Tassal Group Strategic Thoughts, page-332

They do take branding seriously, but Huon probably has a better premium product (it has won awards), but there is really only Tassal and Huon, all other salmon sales in Australia is niche, imported salmon is more expensive, and probably less desirable from an ESG point of view (carbon miles).

When there is limited consumer choice branding is less important, but it is important for the industry long term as it can help grow consumption, which is pretty low in Australia compared to other countries (about half IIRC). Domestic sales are less risky than exports.

Tassal management do take branding seriously, slightly less than half our volume is sold unbranded, the rest branded (46:54), with revenue split 50:50, so there is a small premium for the branded product.

"Salmon retail “Tassal” branded volume growth ‐ MAP up 27.7% and smoked up19.5%, reflecting a focussed marketing campaign that delivered increased brandstrength and trust, and successful levering of the megatrends that underpinsalmon growth." - AGM presentation
The story here though is that those numbers are coming of a low base as we used to sell a lot more behind the deli, but are losing some volume there as we lost one of the supermarket contracts to Huon IIRC.

Management are also taking branding seriously from Prawns (again from Annual Report)
"Similar to salmon, branding will become central. Our vision is for Topic Co to be Australia’s no. 1 farmed Tiger Prawn brand, recognised and trusted by customers and consumers"

This is the companies branding view, #1 with Salmon, but #2 with Seafood more generally.



I think as an investor its important to listen to critics, so i value this engagement, but im not trying to "convert" you, we all have to make our investment decisions, we should be able to base such decisions on the same information in any case.