reLAKSation 451
Take note: Former president of PepsiCo UK and now CEO of Bird’s Eye Iglo Group, Martin Glenn, addressed the IntraFish Seafood Leadership Luncheon at the European Seafood Exposition this year. It was said that when a man of Mr Glenn’s background speaks, the industry should taken notice.
Martin Glenn told the audience that the industry must stop thinking like fishermen and farmers and start thinking like brand owners, adding that commodity is a state of mind. He said that businesses should avoid the ‘vicious cycle’ that comes from commoditising products and instead create a ‘virtuous circle’ and have the courage to charge a premium over other proteins. He went on to say that the seafood industry does not command the same high share of the protein market as beef and poultry, so therefore it is important to charge prices that reflect the scarcity, quality and nutritional benefits of seafood.
Whilst it is one thing to tell an invited audience in convivial surroundings to have courage and raise prices, it is another to have the courage of your convictions to implement it in the marketplace. Mr Glenn related how last year, backed by a multi-million pound marketing campaign, Bird’s Eye launched its premium-priced cook-in-the bag ‘Simply Bake to Perfection’ range. He told the audience that sales of this range have been strong, illustrating the success of this premium strategy.
Unfortunately, what Mr Glenn didn’t say was that since its launch, this range has been regularly on promotion in one form or another in most stores. The most used promotion has been a saving of £1 on the normal price of £3.99 i.e. saving 25%. What seems to happen is that the product is offered on promotion and sales increase, however when the product reverts to its premium price, sales drop off as consumers seek better value for money elsewhere. This then prompts the reintroduction of another promotion. The following images highlight just some of the promotions of Bird’s Eye products this week. It can be seen that it is not just this new range that is subjected to discounting but that it occurs across the whole Bird’s Eye portfolio. This includes their salmon fish finger, the TV advert for which drew laughs from the crowd at the luncheon. Perhaps Mr Glenn won’t be laughing as much after having to discount the price of the salmon fingers by 59p (22%).
Mr Glenn did mention that the new range was launched at a time when the economic climate was at its bleakest; however this does not explain the need for continual discounting. The Brahms Insight survey for SeaFish showed that UK consumers actually thought fish and seafood to be expensive compared to other proteins, not cheaper. The problem for Bird’s Eye and Mr Glenn is that this does not transfer to frozen fish, which consumers expect to represent value. The issue is not about having the courage to charge premium prices but whether the frozen sector is the place to launch premium products. As Mr Glenn has discovered, the public might like his products but they are not so willing to pay a premium for them.
Aquaculture sustainability: Our comments about the ASC’s logo in reLAKSation no 449 prompted a response from the Aquaculture Stewardship Council. They said that the ‘visual identity’ launched at ESE was actually their corporate image to be used only for business to business communication and was never intended to be part of their ‘customer facing label’. Of course, we only have their word for that, since there is no mention of the customer interface on their website or in their communications. It is an added puzzle why the ASC needs a different corporate identity to the one seen by consumers. Surely this would only compound any confusion about the scheme. After all, the MSC seems to manage with one single identity. Why does the ASC need two? Perhaps, they don’t, but they simply hadn’t given any thought yet to how the current logo would work in the retail environment until it was pointed out?
Lodge an appeal!: According to IntraFish, the independent adjudicator, Michael Lodge, has identified ‘serious procedural errors’ in the certification process of a toothfish fishery by an independent consulting company that recommended the fishery for MSC certification. Michael Lodge was brought in to adjudicate after an appeal by the ‘Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition’.
The adjudicator agreed with the ASOC that the independent certification company could not justify the scoring indicators for a number of crucial indicators and has asked the company to reconsider and revise its recommendations.
Whilst the adjudicator’s decision will have major ramifications for the certification of this particular fishery, his decision may have even more serious implications for the credibility and future viability of the Marine Stewardship Council.
The MSC have always remained detached from the certification process saying that this is the responsibility of independent certification companies such as the one involved in the current appeal. However, given that the adjudicator has identified serious procedural errors made by this company, the MSC must now be concerned whether similar serious procedural errors have been made in other fisheries and they have only been allowed to pass unnoticed because the certification has not been disputed by other interested parties. Given that about 66 fisheries have been so far certified by ten independent certification companies, it might be appropriate to send five or six of them for an additional independent check – just to be sure.
Unfortunately, the ten independent certification companies have not had an equal bite at the certification ‘cherry’. A rough check through the certifications seems to indicate that this particular company has undertaken 32 of the 66 assessments with involvement in a further four. This accounts for over 50% of the approved certifications leaving the unanswered question as to whether the majority of MSC sustainable fisheries are truly sustainable or not. Perhaps the independent adjudicator can really be the only judge of that!