• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Abstract
 The Florida agricultural market...
 Table of Contents
 List of Tables
 List of Figures
 Acknowledgement
 Summary
 Introduction
 Objectives and procedure
 Findings
 Conclusions
 References






Group Title: FAMRC industry report
Title: Changes in consumer demand for Florida tomatoes
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00026921/00001
 Material Information
Title: Changes in consumer demand for Florida tomatoes a report
Alternate Title: FAMRC industry report 92-1
Physical Description: x, 61 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Degner, Robert L
Moss, Susan D
Publisher: Florida Agricultural Market Research Center, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: April, 1992
Copyright Date: 1992
 Subjects
Subject: Tomatoes -- Marketing -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Tomatoes -- Quality -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: by Robert L. Degner, Susan D. Moss.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (p. 61).
General Note: "April 1992."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00026921
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: notis - AJL7700
oclc - 27825566
alephbibnum - 001794009

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Abstract
        Page i
    The Florida agricultural market research center
        Page ii
    Table of Contents
        Page iii
    List of Tables
        Page iv
        Page v
        Page vi
    List of Figures
        Page vii
        Page viii
    Acknowledgement
        Page ix
    Summary
        Page x
        Page xi
    Introduction
        Page 1
    Objectives and procedure
        Page 2
    Findings
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
    Conclusions
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
    References
        Page 61
Full Text

'~- '

Industry Report 92-1
April 1992



FAMRC




CHANGES IN CONSUMER DEMAND
FOR FLORIDA TOMATOES





&.j -"> %- a report by

O Dr. Robert L. Degner
Susan D. Moss




Florida Agricultural Market Research Center
a part of the Food and Resource Economics Department
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611















CHANGES IN CONSUMER DEMAND FOR FLORIDA TOMATOES








A Report by


Dr. Robert L. Degner
Susan D. Moss




April 1992






Florida Agricultural Market Research Center
Food and Resource Economics Department
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611









ABSTRACT


This study evaluates consumers' attitudes and consumption patterns for fresh
regular round tomatoes and how they have changed since a similar study was conducted
in 1985. A telephone survey of 1,000 primary food shoppers was conducted in five major
markets in the northeastern U.S. Markets were defined as television areas of dominant
influence (TV ADIs) and were the same TV ADIs that were used for the 1985 study.

The proportion of households using any type of fresh tomatoes declined from 89.6
percent in 1985 to 84.9 percent in 1991. Overall usage of fresh regular round tomatoes
declined from 82.3 to 77.9 percent between 1985 and 1991. However, usage of plum and
cherry tomatoes increased significantly. The 1991 survey also found that under
hypothetical scenarios where regular round tomatoes of varying degrees of ripeness were
available, the total quantity of regular round tomatoes purchased was greater than when
only fully ripe or underripe tomatoes were available. Florida-grown tomatoes were
preferred over Mexican tomatoes by a larger percentage of respondents in the 1991
survey. A significantly smaller percentage of respondents reported properly storing fresh
tomatoes at room temperature in 1991 compared to 1985, although those that had
switched to room temperature storage were more satisfied by the practice. More people
were willing to serve a tossed salad without fresh tomatoes in 1991. The use of cherry
tomatoes, peppers and plum tomatoes as substitutes for regular round tomatoes
increased significantly. Respondents recalled newspaper food pages, recipes/leaflets, in-
store posters, magazine ads and other TV publicity more often than in the 1985 survey,
while recall of radio commercials for fresh tomatoes was significantly lower. The study
also provides specific reasons for liking and disliking regular round tomatoes and
compares them to the 1985 survey.









THE FLORIDA AGRICULTURAL MARKET RESEARCH CENTER


The Florida Agricultural Market Research Center is a service of the Food and

Resource Economics Department. Its purpose is to provide timely, applied research on

current and emerging marketing problems affecting Florida's agricultural and marine

industries. A basic goal of the Center is to provide organized groups with practical

solutions to their marketing problems. The Center seeks to provide marketing research

and related information to producer organizations, trade associations, and governmental

agencies concerned with improving and expanding markets for Florida's agricultural and

marine products.

Client organizations are required to pay direct costs associated with their research

projects. Such costs include labor for personnel and telephone interviewing, mail

surveys, travel, and computer analyses. Professional time and support is provided at no

charge by IFAS.

Professional agricultural economists with specialized training and experience in

marketing participate in every Center project. Cooperating personnel from other IFAS

units are also involved whenever specialized technical assistance is needed.

For more information about the Center, contact:



Dr. Robert L. Degner, Director
Florida Agricultural Market Research Center
1083 McCarty Hall
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611
(904) 392-1871


ii










TABLE OF CONTENTS


LIST OF TABLES ............................................... iv

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................. vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................ ix

SU M M ARY ................................................... x

INTRODUCTION ................................................ 1

OBJECTIVES .................................................. 2

PROCED U RE ................................................. 2

FIN D IN G S .................................................... 3

Trends in Fresh Tomato Use .................................. 3

Effect of Ripeness on Retail Tomato Sales ....................... 26

Florida vs. Mexican Tomatoes ................................ 29

Storage Practices and Usage Patterns for Fresh Tomatoes ........... 36

Use of Room Temperature Storage ....................... 36
Effect of Room Temperature Storage on Satisfaction with
Tom atoes ..................................... 40
Use of a Ripening Bowl ............................... 43
Knowledge of Placement During Storage ................... 44
Elapsed Time Between Purchase and Consumption ........... 44
Serving Temperature of Uncooked Tomatoes ................ 45
Predominant Uses for Fresh Tomatoes .................... 47
Willingness to Serve Tossed Salad Without Tomatoes and
Substitutes for Tomatoes .......................... 47

Recall of Advertising and Publicity ............................. 50

CONCLU SIONS ............................................... 58

REFERENCES ................................................ 61


iii









LIST OF TABLES

page
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents, 1985 and 1991. . 4

Table 2. Use of all types of fresh tomatoes, by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991. ... 5

Table 3. Proportion of households using fresh tomatoes, by demographic
characteristic, 1985 and 1991............................... 8

Table 4. Primary reason given for never buying fresh tomatoes .......... 9

Table 5. Percentage of households using selected types of tomatoes within
the previous three months, by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991. ........ 10

Table 6. Usage of all types of fresh tomatoes from survey samples and
estimated market penetration, by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991 ....... 12

Table 7. Assortment of fresh tomatoes purchased in previous three months
by surveyed tomato users, 1985 and 1991 surveys ............. 18

Table 8. Tomato-consuming households with regular round tomatoes on
hand, 1985 and 1991. .................................. 18

Table 9. Primary reasons given for not buying tomatoes within the previous
three months .............................................. 19

Table 10. Primary reason given for buying regular round tomatoes available
in winter and early spring, 1985 and 1991. .................. 20

Table 11. Attributes of round tomatoes available in winter and early spring
which are most disliked, 1985 and 1991. .................... 22

Table 12. Overall satisfaction with regular round tomatoes purchased in the
past three months. ..................................... 24

Table 13. Average overall satisfaction ratings of winter and early spring
round tomatoes, by selected socio-economic and demographic
characteristics, 1985 and 1991. ............................ 25

Table 14. Tomato purchases for three hypothetical shopping scenarios. .... 27

Table 15. A summary of hypothetical purchases of regular round tomatoes by
respondents given a choice of ripeness. .................. . 27

iv











LIST OF TABLES, continued

page
Table 16. Average price tomato users would pay for fully ripe and for slightly
underripe regular round tomatoes. ........................ 29

Table 17. Consumers' preference for round tomatoes grown in either Florida
or Mexico, by TV ADI. ................................. 31

Table 18. Consumer preference for round tomatoes grown in either Florida
or Mexico, by selected demographic characteristics, 1985 and
1991. ............................................... 33

Table 19. Primary reasons given for choosing Florida tomatoes ............ 34

Table 20. Shoppers' concerns about Mexican tomatoes ................. 35

Table 21. Primary reasons given for choosing Mexican tomatoes .......... 35

Table 22. Incidence and recent adoption of room temperature storage for
fresh tomatoes, by TV ADI............................... 36

Table 23. Sources of information influencing consumers to switch to room
temperature storage within the last three years, all TV ADIs, 1985
and 1991 . .................................. .. ..... 38

Table 24. Sources of information influencing consumers to switch to room
temperature storage within the last 3 years, by TV ADI, 1985 and
1991. ................................................... 39

Table 25. Effects of room temperature storage on satisfaction with
tomatoes. .................................... ...... 40

Table 26. Proportion of respondents usually storing fresh, underripe tomatoes
at room temperature, by demographic characteristics, 1985 and
1991 surveys. ...................................... ... 42

Table 27. Use of ripening bowl or other container for storing underripe
tomatoes, for those respondents which usually store underripe
tomatoes at room temperature, 1985 and 1991 surveys. ........ 43

Table 28. Storage of fully red ripe tomatoes, 1985 and 1991 surveys. ...... 43


v









LIST OF TABLES, continued

page
Table 29. "Correct" placement of round tomatoes during storage, by TV
ADI ............................................... 44

Table 30. Storage time from purchase date before the first tomato and the
last tomato is used for those respondents which purchased fresh
tomatoes during the winter and early spring months, 1991 ....... 45

Table 31. Usual serving temperature for uncooked tomatoes. ............ 47

Table 32. Serving methods for fresh tomatoes, 1985 and 1991 ............ 48

Table 33. Respondents' willingness to serve a tossed salad without fresh
tomatoes, by TV ADI.................................... 48

Table 34. Respondents' willingness to serve a tossed salad without fresh
tomatoes, by demographic characteristic. ................... 51

Table 35. Substitutes most often used for regular round tomatoes in a tossed
salad. .............................................. 52

Table 36. Patronization of a restaurant with a self-serve salad bar within the
previous month, by selected socio-economic and demographic
characteristics. ....................................... 54

Table 37. Preference for regular round tomatoes cut into wedges or cherry
tomatoes from a salad bar, by selected socio-economic and
demographic characteristics............................... 55

Table 38. Recall of advertising and publicity for fresh tomatoes during the
past two or three years. ................................. 56













vi










LIST OF FIGURES


Figure 1. Use of all types of fresh tomatoes by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991. .... 6

Figure 2. Percentages of households using selected types of tomatoes within
the previous three months, all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991. ....... 11

Figure 3. Changes in number of households using selected types of tomatoes,
all ADIs, 1985 and 1991. ............................... 13

Figure 4. Changes in market penetration for regular round tomatoes, by TV
ADI, 1985 and 1991. .................................. 15

Figure 5. Changes in market penetration for plum tomatoes, by TV ADI,
1985 and 1991. ....................................... 16

Figure 6. Changes in market penetration for cherry tomatoes, by TV ADI,
1985 and 1991. ....................................... 17

Figure 7. Primary reasons for buying regular round tomatoes available in
winter and early spring, all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991 ........... 21

Figure 8. Attributes of round tomatoes which are most disliked. ......... 23

Figure 9. Percent of households buying selected types of tomatoes, given
different degrees of ripeness of regular round tomatoes ......... 28

Figure 10. Quantities of selected types of tomatoes purchased under
hypothetical shopping scenarios, given different degrees of ripeness
of regular round tomatoes................................ 30

Figure 11. Households preferring Florida-grown tomatoes, by TV ADI, 1985
and 1991. ........................................... 32

Figure 12. Households storing fresh tomatoes at room temperature, by TV
ADI, 1985 and 1991. .................................. 37

Figure 13. Effects of room temperature on satisfaction with tomatoes, all TV
ADIs, 1985 and 1991. .................................. 41

Figure 14. Storage time from purchase date before the first tomato and the
last tomato is used, all TV ADIs, 1991. .................... 46


vii









LIST OF FIGURES, continued


Figure 15. Willingness to serve a tossed salad without fresh tomatoes, by TV
ADI, 1985 and 1991. .................................. 49

Figure 16. Substitutes most often used for regular round tomatoes in a tossed
salad, all ADIs, 1985 and 1991. .......................... 53

Figure 17. Recall of advertising and publicity for fresh tomatoes during the
past two or three years, all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991 ........... 57





































viii










ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


Our appreciation is expressed to the membership of the Florida Tomato

Committee for their financial support. Thanks also go to the Committee's professional

staff, particularly Wayne Hawkins and Beth Mahaffey for their assistance in the

formative stages of this project. We are also indebted to Gordon Kubota and his staff

at CIC Research, Inc. for their assistance with the telephone field work.



































ix










SUMMARY


"* The proportion of households using fresh tomatoes declined from 89.6
percent in 1985 to 84.9 percent in 1991 in the markets studied.

"* The proportion of households using regular round tomatoes declined from
82.3 to 77.9 percent, but the proportions of households using plum and
cherry tomatoes increased dramatically from 1985 to 1991.

"* Consumer satisfaction with regular round tomatoes deteriorated in the
study area from 1985 to 1991. Major complaints are taste, not ripe
enough, poor texture ("mealy") and lack of freshness. However, many
consumers continue to buy tomatoes because they are essential in recipes.

"* Most consumers were not particularly concerned with price; only 2.6
percent mentioned high prices as their primary complaint in 1991.

"* Offering shoppers a choice of "slightly underripe" and "fully ripe" regular
round tomatoes may result in significant sales increases because consumers
want tomatoes for immediate consumption as well as for use up to a week
after purchase.

* Florida-grown tomatoes were overwhelmingly preferred over Mexican-
grown tomatoes in both 1985 and 1991. A favorable image of Florida and
loyalty to U.S. products were the most common reasons given for
preferring Florida-grown tomatoes.

"* The proportion of households utilizing "kitchen ripening" declined
somewhat from 1985 to 1991, but a higher proportion of those storing
tomatoes at room temperature reported greater satisfaction with tomatoes
as a result.

"* Consumers' recall of specific types of advertising and publicity reflects the
programs and emphasis that the Committee has adopted in recent years.
Survey results indicate that Florida Tomato promotional programs are
working, but advertising and publicity alone cannot overcome basic
product limitations.

"* Maintaining product quality throughout the marketing channel should
remain a top priority, as well as educating consumers as to proper ripening
and storage practices.



x













INTRODUCTION


F.O.B. price and shipment data for 1991 indicated a downturn in consumer

demand for fresh tomatoes. Although fresh tomatoes remain one of American

consumers' favorite produce items, they are also the frequent target of complaints and

criticism by food writers and others. Recent surveys by The Packer reveal that fresh

tomatoes (excluding cherry tomatoes) are viewed as being the least consistent of all

vegetable items with respect to quality and value, and focus group interviews conducted

for the Florida Tomato Committee in 1989 detected negative attitudes towards winter

and spring tomatoes among many consumers. These negative attitudes, coupled with the

widespread availability of numerous fresh substitutes as salad ingredients, may be

adversely affecting the demand for fresh tomatoes. In today's competitive environment,

the Florida tomato industry must determine if the criticism that frequently surfaces in

the popular press represents consumers' attitudes or the misguided opinions of writers

looking for sensational stories.

This research was initiated to assess the market environment for fresh tomatoes,

and to determine what can be done by the Florida tomato industry to counteract

negative demand factors, thereby increasing sales. A consumer survey conducted by

telephone provided data for the study. A similar study conducted in 1985 provides a

benchmark to determine if, in fact, consumers are changing their tomato consumption

patterns. Funding for the research was provided by the Florida Tomato Committee.





2



OBJECTIVES


The primary objectives of this research were to determine trends in consumers'

purchase, use, and storage patterns for Florida tomatoes and also to explore prevailing

and emerging attitudes toward winter and spring tomatoes.

Specific objectives were to:

1. Determine general levels of satisfaction with winter and spring
tomatoes and identify positive and negative factors affecting fresh
tomato demand at the consumer level.

2. Estimate current frequency of tomato purchases and quantities
purchased.

3. Determine the extent of proper versus improper storage and
ripening practices at the household level.

4. Compare current findings with benchmark data obtained in the
1985 consumer study to identify significant behavioral and
attitudinal shifts.

5. Formulate marketing strategies to increase fresh tomato
consumption during the Florida production season.


PROCEDURE


A telephone survey of 1,008 primary food shoppers was conducted in late March

and early April 1991. The sample included approximately 200 households in each of five

major markets identified as the television area of dominant influence (TV ADI) defined

by Arbitron Research. The five areas surveyed were New York, Boston, Philadelphia,

Pittsburgh, and Roanoke/Lynchburg. These market areas are the same ones surveyed

for the Florida Tomato Committee in 1985. Most of the questions were identical to the

previous study, thus the results for 1985 and 1991 provided a direct comparison of






3



current and benchmark findings. Telephone numbers within each TV ADI were

randomly generated by computer to assure inclusion of unlisted households, and the

primary food shopper within each household was interviewed by a professional

interviewer. Because TV ADIs are multi-county regions, the sample within each TV

ADI was stratified by county populations to assure proper geographic dispersion.


FINDINGS


The research results which follow are organized into five major sections: "Trends

in Fresh Tomato Use," "Effect of Ripeness on Retail Tomato Sales," "Florida vs.

Mexican Tomatoes," "Storage Practices and Usage Patterns for Fresh Tomatoes" and

"Recall of Advertising and Publicity." Current (1991) and benchmark (1985) data

showed few differences in the socio-demographic characteristics of survey respondents,

so direct comparisons of the two surveys are often possible (Table 1).


Trends in Fresh Tomato Use


Usage of fresh tomatoes (all types) declined from 89.6 percent of all households

in 1985 to 84.9 percent in 1991 (Table 2, Figure 1). Statistically significant declines

occurred in the most populous markets, which included New York, Philadelphia and

Boston. Pittsburgh showed little change in tomato use, and Roanoke/Lynchburg showed

an increase.

Examination of fresh tomato usage by selected socio-economic and demographic

characteristics in 1985 and 1991 indicated that smaller households, lower income groups,






4




Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents, 1985 and 1991.

1985 1991
Characteristic Number Percent Number Percent

Household Size
1 404 16.9 161 16.3
2 756 31.6 311 31.4
3 449 18.8 170 17.2
4 442 18.5 206 20.8
5 or more 340 14.2 141 14.3

Education Levela
Some grade or high school 390 16.3 79 8.1
Tech or high school grad. 1,050 43.9 368 37.8
Some college or voc. school 346 14.5 188 19.3
College grad. 604 25.3 338 34.7

Income
Under $10,000 268 15.5 79 9.8
$10,000-$19,999 421 24.4 146 18.1
$20,000-$34,999 476 27.5 197 24.4
$35,000-$49,999 404 23.4 186 23.0
$50,000 + 159 9.2 199 24.7

Age
Under 25 221 9.2 103 10.5
25-34 567 23.7 253 25.7
35-49 723 30.3 307 31.2
50-64 497 20.8 176 17.9
65 or older 382 16.0 144 14.6

Racea
White 2,112 88.9 845 84.1
Black 193 8.1 83 8.3
Hispanic 31 1.3 19 1.9
Asian/American Indian 39 1.6 58 5.8

Sex
Male 551 23.0 250 25.8
Female 1,841 77.0 718 74.2

Phone
Listed 1,883 80.2 752 77.7
Unlisted 464 19.8 216 22.3

Total 2,409 100.0 1,008 100.0

A Chi-square test indicated that the 1985 and 1991 samples were significantly different with respect
to this variable (P < 0.05).






5



Table 2. Use of all types of fresh tomatoes, by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991.

1985 1991
Total number Percent using Total number Percent using
TV ADIa of households tomatoes of households tomatoes
(Thousands) (Thousands)
New York 6,677.3 90.2 7,178.9 84.6
Philadelphia 2,562.6 89.6 2,767.3 82.0
Boston 1,972.6 90.0 2,143.3 87.3
Pittsburgh 1,247.4 85.8 1,171.8 87.1
Roanoke/Lynchburg 353.0 88.0 380.4 91.6
All TV ADIs 12,812.9 89.6c 13,641.7 84.9r

a The 1985 survey was based on 2,407 usable observations and the 1991 survey was based on 1,007
usable observations. Usage across all TV ADIs was based on the survey sample and weighted by total
population in each market area. Across all TV ADIs, there was a statistically significant decline in tomato
usage from 1985 to 1991. As for individual market areas, New York, Philadelphia and Boston showed
significant declines; usage in Pittsburgh was not significantly different, but usage in Roanoke/Lynchburg was
significantly higher.

b Chi-square analysis indicates no statistically significant differences in the proportion of households
using tomatoes among TV ADIs, P 0.05.

c Weighted by total number of households in each TV ADI.







100

91.6
90.2 89.6 90.0 89.6
I I-'- 87.3 87.1 .88 .0 .
84.6 *X 85.8 8 84.9
82.0
80
U)




O 60






) 40
C/
a)

a-

20






1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991

New York Philadelphia Boston Pittsburg Roanoke/Lynchburg All ADIs

Figure 1.--Use of all types of fresh tomatoes by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991.
* Statistically significant difference.






7



and households where the primary food shopper was under 25 or over 65 years old

tended to be somewhat less likely to use tomatoes (Table 3). In 1991, males were also

less likely to use fresh tomatoes than females, and whites and Asians were less likely to

use fresh tomatoes than blacks or Hispanics.

Poor taste was by far the most common reason given by shoppers for never

buying fresh tomatoes in both the 1985 and 1991 surveys. However, the percentage

citing poor taste declined significantly: 57.3 percent of non-users in 1985 and 42.6

percent in 1991 (Table 4). Price was of much less concern in 1991 (2.2 percent) than

in 1985 (10.1 percent). Health concerns replaced price as the second most common

reason for not buying tomatoes (13.2 percent in 1991 versus 9.7 percent in 1985), and

the 1991 survey showed a statistically significant increase in the use of home-grown

tomatoes; over 12 percent said they used only home-grown tomatoes in 1991 while about

five percent had cited the use of home-grown tomatoes in 1985. Lack of freshness

moved from a relative position of sixth in 1985 to fourth in 1991 as a primary reason for

never buying fresh tomatoes. Poor texture, high price, ripeness and short shelf life were

all cited by less than five percent of non-users in 1991, with ripeness and price

mentioned by significantly fewer of the non-users in 1991 than in 1985. Other relatively

infrequent reasons given for never buying fresh tomatoes included bruised or damaged

fruit, the use of canned tomatoes, limited availability, and package size.

In both surveys, the primary shopper in each household using fresh tomatoes was

asked what types (regular round, plum or cherry) of tomatoes had been purchased within

the previous three months. Across all five markets, the percentage of households buying

regular round tomatoes decreased from 82.3 percent in 1985 to 77.9 percent in 1991





8




Table 3. Proportion of households using fresh tomatoes, by demographic characteristic, 1985 and
1991.

Households Households
Characteristic (1985) (1991)
Number Percent Number Percent
Household Size
1 326 80.7 114 70.8
2 657 87.0 277 89.4
3 405 90.4 148 87.1
4 407 92.1 190 92.2
5 or more 322 94.7 131 92.9
Education Level
Some grade or high school 330 84.8 65 82.3
Tech. or high school grad. 936 89.1 316 85.9
Some college or voc. school 309 89.3 174 92.6
College grad. 541 89.7 295 87.5
Income
Under $10,000 224 83.6 68 86.1
$10,000-19,999 375 89.1 118 80.8
$20,000-34,999 436 91.8 174 88.8
$35,000-49,999 377 93.5 174 93.6
$50,000 + 143 89.9 180 90.5

Under 25 188 85.4 84 81.6
25-34 505 89.1 219 86.6
35-49 664 91.8 277 90.2
50-64 445 89.5 160 91.4
65 or older 313 82.2 112 77.8
Race
White (not Hispanic) 1,867 88.5 736 87.2
Black (not Hispanic) 178 92.2 75 90.4
Hispanic 25 80.6 17 89.5
Asian/American Indian 34 87.2 40 69.0
Sex
Male 477 86.7 201 80.4
Female 1,645 89.4 640 89.3
All Householdsb 2,133 88.6 871 86.5

a Chi-Square analysis showed that fresh tomato usage was statistically different for household size,
income and age in the 1985 survey. These three demographic groups were again found to be statistically
different in 1991, along with race and sex, P < 0.05.

b Overall use of fresh tomatoes in this table reflects survey data. It is not weighted by population
as in Figure 1 and Table 1.






9



Table 4. Primary reason given for never buying fresh tomatoes.

1985 1991
Reason Number Percent Number Percent

Do not like the taste 153 57.3 58 42.6a
Health reasons 26 9.7 18 13.2
Use only home grown 14 5.2 17 12.5a
Not fresh 6 2.2 7 5.1
Poor texture 3 1.1 5 3.7
High price 27 10.1 3 2.2a
Not ripe 17 6.4 3 2.2a
Short life 2 0.7 3 2.2
Miscellaneousb 13 4.9 7 5.1
Do not know 6 2.2 15 11.0a
Total 267 100.0c 136 100.0c

a Using a t-test, these response rates in 1991 were statistically different than 1985 response rates
at the 0.05 probability level.
b Miscellaneous includes "use only canned tomatoes," "not readily available," "don't eat enough to
buy them," "bruised or damaged," and "package size too large."
c Does not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.


(Table 5, Figure 2). Households using plum tomatoes increased from 14.4 percent in

1985 to 28.1 percent in 1991, and households using cherry tomatoes increased from 19.8

percent in 1985 to 26.3 percent in 1991. Although the total number of households in the

five markets increased by about 6.5 percent from 1985 to 1991, the number of

households buying regular round tomatoes remained nearly unchanged at about 10.6

million households (Table 6, Figure 3). The number of households buying plum

tomatoes jumped from 1.8 to 3.8 million and households buying cherry tomatoes went

from 2.5 to 3.6 million households.





10



Table 5. Percentage of households using selected types of tomatoes within the previous three
months, by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991.

Cherry Plum Regular

TV ADI 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
(------------------------ Percent----- --------------)
Boston 18.7 22.3 12.6 27.9 83.4 76.1
Roanoke/Lynchburg 13.3 17.8 10.1 17.2 81.5 86.7
Philadelphia 19.3 26.3 6.2 23.5 81.9 73.2
New York 22.0 29.5 19.8 31.9 82.8 79.6
Pittsburgh 13.0 15.9 6.8 19.5 79.3 79.2
All TV ADIsa 19.8 26.3 14.4 28.1 82.3 77.9

a Overall percentages are based on survey samples and weighted by population in the respective
market areas. Using a t-test, overall usage of cherry and plum tomatoes showed a significant increase
between the 1985 and 1991 surveys, however use of regular round tomatoes showed a significant decline
(0.05 probability level). Boston, Philadelphia and New York each reflected the overall trends. Pittsburgh
and Roanoke/Lynchburg showed a significant increase in usage of plum tomatoes only.







100




82.3
80 77.9


W 0.5


0 60 -

'-



S40 -

C
0 28.1 *
26.3
(.
20 19.8
14.4





1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
Regular round Plum Cherry

Figure 2.-- Percentages of households using selected types of tomatoes
within the previous three months, all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991.

* Statistically significant difference.







Table 6. Usage of all types of fresh tomatoes from survey samples and estimated market penetration, by TV AII, 1985 and 1991.
New York Philadelphia Boston Pittsburgh Roanoke/Lynchburg All TV ADIs
Year 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991

Total number of households in
market area (millions)* 6,677.3 7,178.9 2,562.6 2,767.3 1,972.6 2,143.3 1,247.4 1,171.8 353.0 380.4 12,812.9 13,641.7
Percent of surveyed households
using fresh tomatoes 90.2 84.6 89.6 82.0 90.0 87.3 85.8 87.1 88.0 91.6 89.6 84.9
Total number of households
using fresh tomatoes (millions) 6,022.9 6,073.3 2,296.1 2,269.2 1,775.3 1,871.1 1,070.3 1,020.6 310.6 348.4 11,475.3 11,582.7

Percent of surveyed households
using RRTs (regular round
tomatoes)c 91.8 94.1 91.4 89.3 92.7 87.2 92.4 90.9 92.6 94.6 91.9 91.8
No. of households in market
area using RRTs (millions) 5,529.0 5,715.0 2,098.6 2,026.4 1,645.7 1,631.6 988.9 927.8 287.7 329.6 10,550.0 10,630.4
Percent of all households in
area using RRTs 82.8 79.6 81.9 73.2 83.4 76.1 79.3 79.2 81.5 86.7 82.3 77.9

Percent of surveyed households
using plum tomatoes 21.9 37.7 6.9 28.6 14.0 32.0 7.9 22.4 11.5 18.8 16.1 33.1
No. of households in mkt. area
using plum tomatoes (million) 1,319.0 2,289.7 158.4 649.0 248.5 598.8 84.6 228.6 35.7 65.5 1,846.3 3,8315
Percent of all households
area using plum tomatoes 19.8 31.9 6.2 23.5 12.6 27.9 6.8 19.5 10.1 17.2 14.4 28.1

Percent of surveyed households
using cherry tomatoes 24.4 34.9 21.5 32.1 20.8 25.6 15.2 18.3 15.1 19.4 22.2 30.9
No. of households in mkt. area
using cherry tomatoes (millions) 1,469.6 2,119.6 493.7 728.4 369.3 479.0 162.7 186.8 46.9 67.6 2,542.1 3,581.4
Percent of all households i
area using cherry tomatoes 22.0 29.5 19.3 26.3 18.7 22.3 13.0 15.9 13.3 17.8 19.8 26.3

a Arbitron Ratings Company, Arbitron Ratings: Television, 1984-85 Universe Estimates Summary and 1990-91 Universe Estimates Summary, New York, NY, 1984 and 1990.

b The 1985 survey was based on 2,407 usable observations and the 1991 survey was based on 1,007 usable observations. Usage across all TV ADIs was based on the survey
samples and weighted by total population in each market area. Across all TV ADIs, there was a statistically significant decline in usage of all types of fresh tomatoes from 1985 to 1991.
As for individual areas, New York, Philadelphia and Boston showed significant declines; usage in Pittsburgh was not significantly different, but usage in Roanoke/Lynchburg was
significantly higher, P < 0.05.

c The survey sample showed usage of cherry and plum tomatoes increased significantly (P < 0.05) between the 1985 and 1991 surveys. This was true for each TV ADI. Over
all TV ADIs, the sample showed no significant change in the use of regular round tomatoes. However, the Boston sample showed a significant decline in the proportion using regular
round tomatoes, while the New York and Roanoke/Lynchburg samples showed significant increases between 1985 and 1991.

d Using a t-test, usage of cherry and plum tomatoes over all five market areas showed a significant increase between the 1985 and 1991 surveys, however use of regular round
tomatoes showed a significant decline overall (P < 0.05). Boston, Philadelphia and New York each reflected the overall trends. However, Pittsburgh and Roanoke/Lynchburg showed
a significant increase in usage of plum tomatoes only.






12


10.6 10.6

9) 10








0
aE





V)
O 6

















Regular round Plum Cherry
Figure 3.-Changes in number of households using selected types of tomatoes,
0 3.6


E 2.5






1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
Regular round Plum Cherry

Figure 3.- Changes in number of households using selected types of tomatoes,
all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991.
* Statistically significant difference.





14



Market penetration (the percent of households using each type of tomato) was

estimated for the five individual market areas (Table 6). Market penetration of regular

round tomatoes declined in the three largest markets. Philadelphia registered the largest

drop, 8.7 percent (Figure 4). Usage in Boston dropped by 7.3 percentage points and

New York declined by about three percentage points. Usage of regular round tomatoes

increased by 5.2 percent in Roanoke/Lynchburg, but remained unchanged in Pittsburgh.

Market penetration for plum tomatoes increased dramatically in all five market areas,

and all markets experienced significant increases in the proportions of households using

cherry tomatoes (Figures 5 and 6).

The "mix" of regular round, plum and cherry tomatoes purchased by consumers

during February-April changed considerably between 1985 and 1991 (Table 7).

Consumers are buying a greater variety. The proportion of surveyed households

purchasing regular round, plum and cherry tomatoes nearly doubled, from 4.8 percent

in 1985 to 9.1 percent in 1991. The proportion buying both regular round and plum

tomatoes nearly tripled, 5.4 percent in 1985 to 15.9 percent in 1991. The big loser has

been "regular round only" category. In 1985, 71.6 percent of survey respondents

purchased regular round only compared to 52.2 percent in 1991. Plum tomatoes have

made the biggest gains in terms of the percentage of households including them in their

tomato purchases. Despite the apparent decrease in market penetration for regular

round tomatoes, the proportion of households having them on hand when the interviews

were conducted increased from from 47.7 percent in 1985 to 53.5 percent in 1991 (Table

8).






100


86.7
83.4 82.8 81.9 81.5
80 79.6 . 79.3 79.2..
76.1 .*
73.2



0


0






















Figure 4.-.Changes in market penetration for regular round tomatoes,
Statistical si....nificant difference.
-~ ~ o --- ...- .... -. -,,,
Oo


40








..... -. .,
0 . . I /I . ./. . ..












1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
Boston New York Philadelphia Pittsburg Roanoke/Lynchburg

Figure 4.--Changes in market penetration for regular round tomatoes,
by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991.
* Statistically significant difference.






35

31.9

30
27.9


25 /
0 /23.5



C 20 9.8 19.5
0
0o 17.2

C15
0)
12.6
4)











1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
Boston New York Philadelphia Pittsburg Roanoke/Lynchburg

Figure 5.--Changes in market penetration for plum tomatoes, by TV ADI,
1985 and 1991.
Statistically significant difference.






35




30 29.5


26.3

S25

0 22.3 22.0
a-

C 20 a- 19.3
o 18.7
17.8

15.9
C15 /
1 13.0 13.3


S10








0 ---a -
1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
Boston New York Philadelphia Pittsburg Roanoke/Lynchburg

Figure 6.--Changes in market penetration for cherry tomatoes, by TV ADI,
1985 and 1991.

* Statistically significant difference.






18




Table 7. Assortment of fresh tomatoes purchased in previous three months by surveyed tomato
users, 1985 and 1991 surveys.

1985 1991
Assortmenta Number Percent Number Percent

Regular round only 1,517 71.6 454 52.2
Regular round and plum 115 5.4 138 15.9
Regular round and cherry 221 10.4 123 14.1
Regular round, cherry, plum 101 4.8 79 9.1
Plum only 22 1.0 14 1.6
Cherry only 51 2.4 12 1.4
Cherry and plum 23 1.1 12 1.4
None 68 3.2 38 4.4
Total 2,118 100.0 870 100.0

a Chi-square analysis showed the assortment purchased in the previous three months was statistically
different between the 1985 and 1991 surveys, P < 0.05.






Table 8. Tomato-consuming households with regular round tomatoes on hand, 1985 and 1991.


Tomatoes on hand 1985 1991
Number Percent Number Percent


Yes 930 47.7 425 53.5a
No 976 50.0 366 46.1
Do not know 44 2.3 3 0.4
Total 1,950 100.0 794 100.0

a Chi-square analysis showed no significant differences among TV ADIs, P < 0.05. A t-test showed
a significantly larger proportion of tomato-consuming households had regular round tomatoes on hand in
1991 than in 1985, (P < 0.05).






19



When the primary food purchasers in tomato-using households were asked why

they did not buy regular round tomatoes in the February-April period, quality

considerations were mentioned most frequently. Poor taste, lack of freshness, unripe

tomatoes, and poor texture were the four top complaints in 1991 (Table 9). Only 2.6

percent complained of high prices in 1991, down from 9.6 percent in 1985.


Table 9. Primary reasons given for not buying tomatoes within the previous three months.

1985 1991
Reason Number Percent Number Percent

Do not like the taste 49 33.6 35 45.5a
Not fresh 12 8.2 8 10.4
Not ripe 18 12.3 5 6.5a
Poor texture 5 3.4 4 5.2
High price 14 9.6 2 2.6a
Health reasons 6 4.1 1 1.3
Short life; bruised, damaged 4 2.7 1 1.3
Miscellaneousb 33 22.6 18 23.4
Do not know 5 3.4 3 3.9
Total 146 100.0 77 100.0'

a These response rates in 1991 were found to be statistically different than the 1985 response rates,
using a t-test (P :< 0.05).
b Miscellaneous includes "dislike of hothouse tomatoes," "package size too large," "size of tomatoes
too small," "use only home-grown," and "only buy when locally in season."

c May not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.


Nearly 40 percent of the shoppers who used tomatoes during the February-April

period said they were essential in recipes, up from 16 percent in 1985 (Table 10, Figure

7). About 26 percent said "good taste" was the number one reason for buying regular

round tomatoes, down from 39 percent in 1985. Other statistically significant decreases

were noted in reasons which included "habit," "nutritive content," "good color" and

"freshness."





20




Table 10. Primary reason given for buying regular round tomatoes available in winter and early
spring, 1985 and 1991.


1985 1991
Reason Number Percent Number Percent


Essential in recipes 330 16.0 341 39.2a
Good taste 802 38.9 231 26.5a
Habit 328 15.9 62 7.1a
Nutritious; low calorie 160 7.8 45 5.2a
Only type available 122 5.9 41 4.7
Good color 112 5.4 19 2.2a
Fresh 87 4.2 15 1.7a
Low price 56 2.7 8 0.9a
Texture 27 1.3 8 0.9
Advertisements 7 0.3 1 0.1
Miscellaneousb 29 1.4 100 11.5a
Total 2,060 100.0c 871 100.0C

a These response rates in 1991 were found to be statistically different than the 1985 response rates,
using a t-test (P : 0.05).

b Miscellaneous includes attributes such as long shelf life, smell, size, and those who like all aspects
of tomatoes but could not isolate any one reason.

C May not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.






50




40 -39.2 38.9




30
26.5
0
I-B



20 /
16.0 15.9



0 5.2 5.9 5.4
"NO 22 4.2
0 7//// IMM












1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
Essential Good taste Habit Nutritious/ Only type Good color Fresh
in recipes low calorie available
Figure 7.--Primary reasons for buying regular round tomatoes available in winter
and early spring, all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991.
Statistically significant difference.






22



When asked what they disliked most about regular round tomatoes available

during the February-April period, "taste" and "ripeness" were the two most frequently

mentioned dislikes in 1991 (Table 11, Figure 8). High price was mentioned by less than

one out of 20 consumers in 1991 compared to nearly one out of 8 in 1985. The

percentage saying they disliked nothing about winter and early spring tomatoes declined

from 21 percent in 1985 to 14 percent in 1991.


Table 11. Attributes of round tomatoes available in winter and early spring which are most disliked,
1985 and 1991.


1985 1991
Attributes Number Percent Number Percent

Taste 385 18.3 244 28.0a
Not ripe enough 509 24.2 183 21.0
Nothing 446 21.1 123 14.1a
Bad texture 126 6.0 99 11.4a
Not fresh 281 13.4 88 10.1a
Misc.b 43 2.0 73 8.4a
High price 263 12.5 39 4.5a
Short life 51 2.4 22 2.5

Total 2,104 100.0 871 100.0

a These response rates were statistically different between the 1985 and 1991 survey, using a t-test
(P 0.05).

b Miscellaneous includes various aspects such as, "Prefer single to packaged tomatoes," "Not readily
available," "Taste affected by chemicals used in growing," "Small selection," "Water or seed content too high,"
"Tough skin," and "Inconsistent quality."


Consumers' overall satisfaction ratings for regular round tomatoes declined

somewhat from 1985 to 1991 (Table 12). Shoppers that had bought regular round

tomatoes in the previous three-month period were asked to express their overall

satisfaction using a nine-point rating scale where 1 represented extremely satisfied and






30
28.0



"25 24.2



21.0 21.1

20
18.3



0 15 -
14.1
iG !lV1 i I r13.4
I 12.5
11.4
10.1
10 -
8.4


6.0

5 4.5





1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991

Taste Not ripe Nothing Bad Not Misc. High Short
enough texture fresh price life

Figure 8.--Attributes of round tomatoes which are most disliked.

* Statistically significant difference.





24



9 extremely dissatisfied. In 1991, less than 10 percent were extremely satisfied (a rating

of 1) compared to 21.3 percent in 1985. About six percent were extremely

dissatisfied (a rating of 9) in 1991 compared to 9.5 in 1985. If the midpoint of the scale

is viewed as neutral, ratings one through four as positive and six through nine as

negative, then 42.7 percent were satisfied in 1991 compared to 45.6 percent in 1985, and

about 26 percent were dissatisfied compared to 24 percent in 1991. A slightly larger

proportion fell in the neutral category in 1991. Average ratings were calculated and

compared for various socio-economic and demographic categories. In both surveys,

females, white respondents, those with more education, and those with higher incomes

generally expressed less satisfaction with tomatoes bought in the winter and early spring

(Table 13).


Table 12. Overall satisfaction with regular round tomatoes purchased in the past three months.

1985 1991
Rating Number Percent Number Percent

1 446 21.3 82 9.9
2 112 5.4 74 8.9
3 207 9.9 119 14.3
4 188 9.0 80 9.6
5 427 20.4 179 21.6
6 162 7.7 97 11.7
7 236 11.3 103 12.4
8 114 5.4 44 5.3
9 198 9.5 52 6.3

Total 2,090 100.0b 830 100.0
Average 4.5 4.7

a The rating scale is from 1 to 9, where 1 is extremely satisfied and 9 is extremely dissatisfied.
Chi-square analysis indicates that the distributions of ratings were significantly different for the two years,
X2= 84.2, d.f.= 8, P < 0.01.
b Does not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.







25




Table 13. Average overall satisfaction ratings of winter and early spring round tomatoes, by selected
socio-economic and demographic characteristics, 1985 and 1991.


1985 1991
Characteristic Number Meana Number Meana

Household Size
1 316 4.1z 105 4.0zy
2 642 4.0z 265 4.0zy
3 398 3.8z 142 4.2zy
4 403 4.0z 187 3.5z
5 or more 315 3.8z 125 3.8y
Education Level
Some grade or high school 320 3.5y 62 3.6z
Tech. or high school grad. 917 4.2z 299 3.9z
Some college or voc. school 304 4.0zy 169 4.0z
College grad. 534 4.0zy 285 4.1z
Income
Under $10,000 219 3.7zy 67 3.9z
$10,000-19,999 370 3.7zy 111 3.8z
$20,000-34,999 425 3.6y 171 3.8z
$35,000-49,999 374 4.1z 168 3.9z
$50,000 + 140 4.6 171 4.2z
Age
Under 25 186 4.0zy 84 3.6z
25-34 498 4.1zy 211 4.0z
35-49 652 4.0zy 264 4.5
50-64 435 4.1zy 154 4.0z
65 and older 303 3.6z 103 3.4z
Race
White (not Hispanic) 1,830 4.5z 702 4.4z
Black (not Hispanic) 175 3.9y 75 4.0z
Hispanic 24 4.1zy 16 3.8z
Asian/American Indian 33 3.2y 34 3.4z
Sex
Male 468 3.8 192 3.6z
Female 1,611 4.1 613 4.2

a Means with the same letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 probability level. The mean
values shown here are least squares means obtained with a general linear model which expressed the overall
rating as a function of all socio-economic and demographic variables. Probabilistic choice models such as
the multinomial logit or multinomial probit model would have been more technically correct, but computer
software for these models was not readily available. The results shown are thought to be reasonable
approximations, however.





26



Effect of Ripeness on Retail Tomato Sales


In addition to information comparable to the 1985 survey, the 1991 survey added

a component to evaluate the effect of ripeness on retail sales of regular round tomatoes.

Participants were each given one of three hypothetical shopping scenarios. The first

scenario presented the shopper with three types of fresh tomatoes: regular round

tomatoes that were "slightly underripe, that is, light red or pink and very firm," and

cherry and plum tomatoes of "typical ripeness." The second scenario presented the

shopper with the same three types of fresh tomatoes as the first scenario, plus a fourth

choice which was "regular round tomatoes that were fully ripe, that is, bright red, and

beginning to soften slightly." The third scenario included the fully ripe tomatoes

described in scenario two and excluded the slightly underripe tomatoes. In each

scenario, respondents were told to assume "regular" prices, not sale prices. The

respondents were asked whether they would or would not buy any of the choices

presented, and for each type the respondent was willing to buy, they were asked how

many they would buy.

Given the first scenario, where all regular round tomatoes were "slightly

underripe, that is, light red or pink and very firm" about 60 percent of shoppers would

buy them (Table 14, Figure 9). If only "fully ripe" regular round tomatoes were available

(scenario three), the percentage of buyers increases to 72 percent. When both "slightly

underripe" and "fully ripe" are available (scenario two), the percentage of buyers

increases to 92 percent (Table 15). These results suggest that more consumers will buy

regular round tomatoes if given a choice of ripeness and fewer will choose to buy cherry

and plum tomatoes.






27




Table 14. Tomato purchases for three hypothetical shopping scenarios.

Hypothetical Quantity
Percent of
Percent Average Total Units Total
Willing to Units Per Per 1,000 Tomatoes
Type of Tomatoes Available Buy Customer Customersa Weightb Purchased
(Pounds) (Percent)
Scenario 1
Regular round, slightly underripe 59.7 3.8 2,269 851 46.9
Plum 33.9 4.9 1,661 363 20.0
Cherry 41.8 1.2 502 602 33.2
Totals ---- ---- ---- 1,816 100.0

Scenario 2c
Regular round, slightly underripe 61.0 3.1 1,891 709 31.2
Regular round, fully ripe 59.9 3.5 2,096 786 34.6
Subtotal, regular round 3,987 1,495 65.8
Plum 28.2 5.1 1,468 321 14.1
Cherry 31.6 1.2 379 455 20.0
Totals ---- ---- ---- 2,271 100.0

Scenario 3
Regular round, fully ripe 71.6 3.8 2,721 1,020 54.2
Plum 30.3 5.4 1,636 358 19.0
Cherry 34.9 1.2 419 503 26.7
Totals ---- ---- ---- 1,881 100.0

a For regular round and plum tomatoes, respondents indicated the number of fruit they would buy;
for cherry tomatoes, they indicated the number of pint baskets.

b For quantity conversions, regular round tomatoes were assumed to weigh 6 ounces and plum
tomatoes 3.5 ounces each (Maynard).

c A total of 92.4 percent of those given a choice of ripeness would purchase RRTs.


Table 15. A summary of hypothetical purchases of regular round tomatoes by respondents given a
choice of ripeness.

Hypothetical purchases of regular round tomatoes Percent willing to buy

Slightly underripe only 31.5
Fully ripe only 32.9
Combination of slightly underripe and full ripe 28.0
No regular round tomatoes 7.6
Total 100.0

a Based on 289 responses from tomato-using primary shoppers given the choice of slightly underripe
or full ripe regular round tomatoes.
b The converse is that 92.4 percent would purchase RRTs.







100
92.4



80
71.6



59.7
60


1.6
4)
S. 41.8
40
33.9 34.9 00
31.6 30.3



20 -
28.2


20



0 9- -1 -


RRT Plum Cherry RRT Plum Cherry RRT Plum Cherry

Underripe RRTs only Both underripe and Fully ripe RRTs
fully ripe RRTs


Figure 9.--Percent of households buying selected types of tomatoes, given
different degrees of ripeness of regular round tomatoes.






29



To estimate how ripeness affects retail tomato sales, the quantities given by

respondents were converted to weight in pounds per 1,000 customers (Table 14, Figure

10). Offering only "slightly underripe" regular round tomatoes resulted in lowest sales

of regular round tomatoes. Offering only "fully ripe" tomatoes resulted in sales that were

approximately 20 percent greater than the "slightly underripe" scenario. Offering a full

range of ripeness resulted in a 75 percent increase over the "slightly underripe" scenario.

When asked what would be a reasonable price per pound for slightly underripe

regular round tomatoes and what would be a reasonable price per pound for fully

ripened ones, shoppers said they were willing to pay nearly four cents more for fully ripe

tomatoes (Table 16).


Table 16. Average price tomato users would pay for fully ripe and for slightly underripe regular
round tomatoes.

Degree of ripeness

Fully ripe Slightly underripe Difference

Average price per pound 87.1 83.4 3.7

a Based on 866 tomato users providing an average price per pound.


Florida vs. Mexican Tomatoes


In order to examine attitudes toward Florida-grown versus Mexican-grown

tomatoes, survey respondents which purchase fresh tomatoes during winter and early

spring months were asked if they preferred tomatoes grown in Mexico or Florida, and

to give reasons for their preference. Florida was the overwhelming choice, preferred by

about two-thirds of all shoppers in both 1985 and 1991 (Table 17, Figure 11). Less than






2,000



"U)


0 1,495
SL 1,500
.0

(A Under-
3 ripe
S709
E 1.020
0 1,000

0 851
0
So
m, 602 Fully
503 ripe
S500 786 455
S363 358
321




0 9 9
RRT Plum Cherry RRT Plum Cherry RRT Plum Cherry
Underripe RRTs only Fully ripe RRTs only Both underripe and
fully ripe RRTs
Figure 10.--Quantities of selected types of tomatoes purchased under hypothetical shipping
scenarios, given different degrees of ripeness of regular round tomatoes.






31



Table 17. Consumers' preference for round tomatoes grown in either Florida or Mexico, by TV ADI.

Preferred Source
Florida Mexico Indifferent Total
TV ADIa 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
(-----------------------Percentb--- -------------) (---Number---)
Bostonc 60.6 72.4 53 4.3 34.2 23.3 360 163
Roanoke/Lynchburg 62.4 63.2 8.1 7.1 29.6 29.7 707 182
Philadelphiac 59.8 70.7 6.6 4.0 33.6 25.3 363 150
New York 70.0 64.5 5.0 4.5 25.0 31.0 360 155
Pittsburgh 64.1 64.8 4.1 4.9 31.8 30.0 343 162
All TV ADIs 65.7 67.0 5.4 4.5 28.9 28.5 2,133 812

a Chi-square analysis indicates that preferences were significantly related by TV ADI in 1985 but
not in 1991, P < 0.05.
b Percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.

c Using a t-test (0.05 probability), Boston and Philadelphia showed significant increases in
preference for Florida tomatoes between 1985 and 1991.


five percent preferred Mexican tomatoes in 1991, and the remainder (less than one-

third) were indifferent. This result is virtually unchanged from the 1985 survey. Both

Boston and Philadelphia showed statistically significant increases in preference for

Florida-grown tomatoes between 1985 and 1991; each were up from about 60 percent

to over 70 percent. Pittsburgh and Roanoke/Lynchburg both showed slight increases in

preference for Florida-grown tomatoes, but New York showed a decline.

Chi-square analyses indicated that preferences were related to age and income

in both 1985 and 1991, and also related to education level in 1991 (Table 18). In both

surveys, preferences did not vary much across age groups, but fewer older respondents

preferred Florida tomatoes, expressing more indifference. In 1985, respondents with

incomes of $50,000 or more were more likely to prefer Mexican-grown tomatoes than

those with lower incomes. This was reversed in 1991 with the lowest income level more






80

72.4 7 X
70.0 70.7
/ 6... 67.0
65.7
C) 1 64.5 64.1 64.8 6
"C .. / ---- ///- 62.4 63.2
S60.6 59.8
60


0





oo
0
E




20
20








1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991

Boston New York Philadelphia Pittsburg Roanoke/Lynchburg All ADIs



Figure 11.--Households preferring Florida-grown tomatoes, by TV ADI, 1985 and 1991.

* Statistically significant difference.






33




likely to prefer Mexican-grown tomatoes. However, in both surveys, Florida-grown

tomatoes were heavily preferred at each income level. The 1991 survey showed

respondents with higher education levels were less likely to prefer Mexican tomatoes and


more likely to be indifferent. Respondents with a high school diploma were most likely


to prefer Florida-grown tomatoes.



Table 18. Consumer preference for round tomatoes grown in either Florida or Mexico, by selected
demographic characteristics, 1985 and 1991.
Preferred source Preferred source
1985 1991
Characteristic' Mexico Florida Indifferent Mexico Florida Indifferent
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Age
Under 25 14 7.4 138 73.4 36 19.1 6 7.5 67 83.8 7 8.8
25-34 25 4.9 339 67.1 141 27.9 8 3.8 136 65.1 65 31.1
35-49 34 5.1 413 62.2 217 32.7 16 6.2 177 68.1 67 25.8
50-64 38 8.5 271 60.9 136 30.6 8 5.4 93 62.8 47 31.8
65 or older 19 6.1 178 56.8 116 37.1 3 2.9 64 61.5 37 35.6
Income
Under $10,000 15 6.7 152 67.9 57 25.4 7 11.1 48 76.2 8 12.7
$10,000-19,999 18 4.8 251 66.9 106 28.3 2 1.9 78 72.2 28 25.9
$20,000-34,999 38 8.7 285 65.4 113 25.9 13 7.8 111 66.5 43 25.8
$35,000-49,999 16 4.2 235 62.3 126 33.4 6 3.8 108 67.9 45 28.3
$50,000 + 15 10.5 88 615 40 28.0 5 2.8 118 67.1 53 30.1
Education
Some grade or high 24 7.3 215 65.2 91 27.6 6 10.2 38 64.4 15 25.4
school
Tech. or high school 56 6.0 609 65.1 271 29.0 16 5.4 218 73.9 61 20.7
grad.
Some college or 22 7.1 188 60.8 99 32.0 8 5.0 111 68.5 43 26.5
voc. school
College grad. 29 5.4 328 60.6 184 34.0 11 3.9 172 60.4 102 35.8

"* Chi-square analysis indicates that preferences were significantly related to age and income in 1985 and 1991, and to
education in 1991 (P S 0.05).


The two most frequently mentioned reasons given for preferring Florida tomatoes


were a favorable image of Florida products and loyalty to U.S. products (Table 19). The


proportions of shoppers giving these reasons increased dramatically from 1985, probably


as a direct result of the war in the Persian Gulf (Desert Storm) being waged a few weeks





34



earlier. Better taste, freshness, better texture, lower prices and poor image of Mexico

were given as reasons for preferring Florida tomatoes by significantly fewer shoppers in

1991 than in 1985.


Table 19. Primary reasons given for choosing Florida tomatoes.


1985 1991
Reason Number Percent Number Percent

Favorable image of Florida 106 8.2 159 29.2a
Loyalty to U.S. products 216 16.8 149 27.4a
Taste better 385 29.9 62 11.4a
Pesticides are regulated in Florida 65 5.1 40 7.4
Fresher, better physical condition 216 16.8 35 6.4a
Better sanitation 92 7.1 32 5.9
Good color 23 1.8 10 1.8
Better texture 63 4.9 8 1.5a
Lower prices 50 3.9 4 0.7a
Poor image of Mexico 14 1.1 0 0.0a
Miscellaneousb 23 1.8 24 4.4a
Do not know 34 2.6 21 3.9
Total 1,287 100.0C 544 100.0e

"a Responses in 1991 are statistically different from 1985 at the 0.05 probability level, using a
standard t-test.
b Miscellaneous includes better climate for growing tomatoes, better growing techniques, etc.

C May not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.


More than half of the shoppers from tomato-using households in 1991 had no

concerns about Mexican tomatoes. This is down significantly from 71.1 percent in 1985

(Table 20). However, Mexican pesticide regulations and concerns about sanitation were

mentioned by about 25 percent in 1991 compared to 12 percent in 1985. Poor taste, the

lack of ripeness, texture and freshness were among other miscellaneous reasons

mentioned by less than five percent of respondents in both surveys.






35



Table 20. Shoppers' concerns about Mexican tomatoes.

1985 1991
Concern Number Percent Number Percent

No concerns 1,501 71.1 474 54.4a
Pesticide residue or other chemicals 103 4.9 129 14.8a
Sanitation 149 7.1 83 9.5a
Loyalty to U.S. producers 233 11.0 82 9.4
Bad taste 21 1.0 5 0.6
Too ripe 14 0.7 5 0.6
Not ripe 15 0.7 3 0.3
Bad texture 21 1.0 2 0.2a
Freshness 7 0.3 0 0.0a
Miscellaneous 10 0.5 21 2.4a
Do not know 36 1.7 67 7.7a
Total 2,110 100.0" 871 100.00
a Response in 1991 was statistically different from 1985 using a standard t-test (P < 0.05).
b Miscellaneous includes high prices, environment, distrust of foreign foods, etc...
c Percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.


The few respondents preferring Mexican tomatoes most frequently mentioned

taste as their primary reason in both 1985 and 1991 (Table 21). Other less frequently

mentioned reasons included a favorable image of Mexico, better texture, freshness, color,

better growing conditions and lower prices.


Table 21. Primary reasons given for choosing Mexican tomatoes.

1985 1991
Reason Number Percent Number Percent

Taste better 76 59.8 27 65.9
Good image of Mexico 6 4.7 2 4.9
Better texture 15 11.8 1 2.4a
Fresher 7 5.5 1 2.4
Good color 7 5.5 1 2.4
Miscellaneousb 16 12.6 9 22.0a
Total 127 100.0C 41 100.00
a Responses in 1991 were statistically different from those in 1985, using a standard t-test, 0.05
probability level.
b Miscellaneous includes smell, bigger size, more like home-grown, better growing conditions, and
lower prices.
c May not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.





36



Storage Practices and Usage Patterns for Fresh Tomatoes


Use of Room Temperature Storage


Overall, the percentage of households using room temperature storage (RTS) for

fresh but slightly underripe tomatoes declined from about 75 percent in 1985 to 63

percent in 1991. Boston, New York, and Philadelphia experienced significant reductions

in the proportions of households using RTS, but Pittsburgh and Roanoke-Lynchburg

were virtually unchanged (Table 22, Figure 12). Overall, there was no increase in the

proportion of tomato users that had switched to room temperature storage over the

three years prior to each survey. Roanoke/Lynchburg and Philadelphia had the fewest

"switchers" in 1991 and recent "switching" had declined significantly in both cities since

the 1985 survey. New York and Pittsburgh had the most "switchers" in the 1991 survey.


Table 22. Incidence and recent adoption of room temperature storage for fresh tomatoes, by TV
ADI.

Switching to room temperature
Storing at room temperature storage in the past 3 years
TV ADI 1985 1991 1985 1991
(-----------------------P----Percent--------------------------)
Boston 64.2 55.7T 28.6 25.3
Roanoke/Lynchburg 74.9 75.4 26.0 19.4a
Philadelphia 79.3 68.7a 31.1 20.7a
New York 75.6 60.1a 28.9 33.7
Pittsburgh 75.5 77.8 30.9 33.1
All TV ADIsb 74.6 63.1a 29.4 29.3
a Standard t-tests showed statistically different percentages stored fresh tomatoes at room
temperature over all TV ADIs, and for Boston, Philadelphia and New York between the 1985 and 1991
surveys. Philadelphia and Roanoke/Lynchburg showed a statistically different percentage recently switched
to room temperature storage between 1985 and 1991 (P < 0.05).
b The proportion storing at or switching to room temperature across all TV ADIs was weighted by
number of households.






100






80 79.3 77.8
74.9 75.4 75.6 75.5 74.6

68.7
64.2 63.
63.1
60.1 X
60- *
1"55.7





40 -






20






1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991

Boston Roanoke/Lynchburg Philadelphia New York Pittsburgh All ADIs


Figure 12.--Households storing fresh tomatoes at room temperature, by TV ADI,

1985 and 1991.

SStatistically significant difference.





38




Across all TV ADIs, word-of-mouth, self discovery, newspaper and magazine

stories, and TV shows were the most frequently mentioned sources of information

persuading respondents to switch to room temperature storage of fresh tomatoes during

the previous three years. In addition, TV commercials, magazine ads, leaflets, and in-

store signs were also mentioned (Tables 23 and 24).


Table 23. Sources of information influencing consumers to switch to room temperature storage within
the last three years, all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991.


All TV ADIs
Source 1985 1991
(--------.. -----Percent-----------)
Word of mouth 40.5 34.9
Discovered myself 35.8 28.1
Do not remember 21.3 21.2
Newspaper stories 7.2 8.9
Magazine stories 11.5 4.8a
T.V. shows 0.0 4.8a
T.V. commercials 13.3 4.1a
Magazine ads 6.7 4.1
Leaflets 2.2 3.4
In-store signs 3.5 2.7
Other 4.3 1.4a
Store personnel 3.3 0.7a
Information on package 0.5 0.0

Base (number) 597 146

a A t-test showed 1991 responses were statistically different than 1985 responses (P :9 0.05).













Table 24. Sources of information influencing consumers to switch to room temperature storage within the last 3 years, by TV ADI, 1985 and
1991.


City
Roanoke/
Boston Lvnchburg Philadelphia New York Pittsburgh All TV ADIs
Source 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
(---------------------------------.--------------Percent----------- ------------------------------------.-)
Word of mouth 36.6 43.5 36.3 30.8 45.3 39.1 45.2 43.8 41.9 23.8 40.5 34.9
Discovered myself 15.8 30.4 44.1 38.5 31.5 8.7 44.2 37.5 34.3 23.8 35.8 28.1
Do not remember 17.8 0.0 35.2 30.8 18.5 21.7 10.6 18.8 17.1 28.6 21.3 21.2
Newspaper stories 8.9 4.3 3.4 7.7 10.2 17.4 7.7 0.0 8.6 14.3 7.2 8.9
Magazine stories 13.9 13.0 8.9 3.8 11.1 0.0 12.5 3.1 13.3 4.8 11.5 4.8
T.V. shows 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 9.5 0.0 4.8
T.V. commercials 15.8 4.3 6.2 7.7 12.9 8.7 17.3 0.0 9.5 2.4 13.3 4.1
Magazine ads 8.9 0.0 6.7 0.0 4.6 8.7 8.6 9.4 4.8 2.4 6.7 4.1
Leaflets 1.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 2.8 4.3 3.8 9.4 0.9 2.4 2.2 3.4
In-store signs 4.0 4.3 2.8 0.0 4.6 0.0 2.9 3.1 3.8 4.8 3.5 2.7
Other 4.9 0.0 1.7 0.0 6.5 8.7 4.8 0.0 6.7 0.0 4.3 1.4
Store personnel 3.0 4.3 2.8 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.9 0.0 6.7 0.0 3.3 0.7
Information on package 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.5 0.0


Base (number) 101 23 179 26 108 23 104 34 105 42 597 146





40



Effect of Room Temperature Storage on Satisfaction with Tomatoes


Everyone that was found to be using RTS was asked what effect it had on their

satisfaction with tomatoes, i.e., whether it had resulted in greater satisfaction, resulted

in no change, or resulted in less satisfaction. The proportion expressing greater

satisfaction increased from 60 percent in 1985 to 74.4 percent in 1991 (Table 25, Figure

13). The proportion expressing less satisfaction decreased from 4.8 percent to 1.8

percent and those indicating no change decreased from 35.2 percent to 23.7 percent.

Females and respondents in the 25-34 age group showed significant decreases in the use

of room temperature storage (Table 26).


Table 25. Effects of room temperature storage on satisfaction with tomatoes.


1985 survey 1991 survey
Satisfaction with room
temperature storage Number Percent Number Percent

Greater satisfaction 945 60.0 405 74.4a
Less satisfaction 75 4.8 10 1.8a
No change in satisfaction 554 35.2 129 23.7a

Totalb 1,574 100.0 544 100.0

a Chi-square test indicates statistically significant change in satisfaction between 1985 and 1991 (P
_ 0.05).
b The total includes only those respondents storing tomatoes at room temperature.






80
74.4




060.0
to


"0

0

SL35.2

Fig 23.7
20



4.8 .
1.8

1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
Greater Less No change
satisfaction satisfaction in satisfaction
Figure 13.--Effects of room temperature on satisfaction with tomatoes, all TV ADIs,
1985 and 1991.
SStatistically significant difference.





42




Table 26. Proportion of respondents usually storing fresh, underripe tomatoes at room temperature,
by demographic characteristics, 1985 and 1991 surveys.


Proportion storing fresh
tomatoes at room temperature Total
Characteristics 1985 Survey 1991 Survey 1985 Survey 1991 Survey
(-----------Percent--------------) (------------Number--------------)
Age
Under 25 64.4 60.2 188 83
25-34 71.5 57.7 505 215
35-49 75.5 72.0 662 264
50-64 76.5 75.5 442 155
65 or older 79.2 72.4 312 105


Sex
Female 76.3 69.7 1,639 617
Male 67.3 61.9 477 194


Education
Some grade or high school 73.0 80.3 329 61
Tech or high school grad. 76.4 70.5 933 305
Some college or voc. school 73.7 63.9 308 169
College grad. 71.5 64.7 540 286


Race
White (not Hispanic) 74.9 68.9 1,862 710
Black (not Hispanic) 71.7 61.1 177 72
Hispanic 52.0 47.9 25 17
Asian/American Indian 67.6 64.9 34 37


Total 74.2 67.7b 2,127 839

"a Chi-square analysis indicates the storage method (room temperature vs. refrigeration) was
significantly different (P 0.05) for age, sex, and race in 1985, and for age, sex, and education in 1991.

b There was a statistically significant decline in room temperature storage of underripe tomatoes
at the 0.05 probability level. The decline was significant for females and for respondents in the 25-34 age
category.







43



Use of a Ripening Bowl


Among households using RTS, the use of a ripening bowl or other container for

ripening declined from 26.7 percent in 1985 to about 20 percent in 1991 (Table 27). In

both surveys, over 70 percent of all respondents said they refrigerate tomatoes after they

become "fully red ripe" (Table 28).


Table 27. Use of ripening bowl or other container for storing underripe tomatoes, for those
respondents which usually store underripe tomatoes at room temperature, 1985 and 1991
surveys.


1985 Survey 1991 Survey
Response Number Percent Number Percent

Yesa 415 26.7 111 19.6

No 1,139 73.3 455 80.4

Total surveyed 1,554 100.0 566 100.0
a A t-test indicates a statistically significant decline in the use of a ripening bowl between the 1985
and 1991 survey (P 0.05).



Table 28. Storage of fully red ripe tomatoes, 1985 and 1991 surveys.


Type of Storagea
Survey Year Refrigerated Room Temperature Total
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

1985 1,151 72.9 427 27.1 1,578 100.0

1991 403 71.0 165 29.0 568 100.0

a Chi-square analysis was used to examine the relationship between type of storage used for fully
ripe tomatoes and selected demographic characteristics. Refrigerated storage for full ripe tomatoes was
more prevalent among those with more education in 1985, but no demographic characteristics were found
to be significant in 1991.





44



Knowledge of Placement During Storage


There was little change in the proportions that either knew or guessed that

tomatoes should be placed stem side up during storage to minimize bruising. In 1985,

41.8 percent knew or guessed correctly, and in 1991, 44.4 percent knew or guessed

correctly (Table 29). Respondents in Philadelphia and Boston appeared to be most

knowledgeable in 1991. More than a fifth of all survey respondents stored tomatoes

stem down in both surveys. No respondents stored tomatoes on their sides in 1991, and

more than a third admitted that they did not know the correct placement.


Table 29. "Correct" placement of round tomatoes during storage, by TV ADI.

Stem up Stem down On their sides Do not know Total responses
TV ADIa 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991
(--------------------------Percent ------ ------------) (--Number--)
Boston 44.7 47.7 17.5 16.9 6.7 0.0 31.1 35.5 360 172
Roanoke/Lynchburg 35.5 45.7b 39.0 35.5 2.2 0.0 23.4 18.8 706 186
Philadelphia 38.6 50.6b 26.2 19.1 6.3 0.0 28.9 30.4 363 170
New York 43.3 42.9 21.5 17.7 3.1 0.0 32.1 39.4 358 168
Pittsburgh 37.7 32.0 34.2 47.4b 3.5 0.0 24.6 20.6 342 175
All TV ADIse 41.8 44.4 23.5 20.9 4.3 0.0 30.3 34.8b 2,129 871

a Chi-square analysis indicates statistically significant differences in responses by TV ADI, in both
1985 and 1991, P90.05.
b A t-test showed 1991 responses were statistically different than 1985 responses (P < 0.05).

C Weighted by number of households within the respective TV ADIs.


Elapsed Time Between Purchase and Consumption


When questioned about the elapsed time between the purchase of fresh tomatoes

during the winter and early spring months and the use of the first and last tomatoes,

over 38 percent of survey respondents reported that they eat tomatoes the same day they






45



are purchased. Nearly 85 percent eat some tomatoes within 2 days of purchase, and

over half of all consumers eat all of their tomatoes within four days after purchasing

(Table 30, Figure 14). This indicates that many consumers are not giving "kitchen-

ripening" enough time to be effective.


Table 30. Storage time from purchase date before the first tomato and the last tomato is used for
those respondents who purchased fresh tomatoes during the winter and early spring
months, 1991.


Days in storage Use the first tomato Use the last tomato
Number Percent Cum. % Number Percent Cum. %

0 318 38.1 38.1 20 2.4 2.4
1 186 22.3 60.4 48 5.8 8.2
2 204 24.5 84.9 87 10.6 18.8
3 92 11.0 95.9 137 16.7 35.5
4 18 2.2 98.1 123 15.0 50.5
5 8 1.0 99.1 86 10.5 61.0
6 0 0.0 99.1 43 5.2 66.2
7 8 1.0 100.0 218 26.5 92.7
8 or more 0 0.0 100.0 60 7.3 100.0

Total 834 100.0a 822 100.0a

a Percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.


Serving Temperature of Uncooked Tomatoes


In 1991, 46 percent of survey respondents reported that they usually serve

uncooked tomatoes at room temperature, a slightly higher proportion than in 1985

(Table 31). Boston and Pittsburgh showed significant increases in the proportion which

usually serve fresh tomatoes at room temperature.






120

First used
98.1 99.1 99.1 100 100
100 95.9 ,e
92.7 4c'
84.9

80 -
h. X66.2 .
0 60. 61 I-A
60 -
"- Last used 50.5',,
38.1
40 3 5.5,
418.0


8.2
2.4 ..A^

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+
Number of days


Figure 14.--Storage time from purchase date before the first tomato and the last
tomato is used, all TV ADIs, 1991.






47



Table 31. Usual serving temperature for uncooked tomatoes.

Serving Temperature
Cold Room Temperature
TV ADIa 1985 1991 1985 1991
(----------------------------Percent---- --------------)
Boston 64.3 52.1b 35.6 47.9b
Roanoke/Lynchburg 42.4 46.7 57.6 53.3
Philadelphia 58.2 55.2 41.8 44.8
New York 56.4 54.4 43.6 45.6
Pittsburgh 58.2 51.8 41.8 48.2b
All TV ADIsc 57.8 53.8 42.2 46.2

a Chi-square analysis indicates a statistically significant relationship between usual serving
temperature for uncooked tomatoes and TV ADI, in 1985, but not in 1991 (P 0.05).
b Standard t-tests showed statistically different percentages between 1985 and 1991 responses (P _
0.05).
0 Weighted by number of households within the respective TV ADIs.


Predominant Uses for Fresh Tomatoes


The most popular ways to serve tomatoes during the winter and early spring

months are in tossed salads with dressings, on sandwiches, sliced with dressing, and as

an ingredient in cooked dishes (Table 32). Since the 1985 survey, the serving method

gaining most in popularity is as an ingredient in a cooked dish.


Willingness to Serve Tossed Salad Without Tomatoes and Substitutes for Tomatoes


Between 1985 and 1991, the proportion of households willing to serve a tossed

salad without regular round tomatoes increased from about 72 percent of all respondents

to 78.4 percent. This result was consistent across all cities, and statistically significant

for all except the Pittsburgh TV ADI which experienced a statistically significant

decrease (Table 33, Figure 15). Chi-square analyses indicated that respondents

with higher income levels and higher education levels were more often willing to serve





48



Table 32. Serving methods for fresh tomatoes, 1985 and 1991.


Serving method 1985 1991
(----------Percenta-------)
Sliced without dressing 43.9 50.5b
Sliced with dressing 50.3 61.8b
In a tossed salad without dressing 32.1 32.6
In a tossed salad with dressing 79.9 91.4b
On a sandwich or hamburger 75.6 89.6b
As an ingredient in a cooked dish 44.0 62.1b
Stuffed but not cooked 21.3 17.7b

a Percentages were based on 2,122 to 2,126 observations in 1985 and 863 to 864 observations in
1991.

b A t-test indicates that the 1991 response was significantly different from the 1985 response ( P <
0.05).





Table 33. Respondents' willingness to serve a tossed salad without fresh tomatoes, by TV ADI.


Would serve salad without tomatoes
TV ADI 1985 1991 Changea
(--------------------Percentb ------- )
Boston 66.6 81.4e 14.8
Roanoke/Lynchburg 64.1 75.70 11.6
Philadelphia 70.8 81.4c 10.6
New York 73.9 77.4c 3.5
Pittsburgh 78.3 73.0O -5.3
All TV ADIsd 72.3 78.40 +6.1

a Change in percentage willing to serve salad without tomatoes in 1991 versus 1985.

b Chi-square analysis indicates there were significant differences among TV ADIs in 1985 but not
in 1991, P : 0.05.

C The difference in percentage of respondents willing to serve tossed salad without fresh tomatoes
was statistically different between the 1985 and 1991 surveys at the 0.05 probability level.

d The proportion of households in all TV ADIs willing to serve salad without tomatoes was
weighted by number of households in each TV ADI.






100





81.4 81.4
80 81. 77.4 78.3 78.4
75.7 /"
73.9 73 72.3
70.8
66.6
66.6 64.1
0
) 60

Sasil sni difference
OI



C 40






0







1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991

Boston Roanoke/Lynchburg Philadelphia New York Pittsburgh All ADIs

Figure 15.-- Willingness to serve a tossed salad without fresh tomatoes, by TV ADI,

1985 and 1991.

* Statistically significant difference.





50



a tossed salad without fresh tomatoes. The same held true for respondents between 25

and 65 years of age, whites, and females (Table 34). Cucumbers, cherry tomatoes,

peppers, radishes, carrots and plum tomatoes were the most popular substitutes for

regular round tomatoes in 1991 (Table 35, Figure 16). However, about 26 percent

indicated they used no substitutes for regular round tomatoes.

In addition to questions about usage that were asked in the 1985 survey, the 1991

survey included two questions regarding use of tomatoes when patronizing restaurants

with salad bars. Respondents from households with two or more people, higher

education levels and higher incomes were more likely to have patronized a restaurant

with a self-serve salad bar within the previous three months (Table 36). Overall, regular

round tomatoes were preferred to cherry tomatoes in salad bars by a 54 to 46 percent

majority. College graduates, those with incomes over $50,000 per year and those

between the age of 35 and 49 were more likely to prefer cherry tomatoes on salad bars,

while respondents with lower education and income levels, and those over 50 and under

25 years of age were more likely to prefer round tomatoes from a salad bar (Table 37).


Recall of Advertising and Publicity


Survey results showed significant increases in consumers' recall of advertising and

publicity activities that have been emphasized by the Florida Tomato Committee in

recent years. For example, newspaper food pages publicity (not price ads) was

mentioned by nearly half of all shoppers in the 1991 survey, compared to about a third

in the 1985 survey (Table 38, Figure 17). Recipes, leaflets, and posters in stores were






51




Table 34. Respondents' willingness to serve a tossed salad without fresh tomatoes, by demographic
characteristic.
Would serve without fresh tomatoes
Characteristic 1985 1991
Number Percent Number Percent Change in
Percent
Education Level
Some grade or high school 187 56.7 40 62.5 5.8
Tech. or high school grad. 654 70.2 244 77.5 7.3
Some college or voc. school 209 68.1 132 75.9 7.8
College grad. 418 77.3 245 83.1 5.8
Income
Under $10,000 129 57.6 42 62.7 5.1
$10,000-19,999 261 70.0 81 68.6 -1.4
$20,000-34,999 321 73.8 141 81.0 7.2
$35,000-49,999 296 78.7 139 79.9 1.2
$50,000 + 113 79.0 148 82.7 3.7
Age
Under 25 122 64.9 55 65.5 0.6
25-34 367 73.0 175 80.0 7.0
35-49 490 74.0 223 80.5 6.5
50-64 305 68.7 128 81.0 12.3
65 or older 185 59.3 78 70.3 11.0
Race
White (not Hispanic) 1,330 71.5 592 80.7 9.2
Black (not Hispanic) 99 55.6 41 54.7 -0.9
Hispanic 13 52.0 12 70.6 18.6
Asian/American Indian 21 61.8 26 70.3 8.5
Sex
Male 313 65.9 135 67.5 1.6
Female 1,161 70.7 521 81.7 11.0

a Chi-Square analyses indicate that responses were significantly related to all characteristics listed
(P 0.05).





52




Table 35. Substitutes most often used for regular round tomatoes in a tossed salad.

1985 1991
Substitute Number Percent Number Percent


Nothing 384 26.1 175 26.0
Cucumbers 266 18.1 85 12.6a
Cherry tomatoes 65 4.4 68 10.1a
Peppers 100 6.8 68 10.1a
Radishes 104 7.1 53 7.9
Carrots 134 9.1 47 7.0
Plum tomatoes 0 0.0 22 3.3a
Miscellaneousb 288 19.6 93 13.8a
Do not know 128 8.7 62 9.2
Total 1,469 100.0c 673 100.00

a A t-test shows a statistically significant difference in the use of these items between the 1985
survey and the 1991 survey (P < 0.05).

b Miscellaneous includes celery, onion, mushrooms, lettuce (other than iceberg), cabbage, stewed
tomatoes, cheese, avocado, broccoli, and grapefruit.

C Percentages may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.








30
30 | i -i-- - ------ --- ------------



26.1 26.0

25 -



()
20 19.6
O
0r 18.1
(D

0
15 *
6 13.8
O
12.6
C
S10.1 10.1
-10
*) 9.1 7 9.2
.8.7
7.9
6.8 7.1 7.0


5 -4.4
3.3



0.0
"0 B- -
19851991 19851991 19851991 19851991 19851991 19851991 19851991 19851991 19851991

Nothing Cucumbers Cherry Peppers Radishes Carrots Plum Misc. Do not
tomatoes tomatoes know

Figure 16.--Substitutes most often used for regular round tomatoes in a tossed
salad, all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991.

* Statistically significant difference.






54




Table 36. Patronization of a restaurant with a self-serve salad bar within the previous month, by
selected socio-economic and demographic characteristics.

Characteristic Yes No
Number Percent Number Percent
Household size
1 41 36.3 72 63.7
2 143 51.8 133 48.2
3 69 46.6 79 53.4
4 88 46.8 100 53.2
5 or more 53 40.5 78 59.5

Education level
Some grade or high school 17 26.6 47 73.4
Tech. or high school grad. 145 45.9 171 54.1
Some college or voc. school 77 44.5 96 55.5
College grad. 152 51.9 141 48.1

Income
Under $10,000 20 29.8 47 70.2
$10,000-19,999 40 33.9 78 66.1
$20,000-34,999 91 52.6 82 47.4
$35,000-49,999 93 53.5 81 46.6
$50,000 + 92 51.7 86 48.3


Under 25 33 39.3 51 60.7
25-34 106 48.6 112 51.4
35-49 130 46.9 147 53.1
50-64 78 49.4 80 50.6
65 or older 42 37.8 69 62.2

Race
White 349 47.7 383 52.3
Black 26 34.7 49 65.3
Hispanic 6 35.3 11 64.7
Asian/Am. Indian 17 42.5 23 57.5

Sex
Male 81 40.7 118 59.3
Female 310 48.6 328 51.4

Total 398 45.9 469 54.1

a Chi-square analysis indicates that patronizing a restaurant with a self-serve salad bar was
significantly related to household size, education level and income (P 5 0.05.







55



Table 37. Preference for regular round tomatoes cut into wedges or cherry tomatoes from a salad
bar, by selected socio-economic and demographic characteristics.

Characteristic Prefer cherry tomatoes Prefer round tomatoes
Number Percent Number Percent
Household size
1 43 38.4 69 61.6
2 115 45.5 138 54.6
3 60 43.2 79 56.8
4 86 49.1 89 50.9
5 or more 67 54.5 56 45.5

Education level
Some grade or high school 20 35.7 36 64.3
Tech. or high school grad. 120 40.0 180 60.0
Some college or voc. school 76 46.9 86 53.1
College grad. 151 54.9 124 45.1

Income
Under $10,000 20 30.8 45 69.2
$10,000-19,999 58 53.7 50 46.3
$20,000-34,999 73 43.7 94 56.3
$35,000-49,999 74 44.9 91 55.2
$50,000 + 95 58.3 68 41.7

Race
White 321 46.9 363 53.1
Black 31 43.7 40 56.3
Hispanic 4 26.7 11 73.3
Asian/Am. Indian 17 42.5 23 57.5

Agea
Under 25 28 36.8 48 63.2
25-34 99 48.3 106 51.7
35-49 146 55.5 117 44.5
50-64 59 39.9 89 60.1
65 or older 35 34.0 68 66.0

Sex
Male 75 43.4 98 56.7
Female 288 47.1 323 52.9

Total 372 45.9 438 54.1

a Chi-square analysis indicates that patronizing a restaurant with a self-serve salad bar was
significantly related to education level, age and income (P < 0.05).





56



Table 38. Recall of advertising and publicity for fresh tomatoes during the past two or three years.

Recall Total
Media Type 1985 1991 1985 1991
Number Percent Number Percent (----Number----)

Newspaper food page stories and recipes 690 32.4 411 47.8b 2,130 859
Tomato recipes, leaflets or booklets 558 26.3 289 33.6b 2,118 860
Posters in stores 303 14.2 278 32.4b 2,130 858
Magazine ads 327 15.3 193 22.4b 2,132 863
Other T.V. 278 13.1 162 19.0b 2,129 853
T.V. commercials 392 18.4 151 17.6 2,131 856
Magazine feature stories 271 12.7 102 11.9 2,128 860
Radio commercials 137 6.4 35 4.1b 2,128 863

a In 1985, 66.5 percent of all respondents were able to recall at least one kind of advertising or
publicity for fresh tomatoes, compared with 67.1 percent in 1991. This slight difference is not statistically
significant (P < 0.05).
b A t-test indicated that response rates for 1985 and 1991 were statistically different (P < 0.05).






60




50 *X
47.8




40
O

S33.6 *
32.4 32.4
O



C /./22.4

20 19.0 18.4
a) 17.6
15.3
14.2
13.1 127

10/
0 6.4
0- A i -



1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991 1985 1991

Newspaper Recipes/ Posters Magazine Other TV Magazine Radio
food page leaflets in store ads TV commercials features commercials


Figure 17.--Recall of advertising and publicity for fresh tomatoes during the
past two or three years, all TV ADIs, 1985 and 1991.

* Statistically significant difference.





58



recalled by about one-third, all up substantially from 1985 survey levels. Magazine ads,

TV food shows, news features, and TV commercials were mentioned by about one-fifth

of all shoppers. Magazine features and radio commercials were recalled by about 12

percent and four percent, respectively, slightly lower than 1985 levels of shopper recall.


CONCLUSIONS


Findings of the 1991 survey indicate that use of fresh tomatoes in general, and

regular round tomatoes in particular is down from 1985 levels. While the

Roanoke/Lynchburg area showed an increase in usage of regular round tomatoes, the

three largest TV ADIs studied, Boston, New York and Philadelphia, each showed a

significant decline. Consumer satisfaction with fresh regular round tomatoes has

deteriorated in the study area with major complaints being quality related, not price

related. Fresh regular round tomatoes are often replaced by cherry or plum tomatoes

as well as by other fresh vegetables such as peppers and cucumbers.

However, even as the market penetration of competing cherry and plum tomatoes

has increased and the proportion of all households using regular round tomatoes has

decreased, the total number of households in the study area estimated to be using

regular round tomatoes has remained unchanged since 1985. The primary reason given

by consumers for buying fresh regular round tomatoes in the winter and early spring is

that they are essential in recipes; this is probably the result of increased emphasis on

newspaper food page publicity, magazine and TV features, and the in-store educational

program, all of which foster greater tomato purchases and use.






59



Preference remains for Florida-grown tomatoes over Mexican-grown for reasons

which include Florida's favorable image and loyalty to U.S. products. Concerns about

Mexican pesticide regulation and sanitation were also expressed by about a quarter of

all shoppers.

The proportion of households utilizing "kitchen ripening" at room temperature

was somewhat lower than in 1985, but greater satisfaction with tomatoes stored at room

temperature was reported. This could mean that better quality tomatoes are reaching

the consumer and emphasis on the kitchen ripening theme should be continued.

Offering shoppers a choice of "slightly underripe" and "fully ripe" regular round

tomatoes may result in significant sales increases because consumers want tomatoes for

immediate consumption as well as for use up to a week after purchase. An in-store

ripening program could increase sales and possibly increase store revenues because some

customers are willing to pay slightly more for fully-ripe tomatoes. The economics of

such a program should be explored through in-state tests.

Consumers' recall of specific types of advertising and publicity reflects the

programs and emphasis that the Florida Tomato Committee has adopted in recent years.

Survey results indicate the programs are working, but advertising and publicity alone

cannot overcome basic product limitations. Maintaining product quality throughout the

marketing channel should remain a top priority, as well as educating consumers as to

proper ripening and storage practices.

Estimates of the relative market shares of regular round, plum and cherry

tomatoes should be made on a tonnage basis through a detailed market study. If the

market share of regular round tomatoes continues to be lost to plum and cherry






60



tomatoes, the ability of the Florida Tomato Committee to conduct broad based

educational and promotional programs could be jeopardized in the future unless growers

of all types of tomatoes contribute to the programs.





61



REFERENCES


Arbitron Ratings Company (1984), Arbitron Ratings: Television, 1984-85 Universe
Estimates Summary, New York, NY.

Arbitron Ratings Company (1990), Arbitron Ratings: Television, 1990-91 Universe
Estimates Summary, New York, NY.

Degner, Robert L., An Evaluation of the Promotional and Public Relations Programs
for Florida Tomatoes. Industry Report 85-2, Florida Agricultural Market
Research Center, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, August 1985.





University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs