Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Eggheads is the go-to podcast for egg industry professionals who are interested in leadership and innovation in the egg world. Host Greg Schonefeld explores the evolving world of modern egg farming, from the latest in cage-free innovations and organic certifications to navigating the economics of large-scale production. Whether you're an egg producer, supplier, or involved in poultry genetics, this show provides the insights and expert discussions you need to thrive in the industry. Crack open the science, strategies, and stories behind the egg industry’s biggest challenges and opportunities.
Greg Schonefeld:
Hey, everyone. Today's episode of Eggheads is going to sound a little bit different. I got an opportunity to host a panel at the PEAK Conference back in April where we convened four experts to talk about a pretty hot topic in the egg industry today, in-ovo sexing.
That's being able to determine the gender of a given egg before it hatches, which could essentially put an end to the practice of male chick culling at hatcheries.
For a long time, this was seen as a pipe dream, but now the tech seems to have actually caught up and we're seeing in-ovo sexing machines being used throughout Europe and being rolled out by certain companies in the US as well. But adoption by specialty egg producers is a lot different than widespread use throughout the industry, and there are several different issues that need to be resolved before we get there.
To talk us through some of those barriers, we've got Nancy Roulston, Senior Director of Corporate Policy and Animal Science at the ASPCA, Juliana Machado, a geneticist and data scientist at Hendrix Genetics, Casey Downey from Innovate Animal Ag, and Dr. Larry Sadler, Senior Vice President of United Egg Producers, all bringing their unique expertise and industry point of view to this conversation.
I hope you enjoy listening to them as much as I did and that you learn a thing or two about this topic that's only going to become more relevant in the years to come.
Nancy, can you just kick us off with, I think most people in here are probably familiar with in-ovo sexing, but just what problem does this solve, which is male chick culling? Can you explain the problem behind this?
Nancy Roulston:
Yes, yes, just briefly. So there are 600 million chicks that are hatched in the egg industry every year. 300 million of those chicks are female and they grow up to become hens that lay the table eggs that we find in supermarkets. But the other 300 are males and they will never lay eggs, so those chicks are culled at the hatchery, that's called male chick culling, either by maceration or by gassing.
Greg Schonefeld:
And of course I guess the reason for that is they don't provide an economic value and that's kind of been the industry practice to make that happen?
Nancy Roulston:
Yeah. They will never lay eggs so they're of no use to the egg industry, and they grow slowly, so the broiler meat industry does not see them as economically viable either.
Greg Schonefeld:
Right. And, Larry, as you mentioned in our pre-call, this has been something talked about for 10 years. Can you maybe walk us through in 10 years maybe what's been historically the challenge of this and what's changed today, if anything?
Dr. Larry Sadler:
Yeah, so happy to go through it. And it certainly started before I was with UEP, so somewhat I don't even have all the perspective by any means, but I was Head of Animal Welfare for Kraft Heinz when some of this was happening and so also got the perspective from that.
But essentially, it largely did start in Europe of like, "Hey, there's a problem there and there's a technology that's starting to be developed to try to answer this problem." I think it's an issue that all producers, if we had a wand and could wave it and end it, everyone wants this to end. Everyone's going in that same direction.
And Europe, and in particular Germany, started to have what looked like was going to be a solution. And so back then, Germany did actually pass legislation that said it would eliminate chick culling by 2022, and then France quickly followed that as well and that gave sort of inspiration to the US producers of, "Hey, this looks like it's happening." And there was some technology that looked really, really promising that was coming out at that time that seemed like it was really just really close, the solution was really close.
As it turned out, as years went on, that technology that seemed really close at the time didn't actually work out. They weren't able to come up with a solution.
And so largely a big factor of sort of the timeline of why it's taken so long, it's just a very complex issue. It's a technologically-complex issue to try to solve. And so even though back then it seemed like a solution was close, it didn't work out, and so it took several more years for a solution to kind of develop and solidifying to what we currently have today.
Greg Schonefeld:
So over those 10 years, the tech has really progressed, it sounds like?
Dr. Larry Sadler:
Extremely progressed from really not being possible to being possible. But I also think it's probably worth noting, Germany, for example, first started with saying that you couldn't cull birds after day seven, and the technology couldn't do it. So they really updated, they changed their legislation to say to day 12. And France likewise has sort of adapted their legislation to what the technology is actually capable of.
So there was sort of that, "Here's where we think we can achieve," back then more than 10 years ago, and we've seen significant changes in the technology, but also sort of the legislation matching what's actually possible with the technology.
Greg Schonefeld:
Okay, good. It's a good background. So Casey, wondering if you could just give a quick rundown on the technology available today.
Casey Downey:
Yeah. And also I wanted to add one thing if that's okay. So in addition to being this kind of ethical issue as Nancy pointed out, it's also a remarkable inefficiency. I mean, it's kind of remarkable that we spend all this money incubating these chicks like paying for laborers to sex them. And so not only is there kind of this ethical issue, there's also this economic issue where this is costing ultimately the industry money, and ultimately now there's technology that will and can solve that.
There are three companies that have produced technologies that I would say are very clearly commercially successful and commercially in the market. So the first is AAT's Cheggy, which has, I believe, three machines in the US hatcheries and is also proliferated throughout Europe.
This technology uses hyperspectral imaging, or essentially light, to look through the eggshell and basically identify the difference between a male and a female, because there's different feather colors for males and females of brown egg-laying breeds.
The second company is Orbem, who they essentially use MRI to look through the egg and actually see the gonads of the developing embryo. And then finally, the other technology that is currently in the market is SELEGGT, and they actually take a tiny sample of allantoic fluid from the egg and they then run a PCR or a DNA test on that fluid to figure out whether it is male or female.
There's one other company called Omegga, which is starting kind of to move out of the R&D phase in Europe and they also use hyperspectral imaging. There's also a number of genetic editing solutions that currently are not in large-scale commercial practice, but potentially show promise for the future.
Greg Schonefeld:
And I understand, I mean, if we talk about the cage-free movement, that really required change that took place at the farm, but this change all takes place in the hatchery, which brings in Juliana. Can you talk to what does it actually look like to put this in practice?
Juliana Machado:
Yeah. So they already mentioned some of the challenges, and of course when we mention challenges, the first one that comes up is cost, but it's not cost alone. So this means that we need to have space in the hatcheries to accommodate these machines and these technologies.
It seems just, again, it's not only space, it's making sure that we have ventilation, that we have the energy system, if you have labor skills to run these machines and to have the egg flow, because you don't want to have these eggs outside of the incubators for long. So there are many things involved on this that needs to be taken in consideration. So it's not only about the number and if you're able to pay but how operationally is possible.
Greg Schonefeld:
Does the technology today, does it produce enough throughput to solve the problem?
Casey Downey:
So the short answer is yes, the throughput can be there. It definitely requires operational changes, which are very difficult. As you mentioned, training new laborers like changing the way that your hatchery is set up, these are all things that take time and take learning, but ultimately, let's just say that you're using a machine that can in-ovo sex on day 11, 12, and 13, right? And if you have six modules each doing 3,000 eggs per hour, if you run that for two eight-hour shifts for each of those three days, you have plenty to meet kind of the demand of the largest flock sizes.
Greg Schonefeld:
Okay.
Casey Downey:
Yeah.
Greg Schonefeld:
That clears that up. So it sounds like we have a real solution, but it comes with a cost, and I understand that's roughly one cent an egg. I've heard a little more, I've heard a little less, but let's just say it's one cent an egg for simplicity. Does that feel absorbable to the market? And, Casey, I'd like to get your take on that.
Casey Downey:
Yeah. I think one thing that is not present in the current conversation about cost, which I think is very important though, is that in-ovo sexing does have economies of scale, and right now we are in an equilibrium where the in-ovo sexing machines that are in the US are used by specialty producers and not used by the broader market, right?
So as Nancy mentioned, perhaps there's about 600 million chicks that are produced in the US each year, and there's nowhere near that amount that are currently being running through the machines that we have.
And so even though these machines do have operational expenses, they have a little bit of labor, they have some electricity, they have cooling, all these different things, really what these machines are are they're capital expenses, they're capital equipment. And so essentially when you buy these machines and you scale up the production, you do a 20 million per year hatchery, the type of costs that we're seeing right now are not actually the costs that reflect kind of the longer-term equilibrium of this technology being rolled throughout the country.
Greg Schonefeld:
So the more this scales up, the more the cost per egg goes down.
Casey Downey:
That's correct. Yeah. And both for simple economies of scale, and also as Larry has pointed out, over the last few years really this technology has improved a significant amount. In Europe it used to be five extra dollars per pullet, right? And now it's much closer to €1.50 or €2.
Greg Schonefeld:
Right.
Nancy Roulston:
I also think there's a lot of benefits from being a leader in this space and adopting in-ovo sexing. Of course there's the benefit of being part of the solution. There's meeting consumer expectation and the marketing opportunities that come with that. There's improving your workplace morale, especially for hatchery workers who may not want to participate in this practice. There's opportunities to get preferential pricing from the technology companies and preferential contracts. And there's also just a PR benefit and reducing any risk, any negative PR by getting ahead of it.
Greg Schonefeld:
Mm-hmm. What about from a market perspective? I mean, this could ultimately be shared with the consumers or retailers, that kind of thing. How do you look at it on that end as far as a cost that's absorbable or not?
Juliana Machado:
I think one of the good things, and I think it's why we are here together, is because we need to involve the stakeholders. And the nice thing about this is actually sometimes there is not a problem that's maybe out there all the time, so it's very nice that we start this and having the different parties together to really work with the stakeholders, with the customer, with the retailers to bring this the best way possible in the way that feeds our operational situation, our reality, that doesn't influence the efficiency of the hatchery but actually improves the efficiency of our hatchery and the quality of our chicks. So I think it's really a working together looking forward.
Greg Schonefeld:
Yeah. That's a really good note that we definitely need to dig into. Casey, were you going to add something?
Casey Downey:
Yeah. I think we all also kind of need to be honest in this room that this kind of challenge does reflect a long-term liability for the industry and there are some difficult conversations and difficult discussions about pricing and price sharing and who goes first and what does that mean for my competitors, et cetera.
But one of the things that we've seen quite recently in this very industry is that public opinion can crystallize very quickly and in ways that we would not expect in this kind of new fluid media environment.
Even though oftentimes the issues that are kind of raised in these TikTok stampedes, for lack of a better word, seem to fade away, they often do cause permanent change in consumers' behavior or consumers' impressions of the brands or retailers that they're purchasing their products from. And so I also kind of think of it from that perspective where we just don't really know when it might come out to bite us, but we all know that this is a problem that needs to be solved and everyone in this room wants it to be solved.
Dr. Larry Sadler:
And I would completely agree with what everyone said. Producers certainly want to see this move forward. We're all moving in that same direction again.
But I will also note, to answer your question more directly, we don't actually at this time know is their consumer, I don't want to say acceptance, but is there interest in it? Are they willing to pay more? That is far from proven out at this point.
And we've seen, I would say somewhat unfortunately, with other kind of animal welfare claims where most consumers will say, "Yes, we're very interested in that," but their willingness to pay for it is not there. And so there's always that hesitation and concern of yes, it's great to say you want this, but is there actually proof that they are willing to pay for it? And that is not proven yet.
Nancy Roulston:
Yeah. I just wanted to add that a lot of folks don't know about this problem yet, a lot of consumers are not aware, but we've seen that when they do become aware, they do care a lot.
And there was a study published by Faunalytics in 2025 that showed that male chick culling was among the most unacceptable practices among all other animal egg practices. So it was about a dozen issues.
The ASPCA did a survey just about a month ago, so Q1 2026, that found that once folks were made aware of this problem, that 7 in 10 were willing to switch egg brands to one that didn't involve male chick culling, and 8 in 10 wanted their supermarkets to provide shelf space to provide a selection of eggs that didn't involve male chick culling. And in that same survey, 8 in 10 Americans wanted the US to catch up to Germany and catch up to France on adopting this innovation, and that view was significantly more common in males, older adults, and those whose income is tied to agriculture.
Greg Schonefeld:
One thing, I mean, I don't know, just from things I've heard where I feel like a producer might push back is that sometimes you see the surveys where people gladly say one thing but when they vote with their dollars they say something different. I don't know if anyone has any notes on that?
Casey Downey:
You don't need, as a business, 80% of consumers to be willing to pay more of something for it to matter for your bottom line. And just a few percent of consumers can really shift purchasing behavior in a significant way that impacts the retailers, that impacts an egg producer, which is I think something that was left unsaid here too is that the data for consumers are always going to say crazy things, but at the end of the day, even if it's not 80%, what is it, 5%, 10%, 20%? Those are still actually quite significant numbers.
Greg Schonefeld:
Well, and it is still an indicator of the feelings and probably the aspirations of people, whether they're going to step up with their dollars or not. It says something about the emotions that this can generate.
What I'm taking away from everyone in this part is that everybody wants this, the market might be able to absorb it. I guess what are some of the factors of why this hasn't happened?
Dr. Larry Sadler:
So I think there's a few. One is certainly the cost is there. Sort of acceptability want of it on the consumer side is still being not... It hasn't been proven out.
I actually was thinking about this since our introduction call that we had, and there's some parallels there to cage-free where I would say producers are kind of concerned about what is the real want for this, what will it be?
But I also think in some ways this is a parallel of actually enriched colony housing where we had producers who moved to enriched colony housing, thought that was going to be a solution, spent a lot of money on it, and then now we sit today where we don't even have enriched colony housing certification in the United States and those producers who put all the money into that are essentially out, all that is just gone.
And so I think there's a very real concern of we've been hearing about these technologies for years now. The genetic solutions seem in some way sort of like a perfect solution because the cost would be, in theory, very minimal for a genetic solution. And so I also think there is that hesitation of is this the right time to move forward or not? Yes, this solution kind of sits there, but is it going to be what ultimately is decided on?
And the other aspect of it is just that it is a very complex supply chain. We often think of eggs as being a simple supply chain, but it's a very complex supply chain to try to move into. And so yes, it's easier when it's just the hatcheries, but there are pieces on both sides that are still impacted by that, and so dealing with that complexity is also a barrier as well.
Juliana Machado:
I think you just touched on a point. I don't think, for example, that we have one size fits all here because we have different technologies, Casey mentioned a few of them.
And looking at our company, for example, we have implemented different technology in different parts of the world, so there is no answer. It is what can we do to improve the system, improve our hatcheries? But it feeds with what we have and then we can keep things running, because this is important at the end, and we are of course looking always for different alternatives and we have been working with gene editing as Casey mentioned, but it's not that we are closing the eyes for all the other options, so we are actively working with all of them.
Casey Downey:
Yeah. I would also add that in any industry, and especially in an industry as important as the egg industry, change is difficult, and I do think that oftentimes for things like this, it takes a lot of courage and it takes a lot of leadership to be the company or the leader in a company to step forward and be willing to try new things.
And so in the US, I would really commend the egg producer, NestFresh, who was the first, to really move the needle forward and to get the ball rolling in the US. And now that has started a chain of events where now some other producers are starting to use this technology and now we have five machines in the US. And so there's now an opportunity for those economies of scale that I mentioned to kick in and some of the producers who are less interested in being the first to the punch are potentially now able to take advantage of that.
Greg Schonefeld:
Yeah. And Casey, you mentioned earlier, that's a big question of who goes first, right? I mean, so we have Juliana here at the hatchery end and then you've got the producer and then you've got the retailer and then you've got the consumer. And Juliana, you mentioned earlier that somehow this has to probably get shared. So that's a major coordination problem, right?
Juliana Machado:
Yeah, definitely. How to get all the stakeholders involved in the discussion. So it's not the decision of the hatchery or of course is the producer as well, but how we can get everyone on board. Of course, we agree that everyone wants it. It's how we make it works.
Greg Schonefeld:
Yeah. And what I heard and what you said before is that from your perspective, you're working very hard on how can you implement this? And I'm sure as effectively, as cost-effectively as you can, but ultimately no matter how efficient you are, there's a cost with everything that exists today and you'd love your customer to buy it, but then they'd love their customer to buy it, and you're not really in a great position at the hatchery to really push through that part of the equation, I would imagine.
Juliana Machado:
I think it's why I mentioned before, it's like working together, you need to have all piece together to make it work. So I don't think it depends of one player pushing forward or backwards. I mean, we really needs to work together.
And again, it's why we have been working with all the different technologies because we know that they don't fit in the same space. You have some that are models, some that you can have different units. Curious that when we talk about 1, 2%, but when we're talking millions, these numbers change, right? We are talking about, "Oh, it's just half a percent, but half percent of million is different of half percent of 100."
So all of this and the consistent. So there are many factors that direct our choice of which technology. The technology is there and of course is improving, and we need to take the risk of course that maybe tomorrow is going to be a different technology and I have been implementing this one, but I think this is what our industry is, is dynamic and we need to do the best that we can to improve welfare and it's why we have been working all different technologies since genetics to MRI, spectrumy, so yeah.
Greg Schonefeld:
Yeah. Well, so if this goes all the way from the hatchery to the retailer and even the consumer, one representative we do not have up here is the retailer, unless someone in the audience wants to jump up here and help us out. But like you're saying, we need to get all those stakeholders together. Well, we're missing the retailer today. What can be done without the retailer?
Nancy Roulston:
Well, I think the retailer is a very, very important stakeholder. I don't think it can be done without the retailer.
The ASPCA is a national organization, we speak to millions of Americans and we try to help folks buy in line with their values so they can support positive change in the marketplace.
So because of that, we recognize egg brands that are making a positive difference, that are investing in in-ovo sexing, and we celebrate them on our website and blogs and social media to make sure that folks can identify those brands.
But back to the retailers, we need to make sure that folks know where to find the products. And retailers absolutely need to be making shelf space for eggs from in-ovo sexed hens, and the ASPCA will be launching a supermarket scorecard in 2027 that will recognize the leaders in the retail space for providing that shelf space, but we will also take the opportunity to identify any laggards in the retail space if we don't see any progress.
Casey Downey:
The other thing that I would say is I think we all have a recognition that this problem acts as some sort of liability for our industry, but also with in-ovo sexing, I think we can increase the amount of consumers that we actually have as an industry.
And in fact, I've heard stories already, this is going to sound crazy, of vegans who have decided to start eating eggs again because of the fact that they now have eggs on the shelf that do not involve or do not have chick culling.
And so I think that's like another aspect of this too is the consumer is evolving. We all know that. Consumers are really shifting their preferences in this type of direction. And so I think there's kind of this the short-term idea of the cost, but over the long term there's also a possibility that we are growing and making our industry more sustainable over the long term.
Dr. Larry Sadler:
I do want to take it back to the idea of the retailer though. And one of the things that I do hear from them is that already the egg space is full and there's already several different kind of claims that are on the carton that they're trying to make space for.
And so I do think somewhat, and not to speak for them because they're not here, but to mention that I do think there is some of they want it proven out that consumers will buy this and move it off the shelf. The shelves' space is already full. There's already lots of claims. Will this claim matter and actually move off the shelf? And I think that matters as well.
Greg Schonefeld:
So there's that issue. I mean, what else is going through your retailer's mind? I mean, I guess I would think maybe going back to the cost thing, if I'm a grocer and my eggs are now 12 cents more expensive than the neighbor grocery and the public doesn't know a difference, I'm taking a risk.
Nancy Roulston:
I think in order to give that a fair shot there's got to be a verification mechanism that the consumer can count on. So that's a certification program like UEP's Hatch Check, like Certified Humane's Approved Hatchery, so that folks can have that egg carton in their hand, see that there is no male chick culling in that supply chain.
It's not greenwashing or humanewashing, it is a legit value that's added, and that the retailer has an opportunity to market that value at point of sale because that's when you're going to capture people is when they're in the egg aisle, how can you communicate to them that this is a product that's a product that they should be understanding its full value?
Greg Schonefeld:
So the consumer awareness is a super important piece of the puzzle. What are some of the challenges to that?
Juliana Machado:
I'll give you one perspective is of course we are trying to involve all these stakeholders. We have of course some challenge-zoned implementation. And the customers, one of you I think I mention, are becoming more aware of the issue and faster, so we need to be proactive here to have a solution or the best solution possible before this awareness is completely. Because we also don't want to go out and advertise this issue as a industry. So I think being ahead of the game is the most important thing here.
Greg Schonefeld:
Being ahead in terms of getting the message out, you mean? Or communicating what you're doing or in actually implementing-
Juliana Machado:
Working on the technology and evolving in a smart way. We have been working with communication companies or welfare committees really to make sure that we get our message there that we don't by mistake don't get in a TikTok with the wrong message with maybe a fake news, but it spreads very fast. So we want to be ahead of the game also communicating, showing this is an issue, but we don't want to [inaudible 00:28:19] the issue and we are working on the solution, we are working towards the solution.
Greg Schonefeld:
Yeah.
Casey Downey:
Yeah. I agree 100%, and Juliana raises a really great point about there is a benefit to having our industry in control of the message and the story here, and it's one of leadership and it's one of we had this problem and we solved this problem with technology. If something on TikTok gets out of control and that's the story that can be responded to that with, then that's a very powerful message and the consumer's like, "Okay, all right, we have more trust now."
Greg Schonefeld:
Mm-hmm.
Dr. Larry Sadler:
But I also want to highlight, even outside of the consumer which is what we're talking about right now, it's going to take a long time even in a best-case scenario to get this implemented throughout the United States with all the right things in place. Again, it takes a lot to take an excitement around a technology to actual implementation in a very complex supply chain.
And so even in a best-case scenario, even if cost wasn't a factor, all of that, it would still take a lot of time. And so yes, having consumers pay for it ultimately is of extreme interest, but even if that were to sort of snap and be taken care of today, we're still a long ways out from it being implemented across the US just because of the difficulty of it.
Greg Schonefeld:
Does anyone have a more or less estimate on exactly if we knew, "Hey, this is funded, full go," how long would it take to implement?
Dr. Larry Sadler:
I don't think we have an answer, again, because it's so complex. It would take quite a study to try to get that figured out, and no one has, somewhat because it hasn't been possible up to this point.
And I think in some ways we're still at that case of it not being quite possible. It's still an exciting technology. It's being implemented. Everyone wants this as we keep talking about, but it's still such a complex technology, such a complex supply system. It's not a matter of cost, it's a matter of it's going to take time to get it out there.
Casey Downey:
Yeah. I think one of the things that, relative to the cage-free transition, makes this a lot simpler is that we're talking about less than 30, close to 20 large-scale commercial hatcheries in the US.
Each of these hatcheries needs to figure out how they're going to reorder their operations. How do they build the space for this technology? And so those are really serious challenges.
However, one thing that I would add is that the in-ovo sexing companies whom I speak with on a almost daily basis, they are ready to meet the demand of the industry if the industry is ready to move forward on the order of a couple years.
Greg Schonefeld:
Could someone just throw a dart? Are we talking one year, two years, three years?
Casey Downey:
It would at least take at the very minimum two years to do 100%-
Greg Schonefeld:
Two years.
Casey Downey:
... because of the fact that in order to get the supply of in-ovo sexing machines, literally that is how much time the in-ovo sexing companies would need to supply the industry with 24, 30 for every hatchery. But because of the logistical complications, it will take longer than that, but a bare minimum of two years for 100% transition.
Greg Schonefeld:
I want to go back to the consumer then, because we need the consumer to know so we can fund this thing, but at the same time, if most of them are blindly content right now, you don't want to upset people in the process. I mean, I see that as a major kind of problem here.
Nancy Roulston:
Yeah. We've tried to be very strategic about how we are informing our supporters and the general public. We're trying to focus the messaging in places, in cities where folks can find higher welfare eggs.
So for example, we know where NestFresh is selling their humanely-hatched eggs, so we're trying to concentrate that message to make folks aware of male chick culling and that there is a solution in their local grocery store that they can get.
So we're focusing our resources there instead of, say, putting them elsewhere where folks might be like, "Oh, but I can't do anything with this information and now I'm just sad about it." So that's one way in which we're trying to focus our resources to help folks.
Dr. Larry Sadler:
And I think it's hard to say, but I think somewhat what we're seeing right now is rather than 100% implementation, at least for a time period we're looking at it being more in a niche market, somewhat like cage-free where consumer gets to choose do they want to purchase that or not? And it's an option that's out there, but a niche market is a far step from 100% implementation.
Greg Schonefeld:
So with companies like NestFresh stepping out on a limb, you're able to kind of market that, build some consumer awareness around that.
But outside of that, I almost feel like in the commodity world, you're telling the consumer, "Hey, this is a problem. I really would like you to pay for it. And if you will pay for it in a couple years, I'll have you what you're looking for." I mean, that's kind of a hard road to go down, I feel like.
Casey Downey:
Yeah. And frankly, very few of the large commodity producers, that consumer-facing brand is not really what matters, right? It's the relationship with their retailers who are the ones that have this consumer-facing brand. And I think this is where it gets back to Juliana point and the point that a lot of us are making is that it is a multi-stakeholder dialogue.
And in this case, even if the issue is not, and I think there's arguments to be made that perhaps it shouldn't be directly advertised or talked about, consumers connect with the brands that they buy from or the brands that they go to their store because they know that their brands are doing the right thing in that kind of vague and amorphous way. Consumers aren't necessarily even focused on very specific issues. We're now like, we're in vibes, right? It's very much a vibe thing.
And this is an issue that if kind of the messaging on this gets out of control, the vibes are not great and consumers are not going to be happy with the retailers or with their brands. And so that's kind of the dimension where I think this matters.
Greg Schonefeld:
Yeah.
Nancy Roulston:
Yeah. I just want to say that NestFresh did go out on a limb and they're being rewarded for that now, and some of the big players can also go out on a limb. And as Casey mentioned, it does take bravery, it does take leadership, and so I think it's an opportunity.
And it's a great response if there is some viral TikTok, some, what did you call it? A TikTok stampede to be able to say, "Yes, we have that issue, but we're on it and we have already started bringing in these machines. It's not 100%, but we're working on it and this is how far we've gotten." I think that's a really powerful response that people can respect.
Greg Schonefeld:
So putting kind of a lot of that together, I guess if you, back again to genetics, to the producer, to the retailer, to the consumer, and maybe some producers that are more consumer-facing as well are in that equation, is a little bit like the problem though at the beach where you have the 10 family members there and you have the little kid and it's everyone's responsibility, yet nobody in particular's at the same time so things get missed.
Juliana Machado:
I mean, it's always the risk when you have too many owners, right? No one's take care. So this happens if you send an email and everyone is in the main as sender to and not CC, so it gets lost. But I don't think it's the case here because we are all here today all talking about this from different parts of the industry.
And we have many challenges, operational challenges, of course cost challenges as I think it may be the key driver, but we need to work together. So of course there is a demand that is not coming from the customers maybe anytime soon, so how to pass this through.
Nancy Roulston:
I liked your analogy of the beach with the child and who's watching the child. We do something in our family where we wear a lanyard with a whistle, and if you have that whistle on, you're watching the child. And maybe that's something where we pass the whistle, like whoever's trying to fix that particular component works on that and then passes it down but with the understanding that we're all on the same team, we're all trying to get this fixed.
Greg Schonefeld:
Yeah.
Dr. Larry Sadler:
I think for me, seeing the technology just not that long ago, it wasn't ready to move forward. It's finally really kind of there and you're seeing action all across the chain.
It's going to take time. Again, it's complex, but now that the technology finally seems sort of ready to go out there, you're seeing everybody work on it is ultimately what's happening. And again, kind of why we're all sitting here together, there's sort of finally that green light to go.
Greg Schonefeld:
Progress is being made.
Dr. Larry Sadler:
Yes.
Casey Downey:
Yeah. And the one thing I would add too to everything that has been all said already is that in times of transformation like this, individual leadership, as Nancy mentioned, courage, leadership, those can actually go a very long way and it can result in a single person really influencing positively their industry that they've worked in for decades of their life.
And I think the importance of that should not be left unstated. That's a big thing that individuals in this scenario can do. Whether that's a conversation with your retail partner, right? Whether that's a conversation with your board about do you want to potentially consider moving in this direction? The time for those conversations I think is now as the technology is now ready.
Greg Schonefeld:
Well, it sounds like it's a shared risk across the board. I mean, as we've hit on some of the costs that don't show up on the shelf, if we're talking reputation to the industry, and that's at every step of the way, getting into retailer reputation as well, and this is really a big...
It sounds like the tech is mostly there. Larry, as you mentioned, a lot of things are lining up, but there's ultimately a coordination problem here at the end to get everyone marching along. And I think the courage is kind of a big step to have someone step out and say, "Hey, I'm the one with the whistle right now."
Dr. Larry Sadler:
But I also want to note, we're seeing progress, people are doing that. So I think what you guys are saying for sure, but we're seeing lots of people stepping up right now and making progress that that's happening.
Greg Schonefeld:
Sounds good. Well, with that, I want to go around the room with just one last question which is I guess if you were going to point to the one thing that would unlock this, I want just a hot take from each one of you. Whoever has the courage to go first.
Casey Downey:
Yeah, I'm happy to go first. And basically, I think that the allowing economies of scale to kick in, which it touches on all the challenges we spoke on, but once you get to that point, once you get to broad adoption, the actual cost of implementing this technology is very different than we're currently looking at now.
Greg Schonefeld:
Mm-hmm. Good.
Juliana Machado:
I think one thing that we can take maybe from this panel is we all are ambassadors of our industry and we should share the right message, and I think we have the courage to be the leader in the industry and there is no best solution that is the right solution that works at our system, at your system, and what we can do better every day regarding welfare.
Nancy Roulston:
I love these points. I totally agree. I would just add to let the consumer be involved, and that requires very clear labeling at point-of-sale marketing, at point of sale, and for the retailers to really get involved. I think that is a linchpin.
Dr. Larry Sadler:
So just like last time, I'm going to cop out. I can't not. I don't think we can boil it down to a single issue. I think it is the consumer acceptance, it's the economics, it is threading it through a complex supply chain. I think there is still some refinement that's needed on the technology. I don't think there's a single issue that would just set this off for it to go. I think there's still lots of things to be figured out for it to move forward how we all hope it will.
Greg Schonefeld:
Yeah. No, I think we established that today. Well, since we are recording this for Eggheads, I do have to ask one last question which is how do you prefer your eggs?
Nancy Roulston:
Over-medium.
Juliana Machado:
Sunny side up.
Casey Downey:
Sunny side up as well.
Dr. Larry Sadler:
Fried, hard, or in a cake. [inaudible 00:41:31].
Greg Schonefeld:
Thank you, everyone, for joining, and hope you found it valuable. Yeah.
What makes in-ovo sexing so interesting is that it seems to be something everybody wants, from hatcheries to producers to retailers, but turning that into reality is harder than it sounds because it's not just a technology problem, it's a coordination problem.
Innovations that reduce cost and improve efficiency tend to move through the industry very quickly, but changes that increase cost, even for good reasons, are much harder to push through the system because someone has to move first.
And in-ovo sexing is a bit of a paradox because you need to raise awareness to create value for in-ovo-sexed eggs, but creating that awareness could do some reputational damage to the industry. And on top of that, the logistics of in-ovo sexing are complex and it could be quite some time before we see it implemented at scale even once everything else is aligned.
So the question becomes how do changes like this actually happen? Through consumer demand, courageous leadership, industry coordination, regulation? Whatever the answer is, it's clear there are already people and companies willing to step out on a limb and move this conversation forward.
Thank you for listening to this special edition of Eggheads. If you liked the episode, please leave us a rating and review. And to make sure you don't miss an episode, follow Eggheads on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. I'm Greg Schonefeld, and we'll talk to you soon.