The margins for cheese, yoghurt, ice cream etc. are much lower than infant formula, even in the Australian context, without then adding additional costs for transport etc. to China. Then consider that they have already tried A2 ice cream, and yoghurt through a licensing arrangement with Jalna, both seemingly without astounding success.
The strategy is about prioritising high-margin IF and introducing products that 'branch off' from these more directly. Let's remember that two new products have only fairly recently been launched - A2 Smart Nutrition formula and Pregnancy formula. There is a stronger rationale for these products; not only are they higher margin, but in theory they expand the product life-cyle for an 'A2' consuming child from gestation (Pregnancy formula) right through to through to age 10 (Smart Nutrition). And now they have introduced smaller serving / cartons of fresh milk and Smart Nutrition UHT product for the China market that leverage this consumer base even further.
Personally, I think this is a really exciting and profitable long-term strategy and they should have probably sold it a bit further at the AGM because it is a real winner in my view.
Regarding your other point on competition, I think A2 is unique among all of the examples you provided. They certainly have competition now - virtually every major foreign competitor in China has stumped up an A2 formula offering (and a few Chinese brands have too). However, to this day, there is virtually no other company that only carries A2 products in its portfolio - literally every other competitor is paying lip service to the A2 market/health proposition, whilst still peddling A1-containing products. This provides a mixed message to the consumer - why offer A2 if you are not willing to endorse the health proposition? And if you do acknowledge its health advantages, then why offer A1-containing products?
Every other competitor is therefore saddled with a challenge of reconciling this conflict - if they have success with A2, do they start transitioning more towards that? Building A2 supply? What balance of their marketing budget do they spend on each? How to avoid cannabilising their own customer base? All of these issues face every competitor over the longer-term if the underlying 'innovation' continues to gain traction. And A2M has none of these issues and conflicts.
Then add to this its other advantages - extensive A2 supply, NZ origin, intellectual property, patents and branding, leading research in the area, all on top being 'first to market' from a distribution standpoint in the two largest markets in the world. Considering all of the other product/company comparisons you gave, and even the Dyson example provided by Hearn, all seem to fall short of describing the unique advantages for A2M.
(20min delay)