Dirty tricks, spoiling tactics, arrogance, monopoly - these are just some of the allegations made against each other by the two London afternoon freesheets over the past week.
As the mud-slinging continues between thelondonpaper and London Lite, and while both are attempting to placate agencies and advertisers, the industry is beginning to wonder whether either of the freesheets is worth the hassle.
The war of words has echoes of 1987, when Robert Maxwell launched the London Daily News to challenge the Evening Standard's afternoon monopoly in London.
However, News International has deeper pockets than the late Maxwell, as well as a deep-rooted sense of rivalry.
The two locked horns with the launch of Associated Newspapers' Metro in 1999, since when Metro has eaten into The Sun's readership.
The latest contretemps surrounds allegations made by Associated, which publishes London Lite and the Evening Standard, that distributors of News International's thelondonpaper have been dumping thousands of copies into rubbish bins, as evidenced by video footage shot by Associated.
The Audit Bureau of Circulations has taken the unprecedented decision to "investigate and review the circumstances surrounding these incidents, due to the implications that these allegations may have on the certified distribution figures for the London free newspapers".
Ultimatum issued
While the ABC investigates, Westminster Council awaits the outcome of an ultimatum it issued last week to the two publishers, requiring them to cough up £500,000 for additional waste collection services.
Defending its eco-friendly stance, NI claims that the transferable ink it prints with is easier to pulp than London Lite. But with both being mixed with street debris, neither gets fully recycled. Other councils eagerly await the outcome of Westminster's ultimatum.
NI has also dismissed Associated's allegations as small, isolated incidents by a few rogue distributors, who have now been sacked, and involved only 0.048 % of its total distribution. Yet, no one really knows how widespread this dumping of papers may be, by either publisher.
And when advertisers are already wary of the afternoon model, believing it to add frequency rather than coverage, and with an estimated 50% cross-over in readership, the issue can do nothing but harm to both papers.
A lack of differentiation in content between the two papers and low reader loyalty are further issues for media agencies. Why trust one over the other?
As one press director puts it: "Why would we add them to the schedule when advertisers are asking, 'What about the dumping issue?'"
Many believe that this is another example of Associated trying to protect its afternoon London monopoly previously enjoyed by the Evening Standard, by attempting to bring the whole free market into disrepute, which adds weight to NI's "spoiler" claims.
Meanwhile, NI continually undermines London Lite as just "Lite" and its latest trade campaign thanks the Evening Standard for alerting them to their few rogue distributors.
Publicly promoting doubts over how many copies of the papers get into readers' hands, let alone how well they are read, seems perverse so close to the release of the papers' first NRS readership data in July. Does this already render the data invalid?
But many in the industry believe that free newspapers are here to stay and there is not nearly as much left for the Standard to protect as there was 20 years ago, so Associated's campaign seems counter-intuitive. Would people flock back to a 50p Standard if the freesheets disappeared?
Then again, there may have been 80,000 people who bought it for lack of anything else to read, while the freesheets are not viable substitutes for the hardened ES reader.
Lost contracts
Thelondonpaper maintains that because London Lite lost out on both the Network Rail bid and the Canary Wharf contract, it isn't in it for the long term.
"Without those contracts," says general manager of thelondonpaper, Ian Clark, "we are up by just 10 to 20,000 copies."
But does this mean that Associated is not in the game? Or is it just that it isn't prepared to pay the rumoured £1m a year plus for the privilege of handing out 80,000 more copies per day?
As the willy-waving continues, one gets the impression that the two papers are reluctant rivals, being forced into combat like toddlers by their goading parents.
The real war lies ahead, with the morning Metro contract up for grabs within two years.
THE CAPITAL'S FREESHEET WAR
August 2006 - London Lite launches
September 2006 - thelondonpaper launches
January 2007 - Westminster Council issues a statement saying the two papers must pay as much as £500,000 over two years to cover recycling costs for the 900,000 distributed copies
February 2007 - Kensington and Chelsea Council restricts the number of licences for freesheet distributors
March 2007 - Evening Standard boss Bert Hardy places photos of dumped thelondonpapers in The Observer. NI circulates images of dumped London Lites among Associated executives
April 17 - Westminster Council issues an ultimatum for the publishers to come up with the recycling money or face restrictions
April 23 - Associated Newspapers releases dumping video, verified by former fraud squad detective
April 24 - London Lite launches trade ad campaign featuring stills from the dumping video. Thelondonpaper accuses London Lite of "dirty tricks" and claims that it tried to sort out the issue with its rival without involving the media. London Lite boss Steve Auckland denies he was ever approached in this manner and accuses thelondonpaper of arrogance. The latter releases pictures of dumped London Lites
April 25 - ABC announces it will investigate the allegations of dumping, despite the fact that no official complaint had been lodged.