Page 15 - 0419

COMMENTS & ANALYSIS
The Three Immutable Laws Of Produce Marketing
by jim prevor, editor-in-chief, produce business
We launched Produce Business maga- zine in 1985, and during the past almost thirty-five years, virtually every plan to increase produce consumption has crossed my desk. They are all interesting. Many I have had great hopes for. Some, I still have great hope for.
But the bottom line is this: Not one of them has worked. Thus, I present The Three Immutable Laws of Produce Marketing:
1) Never confuse success at selling one item or category with an increase of produce consumption in general.
We actually have excellent tools to use if the goal is to increase the sale of one item. From kiwifruit to kale, we have done it time and again. There are various techniques we can use ... from substantive product changes — say the development of seedless grapes and easy-peeling citrus — to health tie-ins with kale and pomegranates. We tie in with cultural trends, such as jackfruit in an age of interest in meat replacement, to the use of high-end restaurants to broaden usage of specialty items such as dragonfruit.
Indeed, here is a little secret: Very little high-quality produce is dumped, so consumption — or at least consumer purchase — pretty much equals production. This means producers lower prices to move higher volumes, and this moves consump- tion. But unfortunately, bumper crops are not so large or so uniform that they lower overall produce prices so much and for so long that they convert consumers from cereal or pretzels or steak. Typically, the peaches are a bargain, so the nectarines sit until prices on those are lowered to a market-clearing level.
Experience shows that, for the most part, dramatic increases in use of an item are due to replacement. So, if people traditionally ate spinach salads or had a side dish of spinach with a protein, if kale booms, it takes over these slots, and chefs and consumers substi- tute kale for spinach. So, the industry cele- brates the triumph of kale but never realizes that it is not leading to overall increases of produce consumption.
The bottom line is that people in the United
People in the United States are already consuming more calories than they should, so in order for produce consumption to rise without increasing the obesity problem, consumers have to change their dietary habits whereby they not only eat more produce, but also eat less of other things.
States are already consuming more calories than they should, so in order for produce consumption to rise without increasing the obesity problem, consumers have to change their dietary habits whereby they not only eat more produce, but also eat less of other things. So, dinner goes from a 16-oz. steak to a vegetable stir-fry flavored with two ounces of meat. The evidence of this happening on a wide-scale is slim, and the trend on a global scale is toward a more western-style diet, heavy to proteins, etc.
2) Be highly skeptical of consumer claims that they want to eat more produce.
When people say they are trying to do something that is exceptionally easy to do — such as eating more produce — but they do not do it — the question to ask is why. There are about 68 million people — more than the population of the United Kingdom — who eat in a McDonald’s each day some- where in the world. The last time McDonald’s shared the information, salads accounted for between two and three percent of sales. So, if all these customers were authentically looking to increase produce consumption, it would be easy to do so by simply buying salads rather than cheeseburgers.
Sure, many consumers don’t know how to cook many produce items, but their actions indicate a limited desire to learn. In the days of the internet, a simple search, on even obscure produce items, brings up many possibilities. With more packaging in produce, more recipes are distributed in-store, and virtually all produce companies have websites, often with more recipes.
The problem is that the question we are asking consumers is not a morally neutral question. Produce is widely recognized as good for you, good for the environment, etc., so asking consumers about their aspi- rations on produce consumption is similar to asking if they are very stupid, undisciplined, don’t care about their children, don’t care about the environment, etc. In the research industry, it is known as “Social Desirability Bias,” and it means that sometimes answers to questions do not tell us what people are going to do. The answers tell us what the respondents think is the socially desirable answer.
3) A focus on a plant-based future has little to do with produce.
The hottest item now is the Impossible Burger. Burger King just did a deal to make an Impossible Whopper. But whether this succeeds or fails, it has almost nothing to do with fresh fruits and vegetables.
Indeed, the whole focus on plant-based foods is typically a way of finding ways to replace meat with legumes, beans, soy, whole grains, etc., but produce is rarely substituted for meat. So, we already know how to grill a Portobello mushroom and make that a replacement for a beef burger. The entire focus on things such as the Impossible Burger is to avoid having people make that choice.
It is always great to learn more about consumers and what they have to say. But it is just as important for the industry to under- stand how to interpret what consumers are telling us. The path ahead is neither certain nor easy. But there are opportunities for those who interpret shrewdly.
PRODUCE BUSINESS / APRIL 2019 / 15