Today's Pricing

WATERMELON — F.O.B.S AS OF MAY 13

MEXICO CROSSINGS THROUGH NOGALES, ARIZ. — Crossings (705-766-766, seedless 683-751-759, seeded 22-15-7) — Movement expected about the same. Trading seeded slow, others moderate. Prices seedless 35-60 counts lower, others generally unchanged. Red-flesh seedless-type per pound 24-inch bins approximately 35-60 counts mostly 20 cents, 75-80s 14-16 cents; red-flesh seeded-type approximately 35-55 counts 12-14 cents. Flat cartons red-flesh seedless miniature 6-9s $7-9. Quality variable. Many present shipments from prior bookings and/or previous commitments.

LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY, TEXAS — Shipments (29-96-255, seedless 26-83-223, seeded 3-13-32) — Movement expected to decrease slightly. Trading very active at slightly lower prices. Prices 24-inch bins per-pound red-flesh seedless-type approximately 35-60 counts 28 cents, seeded-type approximately 28-35 counts mostly 21-22 cents. Quality generally good. Most present shipments from prior bookings and/or previous commitments at lower prices.

FLORIDA — Shipments (124-159-233, red-flesh seeded 16-29-53, red-flesh seedless 51-130-180) — Movement expected to increase as more growers start the season in central Florida. Harvesting slowed. Trading very active. Prices generally unchanged. 24-inch bins per-pound red-flesh seeded-type 35s 24-25 cents; red-flesh seedless-type 45 count 29-30 cents, 60 count 29-30 cents. Quality generally good.

IMPERIAL AND COACHELLA VALLEYS, CALIF., AND CENTRAL AND WESTERN ARIZONA — Shipments (AZ seedless 0-23-16, CA 0-26-78, seedless 0-24-73, seeded 0-2-5) — Movement from western Arizona, Imperial and Coachella valleys expected to increase seasonally. Trading fairly active at slightly lower prices. Prices slightly lower. Red-flesh seedless-type per pound 24-inch bins approximately 35 and 45 counts mostly 22 cents. Organic red-flesh seedless 24-inch bins per pound approximately 35 and 45 counts 35 cents; miniature carton 6s and 8s $20.50. Quality generally good. Harvest central Arizona expected to begin the week of May 27.



Learn More
  • Industry Alerts: USDA proceedings,
    Bankruptcy petitions — Learn more...
  • New Companies: PACA new
    licensees — Learn more...
  • Bankruptcy petitions have been filed by these companies — Learn more...
  • Company Listing changes: Address, personnel,
    contact information — Learn more...

News

Even with farm bill provisions, recall insurance still long shot

If the final farm bill keeps the Senate’s provision for a feasibility study of recall insurance, that will be just a starting point.

To make coverage a reality requires answers to questions that can seem like conundrums to insurers.

Feinstein Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., introduced the Senate amendment with an eye to companies swept up in a collapsing market when a competitor’s product is linked to contamination, said Art Garrett, general counselor and partner in Washington, D.C.-based Keller and Heckman LLP. The law firm advises the Produce Marketing Association, among others.

“Feinstein is concerned about those growers who get caught up in a hysteria or panic,” Garrett said. “Collateral damage is what she’s focused on.”

Recall insurance is already widely available but has limited relevance, said Greg Nelson, director of commercial lines and risk management at Irvine, Calif.-based Western Growers Insurance Services.

“Most major companies and several of the Lloyd’s syndicates offer it,” Nelson said. “It pays for the expense of bringing your product back from the market, loss of income, recovering your brand name. It’s a lot of coverage, but the policies specify that the only way you can recover is if your product causes injury or illness. It can’t be someone else’s product.”

Some insurers also require the recall to be mandatory. That’s problematic, to say the least.

“The reality is the federal government never formally requires anybody to recall,” Nelson said. “They’ve gotten everybody to do it voluntarily.”

McInerny Matt McInerny, executive vice president at Western Growers, says the challenges are multiple.

“One is to develop a robust coverage for the larger or smaller contained voluntary market withdrawals,” he said. “Have triggers for that, but have this other really broad coverage for innocent bystanders on the production side who are harmed through no fault of their own.”

Insurers have widely excluded recalls from liability coverage, offering it instead in a separate policy. But discussion of recall insurance seems to lead inevitably to concerns about liability.

“What keeps me up at night is an unprotected scenario that’s an equivalent of a Jensen Farms situation,” McInerny said, referring to the listeria outbreak in Colorado cantaloupe linked to more than 30 deaths.

“Inadvertently you fall into a tragedy beyond comprehension that takes up multigenerational assets built up over time,” he said. “How do you manage the risk? You do it on auto, on liability, but this one is tough. We’ve engaged insurance suppliers globally to see what could be collaborated on that would have layers of protection for everyone in the supply chain, but it’s been elusive.”

Western Growers has sought a solution for several years, Nelson said.

“There have been some efforts by a few companies to broaden the coverage a bit, to add endorsements that will cover similar products,” he said. “We’ve really only seen one that seemed possible, but under further questioning we pointed out some issues and haven’t heard back from them yet.”

What makes broad coverage elusive so far is the challenge of underwriting it.

“If I’m the insurance carrier,” McInerny said, “how do I price it to the risk appropriately to gather enough premium dollars to cover my exposure and then, as they do in the reinsurance market, lay off some of the risk on others?

“If I’m underwriting for Lloyd’s and looking at the last five to 10 years of catastrophic outbreaks, and see it was $100 million here and $50 million there, how do we garner the premium dollars? You’ve got multiple handlers, multiple producers, multiple touch points.”

“How they work business interruption into a recall policy, I don’t know,” Garrett said. “I guess that’s why they (the Senate) are calling it a feasibility study.”

The United Fresh Produce Association, for one, welcomes the study. United Fresh members were briefed on recall insurance issues at the annual convention in May.

“We talked to that group as well,” McInerny said. “Multiple people are asking, ‘How do you a draw up a policy to guard against (third-party damage)?’ It’s hard to quantify your exposure and develop a program of the magnitude needed to address the problem.”

But until something better comes along, Nelson offers some guidelines.

“My recommendation is to take the insurance with a high deductible for catastrophic events,” he said. “We’ve sold almost no coverage at all because everybody is looking for that collateral damage. People who buy it at the low deductible, $5,000, are finding it pretty expensive. We recommend buying it with a $10,000 or $25,000 deductible, but each company has to decide.”

In the end, the calculation on insurance costs of any kind can be a matter of common sense, as Nelson sees it.

“You weigh the value of the company against the cost of the insurance,” he said. “If you make $100,000 in salary a year and someone says your auto insurance is a couple thousand dollars, that’s not bad. But $25,000 is ridiculous. It’s the same thing in business. On the liability side, I don’t know if Jensen Farms could have bought enough insurance. Liability there will be in the tens of millions.”

It’s fairly rare for a food safety event to affect hundreds or thousands of growers and shippers, as the Colorado listeria outbreak did with cantaloupe, Nelson said.

“Maybe your efforts should be more focused on the prevention side,” he added.


Prev 1 2 Next All


Comments (2) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Charlie    
Report Abuse
California  |  July, 07, 2012 at 08:02 PM

I hope that Greg Nelson was quoted out of context when he said that, "Maybe your efforts should be more focused on the prevention side." As printed, it shows that he clearly does not understand the recall insurance conundrum that this article addresses, that is, that a recall by single firm can leave non-implicated firms to suffer the economic burdens of scared consumers. Also, what does he think that the industry is doing, ignoring food safety controls? Is he totally out of touch with the industry? WGA should have him take a course on speaking to the media.

ExpertRECALL    
Report Abuse
Indianapolis, IN  |  July, 09, 2012 at 01:50 PM

While recall insurance is widely available as this article states, many companies are still unaware of the many options and benefits to recall insurance. Coverage can include product recall expenses and liability to third parties seeking damages. Additional options are detailed on the following page: http://www.expertrecall.com/recall-services/product-recalls/what-should-your-recall-insurance-cover/

Feedback Form
Leads to Insight