With Australia continuing to have some of the fastest growing food prices in the developed world, you have to wonder if Australian consumers are being milked by the major supermarket chains.

Saving us money? Pull the udder one, Coles and Woolies. Pic: Bloomberg

After all, Coles and Woolworths control over 87% of Australian supermarkets over 2,000 square metres. That clearly gives them plenty of market power which allows them to push up grocery prices and hence Australia’s food inflation.

Sometimes, however, they keep us guessing about their real agenda. So while we are hearing a lot about fresh milk prices coming down, we don’t hear much about what’s happening with other prices being charged elsewhere in the supermarket or at petrol bowsers linked to Coles or Woolworths.

Let’s start with fresh milk prices. Here we shouldn’t get too excited as the devil is always in the detail and we need to ask a few questions.

First up, if fresh milk prices can come down now why didn’t they come down before? Lower prices today must mean that we were being gouged when prices were higher.

Of course, the major supermarket chains have rushed out to say how great they are in lowering generic brand milk prices. They claim that they are listening to their customers who are looking for price savings. Naturally, it’s a welcome relief that the major supermarket chains may be listening to their customers on milk prices, but why haven’t they listened before?

The sceptical customer will ask if the major supermarket chains are listening to consumers on the price of other products. We have seen petrol prices shoot up opportunistically despite the strong Aussie dollar and the Singapore benchmark price we use to calculate local prices having remained consistent in recent weeks. Yes, international crude oil prices have jumped but local prices are instead linked to the refined price of petrol out of Singapore.

So petrol prices have jumped quickly and the major retailers have been able to increase their average retail petrol profits during the past year. Now Coles and Woolworths are quick to say that the cheaper generic brand milk is not being paid for by higher petrol prices. No surprises in that reply, but let’s not forget that it’s the same parent company that sells milk and petrol. So from a parent company perspective, any loss of revenue on milk can easily be offset by consumers being gouged on petrol.

The same logic applies if lower generic brand milk prices are being offset by higher grocery prices elsewhere in the supermarket. That’s obviously a game that Coles and Woolworths could play. They can go out and publicise cheaper generic brand milk to get customers through the door and once consumers are there they will buy other products at inflated prices.

This is the old “loss leader” trick. Get customers hooked by a super special and then fleece them on other products. It’s the oldest trick in the book and consumers shouldn’t be fooled.

These days a loss leader strategy by large companies like Coles and Woolworths may have very serious legal implications under our competition laws. Under the Birdsville Amendment drafted by the author and enacted by Federal Parliament a company having a substantial market share cannot sell a product below the company’s cost for a sustained period if that has an anti-competitive purpose like trying to drive out a competitor.

In this case below-cost pricing, more commonly known as predatory pricing, is designed to destroy competition. What happens when the competition is destroyed? Well of course the price of the product goes up. That’s clearly bad news for competition and consumers.

Are Coles and Woolworths selling milk below cost? Well, we don’t know and that’s why our competition regulator, the ACCC, needs to ask them some tough questions. Also, the recently announced Senate Inquiry into milk prices should be a valuable opportunity for the Senators on the Committee to ask probing questions and for Coles and Woolworths to explain themselves.

In the meantime, there is a more worrying side to the lower generic brand milk prices. The real question is who is actually funding the lower prices. We know that if it’s the chains funding the lower prices then there’s the danger that consumers could get gouged on other products sold by the chains.

Just remember that there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Consumers can pay for a so-called discount one way or another and advertised discounts on a few products shouldn’t distract us from the real question. Are struggling Aussie families paying more overall for groceries? Of course they are given the food inflation figures from the OECD.

Now there is another concern and that’s where the lower generic brand milk prices end up being funded by the dairy farmers. Our dairy farmers are the best in world, but they are doing it very tough as they have been screwed down for years on the price they get for their milk.

If lower generic brand milk prices at the supermarket mean that dairy farmers are forced to take a further cut in the farmgate price of milk, then we will see even more of them leave their farms. That’s the scariest part of what‘s happening with milk prices. If we lose any more dairy farmers, then we risk losing access to fresh milk.

In many countries, consumers are forced to buy Long Life milk rather than fresh milk. This change has even been pushed by the big overseas supermarket chains as Long Life milk means lower handling costs and higher profit margins for the supermarkets. For these overseas consumers, fresh milk has become a luxury item.

So in the rush to cheaper fresh milk prices by Coles and Woolworths, let’s not forget our dairy farmers because if we lose them we end up paying a higher price by losing our world class access to fresh milk.

84 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Murray Whiley says:

      05:58am | 16/02/11

      I like to think i am the shopper from hell always taking the time to stock up on loss leaders and save about 25 to 30% ON MY WEEKLY BILL,all businises at times ,get caught with excess stock ,check use by dates and use your freezer blanch and freeze veges when seasonal gluts occur milk and bread can also be frozen thats what people out bush routinely do ,THE SECRET is supermarkets cater for a broad range of customers the time poor pay the most ,for conveniance .So if you want to save money make the time ,,,,,,is money.

    • acotrel says:

      08:05am | 16/02/11

      In our toen a little while ago, there was outrage over the Labor government applying legislation about kids working on their parent’s farms.  The costs of producing milk on a dairy farm is more than the farmer gets paid for it.  The shortfall has to come from somewhere!  At last look, the price paid to the farmer was about 22 cents per litre - it cost 27 cents to produce - what is the price in the supermarket? This free market thingy is really great?

    • Josh says:

      01:33pm | 16/02/11

      Murray, grammar and punctuation. USE IT! How hard is it to use fullstops? All who have read your comment have wasted a few extra minutes trying to work out what the hell you are on about. It’s just bloody rude.

    • Jo says:

      06:52am | 16/02/11

      Everyone keeps talking about it.  Fruit and vege, meat, bread, alcohol, newsagents, petrol, farmers and the next will be chemists.
      This article and Barnaby Joyce asking people to support the farmers will not make a difference. The ACCC is a wasted space.

      It’s time for the little people to band together and declare war,  put it out there, it the “in thing” to buy from the little people.
      Facebook brought down a Goverment.
      C and W, the big 2, are addictive. I started with the petrol years ago and now support all the independents, it does take time to get unhooked.

    • acotrel says:

      08:08am | 16/02/11

      Jo, is the government (ACCC) supposed to intervene in the FREE MARKET at every level, so we can get price justice? The actions of the supermarket buying groups are another example of ‘market failure’!

    • Reg says:

      08:58am | 16/02/11

      While I’d like to think that W’worth and Coles are bearing the “loss” of lower milk prices, I cannot for a moment accept that they are NOT asking dairy farmers to bear some of that loss as well.

      There is no reason that food prices should reduce significantly, considering how the agricultural support system of Australians has been abused for years. Now with a Global famine looming, some of the outlandish margins of the big two should be redirected to the farmers and producers.

    • fairsfair says:

      09:23am | 16/02/11

      Agreed. I am currently going through the process now Jo. Shopping at my local IGA (which I have looked into - it is actually locally owned and produce sourced). I go to the little old man Mobil who actually fills your car for you. He is 2c dearer, but I am ok with an extra 80c fuel bill, I think I’ll get by.

      It is hard to do actually. The IGA is a little further out of my way and it is tempting to rip into coles or woolies as they are on they way home and they are a little bit cheaper. My reasoning is though - it is worth it to spend that little bit more knowing that he yoghurt I buy is made in Cairns, the milk comes from up the road and so do the Alfalfa sprouts!

      If we all looked into where what we buy comes from, changed our habits we would see a market shift and also look to return a bit of competition.

      If you start a facebook page, I will joint it! Hmmm, what to call it though…

    • rufus says:

      10:45am | 16/02/11

      Where is the evidence that the milk prices paid to farmers has fallen as a result of supermarket retail price? The article only talks about ‘if farmers are forced to take a cut’. In no reporting or commentary about this have I seen evidence of farmers taking a cut in price paid to them.

      Let’s not form opinions on supposition.

    • Joel B1 says:

      07:18am | 16/02/11

      Frank, your story would benefit from you actually doing the shopping for, say a family of four. As I do.

      For instance you say “lower generic brand milk prices are being offset by higher grocery prices elsewhere in the supermarket”.

      Big Deal.

      Milk is a basic foodstuff, my two primary school aged kids drink 2 litres of it a day, my wife drinks 0.5 litres a day. Before Coles dropped it’s prices I was saving about $700 a year by purchasing Coles brand milk, now it’s more like $900.

      I understand this probably to the detriment of dairy farmers, but that is the only valid argument against this pricing.

      Choice says that Soda Water has gone up in price! Is that it? Soda Water? Soda Water is a discretionary, maybe even luxury item. Milk isn’t.

      It’s a sad day when Choice says lower milk prices are bad. I suspect Choice has fallen victim to the Green philosophy that “big business is inherently evil”. Which is patently rubbish.

      Get out of the office and grab a basket and do the bloody shopping before you write how bad cheaper milk is. You were wrong about GroceryWatch and you’re wrong about this.

    • Lola says:

      09:55am | 16/02/11

      Actually I would classify milk as a luxury item because we don’t need milk to survive. That’s a cultural myth.

      Did you know that after humans turn 12 they no longer process milk in the igestion system as a food?  As with other mammals, we no longer need milk after we have grown up and developed. In quite actual fact, why humans depend on milk (and it’s mostly only Europeans, Indians and Africans) is quite bizarre if you think about it. Grown humans do not need to rely on another mammals lactating to survive.

      I was shocked the other day when 2 colleagues of mine didn’t realise that cows weren’t just ‘milk machines but are actually artificially inseminated and kept constantly pregnant OR torn away from their offspring (the babies are kept very close but locked away from their mothers so they don’t steal the farmers milk - good luck if your a male calf, you’ll be veal soon) so the milk keeps flowing.

      Calcium can be sourced from other things like green leafy vegetables and fish bones etc.

    • undertow says:

      10:20am | 16/02/11

      Interesting that the price of generic milk in the big 2 is only now dropping down to match that of some of the independent grocers/ fruit & veg stores that I prefer to purchase my milk from. Yet for years, these independent grocers have been able to give fair price to both the farmers and to the consumer.

      I don’t think that Frank is necessarily saying that lower milk prices are bad, but what he is suggesting is that between the big 2, their practice may involve a modicum of both gouging and predatory pricing, which works to gain that $900 saving back from you in other ways, whilst negatively impacting a primary producing industry that will have long term ramifications on the price you pay for your milk in the future.

      P.S. I feed a family of 5 on an income of less that 60K, and I feed them well.

    • Grant says:

      10:49am | 16/02/11

      Your body doesnt process milk as food? What on earth are you talking about? of course it does. All things ingested whether its juice, beer peanuts, bread or anti biotics are processed the same way, broken down by various enzymes, acids and alkalies into component parts to be reassembled into compounds the body needs. Nobody ‘depends’ on milk unless its a main food source. Ridiculous.

    • Spanish Girl says:

      11:43am | 16/02/11

      I agree, Lola.  Humans aren’t designed to digest the milk of other species.  Being vegan, I don’t have to worry about whether milk goes up or down in price.  And I shop at farmers markets for my fruit and veg.  But when I was buying everything from the grocery stores, I would try and buy Australian whenever I could.  To me, the small price increase was justified to keep our industries going and money in our own country where it belongs.

      But after reading about how our food is produced, I’m glad I went vegan.

    • rufus says:

      12:38pm | 16/02/11

      Lola, if there is any myth making, it’s coming from you. It’s well documented that dairy products are far and away the best dietary source of calcium, an essential element. This would not be so if adult humans could not process milk, as you falsely claim.

      Good luck trying to get sufficient dietary calcium from fish bones. You’ll either choke to death on them, or end up with chalky old bones from calcium deficiency.

    • Dogbolter says:

      01:11pm | 16/02/11

      Obviously not a farmer are you Joel? They do more than a day’s work for less than office workers, they don’t deserve to be treated like, well, cattle. Would you like it to hapen to you? Besides, fresh milk (luxury or not) is something we should be keeping. The alternative is long-life milk which is what the big 2 are heading for - less storage space and cheaper to store as they don’t need refrigeration.

      Also, I don’t want to be drinking melamine poisoned milk from China, do you? Stop being so bloody selfish and take a look at the big picture.

    • Jane says:

      01:28pm | 16/02/11

      Joel, you desperately need to reduce teh amount of milk your kids are drinking and switch them to water. If you drink too much milk, even as a primary schooler, you lose the benefit the extra calcium provides because you body can only absorb and use so much a day. You would be surprised at how many dairy farmers there are with Oestoperosis from drinking/eating too much dairy.

    • Lola says:

      01:31pm | 16/02/11

      Grant - Nope it doesn’t. Milk is not processed as ‘food’. It is processed as anything else ingested like anything else you drink - nutrients absorbed and the rest out with the waste - but grown humans (i.e. 13+) do not use milk as a food as what an infant or a child would.

      It’s not ridiculous. It’s fact. Name one other mammal that is as reliant on milk as European, some African and Indian people are? Not one.

      Rufus - I’m not making anything up. As I said, name one mammal that requires milk after they mature.

      It is unnecessary and unnatural to drink milk. Technically we could establish industrial sized farming of rat, horse, dog, elephant or blue whale milk the same as cow milk. It’s only because of the Indo-Aryan type of agriculture practiced that cows have been used as our majority source of calcium. We are reliant on milk as our source of calcium because that’s how it’s always been. Nothing more, nothing less.

      And with fish bones I didn’t mean eating the whole carcass - the tiny slithers of bones you get with sardines or salmon. Those are very healthy for you.

      Also - explain this. The majority of people in the world are lactose intolerant. What does that say for it?

    • Dogbolter says:

      02:18pm | 16/02/11

      Lola, Jane and all you other anti-dairy kooks…

      by your reasoning, we should not be eating bread, as humans were not meant to farm wheat or gro vegetables. We should not be eating tinned foods that are years past their shelf life, that’s not natural either. You shouldn’t be wearing clothing, we had fur once to cover ourselves. It’s natural to be naked, not to wear clothes. I respect your beliefs in standing against milk. \i don’t respect you shoving your opinions down my throat. If you feel so strongly about issues, go out and get involved in the ones that matter, like world poverty (milk would be such a help, it’s a high protein food), population control or greening the planet. None of what you say can be backed up by scientific fact, only hysterical chain letters spread by email.

      I’ll bet you believe canola oil gives you cancer or mustard gas poisoning, baby formula and dog food makes stomachs explode and tampon manufacturers use asbestos in them. By the way, did you know soy products are linked to thyroid cancer?

    • Lola says:

      03:50pm | 16/02/11

      Dogbolter - no one is forcing ideas down your throat. This is on a public debate forum and if you don’t want to read it, don’t.

      Actually sourcing milk for the starving world would be a bad idea. The amount of methane and pollution, land degradation and deforestation required to sustain a dairy farm is immense. IMMENSE. Cows are mega methane machines. Bad idea. Very very bad.

      And likening cows to grains is just ridiculous. Cows are living animals just as we are, grains are not. Yes they came from a plant but I’m not exactly going to go down the root of not harming plants am I?  Cows make milk for their offspring, not us. Grain is grown thanks to a farmer sowing the seed and growing the plant. Farmers impregnate cows and then take their calves away from them so we can get the milk and the calves can’t. What’s more natural and humane?

      The point isn’t even about the cows, it’s about the fact that this whole issue is a complete beat up because milk is not as necessary to the diet as everyone makes it out to be.

    • Lexi says:

      07:49am | 16/02/11

      I have been concerned about dairy farmers not being able to sustain the downward pressure from the big duopoly - it’s why for some time now, my family ONLY buys Devondale milk.

      Devondale is the only nationally-available Australian owned milk business. Dairy Farmers is owned by Singaporeans, Pura by Italians etc. If we want to ensure we have Australian farms and farmers into the future, if we want the food grown here to stay here in times of a global food shortage, we all need to see the big picture and buy for the long term. It’s not about what’s cheapest this week or next, it’s about wanting to be able to buy food in 10 years’ time.

    • Simon says:

      08:27am | 16/02/11

      Actually the same company (National Foods) who owns Dairy Farmers also owns Pura and it is a Jappanese Company.

      Joel, I think your missing point of the author, that is, we should be asking why we are paying more than other countries for groceries in general. You might save a couple of hundred dollars on milk ATM, but if we had increased compeition you might save the same, or even more, on your grocery bill overall. Wouldnt that help working families?

      Australian farmers are the worlds best, and it is important we support them now. If not, in the long run, we will pay more and have less control over our food security (both access and quality).

      Would you prefer to buy Australian or Chinese milk?

    • grumpy old man says:

      07:58am | 16/02/11

      Whilst not a great fan of either supermarket chain, it does seem that they are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t!.
      If the price of milk had gone up, there would be complaints that they are gouging, if the price goes down, the complaint is that they are predatory, and out to ruin the milk industry. The logic of these complaints eludes me, what is our expectation of the supermarket chains? Does everyone think it would be a good idea for them to charge more and pass the gain onto the suppliers? How much extra do we want to pay?
      Anyone who actually shops in these outlets will tell you that there is a war going on, and that with careful shopping its possible to take advantage of this. Personally, I think $2 for milk, and $5 for 2 loaves of bread sounds like a good deal.
      It does seem to me that we have become a nation of super whiners, we will complain about anything and everything because we can, with little real thought as to a rational argument to support our case.

    • Jane says:

      02:28pm | 17/02/11

      Except for me. I don’t buy bread or milk! smile How about giving me a discount on something else?

    • deb says:

      08:03am | 16/02/11

      I always check the online catalogues before i go shopping.On a tight budget it is a must.Coles usually comes out a winner with cheaper milk,bread and fruit.
      Meat of course is always expensive no matter which supermarket you go to.
      I would love to put my foot down and protest about farm gate prices ect… but i am afraid my money and my mouth only go so far.
      has anyone looked at the war between Coles and Wollies lately? one drops a pricey item,the other does the same,good for us anyway.
      far example 4 litre tins of oil,dropped over half price.what was the mark up?

    • rb says:

      08:28am | 16/02/11

      Coles and Woolies get a mark-up of all products they sell. Why give them any more by buying their brands?

    • fairsfair says:

      09:26am | 16/02/11

      It is the budget thing. It is so hard to make a stand when making a stand is the difference between a couple of extra loaves of bread a week for school lunches.

      I totally agree with your comment and don’t support home brands, but I only have myself to feed. If I had three teenagers to feed and was spending $400 a week on food, I’d be looking to save at every opportunity. This is what they are preying on. It is hard to look past your own comfort and preservation and think of others - in this instance the dairy farmers.

    • Zeta says:

      08:41am | 16/02/11

      Here’s an idea - stop drinking cow’s milk. It’s disgusting. Everyone agrees it’s weird and uncomfortable when people breast feed their children past puberty. Why don’t we agree it’s also weird to drink cow milk? Would you drink horse milk? Dog milk? Pig milk? Every mammal produces milk, go crazy. It’s bad for you. The human body isn’t designed to process it.

      Fact: the most bad ass races on Earth all have high levels of lactose intolerance. Native Americans? Lactose intolerant. Total bad asses. Maoris? High lactose intolerance, arch-bad asses. Japan, land of the Ninja - lactose intolerant. Black people, the race that gave us Shaft, Dr. Dre, and Rick James - frequently lactose intolerant. There’s a lesson there.

    • Lola says:

      09:58am | 16/02/11

      HAhaha I agree. Not many people actually understand or realise that it’s actually not necessary to drink milk. In fact drinking another mammals milk - designed for baby cows and not humans - is just horrible. It’s only because culturally people see the good cow and good farmer giving us milk which keeps our bones strong. They don’t actually realise how the cow makes the milk or why, or where the poor baby cow is missing out on their mum’s milk.

    • fairsfair says:

      10:03am | 16/02/11

      I’ve said it before Zeta - you are just jealous. You can not swim in the lactosey goodness that are dairy products. You can’t have bree and rocket on a cracker with a crisp white. You can’t don your large glasses, oversized boho handbag and wander the streets with a Venti iced coffee a la the Olsen twins. You know you want to. You know you are missing out…

      Lactose all the way! Don’t try and defame a wonderful part of nature that we have had the intelligence to capture due to pure intollerance. You are quite plainly a simplesugarist. Leave us alone to be with our upset stomachs, bad skin and the plethora of other mild complaints that are simply our bodies rejecting this foreign product. One day they will no longer be mild.

    • Samson says:

      10:54am | 16/02/11

      Maybe it is wrong to drink cow’s milk but brother don’t let your morality get in the way of such a real good time.  Loosen up, ditch your inhibitions.  Wear a masquerade mask if it helps.  Just close your eyes and get some sweet, sweet milkshake up inside you.  Your mind says no but (if you’ve got them) your lactase enzymes say “aww yeah baby gotta get some more of that shit”.

      p.s. How about Vikings?  No one has ever come close to matching them in the badass department and they were all over the cow’s milk.  Also Mongols drank the milk of their horses.  So they could kick ass for months at a time without ever needing to replenish their supplies.  Need I say more?

    • AdamC says:

      11:03am | 16/02/11

      Zeta, that argument is utterly ridiculous. People have bred dairy cattle for millenia. ‘Cows’ as we understand them never even existed in the wild; rather they are descended from aurochs, which no longer exist in the wild. So, while we may not be ‘designed’ (by whom, exacty?) to eat dairy products, the producers of the milk have very much been designed by us to produce it, for us.

      Fact: dairy products are great, especially cheeses.

    • BT says:

      11:11am | 16/02/11

      I agree with Zeta & Lola. The dairy industry’s marketing angle is that we need milk for the calcium when there is actually a lot of evidence to suggest that milk leaches calcium from the bones and increases osteoperosis.

      The dairy industry also has a lot to answer for regarding animal welfare.  Lobbying for it to be law that the calves don’t have to be fed for 30hrs prior to slaughter, as the dairy industry is currently in the process of doing, is cruel. Keeping it chained to the floor so it does not build muscle and keep the meat tender before slaughter (as many factory farms do) is cruel. Slaughtering a 5 day old calf that is separated from it’s mother minutes after birth because it is superfluous to their needs is cruel.

      Find alternatives, you don’t have to support a cruel industry.

    • Zeta says:

      11:51am | 16/02/11

      @ AdamC - What you’re talking about is the Secondary Products Revolution in agriculture that only dates back to the 3rd Century BC. No where near long enough for meaningful evolutionary changes in livestock. What, you think Old World farmers were tasting their cow milk thinking ‘hmm. This doesn’t taste much like breast milk’ and selectively breeding them? And with specific regard to cow milk, we’re talking exclusively about Northern Europe, where they lived through prolonged famines where they would have most likely bred cows for milk exclusively. In the last two and a half thousand years, Nordic people would have been evolving faster than their cows, since they’d have been the ones dieing of starvation. Even in the sub-continent, you still see high rates of lactose intolerance because during the SPD they were breeding Buffalo, whose milk has low levels of lactose. Horse milk has low levels of lactose. Goat’s milk has next to no lactose, which is why I’m eating a Greek salad with goat fetta right now.

      The only reason there is any level of lactose tolerance in the Anglo-Saxon population is because of the Migration Period. But Anglo-Saxon is a misnomer for a huge proportion of the population. If you’re from Greek, Italian, Mediteranean, Asian or Pacific heritage your genetic pre-disposition to lactoce tolerance is minimal, which is why milk and cheese are only small parts of the traditional diet.

      Personally, I don’t give a shit about cows. They’re an evolutionary dead end that would go extinct if we didn’t keep them. I care about humans, and the dairy industry does not - they care about money.

    • AdamC says:

      12:29pm | 16/02/11

      Zeta, googling the secondary products revolution suggested a date for like 3000 BC than 300. Such a length of time as this is quite long enough for substantial human-assisted evolution to occur. And, yes, I do think ancient farmers selectively bred their dairy cattle - are you seriously arguing they wouldn’t have? 

      I have no objection to goats milk or ewes milk cheeses, either, Zeta, but why restrict yourself?

    • Lola says:

      01:37pm | 16/02/11

      Adam C - you are misguided. No matter how far we have ‘developed’ dairy cows how do you think they make milk? Just because? Because the farmer feeds them special food which makes them give milk?

      NO! They artificially inseminate them keeping them perpetually pregnant and keep their babies away from them so they don’t drink OUR milk but close enough to keep the milk flowing.

      How is that ingenious? Pretty primitive if you ask me.

      And by the way - if you love milk so much why is it so taboo for a human mother to breastfeed her own child in public? She’s only doing what those precious cows are doing but instead of giving it to the baby cow who’s missed out on their own mother’s milk she’s actually giving it to a human baby as nature intended.

      Next time you see a lactating woman go and ask for some of her milk shake and see whether you enjoy it as much as you enjoy the cows milk.

    • Lola says:

      01:51pm | 16/02/11

      BT - I completely agree with you. Asians have one of the lowest rates of Osteoporosis yet they are culturally milk free. Yet Europeans who are indoctrinated with the noble dairy farmer myth and that you need milk for your bones have the highest osteoporosis rates given how much calcium they drink.

      I have also read that dairy is acidic and leeches the calcium from the bones - so your only replacing what you’ve lost at the end of the day if you solely rely on milk for calcium.

    • AdamC says:

      03:14pm | 16/02/11

      Quite frankly, Lola, I think you are a nutty zealot with a bizarre aversion to dairy products based on silly pseudo science.

      I think the only way to get over this is to get some cheeses (a double (or triple) cream, a nice hard cheeese and a mild blue are good choices) some bread or crackers and some quince paste or something and eat them. I guarantee you won’t be concerned about your acid leehcing malarkey after that!

    • Elphaba says:

      03:52pm | 16/02/11

      @AdamC, yuuuuuummmm…. a cheese plate makes the slaughter worthwhile.

    • Lola says:

      03:59pm | 16/02/11

      AdamC - No pseudoscience - it’s reality. Explain why the majority of people in the world are lactose intolerant if dairy milk is so vital for human health?
      There are other sources of calcium - like broccoli. Try putting that in your coffee for a change.

    • AdamC says:

      04:25pm | 16/02/11

      Lola, I don’t claim that dairy products are ‘vital’ for human health. They are tasty, though. I also quite like broccoli, which is especially good with a mornay sauce (a milk-based sauce flavoured with a sharp cheese). Those billions of lactose intolerants are really missing out!

      Elphaba, what do you want me to say? Yes? OK, yes, I am a soulless predatory carnivore who doesn’t care that young calves die to provide the raw materials for my cheeses. Does that improve your self-esteem?

    • NicoleG says:

      04:31pm | 16/02/11

      AdamC, to go with that cheese and crackers, I’d like to suggest Lola have a really good whine. Oh wait…....

    • Elphaba - gimme that cheese! says:

      05:49pm | 16/02/11

      Lol, AdamC, maybe I wasn’t clear - I was agreeing with you! grin

    • AdamC says:

      09:31am | 17/02/11

      Elphaba, I guess I missed that one ... so, self-esteem intact, I take it!

    • Elphaba says:

      09:54am | 17/02/11

      @AdamC, it’s my fault, I should have included a cheeky emoticon.  My bad.  Cheese is good and a life without it is a life not worth living. wink

    • Kevin says:

      08:46am | 16/02/11

      My understanding is that amendments to Commonwealth Acts are drafted by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel.

    • ZSRenn says:

      08:50am | 16/02/11

      Ya think!.
      I find it hilarious that I can buy 500g of
      AU beef for $2.00 AU when visiting China

    • Steve of Cornubia says:

      09:21am | 16/02/11

      I was interested to see on TV last night, in a news story about inflation in China, that figures were given for ‘inflation’ and also ‘food inflation’. It would be very useful to have both figures quoted each week in Australia, too, where I think it is clear that a lack of competition in the supermarket sector is driving up prices.

    • AdamC says:

      09:44am | 16/02/11

      “This is the old “loss leader” trick. Get customers hooked by a super special and then fleece them on other products. It’s the oldest trick in the book and consumers shouldn’t be fooled.”

      How are consumers being ‘fooled’ by loss-leading? Like you say, it is a common strategy. I would also note that this regular Coles and Woolies shopper has not really noticed an increase in the cost of other items co-incident with the cut in ilk prices.

      And your comments about loss leading being predatory in this context are outlandish. Coles isn’t going to drive Woolies out of the market by offering cheap milk.

      I can summarise this article as follows:

      Supermarket chains are evil when they don’t compete with each other vigorously and are just as evil when they do.

    • bobw says:

      12:02pm | 16/02/11

      Do you really believe that Coles or Woolworths would sell individual items at a loss (or a nominal profit) without a well-founded expectation of coming out ahead overall?  If it is the case that Coles is selling milk below cost, you can bet that those pulling the strings are pretty confident that some consumers will, in fact, be “fooled” into changing their habits - unless you believe that they’re simply altruists who sincerely want to provide Australians with cheaper groceries.

      And the article - clearly - doesn’t imply that any loss-leading by Coles is “predatory” vis-a-vis Woolworths.  The kind of pricing strategy referred to by Frank would typically be used by one of the big players to damage more marginal operators.

    • AdamC says:

      01:15pm | 16/02/11

      BobW, Coles is seeking to grow its market share at the expense of its margins. Woolies is trying to keep up. There’s no great secret about any of this.

      And, if Zumbo wasn’t suggesting the price cuts are predatory, why mention it?

    • bobw says:

      02:12pm | 16/02/11

      If Coles is taking a bit of a hit on milk margins, it’ll be counting on making up the cash elsewhere, whether it’s through price creep on other items, or increased future sales in circumstances of diminished competition, or whatever.  These people aren’t in the business of going backwards.  It’d be naive to assume that deep discounting on a narrow range of products represents some kind of win for consumers.  Coles makes a big fanfare of cutting prices on a couple of staples; Woolworths “keeps up”; and meanwhile we’re all distracted from the fact that a lack of genuine competition results in inflated prices across the board. 

      On the other matter, it’s reasonable to say that the article at least implies that if Coles is loss-leading on milk - and the author is agnostic on this point - its strategy may be predatory.  What it certainly doesn’t suggest is that it’s may be predatory vis-a-vis Woolworths.  Predatory pricing in this context is likely to be about further entrenching the duopoly, not aspiring to monopoly.

    • Ches says:

      09:48am | 16/02/11

      If you don’t like it shop at Aldi. Fairest retailer to both consumers and suppliers.

    • Bex says:

      09:59am | 16/02/11

      I’m not being sucked into the $1 a litre milk “bargain” for the simple fact that people are buying this over the (granted) more expensive, more independent brands who can’t compete with Coles/Woolworths; and so, when they inevitably get bumped out of the market, Coles/Woolworths will once again raise their prices.

    • Kika says:

      10:10am | 16/02/11

      Please, make me laugh. I don’t fall for the ‘poor’ farmer thing. If it’s too ‘expensive’ to run a dairy farm praytell where are the profits going from the veal they sell? Yes - male calves born to dairy cows are obviously not required so they sell the poor things on for the veal market.

      These poor cows are kept constantly pregnant and lactating with their babies locked up just out of ear shot so us weird humans can use their milk for ourselves.

      Human beings don’t need milk - we need grains, fruit & vegies and protein to survive. Calcium can be sourced from leafy greens, almonds, fish bones, and soy.

      The farmers are making money - otherwise they would be tilers. You know what I mean?

    • fairsfair says:

      10:45am | 16/02/11

      oh. my. god.

      Where does the money go from the boy babies? Coles and Woolies buy them too you know, therefore the farmers again get squat. Did you just learn this in the article last week? It is not new news - it has been happening since dairy farming began.

      Maybe you should actually visit a dairy farm. I have been to quite a few and none of them are as you described. They are run to Australian regulation and you need to report cases of this to the authorities if you have witnessed negligence.

      You know how some human females breast feed there own babies? As long as you keep doing it, you can produce milk for years following the birth of your child. Are you constantly pregnant?

      The farmers are not making money. They live in old houses on old farms that were build by their family before them. Can you even begin to imagine what it would feel like to walk away from what has been the livelihood of generations before you? Can you begin to image what it would feel like to know that your father and grandfather made this work and you were the one who allowed to go tits up? If they could do that, they would all be tiling. You know what I mean?

    • Tim says:

      11:19am | 16/02/11

      Wow,
      thanks for that in depth research Kika. Your breadth of knowledge is truly outstanding. When are you presenting your findings on the current state of Australian Dairy Farmers?

    • Elphaba says:

      11:31am | 16/02/11

      Kika, why do baby cows deserve to live, but not fish?

    • ZSRenn says:

      12:22pm | 16/02/11

      Yes Kika Jam it up those rich farmers whose whole family gets up a 4 in the morning to shift irrigation pipes in sometimes icy conditions and milk the cows. Those that work 365.25 days a year including Christmas to be able to live in old houses that are made of wood built by their grandfathers. Whose children then travel 20km by bus to such illustrious learning centers as Nowhere High School total students 600 and return home and then work till 8:00Pm before the family finally sits down to dinner.

      Those farmers that keep cows constantly pregnant which is a feat really when you consider that a cow broods only once a year and has an 8mth gestation period and then usually produce good milk supply for around a year before the milk flow drops off. So are bred every 2nd or third brood.

      Those farmers that work until they are well into their 70’s and 80’s and can because they have strong bones. The Bastards

      Please consider this as your sitting drinking your double de-café soymilk Latte in The Rocks and pondering how many tones of green leafy vegetables you need to eat everyday to ward off Osteoporosis in your 60’s.

    • Kika says:

      01:46pm | 16/02/11

      Oh rubbish. If they aren’t earning, why are they doing it then? Nobody keeps doing something if it doesn’t give them a benefit.

      ZSRenn - How come then Japanese people who are for the majority quite lactose intolerant and have never culturally had milk inclusive in their diets have very low rates of osteoporosis? They depend on fish, sea vegetables and soy and they seem to do just fine without milk.

      Don’t give me that rubbish. It’s just a cultural myth perpetuated by the dairy industry and northern european culture that you need milk to keep your bones strong.

      The majority of the world are lactose intolerant. But why this - Europeans have the highest rates of osteoporosis YET they depend on dairy to prevent just that?

    • fairsfair says:

      02:01pm | 16/02/11

      Farming is not a job Kika. It is an institution, it is a livelihood, it is a lifestyle it is all a lot of people know and have ever known. The dairy industry is not like the Truffle industry. Low input large gains because curtis stone used the infused oil on my kitchen rules last night. It is massive input for little output and this has markedly changed in recent years. It isn’t the middle aged couple who sought a sea change moved to tasmania and are making a killing on 20 acres of garlic bulbs. 

      I don’t konw what you do for a crust, but if you lived, worked and relied upon your office for your survival (as did your parents) could you shut the door on it one night and never return? No, you’d fight to keep it anyway you could and the prospect of losing it let alone actually losing it would be frightening.

      I don’t understand how you can be so cold toward people who work really hard for a very small return. I don’t eat fish and I don’t agree with the way fish is farmed but according to people and even you they are just fish. Who cares. My views don’t mean that I want to see all fish farmers go down in flames.

    • Elphaba says:

      02:15pm | 16/02/11

      My question hasn’t been answered!!

      Why are baby cows lives valued over fish?

      The Mythbusters proved that the 3 second memory thing is a fallacy, so how can you determine that eating fish bones is more humane that eating baby cows?

    • Kika says:

      03:43pm | 16/02/11

      Hahaha that’s funny.

      My point Elphaba is that calcium from milk is not as important as the dairy industry makes it out to be. Fish are animals just the same, but the vast majority of them are not kept in inhumane conditions just for humans to exploit. Fish farms may be not their natural environment, yes and we can never know how they feel about swimming around in a small pond all day, but they aren’t as bad as a dairy farm.

      http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-food/dairy-industry.aspx

    • ZSRenn says:

      04:18pm | 16/02/11

      @ Kika I spend a lot of time in Asia and yes they do have a large percentage of lactos intolerant members but to say they have low levels of osteoporosis is wrong. My mother in law has it as do many of her generation. This has been reduced with the intake of calcium tablets from an early age.

      Before that the 5000 year old traditional medicines were used which required large intakes of ground up animal bone and could only be afforded by the rich. I think I will stick with milk. rather than eat chalk or bone.  But thanks for your contribution and get back to your Latte

    • Elphaba says:

      05:54pm | 16/02/11

      @Kika, regardless of the environment fish are kept in (real, or natural), I can imagine dying is pleasant for any of them.

      If you’re going to be vego and principled, you need to go all the way.  You’re fence-sitting.  If you’re vego for another reason (eg taste), different story.  But you can’t claim the moral highground and eat fish at the same time.  Sorry, but it just makes you look a little silly.

    • Lisa H. says:

      07:33pm | 16/02/11

      Wow, here we have a key misunderstanding between those in business and those that work for a living: ‘If s/he’s not making any money out of it, why do it?’

      A person who has solely worked as an employee cannot believe that a self-employed person would keep on doing a job that pays very little.
      Such people who complain of being working poor must always be greedy liars, it seems.

      Self-employed cannot just get and and walk away. They have lots of ongoing expenses associated with their place of business - in this case, dairy farms.

      Who would walk away from the their mortgaged home without doing the best to sell? It would be economic madness.

      In the same way, dairy farmers cannot just go and be tilers!

      I have lived and worked in diary communities, and it is true, they live an extremely modest and arduous lifestyle. Too modest, and too arduous.

      If they made more money they might also be more inclined to use veterinary care more often, in cases of cows in trouble calving, or when using antibiotics.

      But veterinary care of diary animals is another story.

    • ZSRenn says:

      07:39pm | 16/02/11

      @Kika The story I told earlier was of my youth. My experience was that the cows were very contented. The best of food to eat all day and at milking time if in a paddock near the dairy they would wander to the dairy early and wait to be milked.

      They had a herd mentality and were usually led everywhere by an older cow. They never really made too much commotion when a calf was removed and sometimes I got the impression they were relieved at the removal of the burden.

      As for your PETA reference I in the first paragraph
      “Factory farm operators typically impregnate them using artificial insemination every year.”
      which is incorrect as I have pointed out earlier. I always consider if an article is incorrect in its first paragraph then the rest must be rubbish I did how ever read the article and found many errors surmising that it must be written by someone who has never been anywhere near a dairy or spoken to a dairy farmer.

      I have never encountered hormones in dairy farming and if a cow is only able to give a certain amount of milk that is all you are going to get. The best method we found is to make sure they have the best food. A.I. is also very expensive and the purchase of a bull who has a history of producing female’s that give a larger milk output is a much cheaper option. He enjoys his life I am sure! You may call this genetic manipulation if you like but ask yourself if you would not choose an Alpha may over an Omega.

      The conditions described for Veal calves is nothing but propaganda. Think about it! With the conditions described how could you possibly get a quality veal meat. You can’t

      I think you need to get in your car, go for a drive into the country and have a look at a dairy and reconsider the decisions about your health that you have made.

    • acotrel says:

      08:53pm | 16/02/11

      Elphaba says:11:31am | 16/02/11

      Kika, why do baby cows deserve to live, but not fish?

      Don’t you believe that plants have feelings?:

    • Connor Jacobs says:

      10:53am | 16/02/11

      Coles and Woolworths do not pay the dairy farmers at all. The farmers are paid standardized rates by the middleman distributors. Coles have recently INCREASED the price paid to their distributors, and their cheap milk is being offered by reducing the profit margin to practically zero. Does this mean the price could have come down earlier? Perhaps. But let’s not forget that the average saving on Coles brand milk now is only approximately 3-5c per litre to the customer, so it can’t really be said that consumers were being “gouged” prior to the price cut.

      Now as to petrol, I honestly don’t understand this argument of gouging. If the Big 2 are artificially increasing prices, wouldn’t that make it entirely possible (and easy) for independents, and even BP
      to substantially undercut Caltex and Shell, thus increasing their own market share? It can’t just be a mark-up at retail level…

    • rufus says:

      12:41pm | 16/02/11

      I suspect you’re right. Widespread claims of the suffering caused to dairy farmers by the supermarkets are being made by those other than the dairy farmers themselves. The claims are just baseless assumptions.

    • Lisa H. says:

      07:58pm | 16/02/11

      The price goes up and down quite regularly, is my understanding, as distributors renegotiate with farmers.
      So the effect of continued discounting might be felt later, when the price paid to distributors is renegotiated, even if they have had an increase recently.
      The price paid for milk is not protected like wages.

      The problem for farmers is that they must milk their cows if they wish to maintain their cows’  milk, so the supply of milk is relatively fixed.
      This puts the farmer at a disadvantage, in price negotiation.

      There are strong structural reasons why farmers stay on the farm even as they are going broke. The necessity of maintaining a dairy herd’s milking pattern is one of those reasons.

    • John says:

      07:05pm | 11/03/11

      “If the Big 2 are artificially increasing prices, wouldn’t that make it entirely possible (and easy) for independents, and even BP
      to substantially undercut Caltex and Shell”

      In theory, yes. In practise, it isn’t going to happen except once in a blue moon for Australia’s capital cities. Because of the nuisance price cycle, when one brand (BP in Perth, I think supermarkets in the east?) hike their prices unnecessarily and the sheep actually buy at such inflated prices, everyone else follows because they can get away with it. It is very rare that a petrol station will keep their price low to gain market share.

      In perfect competition, your theory would be correct. But using “perfect competition” to describe the petrol market it like calling the motorway fast at peak hour.

    • Bondi Billy says:

      11:14am | 16/02/11

      I hate to say it but the major super markets are not charities, they are out to make as much money of the public as possible. If it means that they can have the farmer under the thumb and kill of the competition they will. We shouldnt expect any thing less. They traditionally will kill of competition and jack the prices up. Of course the consumer pays.

    • Shivo says:

      11:21am | 16/02/11

      My local IGA is being forced to close in a few months time as the landlord; Coles; is closing the centre and being replaced by a new centre (under construction) behind. Coles paid well over the going rate to ensure it would own the property.
      IGA has been to court to prosecute a ‘bullying’ case against Coles. The case there is already a Woolworths in this suburb Coolum Beach) and a Coles supermarket in the next suburb (Peregian Springs). The ACCC determined that Coles had no case to answer….......This particular store has been in Coolum forever, employing locals, buying locally and is rather generous in it’s supporting of local sports and charities. The generosity of this store will be lost forever….
      Again showing the expensive white elephant status of the ACCC.

    • Diogenes says:

      12:18pm | 16/02/11

      A friend of mine worked for Colesworths IT (anonymous for good reason), and the data they mine from their respective rewards programs (Frequent Flyers & Woolies Rewards) is incredible -They both apply the Pareto Principle (aka 80/20 rule)  to determine what the most valuable 20% of customers that are responsible in the for the 80% of income were buying & increased the prices of those a little each - with the FF & Rewards programs they can now track sales for an individual customer over many years, and with the bulk of the population now in one or both programs…. well you connect the dots

      Now they can see what these 20% of valuable customers are buying across ALL their stores along with their milk and increase the prices of these a little , need not be staples, nor even in the supermarket - maybe bottles of wine   etc etc

    • AFR says:

      01:01pm | 16/02/11

      Boganomics 101 Really. Bit like “cheap petrol”. Suckers

    • mary monica roche says:

      01:37pm | 16/02/11

      cheap milk at supermarkets is good for consumers in areas where milkmen won’t serve.

    • mary monica roche says:

      01:40pm | 16/02/11

      milkmen seem to be a thing of the past.
      cheap supermarket milk is the next best alternative.

    • Milk Maid says:

      05:21pm | 16/02/11

      Kika keeps saying dairy farmers are in it for the money, which is just not true.

      I am a dairy farmer. I used to be an office worker and much more wealthy for it. We do it because we love the animals and the land but my accountant thinks I’m crazy. I’d recommend Kika drives through our local town and checks out the cars that pull up at the rural supplies store. Not a luxury car in sight, I’m afraid.

    • BT says:

      06:01pm | 16/02/11

      You love the animals? Really? Do you always slaughter the things you love after five days of life? I assume you are female being that your name is “Milk Maid”, so tell me, do you enjoy being perpetually pregnant and separated from your young as soon as they are born?

    • Milk Maid says:

      07:32pm | 16/02/11

      Yes, BT, we do and I’m really proud to let my little girl see how we look after our cows. “Perpetually pregnant” is becoming a bit of a popular urban myth, I’m afraid.

      About a quarter of our cows are only in calf every second year and the rest just once a year. They are ready to conceive within 21 days of calving so, in the wild, they would be in calf more often than they are on farms.

      I’m assuming you’re concerned about separating the calves from their mothers for animal welfare reasons and ironically, that’s exactly why we do move the calves from the paddocks to warm, dry, undercover pens. We want to make sure they’re safe from predators like foxes and feral cats and that they get a really good feed of colostrum (which contains vital antibodies) because some are slow to learn to suckle.

      After we’ve hand fed them for 10 days or so in the shed (some longer if they need extra TLC), they go out into a fox-proof paddock with 10 to 20 others.

      I’m not going to get into a war with you about the pros and cons of farming because I respect your right to choose veganism but thought you might like to hear what really happens on our farm. For me, the bottom line is that if I were a calf (and that’s always how I make decisions about how to treat an animal), I’d rather be raised on a farm like mine than left to fend for myself. So many baby animals in the wild die horrible deaths.

    • ZSRenn says:

      07:45pm | 16/02/11

      @BT Thats bean sprouts that are killed 5 days after they are born. Veal is usually about a year old when slaughtered.

    • James Milton says:

      08:30pm | 16/02/11

      Germany and most of the EU, the USA, Canada, China, HK, Japan… all over the world there is intense competition in the supermarket sector.

      Here we have a duopoly and are told to shut up and go somewhere else if we don’t like it.

      Typical Australia.

    • Kaz says:

      10:14pm | 16/02/11

      You can buy a gallon (that’s 3.75 litres) of milk from Safeway in the US for $2.89.  A loaf of bread costs $2.50.

      It is obvious to anyone with internet access that prices of basic food items in Australia are outrageously over priced.  Someone is price gouging Australian consumers!

    • Clara says:

      12:54pm | 14/06/11

      That’s 2 cvleer by half and 2x2 clever 4 me. Thanks!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @popculturechris: Meanwhile, Gotye holds no.1 for a sixth massive week in the US - "that" song has now sold over 4 million copies there.

ToryShepherd

@loupascale if the survey made you sad, probably skip the comments...

Paul Colgan

@paulwiggins @richardkendall that fountain pens yarn is a great social trend story

Paul Colgan

I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter