RancHERs retire after seven years

[jensend]

i guess i just don't see what their educational pursuits have to do with the credibility of abp. there's about fifteen years of post secondary wandering around this place and we think abp is a puppet of the packers.

[rookie]

Maybe we need the phyc degree people to read inbetwwen the lines for us.........

The spokes people did a job we can brag about, does anyone know who the 3 cowboys were before them...

And its just frustrating for producers because the future just doesn't look all that rosy. Simple frustration and stress.

We need to find some positive motivation ( works for me sometimes) heck, I just cleaned off my desk today and read some optomistic words about the industry and found them in the most unlikely spot...a Creech bull catolog....

[grassfarmer]

So just to clarify - what has been the cost of the RancHers campaign to date/or on an annual basis?
How much of this cost has been paid by the beef processing or retailing sectors of the production chain?

[loric]

I'll do my best to find out the costs of the RancHERs stuff. I know they get paid an honorarium when they work trade show booths. It's not too often that they all work together....just a few of the bigger equations. They also get paid their travel time.

And as far as optimism from a bull sale catalog...us purebred guys have to be optimistic. You can't sell bulls to commercial guys who are pessimistic. It tends to make it harder to sell them.

[coppertop]

Around this place there aren't chaps and ten gallon hats, it's old jeans, likely a fleece or denim jacket and rubber boots this time of year with a lot of cow --- on them.
The women in the ads aren't the problem, all very accomplished and likely very hard working.
They do, for the most part, represent the Calgary/Cochrane/Longview area of the province and there are a few cowgals elsewhere too.
The image is trying to sell beef, which may or may not have benefitted the industry, but the image portrayed is not the REAL WORLD farm women operate in.
Just a question : Is Erin Butters related in any way to Eric Butters ????

[loric]

Erin is Erik's son. When she was chosen, Erik wasn't an ABP delegate and was not involved with ABP. Each applicant for the RancHERs had to submit an application - and there were piles of them I am told. After the applictions were received and waded through, there was an extensive interview process and a photo shoot. When ABP chose their spokespeople, they wanted intellegent, worldly women who worked fulltime on the farm.

[loric]

I mean - Erin is Erik's daughter.

[grassfarmer]

Just to be clear loric, I'm not looking for the travel reimbursements to the ladies concerned I'm looking for the cost expended on all advertising utilising the "RancHers" brand.

[farmers_son]

Grassfarmer: I would think, and I believe that most would agree, that the RancHERs advertising campaign was a huge home run when it comes to efforts to promote our product. I expect you are aware that all the major cattle producing/beef exporting nations have large budgets and spend millions on generic advertising of beef. The retail sector advertises beef on an ongoing basis.

Our industry needs an image, and especially needed an image during the BSE crisis. That image could have been the British Holstein cow doing the funky chicken in the auction ring or that image could be the RancHERs. Even though the media did give play to the Holstein the image that won out and today plays in peoples minds is the image of those three women. I think there can be no question that if the Canadian consumer’s image of the beef industry had been the Holstein cow that we would not have maintained the consumers confidence in our beef product in the same way we did.

But more than that…..our farm is at a point where we are approaching the time for a generational transfer. It is crucial for the continuation of our farm that one of our children decide that farming/ranching is the future for them. My son and his new wife (his wife is a city girl) are both university educated and can easily make a living somewhere else than here. In my view, positive images and role models like RancHERs can be instrumental in helping these young people decide that raising cattle is the best life you can possibly have. If the RanHERS campaign did not raise the price of live cattle one cent I am still getting a 10,000% return on my checkoff dollar if that promotional effort helps one of my children decide to eventually take over the farm.

Yes a picture of Grassfarmer standing in an empty feedlot or a picture of me with manure up to the top of my boots may reflect a side of the cattle business but it does not inspire anyone, and certainly does not help me in my desire to see our farm continue through another generation. The agricultural community has always been quick to promote themselves in a negative fashion, presumably to attract attention of government. My son and his wife know that they will never be rich if they decide to farm with me (unless they sell out) but at least they can have a positive image of themselves. We cannot underestimate the importance of positive role models like the RancHERS and even Corner Gas which I mentioned in a different thread, Rural Issues, in helping to shape the younger generations perceptions of agriculture as a viable career choice.

[smcgrath76]

We are chaps and horses at our place (largely because not do we suck at running cows with motorized vehicles of any size, a quad or dirtbike, can't go most of the places our cows do). That said, we also run a modern business that we are trying to grow.
It is important to market the romanticism of any industry. For GF that may mean promoting product quality, production method, and the resulting health and environmental benefits.
I think the RancHERs was a great campaign and the spokepeople are certainly a tribute to our industry. I also think that the bigger issue is that the campaign was designed and delivered under a production paradigm that has changed significantly.
I always have some concerns with any branding or advertising.
1. Does the reality back up the marketing? If people investigate and the reality does not = the promotion you lose brand equity. Open skies and mountains do not equal feedlot alley.
2. Sometimes the producer begins to believe their own advertising. I see this a lot in AB. We do produce some of the best beef in the world. We also produce a lot of crap. By believing we are the only people in the world who can produce beef this good, and the only ones who can do barley fed we have set ourselves up to stifle innovation, become extremly complacent marketers internationally, and avoid any risk in market development.
3. The third issue which arises from commodity groups marketing the general product has been identified as an issue with many products. A good example is the tomato case in California. Does the ABP advertising beef in general, help or hurt those producers who are trying to market a differentiated product? This is a complex question.

I think at the time RancHERs was developed it addressed a need and fit the industry at the time pretty well. I think a lot has changed since then, and I think a heck of a lot more needs to change. I think things need to be judged against the background of their era, and this one I think was a good one.

[grassfarmer]

Farmers_son, "I expect you are aware that all the major cattle producing/beef exporting nations have large budgets and spend millions on generic advertising of beef. The retail sector advertises beef on an ongoing basis."
Yes I'm aware of these things - I'm also aware that the beef promotion budget in some of these countries is not paid entirely by the cattle producer as appears to be the case in Canada. Sure the retail sector advertises beef in their fliers but they also have Beef Information Centre and RancHers leaflets on display.
I am still waiting on a cost for the advertising undertaken under the RancHers brand. Without knowing the cost how can we evaluate the success or failure of the project or even contemplate a successor advertising brand?
I know that my own advertising cost to be listed on the Eatwild website was a one off payment of US$25 and it has directly earned me beef sales nearing $30,000 in recent years. In contrast I suspect that a large proportion of the hundreds of dollars a year in checkoff I pay goes towards generic advertising like the RancHers ads and produces a return of less than the advertising cost.

I'm really happy that your children are contemplating returning to the land, that must be a great feeling for any parent. However I'd rather have my children follow me because they grew up with a love of the land and experiences that showed them agriculture could be a profitable business rather than being influenced by the country life as portrayed by Corner Gas or three paid actors dressed up in cowboy gear.

[per]

Geeppers Grassfarmer, promoting a positive image of the beef industry is good for all of us. Yes it helps the big bad packers and retail chains, but it also helps us little ma and pop value chains as well. There are many things that the ABP gives room to debate but this one is usefull to us all. Cheer up man.

[grassfarmer]

How does presenting a good image of the beef industry translate into a dollar return for the beef producer's funds expended though Per? If you don't know the cost or return how can you asses the value of something like this? or are you just happy to greenlight a multi-million dollar boondoggle because it feels good?
Do you believe the trickle down effect of prosperity works in this case of generic advertising where it doesn't work in the sphere of beef retail prices relative to live cattle price?
Are you happy that producers of live cattle pay all the price of the advertising and promoting Alberta beef?

[per]

Grassfarmer, I can't quantify the returns of a positive image, but it for sure is better than a negative image. You can't asses the value without knowing the cost and when you know the cost you still will have difficulty assessing "good will". I'm not happy or unhappy about green lighting the campaign as I wasn't the one green lighting it. There was still some good value there. Did it pay or was it worth it? Who knows for sure. I just know that my city friends talk about and like the image in a positive way. Am I happy the live guy pays the price? No, but I am used to stepping up to the plate when others won't. In this case that is what the ABP did. It might not fit today but I think it was the right thing to do at the time. (8 years ago) I just want to stay positive and this one has way more pluses than minuses. Being an apologist for the ABP isn't my normal thing but this time they got it right. Way bigger fish to fry out there than this one.

[coppertop]

per, I agree there are bigger fish to fry, the industry is in crisis and three women wearing cowboy duds aren't going to get us out of it.
My only issue with the ads were they chose women from one area of the province, connected to ABP whether they admit it or not, and showed a persona which really isn't the average female in the livestock industry.
Cost wise, good luck grassfarmer in getting any accurate information, ABP likes to pat themselves on the back for promoting our industry but they have fallen flat on their faces so many times that perhaps they do deserve some credit for showing a positive side of the industry sometimes.
If things keep going downhill in the industry, there won't be many to choose from the next time ABP decides to select REAL LIVE RANCHERS ( male, or female) for their advertising.