ShareThis Page
Tuna executive blames millennials for killing tuna sales |
Food & Drink

Tuna executive blames millennials for killing tuna sales

Eric Lucey
| Wednesday, December 5, 2018 11:18 a.m
In this June 30, 2008 file photo a StarKist brand product is seen on a grocery store shelf in Boston. (AP Photo/Lisa Poole,File)

Wait. Millennials don’t own can openers?

That’s the argument one tuna fish executive is making in a story on the decline of canned tuna sales.

The Wall Street Journal (subscription needed) posted a story on Sunday about companies like StarKist, Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea dealing with a slumping market, especially driven down by a lackluster appetite for canned fish by younger people.

“A lot of millennials don’t even own can openers,” Andy Mecs, vice president of marketing and innovation for StarKist, based in Pittsburgh and a subsidiary of South Korea’s Dongwon Group, told the Journal.

Millennials have been blamed for killing lots of things – marriage, car ownership, house ownership, cereal — but this seemed a little odd, and lead to many responses on Twitter.

It seems can openers are sitting in millennials kitchen drawers, maybe they just are that into tuna according to posts on Twitter ?

Canned food items often come with pull-top lids, so can openers are not the essential kitchen item they may have been, but is that the reason for tuna’s fall off?

The New York Times pointed out that in the past, consumers were scared off by high levels of mercury in the fish. And in the 1980s there was a push to label tuna cans as dolphin-cruelty free.

And earlier this year StarKist agreed to plead guilty to a felony price fixing charge as part of a broad collusion investigation of the canned tuna industry. The company faces up to a $100 million fine when it is sentenced, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Frank Carnevale is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Frank at 412-380-8511, or via Twitter @frnkstar.

Categories: Food Drink
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.