Dec 4, 2013 | Branding, Change, Marketing, retail, Sales, Small business
The produce branding model used by the agricultural so called marketing programs run by industry bodies all fail the basic test of being consumer centric. Generally they are retailer centric, using grower levies to fund discounts, and sometimes display space, never brand building. ”
“Australian tomatoes” is not a brand, it is simply a description.
Besides, the major retailers are exercising their control of the supply chain by not allowing proprietary brand building marketing anywhere near their stores.
The major retailers hold varying shares of produce categories. I suggest that hard vegetables like potatoes and carrots are in line with their overall share of around 75%, but their share of sensitive, seasonal fruit is probably more like 40%, with everything else falling somewhere in between. Where they fall depends on the “commodity” status of the produce, and consumers view of the trade-off between convenience and freshness, taste, and the more subjective things like customer service and product provenance.
Sydney Harvest is determinedly consumer centric. It is an evolving business model that creates a collaboration between the best growers in the Sydney Basin ands specialist produce retailers in Sydney to deliver field fresh, best quality, provenance assured produce to discriminating consumers, turning the usual supply chain into a demand chain.
Currently in pilot, the initiative is setting out to determine if there is a market in the niche, as there is certainly a niche in the market for such a collaboration.
Dec 2, 2013 | Change, Governance
So, the Treasurer has blocked the acquisition of Graincorp by Archer Daniels Midland. However, the acquisition of Warrnambool Cheese and Butter by Canadian group Saputo is OK.
Go figure!
These two businesses are amongst the last significant, strategically important agribusiness assets left in Australian hands, they are subject to the same rules, same laws, yet the political outcome is different.
Why?
Irrespective of your position on the rights and wrongs of these two proposed transactions the fact that there is a different outcome from the political deliberations must be of concern. I have not heard any logical arguments that lead to a conclusion that the outcomes should be different, and can only assume it comes from political expediency, hypocrisy and hubris rather than a dispassionate application of he laws meant to govern us.
The other reason I am pissed off with this decision is that I lost a $50 bet. I was certain that after the approval of the Saputo takeover of WCB in October, that the precedent provided would be sufficient for the Treasurer to ignore the silly blathering of Warren Truss, and acerbic tongue and threats of Barnaby Joyce, and be consistent.
Not so it seems.
There are reasonable, logical and economically and socially defensible arguments on both sides of the question, and inevitably not everyone would have been happy with a consistent decision, but those observing the behaviour of the government will scratching their heads at the inconsistency.
I do however look forward to the smug, self-congratulatory remarks of Mr Truss who I expect will sound like George Pell on Rohypnol, I need to lose some weight, and this may help.
Nov 27, 2013 | Change, retail, Sales, Strategy
The verb that describes the process of retailers ignoring the shift to digital: payment, e-shopping, mobile selection of destination, on-line reviews, and so on.
The business model is rapidly evolving, whatever your current model may be, nothing is set in stone, or even rubber. To survive, business models need to be granular pieces of collaborative capability that capture the instantaneous, mobile, web-enabled future.
Currently, our esteemed political leaders are debating how to extract GST from net sales, bleating about the lost revenue that should go to hospitals, schools, and perhaps overseas study tours. It has happened for the last few Christmases; the retailers’ association generates some on-line sales numbers, then applies GST, hyping up the lost revenue to pollies who are too silly to recognise the flaws in the logic:
- Not all sales over the net are “lost” sales to bricks and mortar retail: the net is a demand generator, it does not simply suck sales away from retail.
- Not all net purchases are from international sellers: many are domestic, on which the GST is collected.
- On-line sales are growing strongly, but are still a modest 6.3%, according to the latest NAB survey. Optimising the other 93% would seem more productive than bleating about the little they lose.
- The compliance costs will be huge. Irrespective of how many economic models are generated, common sense would lead to the conclusion that a significant percentage of parcels would need to be opened, and heavy fines imposed, to put a brake on international purchases. If Customs cannot stop the flow of drugs, guns, and such by post, what makes them think they can be more effective slowing the flow of Barbie dolls and books at Christmas?
- Our retailers have the perfect right, if not the capability, to sell internationally, boosting their numbers. Obviously, boosting capability would seem sensible.
The world has moved on. Being “netf…ked” is optional – a choice in the hands of management. So, why not set out to be the netf..ker” rather than the” netf..kee”
Nov 26, 2013 | Change, Governance, Management
There are now so many one person businesses emerging, SME’s that employ no-one on a full time basis, but call on contractors and specialists when necessary, that I think we need a new term:
“Solepreneurs”.
They are often entrepreneurs, but not in the generally accepted sense of someone doing something radically new.
Rather, they are seeking to innovate, fill a niche, provide a service, or just do a better job on a local level, or in a marginally different way, often personalised in a way corporations, loaded down with overheads, processes, and corporate egos cannot. The digitisation of the way we work has removed the transaction costs in so many ways that these solepreneurs now have marketing and administrative clout unimaginable just 20 years ago, sufficient for them to often be potent competitors to established businesses that perpetuate the myth of the corporation.
The local chambers of commerce and networking groups are filled with them, and whilst individually they are insignificant, except perhaps to their customers, together they are a potent force emerging in the economy.
I wonder when politicians and rule makers will wake up?
Better be soon, as the face of the workforce is changing rapidly, and the old ways of public administration simply do not work well enough.
Nov 25, 2013 | Communication, Marketing, Social Media
In these times of abundance of marketing “stuff”, bloggs, video content, on line advice and templates, what we are missing is a deep intellectual understanding of the marketing process.
The tools have changed, but at its core, human behavior has not. We are still motivated by the same things our parents, and their parents were motivated by, it is just that the frills are a different color, and are in different places.
The first modern advertising man was the dodgy monk who first used Guttenberg‘s new fangled printing device to print church Indulgences, effectively forgiveness for sale, around 1439, leading to Martins Luther‘s 1517 nailing of the “95 Thesis” on the local, Beta version of facebook, the church door.
400 yeas later, enterprising newssheet vendors realised that their readers were a market that sellers of a range of products were prepared to pay to reach, and modern advertising was born, and honed by the Madmen, so beautifully exemplified by Don Draper.
Now we have all this internet stuff bombarding us day and night, and we seem to have forgotten the basic rule of communication:
The receiver has to do something with the message you send before it is communication.
The tools have changed, the drivers of behavior have not.
