Jump to content
frazzledfozzle

World honey prices

Recommended Posts

“How can you tell if a person is a Vegan??  Don’t worry - they’ll tell you!!”

 

And this is the reason people get a bit tetchy with them - constantly trying to convert people to their way of thinking by harassment.  A bit like certain door knocking religions.  

When being confronted by a vocal vegan I like to quote one of my favourite verses -

“Life is nature’s way of keeping meat fresh.”

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i do have sympathy for animal rights activists.

i seldom eat chicken these days unless it is a barn reared or free range chook.

when i buy meat from a supermarket i do have a moment , most of our meat is local kill.

but i also know some pretty judgemental , hypocritical  very annoying vegans

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife is a vegetarian. She's not into veganism. I go along with it as she feeds me. I eat beef when I find it. Muttons good too. Avoid chook and pig. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

i do have sympathy for animal rights activists.

i seldom eat chicken these days unless it is a barn reared or free range chook.

when i buy meat from a supermarket i do have a moment , most of our meat is local kill.

but i also know some pretty judgemental , hypocritical  very annoying vegans

All meat chickens are barn reared - ie no cages.  

25 minutes ago, Gino de Graaf said:

My wife is a vegetarian. She's not into veganism. I go along with it as she feeds me. I eat beef when I find it. Muttons good too. Avoid chook and pig. 

Perfect example of how it should be.  Personal choices without trying to influence each other.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ted said:

All meat chickens are barn reared - ie no cages.  

Perfect example of how it should be.  Personal choices without trying to influence each other.

That's right. I should be allowed to drive at 120kmh when I deem it safe to do so. 

  • Haha 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ted said:

All meat chickens are barn reared - ie no cages.  

I did not know that .

How do they make chicken so cheap .

It must be intensively  farmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kaihoka said:

I did not know that .

How do they make chicken so cheap .

It must be intensively  farmed

 

2 hours ago, kaihoka said:

I did not know that .

How do they make chicken so cheap .

It must be intensively  farmed

Yes very intensively farmed.  Broiler farms generally have multiple sheds and the ones I’ve seen rear 30,000 birds per shed and do around 7 batches per year per shed.  They are all reared on the floor on wood shavings.  Birds are slaughtered at 5 - 6 weeks old so grow incredibly fast.  Very automated systems to so not much labour required.  The farm I’ve seen was run by a husband and wife team and produced almost 1 million chickens a year.

  • Thanks 1
  • Good Info 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/11/2019 at 4:37 PM, flash4cash said:

Yes however the beekeeper needs a direct stake in the brand without the brand they will always remain poor, with no long term security.

 

The brand owner is always the most powerful player in the game. It means sweet FA benefit if midland's honey has a strong brand.  Their owners, who ever they are will want all the benefit to go to them. 

 

Until beekeepers smarten up, they will go round and round in circles. 

I don't entirely agree with your opinion. 

Strong brand = more sales = more purchases of honey = benefit to beekeeper

Are you suggesting that beekeepers want to share the cost of creating and marketing brands and the risks associated? 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Adam Boot said:

I don't entirely agree with your opinion. 

Strong brand = more sales = more purchases of honey = benefit to beekeeper

Are you suggesting that beekeepers want to share the cost of creating and marketing brands and the risks associated? 

 

I think what is being said is that under the existing market structure individual beekeepers have little leverage and are price takers.

By creating a brand beekeepers have another potential means to dispose of their honey and have potential to add and create value.

And after all that is no different to what you have done.

And it doesn't require a budget of millions, just a smaller sale more targeted approach eg for some it may mean selling at a market,

or to a local retail shop, not Chinese influencers and world domination.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look in the supermarkets. Two years ago you were lucky to see three different brands of honey. Now everybody and his dog is out there cutting each other's throats.

  • Agree 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, john berry said:

Have a look in the supermarkets. Two years ago you were lucky to see three different brands of honey. Now everybody and his dog is out there cutting each other's throats.

At last someone stating the obvious truth. Multiple brands are not the pricing solution. Arguably the more beekeepers that create their own brands the worse the position becomes. 

 

Most so called brands are not brands. They are simply a label placed on a jar. Without any USP's or KSP's and without promotion to deliver any messages of difference they are just same, same Me2 product. The owners of the products soon discover that the only ammunition in their sales arsenal is price. The retailer then has multiple choice all competing on price. A simple downward spiral for the majority. Just look at the wasted investment into small packing operations and the number of labels (brands) that rise and fall in no time at all. 

 

Please show me where the value creation is to be had with multiple versions of the same product all competing on price?

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Adam Boot said:

At last someone stating the obvious truth. Multiple brands are not the pricing solution. Arguably the more beekeepers that create their own brands the worse the position becomes. 

 

Most so called brands are not brands. They are simply a label placed on a jar. Without any USP's or KSP's and without promotion to deliver any messages of difference they are just same, same Me2 product. The owners of the products soon discover that the only ammunition in their sales arsenal is price. The retailer then has multiple choice all competing on price. A simple downward spiral for the majority. Just look at the wasted investment into small packing operations and the number of labels (brands) that rise and fall in no time at all. 

 

Please show me where the value creation is to be had with multiple versions of the same product all competing on price?

 

 

 

 

 

 

So.... you have 50 ton in your shed no bulk buyers no future guarantee of sale new season crop coming on....guess what time to pack test your luck ...just maybe you might get your needed 7.5kg to survive or option 2 approach existing packers who offer 3.50 kg knowing full well its below production cost ...??? This is not going to work either way and small and big operators are measuring the string and planning there exit...with no sign or motion of a turn around what are the choices .....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you could be pleased you don't have 80 tonne in the shed and the mother of all kanuka crop on the way

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, yesbut said:

Well you could be pleased you don't have 80 tonne in the shed and the mother of all kanuka crop on the way

Yep I think by April this year the situation will be worse ... than today, heard of hives 100$ including gst double brood on pallets if that's not a bail out sign or industry collapse sign what is? I came into the industry 24 years ago ish first 500 hives cost me 100 plus gst double brood box and 2 supers honey price 3.15kg ......

  • Good Info 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Nuc_man said:

Yep I think by April this year the situation will be worse ... than today, heard of hives 100$ including gst double brood on pallets if that's not a bail out sign or industry collapse sign what is? I came into the industry 24 years ago ish first 500 hives cost me 100 plus gst double brood box and 2 supers honey price 3.15kg ......

 

The ones selling may be the only ones being realistic.  I have mentioned this before but what I don't get are the bk's who are just going on like they always have, putting all their resources and effort into getting a large crop of bush/multi-floral, when there are drums of that in the shed unsold and unsaleable, and all their new crop is going to do is add to the over-supply.  

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CraBee said:

 

The ones selling may be the only ones being realistic.  I have mentioned this before but what I don't get are the bk's who are just going on like they always have, putting all their resources and effort into getting a large crop of bush/multi-floral, when there are drums of that in the shed unsold and unsaleable, and all their new crop is going to do is add to the over-supply.  

Hitting the nail on the head....

Midlands started there beekeeping operation because the average age of the beekeeper owner at the time was 60plus and Duncan could see pollination issues , these issues will come back with reinforcements along with disease issues ....

 

Share this post


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

So.... you have 50 ton in your shed no bulk buyers no future guarantee of sale new season crop coming on....guess what time to pack test your luck ...just maybe you might get your needed 7.5kg to survive or option 2 approach existing packers who offer 3.50 kg knowing full well its below production cost ...??? This is not going to work either way and small and big operators are measuring the string and planning there exit...with no sign or motion of a turn around what are the choices .....

Just my opinion. But if you believe you are going to pack 250g or 500g jars, labeled, packed in shipping cartons and sell them to retail in any significant volume and clear $7.50 per kg, then go for it - fill your boots. That is before your standard MPI compliance, UMF licence, (SQF if you want to supply significant retailers) Halal, Kosher. Processing plant and equipment, finished goods stock holding. Weekly or even next day delivery bla, bla, etc etc

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Adam Boot said:

I don't entirely agree with your opinion. 

Strong brand = more sales = more purchases of honey = benefit to beekeeper

Are you suggesting that beekeepers want to share the cost of creating and marketing brands and the risks associated? 

I'm in the Netherlands at the moment.  We went to a supermarket.  In the fruit section there were 2 kiwi fruit for sale. 

 

One was green the other gold.  The green kiwi fruit had no brand name and the packet was filled with fruit from south America.  The gold kiwi fruit was packed and owned by Zespri. 

 

So the supermarket brought the cheapest green fruit yet had to pay up for the gold fruit.  As a kiwifruit grower which coloured fruit should I grow?  In nz if I want to buy a 1ha plot of kiwifruit which cost more to buy? The gold one because they are the brand owners and price setters.  If however I did not own a stake in Zespri however.  The managers of Zespri would want to source the cheapest fruit for their brand, so let's source it from south America.

 

So beekeepers are the same it is the brand ownership that creates value and ensure it will be their honey in the jar. 

 

Risk/return.  Without a stake in the brand it is 100% risk of no sales and longterm low return.

 

Brands are the number one rule of being success in business. 

 

I go on and on about it simply because it is the most important thing. 

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, flash4cash said:

I'm in the Netherlands at the moment.  We went to a supermarket.  In the fruit section there were 2 kiwi fruit for sale. 

 

One was green the other gold.  The green kiwi fruit had no brand name and the packet was filled with fruit from south America.  The gold kiwi fruit was packed and owned by Zespri. 

 

So the supermarket brought the cheapest green fruit yet had to pay up for the gold fruit.  As a kiwifruit grower which coloured fruit should I grow?  In nz if I want to buy a 1ha plot of kiwifruit which cost more to buy? The gold one because they are the brand owners and price setters.  If however I did not own a stake in Zespri however.  The managers of Zespri would want to source the cheapest fruit for their brand, so let's source it from south America.

 

So beekeepers are the same it is the brand ownership that creates value and ensure it will be their honey in the jar. 

 

Risk/return.  Without a stake in the brand it is 100% risk of no sales and longterm low return.

 

Brands are the number one rule of being success in business. 

 

I go on and on about it simply because it is the most important thing. 

How much was the kiwis? 

Probably Green wasn't a Zespri item? 

It's the amount of value put into a product that potentially gives excellent returns. And how that product is protected from rip offs. Growing Gold requires substantial capital, and is protected. 

If N.Z patents Manuka naming rights, and Beekeepers continue paying farmer royalties, then the value is high. 

How many excellent products are created that within a short period of time gets poorly copied? Devaluing all.

It seems many beeks want to Add value and create so many very similar Manuka items. I see what Mr Boot and Co are doing. 

 

2 hours ago, yesbut said:

Well you could be pleased you don't have 80 tonne in the shed and the mother of all kanuka crop on the way

So true, @CraBee also. 

When you have geared your business to Chase and comit to K/Muka what do you do? Very hard to change strategy. 

A business I know is shifting hundreds of hives south and not wanting a big crop.... Go figure. All those hives gotta go some place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Adam Boot said:

Just my opinion. But if you believe you are going to pack 250g or 500g jars, labeled, packed in shipping cartons and sell them to retail in any significant volume and clear $7.50 per kg, then go for it - fill your boots. That is before your standard MPI compliance, UMF licence, (SQF if you want to supply significant retailers) Halal, Kosher. Processing plant and equipment, finished goods stock holding. Weekly or even next day delivery bla, bla, etc etc

 

But you are only describing the approach to the market you take at your scale.   There are other smaller, less costly, more profitable approaches.

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/11/2019 at 1:37 PM, flash4cash said:

Yes however the beekeeper needs a direct stake in the brand without the brand they will always remain poor, with no long term security.

 

The brand owner is always the most powerful player in the game. It means sweet FA benefit if midland's honey has a strong brand.  Their owners, who ever they are will want all the benefit to go to them. 

 

Until beekeepers smarten up, they will go round and round in circles. 

 

This seems very much to be looking over the fence and saying the grass is greener. Or looking up the vertical integration line and saying the next step up makes more money than me. 

And that is without knowing and/or underestimating the costs, risks, knowledge, time and $ investment required. 

So many NZ beekeepers, made wealthy over ~20-5 years ago, looked enviously at the packers/marketers and said "I can do that too. Why should they make the big $ from my honey" So they "invested" in a packing plant and/or their own labels and tried to DIY it...how many of these many beekeeper brands have become or ever looked like becoming the next Comvita or Manuka Health (the so-called most powerful players in the game)?

 

The brand owner is not the most powerful player in the game. The supermarkets are. They have the pick of the dozens or hundreds of brands begging for the privilege of getting on those shelves, and can dictate prices to them. They have the lowest risk levels: if one or many doesn't work, there are plenty others to take their place; even if the whole category doesn't work, it is balanced by all the other categories. 

12 minutes ago, CraBee said:

 

But you are only describing the approach to the market you take at your scale.   There are other smaller, less costly, more profitable approaches.

 

 

I've seen some of these smaller, less costly approaches. How could they be less costly? Let's see: by cutting corners, not doing what they were obligated to do, yes some had dodgy practices, and many if not all don't count the real and total costs of their inputs. None of these are recipes for long term success, and are not scalable or sustainable. 

 

The way to be less costly production has been indicated in the Chicken industry discussion above @Ted: huge volume utilization of fixed cost capital asssets, minimal labour and variable cost inputs, high levels of automation, virtually guaranteed demand and minimal time spent on sales/marketing, just concentrate on and do what you're best at...

 

Re. "more profitable": While in theory there could be a profitable neiche somewhere, but in reality NZ honey products are very easily imitated (by others in the NZ honey industry), so a neiche doesn't remain profitable for long. 

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we have going on right now is desperation.  Most beekeepers are dead financially.  It makes it make no sense to be another brand selling honey in a jar.  Do not do that; that is dumb.  Race to the bottom. 

 

Building a brand require significant financial investment and time. It takes years. 

 

I disagree that the supermarket is the most powerful player. Comvita has the best brand for Manuka.  If the supermarket does not stock it then they lose sales.  That why they can charge the most for the same product in a different jar. International customers want Comvita, not Bob's manuka. 

 

NZ needs one strong brand, probably Comvita.  That is it. We all invest and supply (and not over supply ) in that. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

 

This seems very much to be looking over the fence and saying the grass is greener. Or looking up the vertical integration line and saying the next step up makes more money than me. 

And that is without knowing and/or underestimating the costs, risks, knowledge, time and $ investment required. 

So many NZ beekeepers, made wealthy over ~20-5 years ago, looked enviously at the packers/marketers and said "I can do that too. Why should they make the big $ from my honey" So they "invested" in a packing plant and/or their own labels and tried to DIY it...how many of these many beekeeper brands have become or ever looked like becoming the next Comvita or Manuka Health (the so-called most powerful players in the game)?

 

The brand owner is not the most powerful player in the game. The supermarkets are. They have the pick of the dozens or hundreds of brands begging for the privilege of getting on those shelves, and can dictate prices to them. They have the lowest risk levels: if one or many doesn't work, there are plenty others to take their place; even if the whole category doesn't work, it is balanced by all the other categories. 

 

I've seen some of these smaller, less costly approaches. How could they be less costly? Let's see: by cutting corners, not doing what they were obligated to do, yes some had dodgy practices, and many if not all don't count the real and total costs of their inputs. None of these are recipes for long term success, and are not scalable or sustainable. 

 

The way to be less costly production has been indicated in the Chicken industry discussion above @Ted: huge volume utilization of fixed cost capital asssets, minimal labour and variable cost inputs, high levels of automation, virtually guaranteed demand and minimal time spent on sales/marketing, just concentrate on and do what you're best at...

 

Re. "more profitable": While in theory there could be a profitable neiche somewhere, but in reality NZ honey products are very easily imitated (by others in the NZ honey industry), so a neiche doesn't remain profitable for long. 

 

 

That is before your standard MPI compliance, UMF licence, (SQF if you want to supply significant retailers) Halal, Kosher. Processing plant and equipment, finished goods stock holding. Weekly or even next day delivery bla, bla, etc etc

I was referring to this post.  An extraction and packing facility is actually not that costly, but it can be if you have deep pockets and want all the bells and whistles.  

Once you've got together the 50+ documents MPI want as part of your RMP, it is pretty simple.  The twice annual audits are the costly part.

SQF - No, not the market

Halal and Kosher - please....

Holding finished stock - warehouse space.

Delivery - well, come on, that is not hard.

 

Here is my question again:  If having a brand is so terrible, why did Midlands create one?

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...