Arla

[Farmer1001]

Hey up @Chips you Arla organic boys have rattled a few cages!

http://www.freerangedairy.org/2017/07/whats-wrong-organic-milk/

https://www.fginsight.com/news/i-re...nic-free-range-milk-claim-disappointing-22873

EDIT
I thought @runny egg wanted consumers to "trade up" but seem they have been "trading down" and Arla wanted to put a stop to that. Fair play to them!

Yes no point in bringing out a new choice if it stagnates total demand or trades consumers down. Anyone who has read my previous thoughts will know i stated very clearly that FR could deliver a net industry benefit if promoted and delivered in a responsible way, I also highlighted the challenge to "organic" to maintain their market and not lose them. But instead of our great industry learning from our colleagues in pork, chicken and eggs, British dairy has got into an argument about who is more "free range" than the other, an argument that serves no (consumer) purpose other than to satisfy the desire (of producers) to kick the sh*t out of each other again.

When it comes to "standards" the fact there is no legal definition means you can all write your own standards or all use the term on your packaging, ND claims the moral high ground as he has developed stds and made his org the self certified industry leaders, whereas Arla simply did what everyone can do in the absence of a legal definition. TBH if any retailer came out with their own brand FR option, copied and pasted the PP standards (and derogations) but applied them to 185/190 or 200 days etc then where does this leave PP? After all PP stds allow a 14 day transition period either end of the season and the ability to house in times of extreme weather... therefore 180 days simply means (in layman terms) "cows must graze for 180 days/nights/yr unless ground conditions, weather conditions or welfare make this impossible" which is pretty much the unwritten rule all grazing based producers work to but without a stated 180 day target.

But I do question the way Arla have thought this through - what happens if they fail to win back consumers or stop the loss of consumers to FR? They (Arla) have played their FR card by tagging it on the organic bottles so where would they go next? Well I dont doubt for one minute that if this happened then you would see Arla bring out their own "FR" choice, but do they then drop FR from organic or have 2 FR options that confuses consumers over the difference between FR and FR organic? Arla will then be left having to either undermine one or the other, or perhaps they take a middle ground route and promote them both side by side on the merits of each - now theres a novel idea?? What if we have Great British Milk, Great British Free Range Milk and Great British Organic Milk.
BTW - Arla havent just labelled their organic milk as FR to kill off this valuable initiative the industry could benefit from, they have slashed the price as well.

And whilst the FR argument goes on we ignore the fact the FR is a "value" but there are many many more that appeal to consumers of milk and will absolutely trade consumers up.

 

[Farmer1001]

This is the actual performance of the egg market. The net result is that from 2006 to 2016 the TOTAL egg market grew by approx 20% and the TOTAL farm gate price grew by 50%! The market sectors saw enriched and barn eggs drop 12%, organic flatlined and FR grew by 112% so proves room for all, demand for all.

Dont know about you but I think Brit dairy can only dream about this sort of growth, because whilst our industry beats each other up and our industry reps enjoy it, then we dont focus on the opportunities.

 

[Daniel]

This is the actual performance of the egg market. The net result is that from 2006 to 2016 the TOTAL egg market grew by approx 20% and the TOTAL farm gate price grew by 50%! The market sectors saw enriched and barn eggs drop 12%, organic flatlined and FR grew by 112% so proves room for all, demand for all.

Dont know about you but I think Brit dairy can only dream about this sort of growth, because whilst our industry beats each other up and our industry reps enjoy it, then we dont focus on the opportunities.



View attachment 549926 View attachment 549928

Haven't followed the thread but the egg market is probably heading for a bloodbath, all the talk is of uncontrolled expansion, particularly in Wales where I believe they get grant money. Coupled to manoeuvring by the main packers to grab a their slice of the market as cage eggs are phased out.

The packers will screw the producers without a second thought to pay for their expansion.

 

[Chips]

Yes no point in bringing out a new choice if it stagnates total demand or trades consumers down. Anyone who has read my previous thoughts will know i stated very clearly that FR could deliver a net industry benefit if promoted and delivered in a responsible way, I also highlighted the challenge to "organic" to maintain their market and not lose them. But instead of our great industry learning from our colleagues in pork, chicken and eggs, British dairy has got into an argument about who is more "free range" than the other, an argument that serves no (consumer) purpose other than to satisfy the desire (of producers) to kick the sh*t out of each other again.

When it comes to "standards" the fact there is no legal definition means you can all write your own standards or all use the term on your packaging, ND claims the moral high ground as he has developed stds and made his org the self certified industry leaders, whereas Arla simply did what everyone can do in the absence of a legal definition. TBH if any retailer came out with their own brand FR option, copied and pasted the PP standards (and derogations) but applied them to 185/190 or 200 days etc then where does this leave PP? After all PP stds allow a 14 day transition period either end of the season and the ability to house in times of extreme weather... therefore 180 days simply means (in layman terms) "cows must graze for 180 days/nights/yr unless ground conditions, weather conditions or welfare make this impossible" which is pretty much the unwritten rule all grazing based producers work to but without a stated 180 day target.

But I do question the way Arla have thought this through - what happens if they fail to win back consumers or stop the loss of consumers to FR? They (Arla) have played their FR card by tagging it on the organic bottles so where would they go next? Well I dont doubt for one minute that if this happened then you would see Arla bring out their own "FR" choice, but do they then drop FR from organic or have 2 FR options that confuses consumers over the difference between FR and FR organic? Arla will then be left having to either undermine one or the other, or perhaps they take a middle ground route and promote them both side by side on the merits of each - now theres a novel idea?? What if we have Great British Milk, Great British Free Range Milk and Great British Organic Milk.
BTW - Arla havent just labelled their organic milk as FR to kill off this valuable initiative the industry could benefit from, they have slashed the price as well.

And whilst the FR argument goes on we ignore the fact the FR is a "value" but there are many many more that appeal to consumers of milk and will absolutely trade consumers up.

I don't seem to remember Arla writing articles into magazines knocking free range when it was launched , but they knock us as soon as we launch a different free range , so who has started any argument ? Not Arla , free range is arguing with it's self here .
You say Arla will have to promote one of it's products over another in time , Arla will not do that , organic promotion in arla never has negative's towards conventional just positive promotion .
You rightly say we need to add value , the problem is free range was not doing this , the opposite in fact as people traded down from organic , Arla's organic Farmers milk has not traded people down at all , 60% of it's growth came from standard fresh the rest from own label organic , the market leader Yeo Valleys sales remained unchanged , and so other than for self interest reasons I fail to see what your problem is here , it's just healthy competition which is great .
The biggest stumbling block to get people to trade up to organic is price and so if by being farmer owned with no 3rd party creaming off profits allows us to offer competitively priced organic milk to the consumer while still returning a top quarter market price to it's farmer without knocking any value from the more expensive established brands it has to be a good thing for all concerned in the industry

 

[Farmer1001]

Haven't followed the thread but the egg market is probably heading for a bloodbath, all the talk is of uncontrolled expansion, particularly in Wales where I believe they get grant money. Coupled to manoeuvring by the main packers to grab a their slice of the market as cage eggs are phased out.

The packers will screw the producers without a second thought to pay for their expansion.

Yes agree. The point of the thread was how the egg industry grew by endorsing consumer demand.

 

[Farmer1001]

I don't seem to remember Arla writing articles into magazines knocking free range when it was launched , but they knock us as soon as we launch a different free range , so who has started any argument ? Not Arla , free range is arguing with it's self here .
You say Arla will have to promote one of it's products over another in time , Arla will not do that , organic promotion in arla never has negative's towards conventional just positive promotion .
You rightly say we need to add value , the problem is free range was not doing this , the opposite in fact as people traded down from organic , Arla's organic Farmers milk has not traded people down at all , 60% of it's growth came from standard fresh the rest from own label organic , the market leader Yeo Valleys sales remained unchanged , and so other than for self interest reasons I fail to see what your problem is here , it's just healthy competition which is great .
The biggest stumbling block to get people to trade up to organic is price and so if by being farmer owned with no 3rd party creaming off profits allows us to offer competitively priced organic milk to the consumer while still returning a top quarter market price to it's farmer without knocking any value from the more expensive established brands it has to be a good thing for all concerned in the industry

Yes I think the article was a stupid mistake and actually not necessary as it simply causes more confusion surrounding FR and this alienates consumers. And for clarity I did not say Arla would have to promote one over the other, I said "Arla will then be left having to either undermine one or the other, or perhaps they take a middle ground route and promote them both side by side on the merits of each". But I stand by my question in the earlier thread, what if Arlas attempts to kill off the FR growth fails and FR continues to grow? For me I think it would have been far better for the industry to learn from other sectors and promote multiple choices.

But maybe for Arla trying to be all things to everyone isnt alway possible and the only way they can capitalise on the FR movement is to tag it the only way possible. And for avoidance of doubt, I would ask the same question regardless of the processor. Your point about Arla Farmers Milk proves my point that there are multiple values consumers place on milk, FR important but taking too much focus from other opportunities.

 

[stablegirl]

Do we have an Arla price announcement this week or next?

 

[Fergieman]

Do we have an Arla price announcement this week or next?

Friday.

 

[Iron150]

Any predictions? No change?

 

[buffalo_soldier]

 

[stablegirl]

It should go up, a smaller rise.

I'd like to see the currency corrected to, off at least a mention in the letter of when it'll be sorted out. If it stays until the next currency month we will have lost out!

 

[Fergieman]

The currency smother held our price up higher than the straight currancy exchange rate at the time from April 14 to January 16, and people were saying on here that we had an artificial higher price, but no one was asking for us to correct it quicker when it was working in our favour.

 

[Sid]

The currency smother held our price up higher than the straight currancy exchange rate at the time from April 14 to January 16, and people were saying on here that we had an artificial higher price, but no one was asking for us to correct it quicker when it was working in our favour.

What do you think should happen?

Currency is an issue for any company import/exporting.
Do you fix some on perceived business. Do you go with the flow or hedge some or all but take the risk you may not need it.

 

[Fergieman]

I don't think there is much wrong with the current system. Whether a change from the current 8 quarters to maybe 4 quarters would be better and farmers would see a quicker turnaround, whether that would be up or down. It all averages itself out over time, but with 8 quarters it takes a long time to turn around, as we are seeing at the moment. Would it be better taking 12 x 1 month averages?

 

[stablegirl]

I have no problem with the currency smoother, does what its meant to all fair.

I have issues with them messing about with it in MAY 2017, the "helped" us by holding the price reduction and using the upcoming currency boost to do it. Via my calculations they will have returned what they took from cashflow any time now and if they do not make any currency amendments before the next 1/4 we will have lost out.

 

[farmer on a bike]

I have no problem with the currency smoother, does what its meant to all fair.

I have issues with them messing about with it in MAY 2017, the "helped" us by holding the price reduction and using the upcoming currency boost to do it. Via my calculations they will have returned what they took from cashflow any time now and if they do not make any currency amendments before the next 1/4 we will have lost out.

Not all the cash has yet been returned and won't be until Dec 31st because it is only being recovered in small amounts each month starting this month. In round figures, in May the price was 1€ c (0.8 ppl )higher than it should have been, in June it was 0.5€c ( 0.4ppl )higher, from July onwards it will be 0.2ppl lower each month than it should be until Dec 31st. To be clear, the whole thing stays within the 'UK pot' so you will not loose out.

 

[stablegirl]

Not all the cash has yet been returned and won't be until Dec 31st because it is only being recovered in small amounts each month starting this month. In round figures, in May the price was 1€ c (0.8 ppl )higher than it should have been, in June it was 0.5€c ( 0.4ppl )higher, from July onwards it will be 0.2ppl lower each month than it should be until Dec 31st. To be clear, the whole thing stays within the 'UK pot' so you will not loose out.

Thank you FOAB, I just 're read the email and I had thought it was .4 short not 0.2 my mistake sorry.

I know it all goes in the pot and they pay out what goes in so there should be no need to second guess them.

But Arla cutting the price first this spring, after telling us they would follow the market up, and then sending a letter a week later or earlier ( can't just remember) asking for more milk. Along with broadcasting to the national press we were In for a windfall when the 13th payment came in has left me disillusioned with ten and I don't trust them anymore!

 

[farmer on a bike]

But Arla cutting the price first this spring, after telling us they would follow the market up, and then sending a letter a week later or earlier ( can't just remember) asking for more milk. Along with broadcasting to the national press we were In for a windfall when the 13th payment came in has left me disillusioned with ten and I don't trust them anymore!

I agree things have been a bit up and down this spring.

The letter was conceived on the back of previous complaints from members that they had not been asked to produce more before new owners were invited to join. I think the lesson has been that sometimes there is no right way of doing it.

The 'windfall' comment was designed to big up being farmer owned with consumers and supermarkets to show the profit is going back to farmers. I think the public relations guys think about their target audience and sometimes forget how it will look to others. The idea was to win better contracts because of being farmer owned (which we did with Morrison), so that in the end us owners will get more.

Currency is still holding back our price by 2ppl, most of that relating to the period between 15 and 24 months ago. It seems sensible to reduce the period that the smoothing operates over to 12 months, because it distorts our price from the market too much directly causing some of these problems.

 

[Chips]

I guess with regards to the currency smoother , we can't alter anything on it until we come to a neutral position , otherwise it would not be fair on members in the other regions , at that point when it's neutral, which may only be one month it may be on the crest of paying out again , at which point UK members may be less keen to get rid of it .

 

[farmer on a bike]

I guess with regards to the currency smoother , we can't alter anything on it until we come to a neutral position , otherwise it would not be fair on members in the other regions , at that point when it's neutral, which may only be one month it may be on the crest of paying out again , at which point UK members may be less keen to get rid of it .

Yes, you maybe right but I think it would be the right action for the whole business.