JAPAN-N.Z. TRADE-II Criticism Of N.Z. Marketing Efforts

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30044, 31 January 1963, Page 5

JAPAN-N.Z. TRADE-II Criticism Of N.Z. Marketing Efforts

(W

R. E. BLAZEY,

Tokyo eomspoitetent eft -Tbe Frost”]

TOKYO, January 28.

Japan and Asia represent natural and in many ways complementary markets for New Zealand. Expansion, however, is limited by a number of important factors.

Apart from Japan nearly aH the countries in the area have serious balance of payments and financial difficulties and can only offer small “class” markets or undeveloped mass markets.

Secondly, there are throughout the area real differences in taste and living habits, political and racial affinities which will preclude any extensive interchanges or “interdependence” as it is now called. Thirdly, there is the intrusion of New Zealand’s great and powerful competitor in many lines, the United States, into the area, supporting its trading and surplus disposal policies with overriding political and military objectives.

Dairy products, especially butter, processed cheese and milk powders (which together with meat, cotton ana beef are given price supports under the United States C.C.C. programme) are trust affected at the moment by The United States surplus disposals. The entire position is affected by America’s economic strategy in granting—usually on “buy American” terms—aid, investments, industrial and personnel tie-ups which bring more and more Asian trade and finance into the orbit of what the Asian nationalists call "American economic imperialism." New Zealand must also face stiff competition from Australian and Canadian produce in some lines. During 1900-61 there was talk in certain New Zealand circles of. marketing New Zealand produce competitively in Japan. Joint Effort Proposed A Japanese meat importers’ association (San Sui Kai) proposal to set up a joint Japan-Australia-New Zealand meat promotion body in Japan to get mutton established was rejected out of hand by New Zealand. The New Zealand Meat Producers’ Board appointed a former Australian journalist employed by a Japanese newspaper as its part-time liaison officer in Japan for public relations and advertising. The Meat Board also launched a twice-weekly “mutton a la carte” programme on Japanese television at a cost of around £20,000 annually. In this correspondent's opinion, the board is not spending this money wisely. The programme is appearing at offpeak hours and has had little success in weaning the Japanese away from their traditional pork, chicken and beef dishes.

An executive of the Japanese advertising agency commissioned to produce the programmes and buy time and space in media complained that the budget was inadequate even for a "minimal mass media” appeal, as envisioned by the client. The Japanese meat importers, with the aid of toe same agency, had suggested a minimum of £BO,OOO a year, with the Japanese to meet one third or one-half of the cost, for a start

It is toe same story with New Zealand newspaper advertising—too little money, spread too thinly. The meat advertisements are placed in a small (approximate circulation 30,000) daily paper, published in English, bought mainly by resident foreigners and tourists. Neither of toe two larger English language papers, the “Japan Times” (circulation 44,000) nor the “Mainichi Daily News" <40,000) was chosen. More important, toe whole of the vernacular Japanese press has been by-passed. Sasser Campaign Some criticism of Australian livestock and meat was made in 1900-61 in articles written for foe Japanese press by public relations agents and circulated by word of mouth in Japan. Korea, and Okinawa. Individuate not sympathetic to this “competitive** approach were smeared, and inreeponsibte statements about a “toade war” between New Zealand and Australia were made. A representative of the New, Zeeland yeas. was openly attacked by foreign beneficiaries of New Zealand advertising and pubHc relations expenditure. Deputations warted on the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs to seek the deportation of an accredited correspondent

fiateely described as an “undestabbfte foreigner.’’ The New Zealand Government had to take dtecipUnary action before fate ugly cemneian ceased. In the broader objective of developing New Zealand’s trade in Asia, any sugpeation of “trade wars” or “going it alone” must be discouraged as unrealistic and dangerous. New Zealand could ant in fact, win any war against anybody and its vital trade intereete can only be safeguarded by etose co-operation with its Comnwnwealto partners. The hietttv successful ktternatfonal Wool Secretariat could be taken as a model for the joint promotion of a bulk primary product in world markets. Whether Britain eventuaßy goes into the European Common Market or not, the position of the Commonwealth vis-a-vis Europe and America will be weaker relatively. Europe. America, and Japan SSfa“ Even SSnnStoti? oped, densely bnntdtaed. •♦hungry** fide' waste lands were to bn "whnssia. for isienpli, has taige arsse of vfagfe bufa

land to Sumatra, Borneo, the Celebes, and West Irian. Thera need be no shortage of food in the world, bat there is a shortage of money to buy M. Experience has shows*—for instance, in Japan— theft people wiH start buying manufactured luxuries even before their bellied ore

properly filled. New Zealend is now an efficient producer at certain pcoivafai. To bold Ito own it mutt also become an efficient seller, employing its beet men to keep its produce moving to markets all over the woriri. Tbe fail and free flow of information, vigorous criticism, and the stimulus of new ideas mutt be considered essential factors in promoting enterprise and curbing the excesses and abuses which grow out at ignorance and secrecy.

(Concluded)