4 ms·

The article made a sudden shift away from "how consumer behavior has changed" and toward "this is what big companies must do", and I don't think it handled that

The article made a sudden shift away from "how consumer behavior has changed" and toward "this is what big companies must do", and I don't think it handled that shift very well. Should companies abandon frozen food research? There's not really a compelling argument in this piece for why. There are still large parts of the consumer market that rely on frozen and canned foods because they don't lose as much to spoilage. Research into how to mix "frozen" with "... but still pretty healthy" could actually be a huge step forward for some of these big companies. Because it's not just agricultural and economic policy, it's also consumer lifestyles that aren't necessarily compatible with a "buy everything fresh 3x per week" approach. Some people have trouble getting to the store that often. Some rely on lunch foods that can be prepared in 3 minutes with the microwave at work. Some rely on foods that can go for a long time without spoiling. While a lot of consumers have shifted away from prepared foods, there are still a lot who have reasons not to yet.

tptacek 11y ago
What's annoying about this is that the anchor point the article uses to draw the conclusion that big brands have to change their strategy is the market shift towards "perimeter" foods --- produce, deli, dairy, bakery, prepared food --- and the suggestion that this meant consumers were buying more produce and fewer frozen meals. In fact, a giant part of Whole Foods strategy is to get customers to treat them like a high-class version of Boston Market --- which is to say like a counter service family style restaurant. That has less to do with what ingredients customers shop for, and more to do with the fact that people aren't preparing meals at home at all. Later Also: click through to the report they're citing, and then mentally walk a grocery store and ask yourself what isn't a "perimeter" product? Flour, bottled tomato sauce, chips, dry pasta, canned beans, frozen dinners --- but pretty much every home-cooked meal will depend somehow on the produce section, dairy, the deli, or the meat counter.
- jkarneges 11y ago
  > That has less to do with what ingredients customers shop for, and more to do with the fact that people aren't preparing meals at home at all. I'd say it's a bit of both. It's nice to know that the prepared food at WFM adheres to the same guidelines as the rest of the store (e.g. no HFCS, no trans fat, humane meats, etc). It's pretty hard to find a restaurant anywhere with such standards.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    I'm a lot less sure. Whole Foods sells and uses factory protein. They have to: they're one of the largest grocers in the country. I'm an investor in a very well-known Chicago local butcher, and they have trouble meeting demand --- and they're a store you have to go out of your way to drive to to get local food. I'm somewhat skeptical of Whole Foods meat. I buy it without worrying, and I do actively avoid Tyson and Smithfield and whatnot, but I'm probably not avoiding antibiotics or animal cruelty by doing so. (WFM discloses this to customers with their 1-2-3-4-5 scale). General rule of thumb: if you can buy a package of 12 or more chicken thighs, and there's another of the same package of 12 or more chicken thighs sitting right behind the one you bought, you're buying factory chicken. Most restaurants are eliminating trans fats. I think HFCS is a cosmetic issue. Sugar is sugar, and it's all bad for you. But then: if you make potato salad at home, is it likely to be more healthful than what you get at WFM? The opposite is, I think, true: WFM's is tailored for palatability, and yours is tailored for ease of preparation, because you only have one family to feed, and WFM can amortize palatability over hundreds of families. Palatability means sugar and fat.
    - jkarneges 11y ago
      Whether or not any of WFM policies pass scrutiny doesn't change the fact many people do visit the store due to these policies and that the prepared foods adhere to them. :) I am hopeful about the meat, at least. In the bay area, much of the chicken comes locally from Mary's which appears to be a legit operation.
    - deciplex 11y ago
      > Sugar is sugar You seem to be knowledgeable enough about nutrition in general to also know this isn't true. There are different kinds of sugar, so what are you getting at here?
vdaniuk 11y ago
Require large food corporations to become B-corps or non-profits. Wouldn't that solve most problems with food industry comparatively fast?
- tptacek 11y ago
  No, it would just mean that hedge funds would end up owning large portfolios of "small" companies selling crappy food, while staples would get more expensive, so that white people would feel a little bit better psychologically while the South Side of Chicago would remain a food desert where families have to rely on McDonalds to feed their kids every night.

tptacek 11y ago

What's annoying about this is that the anchor point the article uses to draw the conclusion that big brands have to change their strategy is the market shift towards "perimeter" foods --- produce, deli, dairy, bakery, prepared food --- and the suggestion that this meant consumers were buying more produce and fewer frozen meals. In fact, a giant part of Whole Foods strategy is to get customers to treat them like a high-class version of Boston Market --- which is to say like a counter service family style restaurant. That has less to do with what ingredients customers shop for, and more to do with the fact that people aren't preparing meals at home at all. Later Also: click through to the report they're citing, and then mentally walk a grocery store and ask yourself what isn't a "perimeter" product? Flour, bottled tomato sauce, chips, dry pasta, canned beans, frozen dinners --- but pretty much every home-cooked meal will depend somehow on the produce section, dairy, the deli, or the meat counter.

jkarneges 11y ago
> That has less to do with what ingredients customers shop for, and more to do with the fact that people aren't preparing meals at home at all. I'd say it's a bit of both. It's nice to know that the prepared food at WFM adheres to the same guidelines as the rest of the store (e.g. no HFCS, no trans fat, humane meats, etc). It's pretty hard to find a restaurant anywhere with such standards.
- tptacek 11y ago
  I'm a lot less sure. Whole Foods sells and uses factory protein. They have to: they're one of the largest grocers in the country. I'm an investor in a very well-known Chicago local butcher, and they have trouble meeting demand --- and they're a store you have to go out of your way to drive to to get local food. I'm somewhat skeptical of Whole Foods meat. I buy it without worrying, and I do actively avoid Tyson and Smithfield and whatnot, but I'm probably not avoiding antibiotics or animal cruelty by doing so. (WFM discloses this to customers with their 1-2-3-4-5 scale). General rule of thumb: if you can buy a package of 12 or more chicken thighs, and there's another of the same package of 12 or more chicken thighs sitting right behind the one you bought, you're buying factory chicken. Most restaurants are eliminating trans fats. I think HFCS is a cosmetic issue. Sugar is sugar, and it's all bad for you. But then: if you make potato salad at home, is it likely to be more healthful than what you get at WFM? The opposite is, I think, true: WFM's is tailored for palatability, and yours is tailored for ease of preparation, because you only have one family to feed, and WFM can amortize palatability over hundreds of families. Palatability means sugar and fat.
  - jkarneges 11y ago
    Whether or not any of WFM policies pass scrutiny doesn't change the fact many people do visit the store due to these policies and that the prepared foods adhere to them. :) I am hopeful about the meat, at least. In the bay area, much of the chicken comes locally from Mary's which appears to be a legit operation.
  - deciplex 11y ago
    > Sugar is sugar You seem to be knowledgeable enough about nutrition in general to also know this isn't true. There are different kinds of sugar, so what are you getting at here?

vdaniuk 11y ago

Require large food corporations to become B-corps or non-profits. Wouldn't that solve most problems with food industry comparatively fast?

tptacek 11y ago
No, it would just mean that hedge funds would end up owning large portfolios of "small" companies selling crappy food, while staples would get more expensive, so that white people would feel a little bit better psychologically while the South Side of Chicago would remain a food desert where families have to rely on McDonalds to feed their kids every night.