Subprimal purchasing and merchandising decisions for pork: relationship to retail value.
To assess retail value and profitability, cutting test data were obtained in a simulated retail cutting room for boxed pork subprimals, bone-in loins (n = 180), boneless loins (n = 94), Boston butts (n = 148), fresh hams (n = 28), and boneless hams (n = 23). Processing times (seconds) and retail weights (kilograms) were used to determine relative value. Cutting style affected (P < .05) value differential (US$/subprimal) for bone-in and boneless loins. When cutting styles within subprimals were pooled, value differential was affected (P < .05) by purchasing specification for bone-in loins, boneless loins, Boston butts, and inside fresh hams. Processing bone-in loins to a boneless end point produced a greater (P < .05) value differential and percentage of gross margin than a bone-in retail end point. Bone-in loins fabricated to a boneless retail end point produced a greater (P < .05) value differential and percentage of gross margin than boneless loins fabricated to the same end point. The increase in retail value can be attributed to the increased number and weight of retail cuts produced from bone-in loins. The thick, boneless loin cutting style produced a greater (P < .05) value differential and percentage of gross margin as a result of a lower (P < .05) cost of fabrication and increased value of retail cuts than the thin, boneless cutting style. In general, boneless pork cutting methods were more profitable than bone-in cutting methods regardless of subprimal.
Lorenzen
C L
CL
Department of Animal Science, Texas A&M University, College Station 77843-2471, USA.
Walter
J P
JP
Dockerty
T R
TR
Griffin
D B
DB
Johnson
H K
HK
Savell
J W
JW
D000818:Animals; D003659:Decision Making, Organizational; D004465:Economic Competition; D005525:Food-Processing Industry / Q000191:economics* / Q000458:organization & administration; D008460:Meat / Q000191:economics* / Q000592:standards; D008722:Methods; D012984:Software; D013552:Swine; D013997:Time Factors