Nutro - Page 2

Other than B2B I don't recall seeing any of the other brands they own. That does not mean anything because not all brands are distributed in all areas of the U.S. I don't know what type of market share they possess but it would stand to reason it is not an enormous share, say like, Science Diet or some of the Purina lines. Hence, they would have fewer complaints.

Since there is currently NO government agency endowed with the authority to enforce a pet food recall, these comments are rather disingenuous. ALL pet food recalls and "withdrawals" are voluntary, every single one of them. Even the largest recall in US history, triggered by the massive 2007 pet food poisoning that resulted in thousands of pet deaths, was done - had to be done - strictly on a "voluntary" basis.

AC

I heartily disagree with this take on recalls, and on pet owners.

Perfection is unattainable. But perfection isn't what most cat and dog owners want - it's honesty and the simple ability to trust the manufacturer of the foods they're feeding their beloved pets.

It isn't whether a company has a recall or two in their history that's important, it's very much about HOW they handle those recalls. Companies that do a decent job of trying to reach their customers to inform them of the action taken (a la Primal with their 31 May recall - notices went up on their website as well as their Facebook and Twitter accounts and emails were sent directly to customers for whom they had addresses), earn the respect and loyalty of their customers. By their honesty and transparency in "admitting" they have a quality control issue and reaching out to as many consumers as they can with the alert, it's clear their priorities lie with the health and needs of those customers and their pets.

The vast majority of recalls, however, are kept as quiet as the company thinks it can get away with. Many are drop and run notices published late on Friday afternoons and are missed as folks head off for their weekend activities. By the time Monday rolls around, other news has buried the notices and the public remains largely unaware.

These actions are taken specifically to keep the company's public relations machine humming nicely along, not to protect customers and their pets. And companies that engage in this type of recall activity earn every bit of the condemnation they receive.

Pet owners, by and large, are more aware and more informed than the 2007 public. They know that relabeling a recall as a withdrawal does nothing to help pets, is not intended to help pets, and is, in fact, nothing but a PR spin; therefore, obviously, engaging in this type of double-speak does nothing (can do nothing!) but erode customer confidence.

Feeding Fluffy and Fido should NOT require constant vigilance or a degree in animal nutrition; people just want to be able to pick out a food they can trust is truly healthy for their pet. Unfortunately, until pet food companies begin putting consumers first, until they begin conversing honestly and transparently with consumers when something goes wrong, they are simply - as a just and direct result of their behavior - going to have to deal with the public's anger and mistrust.

Best regards.

AC

You are entirely confused. My link goes a Google Search. Not a website. Your computer must be broken or something..

Thanks for your post Auntie Crazy, I always love them

That is it exactly.