OT:SweeTango

I was really disappointed with the NPR release. 45 minute interview and I got 20 seconds out. It will take a bit of time, but this action will put small produce grower/wholesalers out of business. I have the honor of being first, the owner of this apple has come after the growers in my area (central Minnesota) They have signed exclusive trade agreements with the grocery chains in our area. An exclusive trade agreement goes like this, " I will sell you SweeTango, but only if you buy all your other apples from us"

The part the REALLY BURNS MY ASS is we got a state law

passed to look into this. But the U and the licensee had about 20 million reasons to make this go away and nothing happened. Some folks are just above the law, but you already knew that.

There, I feel better.

Sweetango is the child of Honeycrisp and Zestar. My personal opinion is the parents are better, but no question its a good apple. Buy some and help put a small grower out of business.

Karl

Regarding the 45 minute interview condensed to 20 seconds, BTDT. It's pretty amazing to see how the media can take a few sound bytes out of a lengthy interview and totally change the content. But we all know that already. I as a general rule discount any media blurb I can't substantiate with at least one 2nd view of the same content.

I hadn't thought about the exclusive trade agreements. That does really suck. I'm sorry to hear it. I know more than a few state reps and senators personally, and they will be getting some input from me on this.

FWIW (which is pretty much nothing), I won't be buying any SweetTango. Consider it a minor personal protest. I'll be encouraging friends/family to do the same.

JW

They ran an article here a week or so ago. I don't recall any mention of the small grower issue, which doesn't surprise me. If you want to read it:

This is a BIG apple growing area, if you want to pitch-a-bitch, send your complaint on to the reporter that wrote this article. May get a follow up if you can pique their interest a bit.

I like Red Delicious myself. A bit mushy, but not yet going to rot. Hard to find anything like that without rummaging around underneath the tree yourself...

For those who missed the NPR story, why don't you guys tell us what the controversy is about?

No mention of karl on the NPR site that I could find.

Try MPR, not NPR. Minnesota Public Radio.

Karl will have a better description, but he alluded to it in his original post.

UMN has developed a new apple (SweeTango) under university license. It is a hybrid of HoneyCrisp and Zestar ( I didn't know the second one). It has been getting a lot of publicity in the area.

But, the U is not releasing these under a public license. I have an issue with that point alone, but moving on... These are being released in exclusive contracts for Minnesota only growers. No real issue with that, I can see not diluting the product. But as Karl has pointed out, they are restricting the commercial marketability of these Minnesota grown apples, and as Karl has apparently learned, some that do have license are engaging in further exclusive contracts with their market base pushing out those who aren't on the SweeTango train.

That is the controversy in a nutshell. Public dollars being used for "public" development screwing the small guy. Not the first time the U has done this, and I'm sure not the last.

JW

Here's the email I sent to the media:

Your organization has a long tradition of supporting new apple releases from the University of Minnesota with a great deal of publicity. This does a lot to get new varieties off to a great start and help small local growers market a new variety.

I see the new variety, Sweet Tango, is starting to get a lot of publicity. Before you give a lot more publicity here you should know this variety is unlike all other agricultural releases from the university. Exclusive rights to Sweet Tango have been granted to a single grower; the largest producer in the state. No one else is permitted to even own a tree.

If you ask why this was done, you'll be told to improve quality in the marketplace and other similar reasons. If you have decent olfactory senses, you should notice the south end of a north bound horse. The plain and simple reason is money, both for the university and especially for the research team members. Of course the, licensee was willing to develop a scheme for additional funds in exchange for a monopoly on an agricultural product developed by the taxpayers of Minnesota.

The licensee will rent trees to small growers for a huge fee of $1000/acre/year (500tree/ac) with the right to increase the rent at any time and only allow a maximum of two acres. Wholesale marketing is not allowed. There are many other burdensome and overbearing provisions. Many growers refused to enter into the agreement. Others have done so under duress. Virtually all agree it is a terrible situation.

A small group of growers went to the legislature in 2006 for relief from potential negative impacts and a bill passed concerning the 1914 apple as it was then known.

or Minnesota 2006 chapter 265 section 4) The University and licensee started negotiations but then managed to have no action taken.

Now, the small grower's worst fears are coming to pass. Small growers in the west metro area have been officially notified by one large grocery chain to not even bother marketing to them as they have signed an exclusive trade agreement with the licensee. We have personally lost nearly all of our wholesale market.

So how does this relate to Sweet Tango? Exclusive trade agreements started when Honeycrisp was in short supply. It goes like this, I will sell you Honeycrisp, but only if you buy all other apple varieties only from me. Many growers did this to maintain markets for other Minnesota varieties. Now the licensee has 100 times the leverage as they are the only supplier of Sweet Tango

Now a few very small apple growers being forced out of business may not be news. But I ask you not to give excessive free time to aid a monopoly situation. Or, at least give equal time to another exiting new apple variety, Zestar - the parent of Sweet Tango, that is every bit as good.

Karl Townsend

Dassel Hillside Farm

Dassel, MN

Ah,, that helps,, thanks.

Sorry deal that. State University results should be public domain IMO as a taxpayer.

OT - I'm headed up to Elkhart Lake for the SCCA Runoffs next weekend. First time up that way for this Texas boy.

I presume I'll be needing a jacket?

Is the UofM funded by the State of Minnesota? I view your problem the same as I would if our state universities decided to only work with large agrabiz instead of all agriculture in my state.

Btw, I'm a McIntosh man myself.

I hope you can prevail.

Wes

State universities everywhere are looking for new sources of revenue. A similar problem is rampant in drug research and discovery.

I agree with you: the situation stinks; they're hurting some of the very people whose tax money is supporting them; it should stop. But I recognize their revenue problem, too.

-- Ed Huntress

I don't know. I'm no lawyer.

The issue there, as it has been in drug research and in many other fields of research, is that tax money is supporting the school, or even the specific research projects, and then the school contracts to licensees -- sometimes exclusive ones -- for the commercialization of the product that develops from the research. It happens all the time now, with universities public and private alike.

It's widely recognized as an ethically questionable practice but so far it seems to be mostly grumbling from people who are being hurt by it, but who don't have the resources to battle over an ambiguous legality.

It would take legislation to cure the general problem, I think, but if legislatures tackle it, they'll be under pressure to find some way to replace the lost revenue. It looks like a third-rail tax situation for them and they probably don't want to touch it.

Why isn't the arrangement between one supplier and the buyer restraint of trade Ed? The University isn't involved in that.

Ed Huntress wrote: ...

It's not clear to me that U couldn't generate as much revenue by general licensing as it does by exclusive. They could still keep it in MN, to maintain quality, but give everybody a shot.

But what do I know, Bob

You know... my wife keeps showing me real estate in MN, matter of fact, not 2 minutes AFTER I read this, she read aloud from her favorite Bemidji Real Estate site about a 38 acre parcel with big house, barn, two garages... "OH, Honey! You're going to LIKE this one..."

She wants to move back, but every time I see something like your post (and there have been a LOT of "somethings like your post," it really reinforces my resolve not to return.

Cortlands when I can.