New Commissioner

Name:                            David Anning

Role:                              Independent Commissioner, UMF Honey Association

Contact:                        umfcommissioner@gmail.com

David Anning

 

I had the opportunity to meet some of you at the Science day and the AGM in Hamilton and look forward to developing that contact.

John has asked me to outline my background and the role that I have for the Association as Independent Commissioner.

I originally trained in Quarrying with a speciality in Asphalt and subsequently held management roles in capital plant companies exporting to Europe North Africa and the Middle East.

Marrying a New Zealander in London we came to NZ in the early 70’s en route to Australia, however family circumstances changed our direction and we took over a near derelict Citrus orchard in Kerikeri replanting it for juice fruit, during which time we kept bees. I helped form the Kerikeri Growers Co-op and became the executive officer ultimately marketing the non-orange crop for virtually all producing areas of NZ, and forming the juicing joint venture with the local Dairy Co-op.

After five years I returned to Auckland to manage industrial marketing companies and then undertook international executive search both in NZ and Australia and took up board appointments in Security, Recruitment, Insurance and Property investment.

In 2006 I was invited to manage the Italian Government Trade Office in NZ a role I held until the closure in 2011.

The Science day demonstrated the extraordinary potential for the UMF Honey producers and I was greatly impressed with both the volume and quality of research work being undertaken.

My main role is the guardianship of the UMF brand and being available to licence holders in the event of any issues they wish to raise.

Since the AGM I have spent some time viewing the honey shelves in supermarkets and delis in Auckland and visiting members’ websites.

Whilst in the Lunn Avenue New World I saw a customer take the last six large jars of +15 UMF Honey a purchase of around $250 and when I asked if she was addicted she said she was sending them to China. She was not Asian.

The lack of clear consistent UMF brand display is disappointing and of considerable concern. There is also the need to clarify the vast difference between Methylglyoxal and UMF +15 to the consumer if this is not done effectively then there is the risk of Methylglyoxal becoming the norm at the consumer level. The proposed promotional budget should consider this when developing the NZ campaign.

There is an immense job to be done both at the producer and consumer level. Association members need to understand the value of a consistent brand presentation using a common logo and how that can impact on the consumer’s perception of the product. I strongly recommend that all members check that their branding is in compliance and effectively displayed.