BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Murray McGregor <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 27 Sep 2002 10:01:43 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (54 lines)
In article <004001c26186$b8d872a0$24d3883e@default>, Harry Goudie
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>I don't think I belong to a "brigade".

Didnt mean to suggest you did. Perhaps should have stressed the AND a
bit more clearly.

>In fact I feel quite alone and
>isolated in my views


>These days this would seem to be an uncommon approach with many
>beekeepers trying to cover up failings in their product.  In my opinion
>these people are guilty of deceiving the public

This very easily reads as negative marketing, in that you may divulge
what you see as the shortcomings of the products of others, even if it
requires a bit of coaxing out of you. From my experience this is a 'turn
off' to most, but will probably attract a small but loyal customer base.
You risk however, becoming the victim of retaliatory negative marketing.
A lose-lose situation for all.

>I only started selling my honey a couple of weeks ago and I have had to
>discuss GM contamination of honey on at least four occasions.

 From the above, perhaps at a subconcious level, you probably invite it.
If you introduce concepts of relative purity in your selling technique
then people do leap in with 'things they have heard' in the media and
you can get involved in long conversations. Watch out for the eyes
glazing over though, most do not actually want an in depth discussion,
they are just making conversation on a current topic you are likely to
have in common.

> This is the
>first year I have ever had this sort of discussion.  I got the  impression
>that the customers were looking for assurance that the honey was not
>contaminated.  I don't know whether they would have bought the honey if it
>had been contaminated

The very use of the word contaminated is laden with negative
implications. You and I both would be reluctant to buy anything deemed
contaminated, before we had even heard with what.
>
>It seems to me that hiding the truth and deceiving the public has got GM
>companies a bad reputation and it would seem that some beekeepers are intent
>on following their example.


If you are going to say things like that you had better be prepared to
name names and state your case. I know of no-one, friend and foe alike,
who is in any way meeting your description.
--
Murray McGregor

ATOM RSS1 RSS2