No more Alberta Beef at Earl's

[btimbit]

Well, just got back from trying it and was pretty impressed.

The Striploin steak was great. To my surprise and delight, the cows were corn fed. Wasn't expecting that. Love it. Very well marbled too. My biggest pet peeve with 'Alberta aaa' steaks has always been how low their marbling standard is. Sometimes it's terrific then sometimes it's brutal. This steak I tried tonight was excellent in that regard. Now, I'll have to have it a few more times to see if that's consistent or just luck of the draw like it seemed to be before.

The burgers were also good. Better than the ones earls had before, but not nearly as good as the ones they had before that, circa 2013 (Before they started "hand smashing" or whatever they call it.)

Sadly, I wasn't able to find out the answer to my biggest question, which is what prompted this change. I really wanted to know if this was a decision made by theexecutive chefs, that then had the marketing spin put on afterwards, or if it was a marketing decision from the start. Realistically it's likely a bit of both, but as a chef it really bugs me that any supplier decision in a restaurant would be made by anything other than its deliciousness.

That overall corporatey, gimmick first attitude was what prompted me to leave earls. Was less than a decade ago that they were considered innovator in the industry, nowadays they seem to do what I call a 'social media first' approach, which is when you try to be cool, hip, trendy, and something you're not. This move kind of reeks of that. The meat did exceed my expectations, but they're paying 3x what they were before, not sure that's worth it.

Only real tell will be how their sales are effected after a few weeks. I asked about that tonight and there's been yearly high sales across the country, but that's normal for a product launch. We'll have to see if it's any higher than before after both the hype, and faux outrage dies down. My prediction is after the dust settles, there will be no difference.

[SebC]

This is almost as bad as when they took the chocolate mousse cake off the menu.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

You must have some documents that show that this is simply a label and nothing more. You are saying that he is making assumptions, are you not doing the same? Seems most people that are upset are making the same assumptions.

I am making my judgment based on the fact that "Humane Farm Animal Care" is a private lobby group dedicated to pushing a registered trademark.

Polak is mooning this thread up by claiming a lack a certification must indicate that the facilities could not acquire certification, despite zero evidence to the contrary.

Not that I expect you are capable of understanding the difference.

Earls has every right to choose it's suppliers, shouldn't make a difference. Think the dish soap they use is made in Canada? Think the aprons, knives, pots and pans are made in Canada? Why aren't you rallying behind that too?

Of course Earls has every right to choose its suppliers. Exactly as the public has every right to choose its eateries.

As to the rest of that comment, if Alberta had a significant pot and pan industry that Earls decided to brag about abandoning while making false insinuations, people would be upset about that too.

Just being little babies and looking for something to whine about,

This statement describes your entire posting history here.

sitting their in a shirt made in China, shoes are probably made in India, drinking coffee from South America and eating fruit from the States. But you had better save the Alberta farmers by boycotting Earls.......

There is nothing quite so vapid as an argument that says "unless you are upset about everything, you are not allowed to be upset about anything".

[CaptainCrunch]

I'll be taking my mom and dad to wellington's next weekend for a late mothers day meal.

Just better steak prep and food overall, and the old guy cooking steaks in the glass box while glowering around is entertainment in itself.

I can safely say that I am exercising my right to food democracy by refusing to eat at Earl's. They chose their marketing plan, and it didn't resonate with me.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I am making my judgment based on the fact that "Humane Farm Animal Care" is a private lobby group dedicated to pushing a registered trademark.

Polak is mooning this thread up by claiming a lack a certification must indicate that the facilities could not acquire certification, despite zero evidence to the contrary".

I think certified humane does mean something. Temple Grandin has my respect. I don't think Earl's is suggesting Alberta producers aren't as good as the certified humane producers but rather suggesting this is just a way to make sure these standards are met. Earl's can't go around to a hundred different farms and monitor their practices. Certified humane can and does.

Stuff like this should be welcomed by AB producers. If the job can be done in a better way then by all means change. Do it better. Here's the book on how to do it better. If it is all just non sense then I'm wrong. But it's just generally a bad idea in business to get your nose out of joint when someone one ups you.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I think certified humane does mean something. Temple Grandin has my respect. I don't think Earl's is suggesting Alberta producers aren't as good as the certified humane producers but rather suggesting this is just a way to make sure these standards are met. Earl's can't go around to a hundred different farms and monitor their practices. Certified humane can and does.

Stuff like this should be welcomed by AB producers. If the job can be done in a better way then by all means change. Do it better. Here's the book on how to do it better. If it is all just non sense then I'm wrong. But it's just generally a bad idea in business to get your nose out of joint when someone one ups you.

I would argue of the dangers of applying one set of standards to a entire market.

As I posted earlier in an interview with a university professor, Alberta has defined its own set of standards and practices and in some cases exceed the humane beef stuff, but in some cases just don't have it as clearly written out and defined.

This whole thing comes down to marketing though, and of course your going to get a lash back in this province especially from the Alberta producers because they're sitting there going, we have to live up to the standards laid out here in this province and this market. not something whipped up in the States.

How angry would Kansas distributors be if every restaurant sin Canada tated that they couldn't buy their beef because it doesn't meet Alberta standards and requirements.

At the end of the day Earls went with a sticker, its like the trade wars when people would put made in the USA stickers, even though half the components in anything are made in China or somewhere not Merica.

Earls statement of basically saying that the standards that Alberta Producers have to live up to isn't good enough for them, of course theres going to be lashback when a restaurant chain with a huge footprint here says that. And of course there's going to be a lashback by the Alberta consumer.

To me, Earls made a tactical mistake, its their right to buy Kansas beef, it really is, but their message came out that Alberta beef is substandard and raised poorly by focusing on this sticker.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

I think certified humane does mean something. Temple Grandin has my respect. I don't think Earl's is suggesting Alberta producers aren't as good as the certified humane producers but rather suggesting this is just a way to make sure these standards are met. Earl's can't go around to a hundred different farms and monitor their practices. Certified humane can and does.

Stuff like this should be welcomed by AB producers. If the job can be done in a better way then by all means change. Do it better. Here's the book on how to do it better. If it is all just non sense then I'm wrong. But it's just generally a bad idea in business to get your nose out of joint when someone one ups you.

Ultimately - and yes, this is only speculation on my part - I believe the driving goal from Earls' perspective was to simplify their process down to a single supplier. Probably one that could also meet any American expansion goals they have. And I am sure they thought the whole "certified humane" trademark would make for great PR.

While I can agree that Earls wasn't intending to suggest that Alberta/Canadian producers aren't as good as the American supplier they chose, that is a message they sent anyway. And it completely undermined any goodwill they thought the trademark would generate. That is entirely on them. If their online presence is any indication - a handful of defensive posts followed by four days of total radio silence - Earls is struggling to figure out how to PR their way out of this mess.

We are seeing in the online reaction that people either don't believe an American trademark makes the supplier better, or that people don't care. In either case, Earls deserves the heat it is getting.

[Simanium]

I feel like now more than ever we need to be supporting our own economy and Alberta Beef is a big part of this. I worked at Earls during university for years and have been a frequent customer since, but count me in the group that won't be eating at Earls. Alberta Burger Fest is starting up in a week and that is a great example that there is no shortage of options when it comes burgers.

[Locke]

Live by the PR die by the PR.

[polak]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

In my world the burden of proof sits with the person/industry that makes the claim.

Isn't that exactly what the Alberta producers COULDN'T provide?

Paperwork and proof that they are actually as great as people on an internet message board who probably have never even been on a cattle farm or slaughter house in their lives claim that they are?

Ridiculous, I can't believe this discussion is still going.

Again, Earls wants a fancy label, AB farmers told them to pound sound so they found someone else. That's it. End of story. Stupid decision? I guess we'll see but if this helps them move into big markets in the States than I really don't think they will care about losing some market share in Alberta.

It's Resolute and all the Alberta Beef whiners that are mooning up this whole ####ing ordeal.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by polak

Isn't that exactly what the Alberta producers COULDN'T provide?

Paperwork and proof that they are actually as great as people on an internet message board who probably have never even been on a cattle farm or slaughter house in their lives claim that they are?

Ridiculous, I can't believe this discussion is still going.

Again, Earls wants a fancy label, AB farmers told them to pound sound so they found someone else. That's it. End of story. Stupid decision? I guess we'll see but if this helps them move into big markets in the States than I really don't think they will care about losing some market share in Alberta.

It's Resolute and all the Alberta Beef whiners that are mooning up this whole ####ing ordeal.

Have you ever tried to get approval certification on anything? I have plenty of times with CSA trying to get their "fancy label" and it matters not if your product meets or exceeds the code specifications as in a lot of cases is can be a very long, drawn out, frustrating, and expensive endeavor. We have products that have taken years to get certified.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Have you ever tried to get approval certification on anything? I have plenty of times with CSA trying to get their "fancy label" and it matters not if your product meets or exceeds the code specifications as in a lot of cases is can be a very long, drawn out, frustrating, and expensive endeavor. We have products that have taken years to get certified.

okay that's not really the issue here though.

They wanted the label and they have every right to want it. If AB farmers cared enough about Earls' business they would've complied, ESPECIALLY since everyone here is claiming that they're already miles ahead of every farm in the entire world. But instead, they decided it's not worth it so Earls went elsewhere.

Like what is so out of line in that situation? Literally everyone involved acted exactly like every normal business would.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Have you ever tried to get approval certification on anything? I have plenty of times with CSA trying to get their "fancy label" and it matters not if your product meets or exceeds the code specifications as in a lot of cases is can be a very long, drawn out, frustrating, and expensive endeavor. We have products that have taken years to get certified.

Ha. Somebody else feels my pain.

[OBCT]

Originally Posted by polak

Isn't that exactly what the Alberta producers COULDN'T provide?

Paperwork and proof that they are actually as great as people on an internet message board who probably have never even been on a cattle farm or slaughter house in their lives claim that they are?

Ridiculous, I can't believe this discussion is still going.

Again, Earls wants a fancy label, AB farmers told them to pound sound so they found someone else. That's it. End of story. Stupid decision? I guess we'll see but if this helps them move into big markets in the States than I really don't think they will care about losing some market share in Alberta.

It's Resolute and all the Alberta Beef whiners that are mooning up this whole ####ing ordeal.

It's possible that some Alberta producers could not provide proof that they met "Certified Humane" standards due to differences in practices. On the other hand, some producers might not have been interested in pursuing or completing extra certification for a variety of reasons - possibly including the extra paperwork and cost. If local producers have ample demand and distributorship right now, the incentive for additional "hurdles" and process complexities may be low.


I do not have the wherewithal to effectively compare and contrast these documents, but the most recent editions of the two standards in question are below. I have a strange feeling they aren't all that different.
Canadian Code of Practice for the Safe Handling of Beef Cattle
Humane Farm Animal Care Standards for Beef Cattle*
* "The Humane Farm Animal Care Standards have been developed to provide the only approved standards for the rearing and handling of Beef Cattle for use in the Certified Humane® program."


I am not an expert in this field, but from reading this thread it seems well accepted that Alberta beef cattle generally are not slaughtered inhumanely. I haven't noticed many concerns about living conditions, quality of feed, etc, but I'm honestly not sure if this is an issue for beef cattle in Alberta.

I have read concerns about use of hormones and antibiotics, however. After reading the following infographics (yes, full, disclosure, they were funded and created by Alberta Beef Producers), I tend to think those concerns are largely overblown.
Hormones Infographic -- references
Antibiotics Infographic -- references


In the end, although I won't likely ever know the true motivation(s) for Earl's switching to Certified Humane® beef, it wasn't a positive move from my perspective. They may see benefits as a company in the long term due to reported southeastern expansion plans, but when I see them pouring significantly more resources into a foreign product which is very comparable to Alberta beef, I don't find that compelling enough reason to purposefully frequent their establishments.

Beyond that, I've made a conscious choice to be a carnivore, so my "food ethics" are already under question. Ironically, after reading this thread, I am no less comfortable consuming Alberta beef than I was before.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by polak

okay that's not really the issue here though.

They wanted the label and they have every right to want it. If AB farmers cared enough about Earls' business they would've complied, ESPECIALLY since everyone here is claiming that they're already miles ahead of every farm in the entire world. But instead, they decided it's not worth it so Earls went elsewhere.

Like what is so out of line in that situation? Literally everyone involved acted exactly like every normal business would.

Like it or not, people are free to react the way they did too. It is up to not only Earls, but other companies, to look at what happened and decide if having the marketplace of ideas come down on you for making such a decision is worthwhile.

Remember, the freedom to do things does not create a shield from criticism for what you do. Earls does not deserve special protection. They made a business decision, and they must eat the consequences of that decision - be it positive, negative or indifferent.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Have you ever tried to get approval certification on anything? I have plenty of times with CSA trying to get their "fancy label" and it matters not if your product meets or exceeds the code specifications as in a lot of cases is can be a very long, drawn out, frustrating, and expensive endeavor. We have products that have taken years to get certified.

If its a BS certification find a nice printing company, get some good quality card stock and some nice letterhead and a big fancy stamp.

You can be the Certified Master of the Universe in a jiffy. Who is going to check?

[CaptainCrunch]

Even though I'm not a father, my worlds greatest dad coffee cup certifies me to be able to give you all parental advice and you have to accept it.

[Suave]

On Wednesday, the Vancouver-based company said it will continue to buy beef from Alberta farmers after all.

“We made a mistake when we moved away from Canadian beef,” said Earls Restaurants president Mo Jessa in a statement. “We want to make this right. We want Canadian beef back on our menus so we are going to work with local ranchers to build our supply of Alberta beef that meets our criteria.”

.....According to an Earls spokeswoman last week, the company tried to work with Alberta farmers until just a few weeks ago, but after it tried to supply just seven of its 66 locations with Alberta Certified Humane beef, the company ran out of beef and had to use supplies that did not meet the new standard.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ticle29852514/

[Resolute 14]

Given how they went into complete radio silence for a few days, this isn't surprising to me. Publicly reversing course is pretty much the only way they could have begun to repair the damage from a PR perspective.

[Simanium]

Just saw the announcement on the Earls Facebook page. The power of the people!