says this nutrient proposal is the first of three planned proposed rules.

What testing found and what happens next

Separately, the FDA said its recent infant formula testing looked at 312 retail samples collected in its 2023 to 2025 Market Basket Survey. As part of that work, the agency tested for chemical contaminants including lead, mercury, cadmium, arsenic, PFAS, and thallium.

According to the FDA, most PFAS compounds tested, 25 out of 30, were not found in any sample. The agency also said 294 of the 312 samples, or 94%, had no detectable thallium, while the remaining 18 samples had very low levels. In broader summary language, the FDA said most tested products had undetectable or very low contaminant levels.

The nutrient proposal is still only a proposal, not a final rule. Next, the FDA will collect public comments through the federal rulemaking process, review that input, and decide whether to finalize, revise, or withdraw the proposed changes before any new requirements take effect.

The FDA said on November 9 that it is revoking the authorization for methylene chloride as a diluent in inks used to mark fruits and vegetables. The change takes effect January 11, 2027, and it is a regulatory action, not a recall of produce already in stores.

What the FDA changed

The agency announced two related color additive actions this week. The first removes the authorized use of methylene chloride in color additive mixtures used as inks for marking fruits and vegetables. The FDA said it took that step in response to a color additive petition filed by the Environmental Defense Fund, Breast Cancer Prevention Partners, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Working Group, and Lisa Lefferts.

In its notice, the FDA said the petition asked the agency to revoke the authorization under the Delaney Clause in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The agency said a color additive that is ingested must be deemed unsafe under that clause if it has been found to induce cancer in humans or animals. The FDA said methylene chloride has been shown to cause cancer in laboratory animals.

This is a rule change about what can be authorized going forward, not an announcement that shoppers should throw out fruit or vegetables in their kitchens. The FDA framed it as the removal of an authorized use in its color additive regulations. For home cooks, the practical point is that the action targets a food contact use tied to produce markings, not the produce itself.

Why the Delaney Clause mattered

The Delaney Clause plays a narrow but important role in this decision. According to the FDA, it applies to color additives that are ingested in food. Because produce marking inks are used on fruits and vegetables, the agency treated the methylene chloride authorization as falling within that standard.

The FDA also used this announcement to explain a separate limit of the Delaney Clause. In a related action, the agency said it was denying part of the same petition that sought to remove certain solvents from the production of annatto extract, paprika oleoresin, and turmeric oleoresin on Delaney Clause grounds. The FDA said any leftover solvent in those color additives would be considered an impurity, and impurities are not subject to the Delaney Clause.

That distinction helps explain why the produce ink action and the color additive manufacturing actions were handled differently. One involved an authorized use of methylene chloride in an ingested color additive application. The other involved substances used during production, which the FDA said are evaluated under a different safety framework for impurities.

Separate changes for annatto, paprika, and turmeric

The FDA announced a second action at the same time, covering methylene chloride, ethylene dichloride, and trichloroethylene used in producing annatto extract, paprika oleoresin, and turmeric oleoresin. In that action, the agency said it was revoking those authorizations on the basis of abandonment after a petition from the International Association of Color Manufacturers.

According to the FDA, the petitioner demonstrated that those uses had been abandoned by industry. The agency said those substances now have no remaining authorized uses as color additives or in the production of color additives. A Federal Register notice also said the request to remove methylene chloride from produce marking inks on abandonment grounds was moot because that authorization had already been removed in response to the separate Delaney Clause petition.

For shoppers and home cooks, the biggest takeaway is timing and scope. The effective date for the revocations is January 11, 2027. The announcement does not describe a recall, does not say fruits and vegetables currently in supermarkets are being pulled, and does not direct consumers to take any action with produce already purchased.

The World Health Organization opened a public consultation on November 2, 2026, for a draft food profiling model that could shape how governments regulate packaged foods. The proposal is already drawing objections from major food industry representatives because it looks beyond sugar, sodium, and fat and also considers some ingredients used to make products more appealing.

What the WHO draft would do

According to the WHO, the draft integrated food profiling model is meant to help governments identify industrially produced, pre-packaged foods that should be consumed in moderation within healthy dietary patterns. The agency says countries could use that framework when designing policies such as food marketing restrictions, front-of-pack labeling, fiscal measures, and public food procurement rules.

The model combines two kinds of tests. One is nutrient based, covering saturated fatty acids, trans-fatty acids, sugars, and sodium. The other looks at whether a product contains flavors, colors, or sweeteners that WHO says are used primarily for sensory purposes.

WHO says a product can be identified under the model if it exceeds one or more nutrient criteria or contains one or more of those specified ingredients. The agency also makes a point that including flavors, colors, and sweeteners in the model does not mean those ingredients are unsafe. Instead, WHO says they can help identify products formulated to increase appeal and consumption.

The consultation is open through Friday, November 27, 2026, at 23:59 CET. WHO says the draft is intended to gather feedback from member states, experts, civil society, academia, and other stakeholders before the publication is finalized.

Why food companies are pushing back

Industry concerns center on the idea that the draft broadens food regulation beyond nutrition panels. Reuters reported that this is the first time WHO has included these types of ingredients in this guidance, where earlier approaches focused on nutritional content such as fat and salt.

The International Food & Beverage Alliance said in a November 2 statement that it supports WHO’s goal of addressing obesity and diet-related disease, but argues that the proposed approach shifts attention away from nutritional quality. The group said WHO’s own analysis suggests the approach could capture nearly all packaged food and beverage products, including products that meet nutrient criteria but are flagged because they contain flavors, colors, or sweeteners.

The alliance also said it is worried the draft could undermine reformulation efforts. In its statement, the group said those ingredients and processing techniques can be used to reduce sugar, sodium, and saturated fat, and to support fortification and innovation.

Reuters also reported that Kraft Heinz CEO Steve Cahillane said industry players should have a say as the discussion moves forward. Those concerns reflect a broader business worry that new models can lead to stricter labeling rules, reformulation costs, and different tax or marketing limits across markets.

What it could mean for US food makers and shoppers

The WHO draft is not a global ban, and it does not automatically change US food rules. It is a guidance proposal for governments, and any effect on American manufacturers would depend on whether regulators in the United States or export markets decide to use similar criteria in future policy.

That said, the model matters because it lays out a framework that could influence future debates over what belongs on the front of a package, which foods can be marketed to children, and which products might face taxes or procurement limits. For US manufacturers that sell globally, a broader profiling system could mean more pressure to review ingredient lists as well as nutrient content.

For shoppers, the immediate impact is mostly about where food policy may head next, not what disappears from store shelves this month. WHO says the proposal is about helping governments decide which foods should be consumed in moderation, and the agency is still taking comments before it finalizes the document.

The distinction matters. WHO is not declaring flavors, colors, or sweeteners unsafe in this draft. It is proposing a new way for governments to classify certain packaged foods for possible public health policies, and that idea is now at the center of the industry’s pushback.

The FDA said on October 19, 2026, that seven imported lemon juice samples did not meet U.S. requirements after a multi-year testing assignment. The agency said none of the domestic samples it tested were found to be violative.

What the FDA found in its lemon juice testing

The agency tested 195 lemon juice samples collected from October 19, 2022, to January 22, 2025, according to the FDA’s sampling summary. That total included 38 domestic samples and 157 import samples. The FDA said seven of the import samples were violative, while none of the domestic samples were.

The testing was part of an FDA assignment focused on economically motivated adulteration, which the agency also describes as food fraud. In this case, the question was whether products sold as lemon juice actually matched the federal standard of identity for lemon juice. The FDA said it periodically tests foods like this to protect the integrity of the food supply and help consumers get what they expect when they buy a product.

The FDA said the violative findings represented a 4.5% violation rate among imported samples and a 3.6% rate across all 195 samples. Those figures apply only to the samples collected for this assignment, not to the whole lemon juice market. The agency’s own notice framed the results as sample findings, not a blanket judgment about imported lemon juice as a category.

What the agency was testing for

Under the FDA’s lemon juice standard of identity, a product sold as lemon juice in the United States has to meet defined expectations for what that food is. The agency said that standard exists so shoppers know what they are getting when they pick up a bottle labeled lemon juice. In practical terms, the rule is meant to prevent substitution or dilution that changes what the product actually is.

For this assignment, the FDA said it tested for ingredients inconsistent with that standard, including added sweeteners, citric acid, excess water, and juices from non-lemon sources. The agency said it used multiple analytical tests, then had subject matter experts review results that looked atypical for authentic lemon juice. That review also considered natural variation in lemon juice composition, analytical uncertainty, and differences that can still fall within good manufacturing practices.

That matters in a home kitchen because bottled lemon juice is often used when cooks want stable acidity and convenience for dressings, marinades, baking, and preserving. A standard of identity does not judge whether a product tastes good. It sets a baseline for whether a bottle labeled lemon juice is actually lemon juice under U.S. rules.

What happened to the violative shipments

The FDA said all shipments related to the violative samples were refused entry into the United States. It also said the associated firms and their violative products were placed on Import Alert 99-47, which covers human food products that appear to be adulterated for economic gain. According to the agency, that step allows future shipments to face detention without physical examination.

The FDA said a company listed on that import alert must provide evidence that it corrected the violation before its products can be admitted into the U.S. again. The agency gave third-party laboratory test results as one example of evidence that could show a product now meets the lemon juice standard of identity.

For shoppers, the main point is narrower than the headline may suggest. The FDA did not say all imported lemon juice is fraudulent, and it did not report violative findings in the domestic samples it tested. What it did say is that seven imported samples in this assignment failed to meet the federal standard, and those shipments were blocked from entering the U.S.

Turkey prices are running higher than they were ahead of Thanksgiving last year, but the holiday bird itself does not appear to be in short supply. Early November grocery averages and USDA market reports point to a season with more birds available, even as shelf prices stay elevated.

Why prices are up even with more birds available

In early November, the national average grocery price for a whole, conventionally raised frozen turkey was about $1.26 per pound, up from $1.03 at the same point last year, according to Texas A&M AgriLife Extension economist David Anderson, whose figures were cited by Farm Progress and other outlets reporting on the holiday market. That means shoppers may still pay more at the meat case even though supply has improved from last year’s decline.

Part of the answer is timing. Turkey pricing for Thanksgiving does not move only with the latest weekly wholesale market. Anderson said retail turkey prices often reflect store promotions and earlier contracted prices, not just current spot costs. Farm Progress also reported that whole turkeys on the wholesale market averaged $1.80 per pound in late October, compared with $1.69 a year earlier.

USDA’s Economic Research Service has also been signaling firmer turkey prices this year. In its October 2026 Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry Outlook, the agency said frozen whole hen turkey prices were expected to remain strong through the rest of 2026 and into 2027. For home cooks, that adds up to a familiar Thanksgiving reality: a bird may cost more than it did last November, even when the broader supply picture looks healthier.

What the bigger supply means for Thanksgiving shopping

The key shift this season is production. After a drop of more than 8% last year, producers have bounced back, according to reporting from Farm Progress based on Anderson’s market outlook. The number of birds going to market is up about 3%, and total production is up nearly 6% because birds are heavier on average.

USDA data supports the broader recovery trend. The agency’s turkey sector statistics show turkey meat production in the first half of 2026 reached 2.50 billion pounds, up 7.4% from the same period in 2025. That does not mean every store will stock the same sizes or brands, but it does suggest that shoppers should generally find more available product heading into the holiday than they did a year ago.

That distinction matters because a higher turkey price can sound like a shortage story when it is not. This year’s market is better described as more expensive, but better supplied. For anyone planning a Thanksgiving menu, that likely means less worry about simply finding a bird, especially if flexibility on brand, weight, or frozen versus fresh is part of the plan.

Bird flu is still a risk, and stores are using promotions

Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza remains a concern for the turkey business, especially during fall migration, when outbreaks can pick up. Even so, extension analysts quoted by Farm Progress and Alabama Cooperative Extension said recent bird flu cases have not been significant enough to disrupt Thanksgiving availability in a major way this year.

USDA’s National Retail Report shows that whole birds are being featured more prominently in store ads as the holiday approaches. In the report covering promotions running from October 31 through November 12, USDA said frozen conventional whole turkey feature prices were 26 cents per pound higher than a year earlier. At the same time, more retailers were promoting whole birds, which is a sign grocers are still leaning on turkey as a traffic driver.

That could matter as much as the national average price. Supermarkets often use Thanksgiving staples to bring shoppers through the door, then make the basket work with higher margin items elsewhere in the meal. So even with average turkey prices up, individual deals may still show up in weekly circulars and digital offers, especially in the final stretch before Thanksgiving.

Krispy Kreme has introduced a limited-time Thanksgiving Collection built around holiday dessert flavors. According to the company, the four-doughnut lineup begins November 12 at participating shops and will be sold through Thanksgiving Day.

What’s in the Thanksgiving collection

Krispy Kreme said the collection includes three new doughnuts and one returning seasonal item. The new flavors are Berry Cobbler, Caramel Pumpkin, and Double Chocolate Crumble. The returning choice is the Cinnamon Apple Filled Doughnut.

The Berry Cobbler Doughnut is an unglazed shell filled with raspberry-flavored filling. Krispy Kreme says it is dipped in mixed berry icing and finished with a mixed berry oat crumble, which gives it the collection’s clearest nod to a fruit cobbler topping.

The Caramel Pumpkin Doughnut layers several fall dessert cues into one doughnut. According to Krispy Kreme’s announcement, it is topped with pumpkin cream frosting, caramel icing, and pumpkin spice cookie pieces.

The Double Chocolate Crumble Doughnut leans more toward a rich cake-style dessert profile. Krispy Kreme says it is filled with chocolate creme, then topped with chocolate icing and cookie crumbles for extra texture.

The returning apple pick and when to buy them

The fourth doughnut in the lineup is the Cinnamon Apple Filled Doughnut, which Krispy Kreme described as a returning favorite in its Thanksgiving announcement. That doughnut is filled with apple filling and finished with cinnamon sugar, giving the assortment a more classic baked-apple flavor beside the newer berry, pumpkin, and chocolate options.

Krispy Kreme said the Thanksgiving Collection is available at participating shops nationwide beginning Thursday, November 12, and continuing through Thanksgiving Day. The company framed the assortment as a dessert shortcut for holiday hosts, guests, and anyone showing up to Friendsgiving or Thanksgiving with a shareable box instead of a homemade pie.

That timing matters if you are planning a dessert run close to the holiday. The doughnuts are not positioned as an open-ended seasonal menu item. Krispy Kreme’s announcement ties the promotion specifically to the Thanksgiving window, so shoppers may want to check participating locations rather than assume every store will have the full lineup for the entire period.

Why Berry Cobbler stands out

Berry Cobbler is the most unusual flavor in the set because berry desserts are less common in Thanksgiving fast-food promotions than pumpkin or apple. Krispy Kreme’s build also separates it from a standard jelly doughnut, since the mixed berry icing and oat crumble are meant to echo the top of a baked cobbler rather than just add sweetness.

The rest of the lineup covers more familiar holiday dessert territory. Caramel Pumpkin takes on pumpkin dessert flavors with frosting, caramel, and spiced cookie topping, while Cinnamon Apple Filled goes after the apple pie lane with fruit filling and cinnamon sugar. Double Chocolate Crumble rounds out the box with a richer option for anyone skipping fruit-forward desserts.

For home cooks and holiday planners, the practical takeaway is simple. This collection is aimed at people who want a ready-made dessert that still feels seasonal, especially for office gatherings, school events, Friendsgiving tables, or Thanksgiving Day pickup. Krispy Kreme has not positioned these as permanent menu additions, so the holiday timing is part of the appeal.