Economic and Marketing Information for Indiana Farmers (Sep. 30, 1964) |
Previous | 1 of 4 | Next |
|
|
Loading content ...
Economic and Marketing Information FOR INDIANA FARMERS Prepared by the Agricultural Staff of Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana September 30, 1964 Advertising and Promotion For Agricultural Marketing Edward Dailey, Agricultural Economics Using advertising and promotion to assist in selling farm products is not new. In 1907 a California marketing cooperative, for example, spent $10,000 in Iowa to promote oranges. Over the years promotion activities by producer-promoter groups have shown much variation. Farm products were promoted vigorously during the depression years and up to World War II. With the disappearance of the wartime demands commodity promotion has expanded both in numbers of groups promoting and in size of budgets. Latest USDA surveys show that over 1,200 commodity groups are currently spending about 100 million dollars per year for promotion and advertising. Opinions Divided The merit of using promotion to expand consumption of food products has been widely debated. Proponents of advertising for farm products can point to campaigns where increases in consumption as a result of advertising and promotion are a matter of record. Other observers of agricultural product advertising will point out that gains made in consumption of one product through promotion will be offset by lower consumption of a substitute product. Despite divided opinions, the promotion of farm products assumes a large and increasing interest to producer groups and to those engaged in marketing agricultural products. Variation Exists in Promotion Opportunity While promotion has long been used by some commodity groups, to others it is new and untried. Many questions are being asked about organizing for promotion, and about the costs, practices and effectiveness of promotion for various commodities and marketing situations. While a favorable cost/benefit relation for promotion campaigns for some commodities is a matter of record, for others the record is not quite so clear. Studies made of promotion effectiveness show that the opportunity for effective use of advertising and promotion varies markedly among different products. Each situation as it relates to advertising and promotion must be studied separately. Advertising appears to work wonders in some cases, yet can fail miserably in others. The Promotability Audit Appraisal The test (see page 2) is designed to serve both current and potential agricultural product advertisers. For those groups with existing promotional programs it may provide the basis for revising or strengthening the program. For those considering employing promotion to expand demand it provides a structure to consider the important factors in a systematic way. This test or appraisal is based on accepted principles of advertising, on experience of producer-promoter groups and on studies of demand and market research. It outlines considerations important to profitable promotion. How the questions are answered will give a good indication of the effectiveness of a promotion program for a particular product or commodity group. This appraisal calls for an honest evaluation by all those interested in the outcome. A rating scale is used to allow differences in judgment to be registered. A high score indicates greater opportunity for an investment in promotion to give favorable results. The audit can serve as a guide but the exact score at which promotion should be undertaken cannot be pinpointed. Audit Use May Help Promotion can be an effective tool for some farm commodities and some marketing situations. However, as might be indicated by the audit appraisal some situations are better adapted to the use of advertising and promotion than are others. With our high present and potential capacity to produce agricultural products promotion will continue to occupy the interests of many producer groups. Even so, the practice of producer-sponsored commodity promotion will in all likelihood, continue to be debated. The chances for making good promotion decisions can be increased by a consideration of the principles and guidelines listed in the promotability audit appraisal.
Object Description
Title | Economic and Marketing Information for Indiana Farmers (Sep. 30, 1964) |
Purdue Identification Number | UA14-13-econ196409 |
Date of Original | 1964 |
Publisher | Purdue University. Agricultural Extension Service |
Subjects (LCSH) |
Farm produce--Indiana--Marketing Agriculture--Economic aspects--Indiana |
Genre | Periodical |
Collection Title | Extension Economic & Marketing Information (Purdue University. Agricultural Extension) |
Rights | Copyright Purdue University. All rights reserved. |
Coverage | United States - Indiana |
Type | text |
Format | JP2 |
Language | eng |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Date Digitized | 04/03/2015 |
Digitization Specifications | Original scanned at 400 ppi on a BookEye 3 scanner using Opus software. Display images generated in Contentdm as JP2000s; file format for archival copy is uncompressed TIF format. |
URI | UA14-13-econ196409.tif |
Description
Title | Economic and Marketing Information for Indiana Farmers (Sep. 30, 1964) |
Purdue Identification Number | UA14-13-econ196409 |
Transcript | Economic and Marketing Information FOR INDIANA FARMERS Prepared by the Agricultural Staff of Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana September 30, 1964 Advertising and Promotion For Agricultural Marketing Edward Dailey, Agricultural Economics Using advertising and promotion to assist in selling farm products is not new. In 1907 a California marketing cooperative, for example, spent $10,000 in Iowa to promote oranges. Over the years promotion activities by producer-promoter groups have shown much variation. Farm products were promoted vigorously during the depression years and up to World War II. With the disappearance of the wartime demands commodity promotion has expanded both in numbers of groups promoting and in size of budgets. Latest USDA surveys show that over 1,200 commodity groups are currently spending about 100 million dollars per year for promotion and advertising. Opinions Divided The merit of using promotion to expand consumption of food products has been widely debated. Proponents of advertising for farm products can point to campaigns where increases in consumption as a result of advertising and promotion are a matter of record. Other observers of agricultural product advertising will point out that gains made in consumption of one product through promotion will be offset by lower consumption of a substitute product. Despite divided opinions, the promotion of farm products assumes a large and increasing interest to producer groups and to those engaged in marketing agricultural products. Variation Exists in Promotion Opportunity While promotion has long been used by some commodity groups, to others it is new and untried. Many questions are being asked about organizing for promotion, and about the costs, practices and effectiveness of promotion for various commodities and marketing situations. While a favorable cost/benefit relation for promotion campaigns for some commodities is a matter of record, for others the record is not quite so clear. Studies made of promotion effectiveness show that the opportunity for effective use of advertising and promotion varies markedly among different products. Each situation as it relates to advertising and promotion must be studied separately. Advertising appears to work wonders in some cases, yet can fail miserably in others. The Promotability Audit Appraisal The test (see page 2) is designed to serve both current and potential agricultural product advertisers. For those groups with existing promotional programs it may provide the basis for revising or strengthening the program. For those considering employing promotion to expand demand it provides a structure to consider the important factors in a systematic way. This test or appraisal is based on accepted principles of advertising, on experience of producer-promoter groups and on studies of demand and market research. It outlines considerations important to profitable promotion. How the questions are answered will give a good indication of the effectiveness of a promotion program for a particular product or commodity group. This appraisal calls for an honest evaluation by all those interested in the outcome. A rating scale is used to allow differences in judgment to be registered. A high score indicates greater opportunity for an investment in promotion to give favorable results. The audit can serve as a guide but the exact score at which promotion should be undertaken cannot be pinpointed. Audit Use May Help Promotion can be an effective tool for some farm commodities and some marketing situations. However, as might be indicated by the audit appraisal some situations are better adapted to the use of advertising and promotion than are others. With our high present and potential capacity to produce agricultural products promotion will continue to occupy the interests of many producer groups. Even so, the practice of producer-sponsored commodity promotion will in all likelihood, continue to be debated. The chances for making good promotion decisions can be increased by a consideration of the principles and guidelines listed in the promotability audit appraisal. |
Tags
Add tags for Economic and Marketing Information for Indiana Farmers (Sep. 30, 1964)
Comments
Post a Comment for Economic and Marketing Information for Indiana Farmers (Sep. 30, 1964)