“Beefing” up marketing of lamb

Press, 28 March 1980, Page 16

“Beefing” up marketing of lamb

The Meat Board has plans to strengthen lamb marketing in the United Kingdom. They include hopefully bringing together three farmer-owned co-oper-atives to work more closelv.

The retiring chairman of the board, Mr Hilgendorf, told the annual meeting of the electoral committee of the board this week that they were not satisfied that marketing in this most important area of the world was as good as it should be. It was clear that the constitution of the retail

trade, particularly in frozen meat, had been gradually' changing and the rate of change had accelerated over recent years.’ Probably little more than 40 per cent was now sold through individual retailers. The estimate was that 33 to 35 per cent was sold in supermarkets, 7 or 8 per cent in freezer centres and 17 or IS per cent

through multiple stores. The result was that a much larger proportion of New Zealand lamb was now bought by bigger buyers with more buying clout.

Unfortunately, said Mr Hilgendorf, this increase in buying strength had not been matched by any increase in selling, much less marketing strength. A much smaller proportion was. now sold by companies which had proper storage and distributive facilities which were de-i signed to operate on a predetermined plan over the whole country and over the whole year.

“In fact we have the picture of a stronger

bench of buyers and a weaker bench of sellers than we had 20 years ago,” said Mr Hilgendorf. In addition, and closely allied to this situation, was the fact that a larger proportion of meat was sold straight from the ship’s side direct to supermarket chains or other big users. In itself there was nothing wrong with this; the more directly the meat reached the consumer the better. The drawback was that some companies used this method for a particularly large part of their trade and had made little effort to set up a proper distributive system covering much more than London and perhaps the Midlands. This method of trading could be very profitable for the company concerned but could have a most unfortunate effect on over-all prices at a time of an even temporary over-supply. It was true that by serving only a small part of the market in an unsophisticated

way and moving in and out of the market money could be made from selling lamb by individiuals. but it was not for the benefit of the over-all industry. With this position at the back of its mind, over the last year, Mr Hilgendorf said’ that the board had had talks with the three farmer-owned cooperatives, who together owned a very substantial amount of lamb, to see if there was a way in which they could come closer together or at least co-ordi-nate their marketing operations. Some of their more long-sighted board members and administrators saw merit in the idea. With two alternative

New Zealand-owned outlets in existence Mr Hilgendorf suggested that L there would be a better! opportunity to persuade'i other sellers to operate'; through one or the other. - A The board was also anx-j ious to ' encourage, and'; where necessary assist,’’ companies to set up or ex-) tend storage arid cutting - in the United Kingdom of ’■ elsewhere. Further down the lineand in spite of the “hide- <- ous” complications, he said he believed that New ■■ Zealand companies should | ! be looking at participation ) in the retail trade, either’;' through the ownership of t' butcher shops or part of a supermarket'.' chain. •'<