Allan Barber bemoans the red meat sector’s record of failure to develop a promotional strategy that works and stick to it

My previous opinion piece analysing the challenges facing our red meat sector has provoked some strong reaction questioning the state and competence of the marketing of New Zealand Beef and Lamb.

My correspondent expressed serious concern at the large investment of levy payers’ funds in Taste Pure Nature in initially two, now one key market, asking how Beef + Lamb NZ could hand over leadership of the programme to the MIA without consulting farmers, while continuing to stump up $2 million over three years. All the money spent on TPN in the West Coast USA market may possibly have achieved a small positive outcome for our grassfed meat, but it was abandoned in 2023 because of other priorities.

This continues the sector’s record of failure to develop a promotional strategy that works and stick to it. The main principle of successful marketing is consistency of message, not chopping and changing to chase the next apparent rainbow. The best example of good marketing practice in the sector has been the consistent work by the domestic arm of BLNZ. The improvement in meat eating quality following the introduction of the Quality Mark, the consistent messaging of the Iron Maidens campaign and public awareness are evidence of successful marketing, but New Zealand is only one of many markets and even here red meat consumption has dropped.

Obviously funds will always be limited and need to be spent carefully, but there is little evidence the New Zealand red meat sector’s overseas marketing programmes in recent years have been well coordinated.

Most questionable of all was the decision to cease support for the NZ Lamb rosette which had underpinned New Zealand lamb in the lucrative UK chilled market, a reputation built up over more than 100 years. The rosette reinforced generic recognition for New Zealand lamb in its previously most important market, where individual exporters were not able to differentiate their brands. It is so hard to achieve brand recognition in the first place and even harder to regain it, once it has been lost.

When Australia negotiated its FTA with Great Britain, the floodgates were about to open to admit Australian lamb and our response was to wave the white flag, retreating from that market because suddenly China was paying higher prices. We all know what has happened to that short term sugar rush.

Historically BLNZ, on behalf of the producers, was previously the only flag bearer for the sector, as exporters had no interest in promoting a generic product which retailers were unwilling to brand to the consumer. New Zealand Beef and Lamb became the sole product identification, although BLNZ through various iterations kept trying to persuade exporters to assume responsibility for marketing. There has been a long drawn-out debate about whether farmers or exporters should take the lead on this, with exporters generally resisting the call to conduct expensive promotional campaigns.

Silver Fern Farms’ “plate to pasture” strategy is an exception, but it has struggled to expand its consumer product range to equate to more than 10% of its annual revenue. The money invested in product development, processing, packaging and marketing, let alone livestock quality incentives, almost certainly exceeds the returns by a considerable margin. It is too early to gauge whether this strategy will eventually succeed or fall victim to the economic realities of trying to escape from unbranded ingredient or commodity markets which buy the vast majority of the product.

The transfer of lead responsibility for TPN to the MIA has coincided with a change of strategy to a focus on China, specifically Shanghai. Realistically the funds provided from MIA reserves, BLNZ and MPI, $8 million over three years, are unlikely to be more than a drop in an enormous bucket. I suspect when the trial period comes to an end and meat exporters are faced with spending their own money, they will have lost their appetite to continue the programme, unless large volumes of high value product have been sold to the consumers of Shanghai. The problem will always be to convince all exporters to contribute their share which will lead to arguments about freeloading.

The most important questions to be answered are how New Zealand should market its red meat and whose responsibility it is. Past and current experience suggest traditional promotion is too difficult and too expensive for the sector’s limited resources. The success of the lamb rosette points to a simple generic message covering beef and lamb that reinforces its origin and natural, sustainable attributes.

Most of our red meat does not reach the end consumer in a packaged state which means trying to reach the Californian and Chinese buying public in large enough numbers is doomed to fail, presuming the ultimate goal is to increase the reputation, value and quantity of product sold. These ad hoc promotional programmes give the impression of being aimed at showing farmers the sector is doing something. Unfortunately no single agency has the resources to continue spending for long enough and inevitably, as was the case with the rosette in the UK and TPN in California, the programmes will cease.

The higher value product is generally sold to major retailers or to food manufacturers which increasingly seek assurances of sustainable and environmentally conscious farming practices if they are to continue buying from New Zealand. Whether or not we believe these claims are justifiably valid, we will need to ensure our product can be proven to meet them, if we want to obtain the best prices.

Responsibility rests with the whole sector from the farm through every step of the process to final sale, as well as BLNZ and MPI, to guarantee the excellence of grass fed New Zealand beef and lamb. We must make sure the right standards are in place at all stages and reinforce the product quality with a simple consistent message on every box, package and communication that proudly states New Zealand as the country of origin.

It is time to realise the limitations of marketing campaigns and concentrate on spending farmers’ and taxpayers’ money carefully.                                                          

Current schedule and saleyard prices are available in the right-hand menu of the Rural section of this website.