One of my favorite lines of cinema was delivered by Michael Keaton in The Founder, a biopic of Ray Kroc, the founder of McDonald’s. One might ask why the founder of McDonald’s is a guy named Ray Kroc, and not Ray McDonald? Well, there actually were two brothers surnamed McDonald who began the original restaurant chain in California. Ray Kroc was the guy they hired to help turn their regional restaurant into the globally recognized brand it is today. 

The line occurs after Ray Kroc successfully bought out the McDonald brothers in an epic gambit of corporate hijinks. After the deal is done, one of the brothers (Richard McDonald, played by Nick Offerman) confronts Kroc in the men’s room, and asks him why he didn’t just steal their method. Why did he need to buy their business? 

Early on in their business partnership, the McDonald brothers had shown Ray Kroc their revolutionary method, had invited him in to witness the inner workings of their system. Ray responds that if he would have just copied the method, he would have failed.

“It’s not just the system, Dick; it’s the name. That glorious name, ‘McDonald’s.’ It can be anything you want it to be … it sounds like … America.”

When I think about what the Angus breed does well, a lot of things come to mind. Genetics that favor carcass quality and production. Comprehensive and progressive data collection and analysis systems to continuously improve those genetics. A vast network of top-notch breeders, growers and marketers making it all work. All part of an organization with a proven track record of success and achievement. 

However, there is something about the name itself. Angus. It just rolls off the tongue. It sounds like … America.

The meaning

I use this example, because I think there is value in stopping for a moment to recognize the importance of the name and what that name means. On top of the many amazing traits of Angus cattle, one of the great things the breed has going for it is brand recognition. 

Now I freely admit, the term ‘brand recognition’ has been used as a buzzword, and as such, may have lost some of its original meaning. At the very least, it may not mean the same thing to all people. Notwithstanding, based on my conversations with friends, neighbors and veterinary students, I’d say the term Certified Angus Beef (CAB) is largely associated with quality, high-end dining in the minds of the average consumer.

How do we protect the name/brand? As a cattle veterinarian, I can say that brand recognition for me often came down to reputation. When I treated my clients with respect, tried hard to make myself available for their needs and dealt fairly with them in our transactions, I developed a strong brand and was never wanting for things to do. 

However, the feedback loop between my actions and my reputation as a veterinarian was fairly direct and short. If I screwed up in a major way, you can rest assured that most of the county knew about it by the beginning of the next week. Where are the feedback loops between cattle production and the reputation of CAB, and how long until that feedback has an effect?

I recently read an article in the journal of Public Health Nutrition that detailed the results of a survey asking Americans about whether they were trying to reduce their meat consumption. The survey was conducted in 2015, but I feel the results are still relevant today. Of the survey respondents who indicated they were trying to reduce their meat consumption, the reasons most frequently cited for doing so were cost (51% of respondents), followed closely by concerns about their health (50%). Concerns regarding animal welfare and the impact of animal agriculture on the environment were relatively uncommon by comparison (12% each). 

I find this interesting, because the reputation of beef seems to take a beating in popular and social media more often for the latter reasons than it does for the former. To be clear, you have to be really careful to not over-interpret survey data. Surveys and other observational studies are fraught with bias and confounding issues, and this survey was performed more than 10 years ago. Still, I recall the price of beef being relatively high back then, much like it is today. At the very least, survey data can spawn better, more focused questions.

For example, is it possible that current conditions are pricing the beef industry out of the market? If we look at the historical data, the answer would seem to be no. High prices have traditionally sent a signal to producers that resulted in greater heifer retention, an increase in cow numbers, and a corresponding drop in cattle/beef prices. 

However, a closer look at the trends suggests we may be witnessing emergent behavior in the most recent iterations of the cattle cycle. The population of the United States is aging; baby boomers are retiring and transitioning from accumulating wealth to enjoying it. Their millennial children are finally moving out of the basement and earning a living wage. Eating beef has never been more expensive, and yet the demand for CAB does not seem to be waning. 

A look at trends

Furthermore, it seems the recent increase in cattle prices is not having the same effect on heifer retention it once did. I don’t pretend to have a full command of all of the factors influencing this trend, but rising land prices and fewer young people accessing the means of production may be relevant factors. The price signals coming from consumers seem to indicate they eat beef not because it’s the most affordable protein, but because it is the most desirable. 

Concerns over the health effects of eating beef persist, yet the evidence supporting the various assertions related to the risks and benefits of a diet high in red meat are mixed. Eating red meat has traditionally been associated with elevated cholesterol, which is associated with heart disease. 

However, recent research suggests there are interactions between cholesterol and insulin resistance that play a much more important role in this syndrome. 

There has been a recent increase in the trend of carnivore diets, or diets based exclusively on animal protein. Some studies suggest there may be legitimate health benefits to these diets, at least in the short term. It’s virtually impossible to perform highly controlled clinical trials with sufficient statistical power to determine the long-term effects of specific human diets, so it’s hard to know for sure. 

Of course, there are the more acute food safety concerns related to factors such as E. coli and other foodborne pathogens, though the literature I’ve read suggests consumers in general don’t really spend too much time worrying about this. I attribute this largely to the genuine safety of the North American food chain. Incidents of illness from foodborne pathogens are relatively rare, and despite the best efforts of industry opponents to distort the numbers, the specter of foodborne illness from eating beef does not seem to loom large in the minds of consumers. 

Much ado has also been made about the benefits of grass- vs. grain-finished beef. The evidence suggests grass finished beef has different fat content and fatty acid profiles, though how these differences translate into health benefits, and the magnitude of these benefits may be harder to determine. These health factors seem to signal that, at worst consumers may view beef as a guilty pleasure, and at best they may view it as the mainstay of a healthy diet. 

I won’t spend a lot of time diving into environmental and welfare issues, other than to say cattle growers have a vested interest in taking care of both. When you take care of the land and the animals, they take care of you. A lot of the disconnect comes from differing ideas on what taking care of the land and animals looks like. Much like the adverse health effects of red meat, opponents of the beef industry tend to focus on isolated cases and blow them out of proportion. 

Regardless, all of these factors represent potential sources of feedback, and even though the signals get filtered and distorted through the various segments of the beef supply chain, industries and individuals who ignore them do so at their own peril. It’s a healthy thing to reflect on your brand, and what that brand means to the people who keep you in business. Whatever changes to the industry may be coming, I hope the name associated with The Business Breed will be Angus, always. 

Editor’s note: Todd Gunderson is a clinical assistant professor, beef production medicine, at Kansas State University in Manhattan, Kan.