Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, frazzledfozzle said:

NZ is such a tiny market when it comes to honey, if we concentrate on targeting those financially sound people who like to try foods from other countries I’m sure they would favour NZ over some other countries because of  how NZ has been marketed overseas as being clean, green unadulterated. And if it’s made by a small family business rather than a big company then that’s even better. 

Many international tourists and those with NZ connections, will buy NZ products in their home countries, and whilst tourists will diminish for several years, there are still many who have travelled in NZ.  

 

Yes, we know that various countries have their own varietals and that enables them to sell those varietals, so NZ is no different in this regard.  

 

I believe that exclusivity, guaranteed high quality and volume, and nostalgia are very good reasons for a market.  Otherwise, why have we got so many honey marketeers in NZ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 302
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Welcome to the world of agriculture. Wools in the ####, has been for years because the plastic boys advertise their products with a sheep on the front. EarthWool batts have no wool in them. What a pro

Unemployed beekeepers?

As a fairly recent diagnosed diabetic , extraction week lead to high sugar levels . now controlled without medications ( bad reaction to the frontline meds ) by cutting out sugar ( honey) and car

Posted Images

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Maggie James said:

 

I believe that exclusivity, guaranteed high quality and volume, and nostalgia are very good reasons for a market. 


absolutely :) 

 

 

Edited by frazzledfozzle
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Maggie James said:

Otherwise, why have we got so many honey marketeers in NZ?

One word - Manuka!!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, Ted said:

One word - Manuka!!

Yes, M certainly has had major impact, but honey prices were starting to creep up before the M boom which really didn't start until after 2007, and new marketeers were already coming into the industry.  

Edited by Maggie James
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Rob's BP said:

What I'm trying to introduce is to see things from the buyer's perspective. 

Consumers are motivated more from 'what benefit can I get from this purchase' than 'what production factors went into this product'.

in the case of manuka, those perceived benefits some mixture of health and prestige I guess?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think the only way we are going to get honey prices to rise and not compete with each other in the same market nis to have a single desk seller such as Zespri or a co-op that every beekeeper who exports must belong to.I  have been in the industry and exported under my own to label to know what happens out there and it is not nice.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bighands said:

I still think the only way we are going to get honey prices to rise and not compete with each other in the same market nis to have a single desk seller such as Zespri or a co-op that every beekeeper who exports must belong to.I  have been in the industry and exported under my own to label to know what happens out there and it is not nice.

 

We used to have a single desk seller. 

 

It was the NZ Honey Marketing Authority, formed in 1952 in the aftermath of WWII.  The NZHMA finally turned into the NZ Honey Producer's Coop in 1982, but gave up single desk selling on a number of honey products before.  Comb honey I think was never controlled, but honeydew was the first opened up in the '70s.  All other export controls were lifted by 1982. 

This graph is a good indicator of the NZHMA's effectiveness - or rather lack it.  The divergence of prices after the 70s was due to effective market diversification by many exporters exploring every available niche.

 

image.thumb.png.48700caa0338abf8c24fe413fb0ae53d.png

  • Like 1
  • Good Info 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, frazzledfozzle said:

When I travel overseas I love to buy from stalls and local markets.

when travelling around NZ I will buy honey from local beekeepers.

 

NZ is such a tiny market when it comes to honey, if we concentrate on targeting those financially sound people who like to try foods from other countries I’m sure they would favour NZ over some other countries because of  how NZ has been marketed overseas as being clean, green unadulterated. And if it’s made by a small family business rather than a big company then that’s even better. 

 

Seems you're extrapolating your own thoughts and behaviour onto your target consumers rather than researching them and understanding their motivation and behaviour.

 

Re. "And if it’s made by a small family business rather than a big company then that’s even better." if that was a widely held motivator, then why is the reality the opposite i.e. the biggest brands are just that, the biggest, while as you said it family businesses are small. The point being that consumers have responded and choose to purchase not the small family business' products but rather the large firms'. Maybe we should learn from the successful/large firms and emulate the good points of what they do, rather than emulate the smallest?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Rob's BP said:

Maybe we should learn from the successful/large firms and emulate the good points of what they do, rather than emulate the smallest?

Large firms in NZ are not the backbone of this industry, nor NZ GDP.  My understanding is a large firm is classed as over 50 employees. In the area I reside, there are a number of outfits in the apiculture industry that are small firms, but large contributors to GDP and employment in the the Selwyn District Council area.     

Also of note Jacinda & Winston & Shane have made it v clear there will be a major emphasis on NZ production; particularly primary production.  So I think individual beekeepers in the longterm and if they can get through the next few months are in a very strong position.  In one thread there was a post from another forum member, this is not the first time in his life history he has seen redundancies and people adapted.  When I read this, had a count up of the times in my working life I have been made redundant and it totals five occasions, and I always got a job following it.  Life is a complex journey full of differing themes in chapters.  

 

Edited by Maggie James
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Emissary said:

 

We used to have a single desk seller. 

 

It was the NZ Honey Marketing Authority, formed in 1952 in the aftermath of WWII.  The NZHMA finally turned into the NZ Honey Producer's Coop in 1982, but gave up single desk selling on a number of honey products before.  Comb honey I think was never controlled, but honeydew was the first opened up in the '70s.  All other export controls were lifted by 1982. 

This graph is a good indicator of the NZHMA's effectiveness - or rather lack it.  The divergence of prices after the 70s was due to effective market diversification by many exporters exploring every available niche.

 

image.thumb.png.48700caa0338abf8c24fe413fb0ae53d.png

 

Great graph and info.

That should also put to bed those who thought a co-op would have got better prices...

Another way to look at it is this - there are apparently 90 serious groups looking at providing a corona virus vaccine - many of which have unique and different approaches.  Better that or one entity trying to crack the vaccine?  I'd go for the 90 any-time....competition will always bring out the best, it is why we have in NZ for the most part a vibrant economy rather than the drab pre 1984 version...

 

 

2 hours ago, Rob's BP said:

 

Seems you're extrapolating your own thoughts and behaviour onto your target consumers rather than researching them and understanding their motivation and behaviour.

 

Re. "And if it’s made by a small family business rather than a big company then that’s even better." if that was a widely held motivator, then why is the reality the opposite i.e. the biggest brands are just that, the biggest, while as you said it family businesses are small. The point being that consumers have responded and choose to purchase not the small family business' products but rather the large firms'. Maybe we should learn from the successful/large firms and emulate the good points of what they do, rather than emulate the smallest?

 

I follow you here and for the most part kind of agree but still sometimes the biggest eg Fonterra is a low margin business versus a Synlait or A2 Milk (when it started out...) which are smaller but considerably more profitable.    And look at Comvita, ok sure, it has great brand recognition, trust etc and that part of its business we could all aspire to create but it is hardly a poster boy for a successful business, perhaps a poster boy for destroying shareholder value....

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Rob's BP said:

 

Seems you're extrapolating your own thoughts and behaviour onto your target consumers rather than researching them and understanding their motivation and behaviour.

 

Re. "And if it’s made by a small family business rather than a big company then that’s even better." if that was a widely held motivator, then why is the reality the opposite i.e. the biggest brands are just that, the biggest, while as you said it family businesses are small. The point being that consumers have responded and choose to purchase not the small family business' products but rather the large firms'. Maybe we should learn from the successful/large firms and emulate the good points of what they do, rather than emulate the smallest?


I don’t think you can say the biggest are the biggest because people have made them so by buying their products.

Im pretty sure there’s a heap of small medium food producers who don’t want to become big.

Also you have to look at the type of people who buy from each type business.

more people buy from the big corporates because it’s cheaper.
 

You will always have more people in a population that buy on price. 

 

Comvita didn’t start big, there had to be at some point a conscious decision to become big. To become a large company you first have to be a successful small company. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, frazzledfozzle said:

To become a large company you first have to be a successful small company.

Or buy up several small businesses and join them together to become a large business.

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, CraBee said:

should also put to bed those who thought a co-op would have got better prices..

We could put aside Better prices, for now. I just want to sell our nice pasture. 

Kubota and skoda got increased value over time. A market share first.

 

My gut feeling (which contains a dose of ignorance) is that, 

Manuka is top and foremost.

Manuka equals money

Money generates desire to buy and export. 

Non M doesn't generate enough money.

 

The current system, as above, fails to address non M. 

Who's responsible, I am first and foremost. Honey in my shed is my problem. 

I accept that I see the hurdles to export my own far too high. What can I do about it?? Sell cheaper? Chase Manuka? Leave honey on? Put more honey in saturated local market? 

Or spend untold hours and $ creating an overseas brand?? For 15 ton a year. Hopeless really. 

A big shed, large inventory of various non M honey, producers who willingly store in said storage, payments over time, as sales progress. 

A one stop shed for the overseas buyers to shop at. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Gino de Graaf said:

We could put aside Better prices, for now. I just want to sell our nice pasture. 

Kubota and skoda got increased value over time. A market share first.

 

My gut feeling (which contains a dose of ignorance) is that, 

Manuka is top and foremost.

Manuka equals money

Money generates desire to buy and export. 

Non M doesn't generate enough money.

 

The current system, as above, fails to address non M. 

Who's responsible, I am first and foremost. Honey in my shed is my problem. 

I accept that I see the hurdles to export my own far too high. What can I do about it?? Sell cheaper? Chase Manuka? Leave honey on? Put more honey in saturated local market? 

Or spend untold hours and $ creating an overseas brand?? For 15 ton a year. Hopeless really. 

A big shed, large inventory of various non M honey, producers who willingly store in said storage, payments over time, as sales progress. 

A one stop shed for the overseas buyers to shop at. 

 

This reminds me of an overseas buyer who used to come to nz every year and we haven't heard or seen him for a long time now

Edited by yesbut
Missing word
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bighands said:

This reminds me of an overseas buyer who used to come to nz every year and we haven't heard or seen him for a long time now

Isle of Man ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

Or buy up several small businesses and join them together to become a large business.

 

Yep, I've seen that in many different industries. There are a lot more Fonterras and Burger Kings out there than there are Graeme Harts.

So, this reminds me of the saying: The easiest way to generate a small fortune is to start with a big one.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Gino de Graaf said:

Isle of Man ?

Yes correct.Have you seen him or spoken to him re sale of your honey

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, frazzledfozzle said:

more people buy from the big corporates because it’s cheaper.

 

Really? Have you done a market survey to come up with this belief?

Comvita is not only the biggest but also the most expensive. 

And (this may be very contrary to your thinking/may be controversial) yes a lot of Comvita's consumers buy it partly because it is the most expensive.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rob's BP said:

 

Really? Have you done a market survey to come up with this belief?

Comvita is not only the biggest but also the most expensive. 

And (this may be very contrary to your thinking/may be controversial) yes a lot of Comvita's consumers buy it partly because it is the most expensive.

 

Because back in Marketing 201 they said if you price the product higher there is a perception that the product is of a superior quality, and they buy it.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CraBee said:

 

Because back in Marketing 201 they said if you price the product higher there is a perception that the product is of a superior quality, and they buy it.

 

Yep, and a whole lot of other assurances/perceptions/assumptions including, but not limited to, trust, desire, safety, performance, bestowed status, and self fulfillment. 

 

To apply it to the auto market as a comparison: say everyone can buy the cheapest car, most with a lot of misgivings, but at least it's functional as a car; whereas most would buy a far more expensive (better?) car if they could for various reasons. Well the great thing about honey is that many, many, many people can buy the most expensive honey. When your house(s) are worth >$1m each, your cars are worth >$100k etc. what's $100-200 when it confers all those superior connetations? Chump change that's what, if you've got it, why would you buy one of the cheaper products available. 

 

Manuka honey is an example of a Giffen Good.

  • Good Info 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Bighands said:

Yes correct.Have you seen him or spoken to him re sale of your honey

I sent him an email.... He was concerned about brexit affect on him 8 months ago. Now covid be another

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Rob's BP said:

 

Yep, and a whole lot of other assurances/perceptions/assumptions including, but not limited to, trust, desire, safety, performance, bestowed status, and self fulfillment. 

 

To apply it to the auto market as a comparison: say everyone can buy the cheapest car, most with a lot of misgivings, but at least it's functional as a car; whereas most would buy a far more expensive (better?) car if they could for various reasons. Well the great thing about honey is that many, many, many people can buy the most expensive honey. When your house(s) are worth >$1m each, your cars are worth >$100k etc. what's $100-200 when it confers all those superior connetations? Chump change that's what, if you've got it, why would you buy one of the cheaper products available. 

 

Manuka honey is an example of a Giffen Good.

 

Except I'm not seeing much evidence of it being a Giffen Good at the moment......your thoughts on the market?  I also don't think you've seen my vehicles, heavy revision downward from the 100K required 🙂

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Rob's BP said:

 

Yep, and a whole lot of other assurances/perceptions/assumptions including, but not limited to, trust, desire, safety, performance, bestowed status, and self fulfillment. 

 

To apply it to the auto market as a comparison: say everyone can buy the cheapest car, most with a lot of misgivings, but at least it's functional as a car; whereas most would buy a far more expensive (better?) car if they could for various reasons. Well the great thing about honey is that many, many, many people can buy the most expensive honey. When your house(s) are worth >$1m each, your cars are worth >$100k etc. what's $100-200 when it confers all those superior connetations? Chump change that's what, if you've got it, why would you buy one of the cheaper products available. 

 

Manuka honey is an example of a Giffen Good.


which is exactly what I am saying is it not ?

people with money being prepapared to pay extra for honey that is priced and marketed as being special and therefore more expensive than honey that is seen as a commodity.

 

when  I was talking big corporates I was talking generally like buying cheese from mainland,  milk from fonterra, beer from DB that kind of thing. 
Those are big companies producing a commodity.

 

If I want something special or I want a gift I will by cheese from a local cheese maker, fresh Bread from the local bakery, beer from a local micro brewer and I expect to pay more and am happy to pay more. 



 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, frazzledfozzle said:


which is exactly what I am saying is it not ?

people with money being prepapared to pay extra for honey that is priced and marketed as being special and therefore more expensive than honey that is seen as a commodity



 

Well said. I suspect that it's easier for marketers to talk up the speciality of M, as it's already got lots of traction. And granted it's uniquely nz, and great for wound care. 

Much much harder to then talk up something that the marketers don't feel all that enthusiastic about. If they are indifferent how on Earth are we going to move forward? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...