Chicago farmer's markets are bul*sh&*

Hi- I ran across this article when I was visiting the local beet. It originally appeared on Chicago now. It kind of reminds me of the recent NYT op-ed piece that was discussed here recently. This guy went to Green City Market to price items, and noted how much more expensive they were there, than they were at the stores he went to. He also mentioned that the farmer's markets here were inferior to the markets he visited in France.
Here is the link to the article. http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-food-snob/2010/08/farmers-markets-in-chicago-are-bull.html

How does he come to the conclusion that his friend the chef would have to charge $16 for a blueberry dessert, if he uses blueberries purchased at GCM? I am interested in other people's comments. Thanks, Nancy

NFriday wrote:Hi- I ran across this article when I was visiting the local beet. It originally appeared on Chicago now. It kind of reminds me of the recent NYT op-ed piece that was discussed here recently. This guy went to Green City Market to price items, and noted how much more expensive they were there, than they were at the stores he went to. He also mentioned that the farmer's markets here were inferior to the markets he visited in France.
Here is the link to the article. http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-food-snob/2010/08/farmers-markets-in-chicago-are-

How does he come to the conclusion that his friend the chef would have to charge $16 for a blueberry dessert, if he uses blueberries purchased at GCM? I am interested in other people's comments. Thanks, Nancy

Looks like the link you've provided doesn't work, Nancy.

=R=

Hi- Now I have the right link. Thanks, Nancy

I have no idea how many blueberries the dessert required so who knows where the $16 figure comes from. But I do pay $5 a pint for blueberries at the Andersonville farmers market which does seem stiff when I go up to Edgewater Produce and see them for $2 from Michigan. But the last ones I got from the market were quite tasty.

The farmers market here is quite expensive and it makes me laugh when people say everyone should buy their produce at these markets, given the prices. There are some research experiments to allow people to use food stamps at farmers markets, but they usually have to give them double the usual value, so the recipients can still afford a sufficient amount of food. Certain stands have dirt cheap produce like corn, peppers, zucchini, etc., but the organic farms are incredibly expensive ($5/lb for tomatoes) and the fruit is usually at least double the price of the local produce markets.

But comparing the markets here to France is just silly as well. Completely different agriculture (and economic) system.

Hi- I've bought certified organic blueberries for 2/$8 at the Evanston market, and most of the other farmers at Evanston sell them for $4 a pint, or 2/$7. When the grocery stores sell them really cheap, they are not making any money on them.

One of the organic farmers at Evanston Saturday, was selling all his tomatoes for $1.50 a pound, including heirlooms, and he was selling his #2 tomatoes for $1 a pound. There is a wide variation on price at the farmer's market. One of the organic growers was selling a quart of tomatoes for $8. I've found that it is better to make the rounds before you purchase anything. That way you can find out who is selling something the cheapest. Lots of times you can get stuff cheaper if you get there an hour before the market closes. Farmers do not want to take their unsold stuff home, and frequently you can find a bag sale. Nichols also frequently sells some of their veggies really cheap when they are getting ready to close. I have gotten bunches of greens, such as collards and kale for $1 a bunch.

There is not as much of a variation in the price of fruit in general, as there is in veggies. One farmer at Evanston though sells #2 peaches for $2 a basket, and charges considerably less per pound for their #1 peaches if you buy a large quantity of them, as opposed to just a quart.

Last season, one of the farmers that frequently has a bag sale for his veggies, right before he loads his truck to go home, sold me a whole flat of strawberries for $15, which was cheaper than wholesale. It was such a good deal, I could not pass it up. Whole sale they were going for $20 a flat. Hope this helps, Nancy

For those who complain about prices at the GCM, go to a different farmer's market. One of the best effects of having many farmer's markets around the city is that they compete with each other. The GCM is the showcase market, go to a smaller market if you don't like the prices and want "basic" seasonal items (like blueberries), and you'll see more competition. Anyway, there's already a lively discussion involving the writer of that article on The Local Beet, so feel free to comment over there as well.

NFriday wrote:Hi- I ran across this article when I was visiting the local beet. It originally appeared on Chicago now. It kind of reminds me of the recent NYT op-ed piece that was discussed here recently. This guy went to Green City Market to price items, and noted how much more expensive they were there, than they were at the stores he went to. He also mentioned that the farmer's markets here were inferior to the markets he visited in France.
Here is the link to the article. http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-food-snob/2010/08/farmers-markets-in-chicago-are-bull.html

How does he come to the conclusion that his friend the chef would have to charge $16 for a blueberry dessert, if he uses blueberries purchased at GCM? I am interested in other people's comments. Thanks, Nancy

Considering how many Chicago restaurants serve blueberry (or whatever) desserts using GCM fruit, and manage to do so at nearly the same price point, shows that either the writer or his friend are misguided here.

aschie30 wrote:Anyway, there's already a lively discussion involving the writer of that article on The Local Beet, so feel free to comment over there as well.

The discussion on The Local Beet is indeed lively and entertaining. It's amusing but hardly surprising to learn that the combative dude who wrote the chicagonow thing is a GEB disciple. Anyway, good for him writing in his own voice about whatever he wants. Hardly original thoughts, but he wrote them in an entertaining way. I agree with him that "M" - the person who outed him on the Local Beat him even though he was trying write anonymously - acted like a cowardly, mean-spirited hypocrite. Actually, that's my characterization - Joe was much nicer to him/ her than that.

Kennyz wrote:Anyway, good for him writing in his own voice about whatever he wants.

Yes, exactly what the world needs. More blowhards.

aschie30 wrote:

Kennyz wrote:Anyway, good for him writing in his own voice about whatever he wants.

Yes, exactly what the world needs. More blowhards.

I enjoy Bill O'Reilly, Dr. Laura, Sunday TV Evangelists, and NPR too. Blowhards are fun.

Kennyz wrote: Blowhards are fun.

as well as plentiful & on both sides of this debate.

Kennyz wrote:I agree with him that "M" - the person who outed him on the Local Beat him even though he was trying write anonymously - acted like a cowardly, mean-spirited hypocrite. Actually, that's my characterization - Joe was much nicer to him/ her than that.

I don't think Joe was trying that hard to write anonymously, since he uses his real name on his @chifoodsnob twitter account (and he used it before this article), and all of his posts on chicagonow are tagged "joe campagna".

gleam wrote:

Kennyz wrote:I agree with him that "M" - the person who outed him on the Local Beat him even though he was trying write anonymously - acted like a cowardly, mean-spirited hypocrite. Actually, that's my characterization - Joe was much nicer to him/ her than that.

I don't think Joe was trying that hard to write anonymously, since he uses his real name on his @chifoodsnob twitter account (and he used it before this article), and all of his posts on chicagonow are tagged "joe campagna".

Clearly he didn't try as hard as "M"

Kennyz wrote:

gleam wrote:

Kennyz wrote:I agree with him that "M" - the person who outed him on the Local Beat him even though he was trying write anonymously - acted like a cowardly, mean-spirited hypocrite. Actually, that's my characterization - Joe was much nicer to him/ her than that.

I don't think Joe was trying that hard to write anonymously, since he uses his real name on his @chifoodsnob twitter account (and he used it before this article), and all of his posts on chicagonow are tagged "joe campagna".

Clearly he didn't try as hard as "M"

Kenny - I don't think Chicago Food Snob was trying to "write anonymously" at all. As gleam points out, he also lists his twitter account as well as tags his name at the bottom of every piece he writes. "Chicago Food Snob" is merely a Chicago Now-esque moniker; all the bloggers have them. I don't think "M" outed him at all, in fact.

aschie30 wrote:Kenny - I don't think Chicago Food Snob was trying to "write anonymously" at all. As gleam points out, he also lists his twitter account as well as tags his name at the bottom of every piece he writes. "Chicago Food Snob" is merely a Chicago Now-esque moniker; all the bloggers have them. I don't think "M" outed him at all, in fact.

I have no idea what Chicago Now is, nor do I know what "tags his name" means. All I know is that i read the article, tried a bit to figure out who wrote it, then came to the conclusion that since there was no byline, the author was attempting to write anonymously. Then in response to "M"'s mention of his name, he wrote:

This person also called me out by name and former place of employment...

I find it personally amusing you can call me out by name and say where I’ve worked and yet hide yourself behind a moniker and vagaries to the restaurant you work in.

Again, he clearly wasn't trying very hard, but there was a degree of an attempt to be anonymous. Regardless, I think M is being lame.

as wendy says, he's not even trying.

I would agree with you if what existed in real life looked anything like what you mocked up. I'm still not sure what all those arrows are supposed to mean.

I'm curious: does anyone think this blog posts makes any reasonable points? Does he say anything you haven't heard before? To me, the answer is no on both counts.

Darren72 wrote:I'm curious: does anyone think this blog posts makes any reasonable points? Does he say anything you haven't heard before? To me, the answer is no on both counts.

I don't know, I find the discussion about the discussion more interesting than the discussion, so I haven't really read it.

Kennyz wrote:I would agree with you if what existed in real life looked anything like what you mocked up. I'm still not sure what all those arrows are supposed to mean.

The only alterations to those images are the arrows, and it's meant to show that his real name is all over his blog and his twitter feed, and that it's ridiculous for him to claim he was trying to post anonymously. The only bits of information that he could really claim he was trying to keep under wraps were the specific restaurants he had worked at, so shame on M for naming GE.

Darren72 wrote:I'm curious: does anyone think this blog posts makes any reasonable points? Does he say anything you haven't heard before? To me, the answer is no on both counts.

The thing is, for a lot of reasons, some I can figure, some I cannot, there's plenty of people who want to be told that farmer's markets are BS. The logic, rhetoric or facts matter hardly little. They just want the comfort of a writer saying, "hey you, eater, it's cool not to go to a market." You know free yourself from the deadly sway of us evil locavores, etc.

gleam wrote:

Kennyz wrote:I would agree with you if what existed in real life looked anything like what you mocked up. I'm still not sure what all those arrows are supposed to mean.

The only alterations to those images are the arrows, and it's meant to show that his real name is all over his blog and his twitter feed, and that it's ridiculous for him to claim he was trying to post anonymously. The only bits of information that he could really claim he was trying to keep under wraps were the specific restaurants he had worked at, so shame on M for naming GE.

There is one other significant alteration. In your text above you called them "images," what you actually posted was a single image which made it appear as if the twitter stuff was actually right below the article.

gleam wrote:The only bits of information that he could really claim he was trying to keep under wraps were the specific restaurants he had worked at, so shame on M for naming GE.

Not something he can genuinely claim.

Kenny, "King of Google," your pleading of ignorance on these matters of internet anonymity really befuddles me.

Kennyz wrote:

gleam wrote:

Kennyz wrote:I would agree with you if what existed in real life looked anything like what you mocked up. I'm still not sure what all those arrows are supposed to mean.

The only alterations to those images are the arrows, and it's meant to show that his real name is all over his blog and his twitter feed, and that it's ridiculous for him to claim he was trying to post anonymously. The only bits of information that he could really claim he was trying to keep under wraps were the specific restaurants he had worked at, so shame on M for naming GE.

There is one other significant alteration. In your text above you called them "images," what you actually posted was a single image which made it appear as if the twitter stuff was actually right below the article.

They're two different images posted one right above the other.

Vital Information wrote:

Darren72 wrote:I'm curious: does anyone think this blog posts makes any reasonable points? Does he say anything you haven't heard before? To me, the answer is no on both counts.

The thing is, for a lot of reasons, some I can figure, some I cannot, there's plenty of people who want to be told that farmer's markets are BS. The logic, rhetoric or facts matter hardly little. They just want the comfort of a writer saying, "hey you, eater, it's cool not to go to a market." You know free yourself from the deadly sway of us evil locavores, etc.

Part of me thinks he's a loose-lipped cowboy, and part of me thinks he knows exactly what he's doing. The part of me that thinks he knows what he's doing thinks that he's deliberately trying to appeal to a certain change-resistant demographic (NASCAR Dads, maybe?) that wants to be told that the current food system is just fine, and has served us well.

Regardless, there is a clear disconnect between his (and GEB's, for that matter) disdain for farmer's markets and the love of industrial food, on the one hand, and the self-proclaimed "food snobbery" inherent in asserting that you have a superior palate, excellent food tastes, and for GEB, charging $35 for an entree, on the other hand.

Regardless of JoeC's motives, there's an audience who wants to hear what he's selling.

Or maybe he's just pissed off that the farmer's markets here often charge too much for stuff that's not as good as it should/ could be. I wouldn't disagree with him about that even though (maybe because) I consider myself a fairly passionate locavore. He levied many of his complants in the direction of the GCM, and even on this forum I've been right there with him on that.

Kennyz wrote:Or maybe he's just pissed off that the farmer's markets here often charge too much for stuff that's not as good as it should/ could be. I wouldn't disagree with him about that even though (maybe because) I consider myself a fairly passionate locavore. He levied many of his complants in the direction of the GCM, and even on this forum I've been right there with him on that.

Maybe, but what about this (and I only use this example 'cause it's fresh for me). Some friends tried the new Graze in Madison the other day. One of their family had a $19 burger, and they did not even like it! So, you know what. Restaurants are bullshit

I'm certainly not saying I agree with Joe from GEB. Under the phony guise of "research," he cherry picked data to support a pre-planned rant against farmer's markets. That's not cool. But I do think he makes an important point somewhere amidst either the blog posts or comments, all of which have become way too circumlocutious to follow. The important point is that locavores are sometimes too hesitant to criticize their own. I noticed one chef this Saturday pleading to farmers about the same complaint I always have: pick and sell some freakin’ ripe peaches already! But often it’s just a big love fest, with chefs, bloggers, farmers and trend seekers supporting and patting themselves on the back for a job middlingly done.

Kennyz wrote:I do think he makes an important point somewhere amidst either the blog posts or comments . . . [t]he important point is that locavores are sometimes too hesitant to criticize their own. I noticed one chef this Saturday pleading to farmers about the same complaint I always have: pick and sell some freakin’ ripe peaches already! But often it’s just a big love fest, with chefs, bloggers, farmers and trend seekers supporting and patting themselves on the back for a job middlingly done.

Kenny - That's your point; not Joe C.'s. You're speculating about Joe C.'s "important point," because nowhere in his piece does he state what you just stated above. If Joe C. were to have written a balanced, reasoned piece, rather than attempt to ignite a flame-war, and initiated a reasoned discussion, then, you could say that if he was then attacked, locavores are hesitant to criticize their own. Please don't fall into the all-too-common trap of painting all so-called locavores with one broadstroke: some locavores are more ardent, others merely see buying local as creating a viable, alternative market for a different type of product, and a different way of buying that product. But merely stating "Farmer's Markets are Bull$%#!," with very little more, will subject a person like Joe C to the ire of a group of passionate people who often feel like their views are misunderstood, and are often characterized in the most extreme light, much in the fashion demonstrated by Chicago Food Snob.

N.B. As I stated above, the GCM is not the only market in town. A free marketist like yourself can understand this. One way to influence the market is to shop at other markets, or find vendors that pick peaches at their ripest, or try to develop a relationship with the farmers, and hope that if enough people have the same complaint, a smaller vendor wishing to compete with Klug will set himself apart by offering truly "tree-ripened" peaches. I agree that the GCM can be a bit of a lovefest, but it's mutual -- customers love it, love the experience, and are willing to pay the money asked. Nobody is putting a gun to their heads to pay $4 for a pint of blueberries. I know many dyed-in-the-wool local eaters who do not shop at the GCM for precisely those reasons. Often, I'm happier with the vendors at the Daley Center Market. Again, the way around this is to support competition.