Opinion

TMP brings success, but at a price

The Test Marketing Program for wool in the United States has been hailed a success at the latest international wool conference.

However, it has to be said that Australian woolgrowers forked out the massive majority of the wool industry funding towards this campaign and Australian wool was not promoted as such.

"Australian Merino" is the brand that is being developed by various forces within the industry and many believe it is time Australian Merino was strongly differentiated from wool from New Zealand, China, Uruguay, South Africa or Argentina.

As Australians we like to think we grow the best Merino wool and our proud history in the arena suggests we do.

But we haven't been able to develop a strong Australian brand and seperate our production from the relatively small industry in New Zealand or the lower quality wool from the rest of the world.

The Kiwis have clearly shown the way through their work with New Zealand Merino in the active outdoor sector.

Would you back your woolgrower levy funds going towards the active promotion of Australian Merino in US department stores to follow on from the TMP?

What are your thoughts?

Posted By: Marius Cuming on 17/05/2007 6:15:46 AM | Comments (6)

Share on
Facebook

Tweet on
Twitter

Email to
a friend

comments

Date: Newest first | Oldest first

The concept of educating and "enrolling" shop staff, as used in the TMP, so that they can sell more product is not new.

Merino wool's competing fibres have used this marketing technique cleverly for years, especially when they have new fabrics etc.

Merino has such a good story to tell - e.g. natural & renewable etc - so we have proved again that we can increase sale value & volume with relatively modest investment.

So let's get on with marketing Merino in our key markets where 80% of the world's clothing purchases occur: USA, Italy, Japan, Germany, UK, France.

Posted by Martin Oppenheimer, 17/05/2007 8:42:20 PM

At long last, it is welcome news to hear that WoolProducers accept that marketing and promotion work for wool.

Educating retail consumers should be a priority for our levy funds.

In this regard, the Woolmark team have done an excellent job and should all be congratulated.

It will be excellent when Woolmark is funded once more by Australian growers.

The Woolmark symbol needs a fresh makeover and must be able to guarantee high quality wool, or else it will fail again.

Well done Robert Peitsch for finally seeing the light.

I hope he is not too exhausted after his IWTO fact-finding mission in Edinburgh this week.

I look forward to the day when he finally admits that industry R&D over the past 5 years has done very little to help woolgrowers wealth, and marketing is the only key to raising demand for australian wool.

And by the way, what a great blog idea. Well done Rural Press. Please keep it up.

Posted by Chick Olsson, 18/05/2007 12:34:07 AM

As seen many times in the past, the current wool price spike is simply driven by the lack of supply and the fear that it creates in the market place.

R&D has achieved nothing for the industry.

Posted by dusty, 19/05/2007 4:52:56 AM

For those drawn back into wool growing by the current price hike I can only say, come in sucker.

Posted by dusty, 29/05/2007 7:58:28 PM

It is curious that some woolgrowers keep bashing AWI for its R&D activity in the past, in 'preference' to marketing.

The fact was that the Govt., in its lack of wisdom, split AWI and AWS at the outset in a manner that precluded AWI from spending more than a token amount of its wool tax money on marketing.

Actually AWI has done well in recent times to bypass this constraint pending the now certain merger of AWI and AWS (Woolmark) - which will mean that the one body can legitimately perform both functions integrally.

The TMP was funded largely by AWI.

Woolproducers Australia was right up front in supporting that program.

It was not something they have just woken up to as some would suggest!

Posted by Andrew Farran, 1/06/2007 3:07:48 PM

Oh Andrew, would'nt it be nice to re-write history on the R&D versus Marketing debate.

The fact is growers have not been given the ability to direct their compulsory levies towards either R&D or Marketing.

Not in Woolpoll 2000, 2003 or 2006. The 2006 woolpoll cost $1.2 million of woolgrowers money, & was a complete farce, as it decided on the level of wool tax for the next 3 years from 1 July 2007 for AWI, despite the fact that AWI & Woolmark would potentially be integrated.

Growers were told to disregard the merger.

Has anyone seen an operating plan yet for the integrated AWI/Woolmark? There is no plan.

Has anyone seen a strategic plan for the Australian wool industry? There is no plan.

Our industry continues to operate in a reactionary manner, because there is no plan.

The welcome AWI decision to fund the TMP with $5 million of grower money was made at the IWTO conference in 2005, because of IWTO member pressure, without grower consultation, & against Woolpoll 2003 guidelines.

Those people controlling the woolpoll questions have a lot to answer for, the lowest Australian sheep flock since 1917 being one.

Posted by Martin Oppenheimer, 2/06/2007 1:43:13 AM