MEAT-BUYING PATTERNS DISSECTED BY NCBA

LIZA B. ZIMMERMAN

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- An in-depth study of consumers' purchase patterns at the meat case was released by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association at the annual Meat Marketing Conference here.

For the study, which NCBA is calling the Meat Purchase Diary, panel data were submitted monthly by 3,000 households -- chosen to geographically and demographically represent the U.S. population -- and collected and analyzed during a three-year period.

The study's meat-case panel data show the species purchased, the cut, the brand, the store format where bought and whether the item was featured at the time of purchase. These details "give the scope and frequency [of purchases] and show differences by region and cut, which we can [use to] classify shoppers by type of purchase, and set a merchandising mix based on those references," said Kevin Yost, NCBA's executive director of channel marketing.

He called this kind of information unique because of the way it "looks at how consumers shop the entire meat case and not just one protein."

Yost said the diary is the most comprehensive behavioral study of consumer meat-purchasing habits available. The objective was "to cut through the void of information that surrounds meat categories in order to help retailers grow the meat category by better understanding and meeting consumer needs."

Yost stated that retailers need to run the entire meat category as a business, and see it as "one supercategory with interdependencies across proteins, the management of which has to be based on consumer behavior."

In the segment of the study that Yost presented at the Meat Marketing Conference, consumers were divided into five categories, based on the types of purchases they make. The categories were beef dominant, rotators, poultry/pork dominant, budget-driven and light users.

The study classified 27.2% of households as beef dominant, 22.8% as rotators, 8.1% as poultry/pork dominant, 17.8% as budget-driven and 24.1% as light users.

In addition to being the households atop the study's numerical list, the so-called beef dominants and rotators were also categorized as the most valuable customers, in terms of how much they spend, the study said.

Beef-dominant households spend an average of $378 annually, the rotators $366, the poultry/pork-dominant buyers $299, the budget-driven consumers $259 and the light users $54.

Rotators split their purchases between beef and poultry and thus need to be serviced with broad assortments in both, the study suggested. This group also "makes about 20% more trips to the meat department than the second-highest group," noted Lynn Chaney, a partner at Chicago-based Blattberg, Chaney & Associates, a marketing consulting firm that is a category-management consultant to the NCBA.

The diary also covered the "reach," as a measure of penetration, and the frequency of purchases of different items in the meat case. These data were analyzed to pinpoint the promotion sensitivity and marketing potential of various items.

In a study segment presented at the conference, cuts like ground beef, which scored high marks in reach and frequency, were classified as marquee items with wide appeal and high price sensitivity, suitable for frequent promotions and deep discounts.

Ham, an item with medium reach and low frequency, was defined as a borderline-necessary item that may often be priced too aggressively and is appropriate to promote occasionally.

Chicken breast, with low reach and high frequency, fits into a key niche category with high price sensitivity, which is appropriate to promote with an average discount to encourage store loyalty, the study said. Beef ribs, with low ratings in both categories, were classified as convenience meats that afford a good opportunity to increase profit margins.

On accessibility of the Meat Purchasing Diary's data, Yost said in an interview after the conference that "anyone who wants access, we are handling on a case-by-case basis. Based on what level of information you want, there's a corresponding price.

"[Since] retailers may go after different markets, we would like to form a relationship with people who want access, to understand their needs and see what they want from the data," Yost added.