Jump to content

Rob's BP

Members
  • Content Count

    331
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Seller statistics

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

Rob's BP last won the day on March 21

Rob's BP had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

218 Excellent

About Rob's BP

  • Rank
    Pupa

Converted

  • Beekeeping Experience
    Honey Marketer

Location

  • Location
    Tauranga

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @Alistair I assume Adam is talking of the Honey Co-op formerly based around Timaru, that owned the Hollands, Sweet Meadow and other brands. The key person of which, and many suppliers switched to Midlands when the Co-op finally fell apart. I had some involvement with the Co-op post demise and while I can't discuss details, let's just say it was far from the ideals of a co-op as postulated by some on this site recently, or a well run company despite the best efforts of some. Without quoting those before in this thread, I'll answer them generally by saying that I largely agree with Adam. A co-op seems to be desired by those who feel disenfranchised by the current system. In reality a co-op seeks to replicate and add to the existing brands, but doesn't create additional value to justify the required commitment of financial resources. If it gets off the ground, all it will achieve in the marketplace is to add additional brands, and competition, to the existing market. How will it find it's place in the market? Generally by starting near the bottom(!), causing more competition, and more choice for the supermarkets to play off against each other, thereby lowering prices for all. Also note, given the "constant bickering" and disagreement of current and historical beekeeping in NZ, how do you expect a group of beekeepers to agree on enough, and put enough money into it, then there's the issue of appropriate skills and resourcing. Who's going to put the time and commitment into all aspects of this? This will take millions of $ and tens of thousands of hours to do even a basic operation with a reasonable modicum of success. Part of the reason the Honey Co-op fell apart was because they were a group of many beeks many (possibly all) of whom were looking out for their own interests first. I heard more than one say they would supply part of their crop/what they had to to the Co-op, but would sell to other commercial buyers for higher prices. Also, skills: while the suppliers/owners are experts at producing drummed honey, they don't necessarily have the skill set and additional time and resources to create and run a successful manufacturing operation and the marketing and sales side of the business. This can't be done part time while you're looking after your bees in the back blocks... Who has the millions of $ to fund this, not just the initial funds, especially coming after the past several years of financial difficulty. The beeks involved will need at least several years of accepting lower returns investing into this. Apart from the Canadian example written earlier in the thread, do co-ops have a good track record? Not in this country, look at Fonterra's track record of destroying farmer wealth for example, and compare that to the privately owned dairy companies. While a co-op is great left wing ideology, history shows it is a great way to create negative equity and below average returns. Private ownership and professional organisations have a much better record of creating wealth. Compare the results of the Honey Co-op, which had a historical and first-starter's advantage over Midland Honey. If disenfranchised beeks want skin in the game, and to own part of a larger enterprise, you'll probably do better financially by buying shares in some other company e.g. Midlands or Manuka Health if you could, otherwise Comvita or Capilano, otherwise other investments Sorry to burst the dream, but while the best side of it is wonderful in theory, unless financed and resourced properly this could be another nightmare, that creates competition, and drags down prices, returns, standards and reputations.
  2. Hi CraBee, MPI and Govt significantly hurt the industry. Their delay after delay to publish their standard meant the whole industry was on hold for ~1-2 years. Then MPI came out with a standard that wasn't a standard i.e. got modified. Uncertainty over product status meant buyers weren't confident, demand decreased, product stockpiled, prices dropped. This plus the extra and long drawn out attention meant news and uncertainty filtered out to all and sundry, affecting retailer and consumer confidence, therefore decreasing demand and pricing. Lastly re. the standard, I think we're all agreed now that it is not accurate enough. Conventional thinking is: Only Manuka honey has DHA/MGO. Only the best and/or purest Manuka honey has the highest MGO (containing anything else would dilute it down). So how can much of the highest MGO Manuka honey not pass MPI's standard? Something wrong with the standard that's what. So beeks that used to get top $ for top MGO now get much, much less for it. Govt should have just done what the now Deputy PM said before the election "Just adopt the UMFHA standard", quick, simple, scientific, already adopted by 80% of the Manuka industry. Support this rather than erode confidence in Manuka, UMF and the industry. Poor weather over the past 3 years, and overstocking has resulted in reduced hive yields, this and the preceding point have been a double whammy. So, overall the gloss has gone off the industry. It is less not more than it was. By trying to 'help' it become a $1.2b industry, MPI/Govt's help actually helped it go backwards, certainly in the short term. Agree they had to set or support a standard, but... As for consumers and markets. In general, there isn't the hysteria/mystique/intrigue that there once was when it was the latest, new/hot thing and (some of) the rich just had to have it. But on the other hand, Manuka has become more widely accepted and written about as factual by more and more in the mass media/lifestyle publications/social media. So it is trickling down from the richest towards those who are well off. We're recently seeing Manuka start to get acceptance and distribution into large format retailers in the States, so taking it's availability and awareness (but not price) to another level, and reducing reliance on Asia, especially China. Awareness, distribution and availability has spread out down the wealth triangle. Australian (and others in future?) "Manuka" is an issue. They can plant/grow/harvest much more leptospermum than we can. Theirs tastes worse than ours does. If allowed to piggyback off NZ's, with very loose standards both of definition and what they write on labels, different taste, higher MGO (in some cases), higher volume, it's not good for us. Let's support and hope UMFHA's Mānuka Honey Appellation Society's efforts starting several years ago succeed. This would result in protection, higher value, demand and prestige for NZ Manuka. So overall we're in a different phase of product life cycle and market maturity.
  3. Re. the many references in this thread to the MPI stuffup...before the election Winston Peters said "New Zealand First would scrap "MPI's wrecking ball," apologise to the entire industry for National's stuff-up, and adopt Unique Manuka Factor asap." Then he got elected as Deputy PM and...he's done the exact opposite! As MP for Northland, you'd think he'd be particularly interested in helping this industry. Time to step up Winston [and no I'm not playing party politics. Just disappointed the one politician who said he would sort this out, and has/had the power and opportunity to sort it out hasn't. Instead he adopted or accepted what he called a stuff up]
  4. Which is why it's often called "Oligo", and one brand was calling it "mini Oligo". Maybe try creating a product ad like this Mini Oligo Bifidus ad
  5. Hmmm, I take issue with the phrase and/or thinking that Honeydew has "never been promoted". Comvita created a monofloral SKU and featured the naturally occurring oligosaccharides (Oligo's were a popular thing in Asia at the time), gave it a good chance but it never took off and is sadly no longer with us...
  6. Shows the results one can draw from incorrect data. It's that Airborne graph with estimated production of almost 30,000 tonnes that has played into his hobby horse topic of over supply leading to market crash. Secondly, saying that Manuka prices could drop by a minimum of 50%. For those who have experienced a huge price drop of non-Manuka honeys, how would you like another price drop of at least 50% on the Manuka honey too! If that happened we'd never see the current prices ever again. Rather than some doing very well, and many doing well, NZ beekeeping would become little more than a subsistence industry. No, we do not want that phrase of his to gain circulation in media and on social media. There are other points that are incorrect, but those are the two biggies IMO.
  7. Greetings all, The economist and analyst Rodney Dickens has published an erroneous opinion piece yesterday that draws some real scare mongering extrapolations and statements. I won't list them or link the piece because we don't want them to get around. If they do get picked up by the media and get further amplified, it would be catastrophic to those involved in any way with the Manuka industry. Per his request, I've emailed him directly about this requesting the piece to be removed and rewritten with insiders' help. Feel free to search it out and also email him directly. I'd include his email address here but the mods will probably remove it. This is a potentially damaging opinion piece that should be removed and rewritten with accuracy.
  8. @Adam Boot Adam, I find it ironic and inconsistent branding when I see advertisements for PURITI that are all pure clean white and expensive gold, and then some ads have the crappiest, oldest, decrepit beehives (ok maybe a little OTT, but you get the point). Sure does seem inconsistent and incongruous. Might be a point of good feedback for ya. Sure you'll have a view and response supporting your position, but perhaps something for consideration. As @Philbee was indicating (quote below), the public/consumers etc. expect PURITI should be produced in the best way in all respects.
  9. Anyone checked out the image's geotags? ??
  10. And yet there are more beekeeping enterprises and beeks than ever. The largest firm only has about 5% of the total number of hives, others of the largest firms only have 2-3%, proving this is an industry with a very diversified producer base. This is the exact opposite of what the quote said: "leading to a small number of large players rather than a large number of small players". Personally I think the writers underestimated the effect of the low barriers to entry.
  11. Historically (and as a generalisation) Comvita's dividend has been less than bank's interest rates. Shareholders would have done better putting funds on term deposit. The shareprice fluctuations are a different beast, and yous takes your chances with that one.
  12. How many other beekeeping operations could afford this? "Instead of delivering a $4.5 million profit, the beekeeping divisions posted a $6.2m after-tax loss."
  13. Jeez @Merk and others, why some of the beekeepers on this site such knockers and tall poppy cutters? Here is another company/organisation trying their best, within the law even if it's very close to the edge of the law, to make and maximise Manuka honey sales. Sales that drive purchasing and prices of honey that beekeepers on this site sell and benefit from. While I'm at it, another favorite target for the knockers is UMFHA. Where would this industry be without the huge effort and investment UMFHA has put in, that we all benefit from, even the freeloading non-UMFHA members and suppliers. Beeks would be getting a lot less, and nowhere near >$100/kg for their best honey if it wasn't for UMFHA. Another example are the people on this site who every now and again trot out the mantra that our honey is of no use internally, is no better than any other honey internally, there is no evidence blah, blah, blah. Giving ammunition for critics and undecided retailers and customers to use. If we're not positive and supporting our product and industry then who should? They're like a person sitting on the branch of a tree sawing or chopping off the branch they're sitting on! And yes by the way there is published scientific research showing benefits of Manuka honey for internal issues. I've posted two such articles on this site and there are others too. Read and respond before trotting out the negative mantra again please. And haven't you ever met anyone in person who has testified to some internal benefit from consuming Manuka honey? If you haven't, you need to talk with our consumers and customers more. I've met at least dozens of people with such testimonies, and know of doctors who recommend it for stomach ulcers. What we, the industry have done is unprecedented and without comparison in the world of honey. NZ honey sells on average for many times more than the next most expensive commercial honey in the world (French honey, due to French Lavender Honey). And then many of the very ones who have benefited are quick to knock the people/companies/organisations that help get them their benefit...unbelievable. Give the knocking a rest, and let/help/support these guys help us and our industry do better. There, said my piece, now waiting for the knockers to respond and knock me for knocking their negativity.
  14. Just clarification re. the above. The science I've seen is that heating (which is probably what you're referring to as "spoiling") only accelerates the DHA/MGO conversion along its potential curve. It doesn't increase the honey's maximum UMF/MGO potential. Essentially it ages the honey, so it reaches peak UMF earlier and then begins the decline earlier.
  15. Appreciate your point Tom. The win-win seems to be to get a good (i.e. better) MPI standard and apply to all Manuka honey. Amazes me that high UMF honey can be classified as non-Manuka. We don't get high UMF from very dilute Manuka. If not from Manuka then where does MPI think high UMF comes from???!!!
×
×
  • Create New...