Jump to content

Adam Boot

Members
  • Content Count

    430
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Seller statistics

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

Adam Boot last won the day on December 21 2019

Adam Boot had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

322 Excellent

1 Follower

About Adam Boot

  • Rank
    Pupa

Converted

  • Beekeeping Experience
    Honey Marketer

Location

  • Location
    Auckland

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Swansea - perfect example and there are many others. Just think of the opportunities to ship bulk to AUS and blend with a little jellybush before you on ship to another part of the world. The only real protection NZ Manuka product has at present is the UMF quality mark.
  2. There are many ways to support our own industries. My preference is for these type of funds to be independent. There is a tendency for a marketing objective to be behind the altruism when individual companies are involved. The best way to protect beekeeping is to protect the integrity of the finished product from adulteration and ensure jars of honey are actually full of honey. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-03/capilano-and-supermarkets-accused-of-selling-fake-honey/10187628 We also need to think and look long term when we consider the protection of our own honey industries. Comvita and Capilano already work together and created a joint venture. https://www.comvita.co.nz/_assets/Investors/Financial-News/Year-ended-31-June-2017/Comvita-and-Capilano-collaboration-update16-08-09.pdf Ironically the New Zealand honey industry is now in a global battle to protect the valuable Manuka name. It seems we like to shoot ourselves in the foot far to often.
  3. Goran raises and important issue that effects the NZ honey industry in general. We are all competing with foreign manufacture because the greatest proportion of industry growth can only come from export. Effectively we compete and sell on a world stage. Fake honey from Chains and other countries seeps through the EU and North America and get blended with real honey and drags the value down. As fast a testing methods catch up the chemical make up of the fake takes another step forward. When something is cheap there are always those that sniff a dollar and turn a blind eye. We may not be able to import honey to NZ but there are plenty of NZ producers that move their honey of shore for blending, processing and packing. This is not simply for any potential lower cost labour savings. It allows NZ honey to be blended with cheeper non NZ honey, It allows people to avoid New Zealand's stricter label an quality compliance and in the case of Manuka allows people to avoid the MPI Manuka Honey Definition. It has been said before and remains a truth - There are plenty of "cowboys' in this industry.
  4. Unfortunately this is the reality. We buy many many tonnes of Manuka each month and are always looking for more if good quality and priced competitively. The difficulty with 100kg is that it is not worth the time, effort, paperwork and testing cost. Proportionately each kg becomes more expensive. $35/36 may work for 10+ but would need to be in the tonnes quantity.
  5. 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? That is a good question. However the starting position for Midlands was different. Midlands were already a large scale packer of OEM private label product. They already had the facility and the bells and whistles in place before embarking on their own brand creation. Brands added security to an existing product mix. A gap in the market was identified before developing a brand to fill the gap. They had the IP within the team to execute a brand or brands with a long term strategy - years not months. In my opinion this is more complex. C are a class act that made some errors that only became obvious with hindsight. Large scale vertical integration is often a sensible move forward in many industries. The integration becomes harder the more diverse the skill sets between the integrated entities. Industrial large scale food manufacturing is a very different skill set to farming (bee keeping). Add a fickle crop such as Manuka and the issue increases. The security they had as a honey buyer came from many and multiple suppliers across many regions without the fixed cost associated with owning. As owners, they cannot achieve the same risk mitigation across supply/quality/cost. Their own crop will never supply all their own requirements and thus to greater or lesser extents they still must go to market to fulfil Honey requirements each season. At the same time, they have acquired the addition fixed costs of Bee keeping. As they acquire more hives they do not necessarily acquire or retain the IP at the same rate. In my opinion their average kg’s per hive will probably be less than a good Bee Keeping operation of 4-6,000 hives. By owning the hives, they also have a commitment to use all the honey, even the non- Manuka and grades or Multiflora that do not fit their product range. Of course, they can sell of the honey they do not require but only at market rate – if they can sell it? In my opinion the Brand is a different story. Though very strong in China the brand has been hijacked by the Daigou channel, becoming a brand on continual discount and promotion. This makes it difficult for major domestic retailers to commit to. Once you brand has become synonymous with discounting you become pigeon hold. This can be compounded if your company name is the same as your brand, especially if you are a publically traded company. That said if there is a company in this industry capable of developing an additional brand or brands and having the means and distribution networks to support them to success it would be the Big C.
  6. 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
  7. 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?
  8. 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?
  9. I reads as 'the Manuka industry' not the Australian Manuka industry
  10. In western economies there is always % of savvy consumers with disposable income that choose products based on more that price alone. French Brie can win over the German equivalent in Germany. English Cheddar can win over a Belgian equivalent. French Champaign will win over as sparkling Spanish Chardonnay. A % of consumers will pay for quality product from NZ. It is up to us to define that % and grow it. NZ only produces 1% of global honey consumption. We should be able to sell all we produce once we have re established markets and defined our points of difference. Very good point. We have recently developed a range of Naturally flavoured clover honey. Caramel, Vanilla, Orange, Lime, Lemon and Ginger. This is directly aimed as an alternative spread, dip, topping to 'Processed' sugar based jams and preserves or high fat spreads such as peanut butter.
  11. The supermarket does not reduce it's % margin. The $ dollar margin reduces as their buy price reduces.
  12. Indeed a few common sense gems. A lot of excuses for their own poor business model and a smattering of complete and utter bull - Great article!
  13. HaHa.........I am flattered I would even be in the running James
  14. I think it is 'Kalara' Manuka does not sell itself at the right price without strong marketing and a point of difference. The industry is plagued by mediocre product/brands, Australian junk product, product blended off shore to avoid MPI definition and counterfeit product. Many companies are working incredibly hard to re open markets for the Non Manuka honey. There is traction and success but the process is a long one. I am not saying that your marketing idea is not a good one but what were you intending to do with a couple of hundred K and how far would that get you and your project? There needs to be a plane with objectives and outcomes if people are to invest.
×
×
  • Create New...