Raw honey could help reduce blood sugar and cholesterol levels, study finds

[Wilco]

You should do some consumer testing and ask your customers what they are looking for in honey they purchase from you ...

I did it a few years ago and the two words that were most used were raw and local .... It matters not what you perceive as advantageous marketing .. it is what your customers perceive and look for in a product that is important.

I was involved in sales and marketing throughout most of my working life - and loads of product launches. The worst selling products were always those where the marketing department decided what the consumer wanted and which got though to sales without any consumer testing. I can give you many examples of products that failed miserably during my time working at Faberge where the marketing department got lost in their own assessment and when they hit the shelves the customers didn't agree...

https://www.parfumo.net/Perfumes/Faberge/Turbo_After_Shave
They tested this one on MEN ... got very favourable results ... but failed to recognise that the vast majority of men's fragrance, at the time, were purchase by WOMEN for men ... when they finally got round to consumer testing on women - they found that their perception of the product was 'that it had connotations of motor oil and dirty hands'. The packaging was seen as dull and too masculine. Didn't last long ...discontinued and sold off at ridiculous prices ...

FIrst rule of marketing = don't fall into the trap of thinking you know what your customer is seeking without actually asking them.

Appreciate the view but my approach is more 'I'm fairly sure I know what the some of the customers want (i.e. 'raw' etc.) and it will improve my sales if I use it, but I disagree with it on principle and it goes against my own ethical standard'. For me it is more important to do what I consider right than what I consider profitable, which I think is different to just not understanding one's consumer base. If that means I lose out, so be it, but I'll lose out with a clear conscience- I've looked at where the other road goes and don't wish to walk it if I can avoid it. I'm sure many others feel differently or don't have the same conflict.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

strangely enough, after speaking to loads of my customers - and with people at the annual Neath food when I used to attend, I can think of only twice the word 'raw' ever cropped up.
And once was in a discussion about the burger stall opposite us at Neath.

 

[JamezF]

I can give you many examples of products that failed miserably during my time working at Faberge where the marketing department got lost in their own assessment and when they hit the shelves the customers didn't agree...

Those eggs went down a storm though.

James

 

[pargyle]

Appreciate the view but my approach is more 'I'm fairly sure I know what the some of the customers want (i.e. 'raw' etc.) and it will improve my sales if I use it, but I disagree with it on principle and it goes against my own ethical standard'. For me it is more important to do what I consider right than what I consider profitable, which I think is different to just not understanding one's consumer base. If that means I lose out, so be it, but I'll lose out with a clear conscience- I've looked at where the other road goes and don't wish to walk it if I can avoid it. I'm sure many others feel differently or don't have the same conflict.

Well ... we can disagree.. I don't see how ethics comes into the discussion at all...it is not misrepresentation (at least in my case), it's not illegal or proscribed by my local authority - if it was i would consider changing.. but i do know that standing firm on shaky principles usually costs you money !

 

[enrico]

Go on ...... Let me get involved!!!!.... You can take the handcuffs and gags off now..... DOH!

 

[Wilco]

Well ... we can disagree.. I don't see how ethics comes into the discussion at all...it is not misrepresentation (at least in my case), it's not illegal or proscribed by my local authority - if it was i would consider changing.. but i do know that standing firm on shaky principles usually costs you money !

As above, I'm ok with it costing me money.

It may not be illegal but that doesn't mean it's not unethical. If, in order to keep it liquid, someone heats their honey above hive temperatures, indeed above temperatures bees can survive, but describes it as raw to their consumers, a term implying it has not been heated, there is a clear contradiction there. The decision on whether it's ok to do it or not is a moral one. As I said, others may not have this issue, but thinking it's morally ok is still a decision based on one's own morality.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

As above, I'm ok with it costing me money.

It may not be illegal but that doesn't mean it's not unethical. If, in order to keep it liquid, someone heats their honey above hive temperatures, indeed above temperatures bees can survive, but describes it as raw to their consumers, a term implying it has not been heated, there is a clear contradiction there. The decision on whether it's ok to do it or not is a moral one. As I said, others may not have this issue, but thinking it's morally ok is still a decision based on one's own morality.

it's all to do with bullsh!t to gull the gullible

 

[pargyle]

As above, I'm ok with it costing me money.

It may not be illegal but that doesn't mean it's not unethical. If, in order to keep it liquid, someone heats their honey above hive temperatures, indeed above temperatures bees can survive, but describes it as raw to their consumers, a term implying it has not been heated, there is a clear contradiction there. The decision on whether it's ok to do it or not is a moral one. As I said, others may not have this issue, but thinking it's morally ok is still a decision based on one's own morality.

So ... as long as it has not been heated above 35 degrees and has not been pressure filtered to extinction then your morality or ethical issue falls away ?

I would wholeheatedly agree that processed or overheated honey should not be sold with a raw tag ...

 

[Ian123]

We need some common sense in this conversation, the fact is there is NO legal definition of raw and there’s a whole can of worms if there was.
I’ve seen raw described as never heated, now it’s hive temperature. Will that be brood temp or the lower super temperature described and sold as extra/super raw. Or do we then allow 10c extra that won’t really alter anything? Then maybe describing it as nearly raw!
So let’s say raw takes off and Joe blogs raw honey that’s heated to hive temps only is out selling the dastardly beekeeper who heats his honey to 45C down the road… He prints a load of labels saying RAW….. Who the F.&(@ is going to police that!! They can’t even police FAKE/ADULTERATED HONEY!!!! let alone the use of the word raw.

Look Tescos even sell pure honey

 

[fian]

However, if there are no sanctioning bodies, it is impossible for these behaviors to be eliminated.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50551385

 

[Erichalfbee]

However, if there are no sanctioning bodies, it is impossible for these behaviors to be eliminated.

There are sanctioning bodies.
The supermarkets have huge resources and deep pockets to fight them.
I reported my local supermarket to trading standards. They took samples.
I was told that yes the honey was adulterated but there was no test that could provide 100% proof and the supermarkets needed only 1% for wriggle room.

 

[Newbeeneil]

We need some common sense in this conversation, the fact is there is NO legal definition of raw and there’s a whole can of worms if there was.
I’ve seen raw described as never heated, now it’s hive temperature. Will that be brood temp or the lower super temperature described and sold as extra/super raw. Or do we then allow 10c extra that won’t really alter anything? Then maybe describing it as nearly raw!
So let’s say raw takes off and Joe blogs raw honey that’s heated to hive temps only is out selling the dastardly beekeeper who heats his honey to 45C down the road… He prints a load of labels saying RAW….. Who the F.&(@ is going to police that!! They can’t even police FAKE/ADULTERATED HONEY!!!! let alone the use of the word raw.

Look Tescos even sell pure honey
View attachment 34904

Interestingly the set honey only had a HMF value of 15.1 and diastase of 6 when tested .... the equivalent runny had an ALMOST illegal value of 37.2 and an equally illegal diastase value of 6 when tested in 2020.

Sorry if its unreadable but the information came from the HAN UK facebook page and I can't post the information here as its a closed group.

 

[Amari]

Appreciate the view but my approach is more 'I'm fairly sure I know what the some of the customers want (i.e. 'raw' etc.) and it will improve my sales if I use it, but I disagree with it on principle and it goes against my own ethical standard'. For me it is more important to do what I consider right than what I consider profitable, which I think is different to just not understanding one's consumer base. If that means I lose out, so be it, but I'll lose out with a clear conscience- I've looked at where the other road goes and don't wish to walk it if I can avoid it. I'm sure many others feel differently or don't have the same conflict.

I think I might entice my customers by describing my honey as Ecological - As seen on a jar for sale in Ronda, near Seville, today

 

[Amari]

Oops, duplicate

 

[fian]

There are sanctioning bodies.
The supermarkets have huge resources and deep pockets to fight them.
I reported my local supermarket to trading standards. They took samples.
I was told that yes the honey was adulterated but there was no test that could provide 100% proof and the supermarkets needed only 1% for wriggle room.

Actions to promote from beekeepers associations.
1.Require testing in the marketing of the last client.
2. Demand the withdrawal of our adulterated by reducing the margin of maneuver from 1 to 10.
3. Make your product known through free tastings at local events, and in schools (a parent would never repeat a product that he or his son rejects not because of intolerance but because of bad taste).

 

[Wilco]

I think I might entice my customers by describing my honey as Ecological - As seen on a jar for sale in Ronda, near Seville, today

Groan

 

[Wilco]

So ... as long as it has not been heated above 35 degrees and has not been pressure filtered to extinction then your morality or ethical issue falls away ?

I would wholeheatedly agree that processed or overheated honey should not be sold with a raw tag ...

No, that's one of my objections. As detailed in other posts there are more and they still have an ethical component.

 

[fian]

I think I might entice my customers by describing my honey as Ecological - As seen on a jar for sale in Ronda, near Seville, today

If his apiary were within the scope of The Broads National Park, he would accept his bet, although he would exchange mountain honey for Scott honey.

 

[pargyle]

We need some common sense in this conversation, the fact is there is NO legal definition of raw and there’s a whole can of worms if there was.
I’ve seen raw described as never heated, now it’s hive temperature. Will that be brood temp or the lower super temperature described and sold as extra/super raw. Or do we then allow 10c extra that won’t really alter anything? Then maybe describing it as nearly raw!
So let’s say raw takes off and Joe blogs raw honey that’s heated to hive temps only is out selling the dastardly beekeeper who heats his honey to 45C down the road… He prints a load of labels saying RAW….. Who the F.&(@ is going to police that!! They can’t even police FAKE/ADULTERATED HONEY!!!! let alone the use of the word raw.

Look Tescos even sell pure honey
View attachment 34904

Yes ... Tescos state " it has temporarily taken the honey off the shelves for further examination, but insists the product is "100% pure, natural and can be directly traced back to the beekeeper".

So ... That bit might be true ... it may be possible to trace the product back to the beekeeper but what if the beekeeper fed sugar to the bees on a continuous basis and the resultant 'honey' was just bee stored sugar syrup masquerading as pure honey ?

Indeed, I've seen beekeepers in the UK feeding their bees until June and starting again feeding in August having taken a crop of ... well ... what is it ? I hope there are no beekeepers in the UK that would deliberately do this in order to create a 'good crop' ... would I put it past some beefarmers in some parts of the world ? Probably not ...

 

[JamezF]

So ... That bit might be true ... it may be possible to trace the product back to the beekeeper

I can't help feeling that they might well have a bit of paper from the supplier that says "We can trace it back to the beekeeper", but if they actually had to do so I wouldn't be surprised if it weren't possible. That or the supplier would just come up with the name of one of their suppliers regardless of whether it was the right one or not. So ok, I'm a cynic...

James