Merisant Worldwide Inc., the privately-held company behind sugar substitute Equal, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

The company reported a debt load of more than half a billion dollars back in November, and the company's declining market share in the face of competitors like Splenda combined with a lack of financial flexibility pushed it into bankruptcy.

According to The Wall Street Journal (subscription required), the company plans to convert a significant amount of its debt into equity and doesn't even think it will have to lay off employees. CEO Paul Block said the filing will free up cash to invest in supporting PureVia, a new product recently launched in partnership with PepsiCo (NYSE: PEP). Merisant is selling it in packets and Pepsi will be using it in some of its products.

No word yet on whether Pepsi is so sure a partner's bankruptcy will have no effect on their relationship. And a bankruptcy in a recession for a company with declining market share that won't result in job cuts or any other impact on operations?

It sounds like the corporate spin machine is running on overdrive.

This post is part of our Battle of the Brands feature. Let us know which brand you prefer, and check out other Battle of the Brands posts.

Among the phrases that mystify me is "Too sweet" -- I was born with 28 sweet teeth. The sweetener holder in most restaurants today holds at least two different ersatz sugars; Sweet'N Low and Splenda. Which is better?

Sweet'N Low has the history. It first came on the market back in 1957 when the key ingredient, saccharin was packaged in the same single-serving sleeves used for sugar. It is still owned by the originators, privately held Cumberland Packing Group. Although the intensely sweet saccharin had been around since the start of the century, it took Sweet'N Low marketing and an increasing focus on the nation's waistline to popularize it.

The product's primary advantage is cost; a packet sells for slightly over a penny a serving. Downsides include bitterness that some users distinguish, and the inability to use it in baking and cooking, as it breaks down under heat.

Posts for all the current Battle of the Brands match-ups have gone live this past week, and while there are some close races, some early favorites have already emerged as well.

In the Saks vs. Nordstrom match-up, for instance, Saks is a clear favorite with about 80% of of your votes. As for Splenda vs. Equal, its Splenda with about 75% of the vote. However, only about 100 of you have voted in each of these match-ups, so things could easily swing the other way.

It's probably no surprise that in the rivalry between Wal-Mart and Target, Target is clearly ahead with nearly two-thirds of your vote. The Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) affiliated Sam's Club isn't faring any better in its match-up with Costco, the latter currently holding about 75% of the votes.

The early surprise is with General Motors vs. Toyota. Despite Toyota's advantages as outlined in the post, more than two-thirds of you prefer down-but-not-out General Motors (NYSE: GM). This match-up has received more than 500 votes so far, and some lively back and forth in the comments. Check it out.

The monster match-up, though, and maybe an even bigger surprise, is FedEx vs. UPS. There have been more than 50 comments and more than 2,000 votes cast so far. About two-thirds of you prefer good old United Parcel Service (NYSE: UPS), but there are some strong opinions about each of these brands.

Other active vote getters so far have been Coke vs. Pepsi, with more than 400 votes, Apple vs. Microsoft, approaching 400 votes, and Bud Light vs. Miller Lite, with well over 300 votes. About two thirds of you prefer Coca-Cola and Bud light (though not at the same time, I'm sure), while about three-quarters of you prefer Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL) products (hello all you iPod lovers).

In CNN vs. Fox News, the latter has jumped out to a quick lead. We could soon see some fireworks in the comments for this match-up as well.

Other match-ups showing clear favorites in the early running are Coach vs. Louis Vuitton, Yahoo! vs. Google, and Amazon vs. Barnes & Noble. And those favorites are Coach (64%), Google (68%), and Amazon (60%).

While all these are clear favorites right now, the polls are still open, and vote tallies are rising fast. Anything could happen. Be sure and let us know which brands you prefer by voting in our reader polls, and we'd love to hear why you're loyal to your favorites in the comments of any of our Battle of the Brands posts.

This post is part of our Battle of the Brands feature. Let us know which brand you prefer, and check out other Battle of the Brands posts.

I never paid that much attention to the pink and yellow and blue packets on the table when my wife and I go out for breakfast a couple of times a week. I'm not a consumer of artificial sweeteners, so when I learned that we wanted to add one more match-up to our Battle of the Brands feature, this one focusing on Splenda and Equal, and that it was going to be up to me pull it together, I thought: Oh boy, what am I going to have to say about that?

But I've never been one to pass up an opportunity to learn something new. I began with what I did know, which wasn't much: the makers of Splenda and Equal were in the news recently -- something about misleading advertising and sour grapes. Besides, weren't these yellow and blue packets really second banana to the ubiquitous Sweet'N Low pink packets? Shows how much I know: turns out Sweet'N Low's virtual monopoly on the artificial sweetener market ended back in the 1980s, when Equal took the lead. Since Splenda was introduced in 1999, however, it has exploded, with sales of more than $200 million in 2006, or about 60% of the U.S. artificial sweetener market. Equal's sales have dropped about $30 million in that time, while sales of sugar have dropped $85 million. No wonder sugar producers and the makers of Equal have gone after the makers of Splenda in court.

For someone who doesn't know his blue packet from his yellow packet, what really is the difference between them?

If you thought that sugar, or rather, what people think of as sugar, was a light and fluffy matter, think again. The New York Times (subscription required) today has a report on the ugly court battle going on between the makers of Splenda and Equal over what each says is false advertising.

Privately held Marisant Worldwide Inc., which makes Equal, accuses rival Splenda of spending millions of dollars convincing the public that its product is made from sugar and is natural. Splenda contends that its product does indeed start with sugar. So nyaaa.

A tiff over language and marketing? More like an argument over who's got the sweetest portion of the market. Equal was number one for a long while, finding its way into thousands of consumer products, as well as being the sweetener used for Diet Pepsi and Diet Coke. But Splenda, made by a unit of Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ), has captured 62% of the $1.5 billion artificial sweetener market since being introduced in 1999. Sweet nothings? Hardly.

Expect a chemistry lesson in what goes into the making of these two popular sweeteners. If nothing else, this battle might help publicize what's actually in those little blue and yellow packets, and why you might be just as well off dropping a spoonful of the real stuff into your morning cup.