|
New beef, pork labels aim to boost sales with consumer clarity
Story Date: 2/27/2013
| |
Source: Rita Jane Gabbett, MEATINGPLACE, 2/26/13
U.S. beef and pork industry groups are proposing new labeling protocols for retail fresh meat muscle cuts (initially beef and pork) aimed at making it easier for consumers to understand what they are buying and how to cook it.
The proposed changes in the Uniform Retail Meat Identity Standards (URMIS) would create a Common Name standard to simplify cut names, reduce unappealing terms, eliminate redundancies and provide a unique name structure for meat cuts. Universal Product Code (UPC) numbers would not be affected.
The proposed new naming protocols (which are voluntary) have been approved by USDA and were rolled out on Monday after 18 months of consumer research conducted by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association on behalf of the Beef Checkoff and the National Pork Board.
The Industry-Wide Cooperative Meat identification Standards Committee (ICMISC), which must approve the new naming system, is set to review the proposal March 27. New meat cut names could be in stores by this summer.
In a joint interview with Meatingplace, NPB Director of Retail Marketing Patrick Fleming and NCBA Director of Market Intelligence and Veal Marketing Trevor Amen explained how the new naming convention would work.
For example, research showed consumers better understood pork cut names when they were aligned with similar (and already familiar) beef cut names. Under the new system, what is now called a “pork loin top loin chop” would be called a “New York chop.” A “pork loin end chop” would now be a “Porterhouse chop.”
Fleming explained the pork producers have not gotten the value of the difference in eating experience that ranges from one end of the loin to the other because they have all been lumped together as “pork chops.”
Amen explained that for beef, the new labels would also allow more differentiation by further breaking apart muscles and explaining those differences to consumers. For example, a “ribeye filet” would connote a steak cut and trimmed differently than a ribeye steak.
Under the proposal, the new common name would top the label. The second line would include cut characteristics, such as the muscle cut and bone-in or bone-out. The third line could provide brief preparation tips, such as, “grill for best results” or “slow cook for best results.”
For example, a product currently labeled an “under blade center steak boneless Denver Cut” would now be described on the first line as a “Denver steak” followed by the longer description on the second line of the label.
Change is difficult
Retailers would have to reprogram their scales to create the new labels. There could also be labeling implications for processors producing case-ready whole muscle cut fresh meats.
The costs of the change will vary, depending on how a retailer is managing their in-store scale system.
The new system also would discourage regional fresh meat names, though retailers could still add them if they chose.
The groups worked with an advisory group of retailers and packer/processors and conducted one-on-one visits with retailers to discuss scale configurations and potential challenges they might face with the new system.
To help facilitate these changes, the groups have created www.MeatTrack.com as a resource. A comment form is available on the site until March 18, 2013. The site also will contain employee training materials.
The industry groups will measure success first by retailer adoption, then by long-term data on retail meat sales.
“This is the biggest opportunity for the meat industry to step forward in 20 years,” said Fleming.
For more stories, go to http://www.meatingplace.com/.
|
|
|
|
