Why DO those fancy tomatoes co$t so much?

[Gifted Gourmet]

article from Slate

When I search for "tomatoes on the vine," the second hit tells me that "the vine keeps them fresh … when the vine is still attached … nutrition from the plant is still being pumped into the tomato, keeping it firm, bright, crisp and yummy—and more nutritious."  In the case of tomatoes, there's only one possible solution to that puzzle: It must be cheaper to provide tomatoes off the vine than on. Maybe that's got something to do with shipping costs; tomatoes look like they'd be a lot harder to pack when they're strung out in a row.

Do you buy the tomatoes on the vine even though it is more expensive to do so?

Do they really taste better?

How did we manage to go through so many years with off-the-vine tomatoes?

[BrentKulman]

There was a time when supermarket tomatoes where just a placekeeper until warm summer nights allowed my homegrown tomatoes to ripen on the vine. That was before I knew anything about heirloom tomatoes and planted nothing but beefsteaks.

Now, the local Harris Teeter carries a very nice range of tomatoes on the vine year round. My salads are so much tastier now year round. Of course, the supermarket tomatoes are still second class citizens compared to the heirlooms I pick up at the farmer's market on Saturday and the ones I grow in my garden that have taken the place of the beefsteaks.

So the tomatoes on the vine are still placekeepers but they do a much finer job than those tasteless firm tomatoes that are still the supermarket mainstays. And for that, they are worth every penny. To me, a salad is not complete without a great tomato sliced on top.

[mizducky]

Once again, Slate underwhelms me with its lackadaisical article-writing. Why an author would make a point of boasting, in print, of his lack of expertise in the area he's writing about totally escapes me. Dude, at least call in an expert on tomatoes if you can't bring yourself to even taste one! or if you're going to rely on Google to be your expert, go at least a little bit deeper than just the second hit you got! And above all, don't waste my time with a bunch of handwaving about how the important issue here is the economics. Yep, the economics are important--but if you don't give a shit about the actual product in question, why in the name of all that's still meaningful in journalism is your editor letting you write about it?!?

Sorry, had to get that off my chest. This kind of thing is obviously a real pet peeve of mine.

Anyway, I did the same Google search as the article's author did, found the same hit he did ... and then went a little futher as he didn't bother to do (sorry, still annoyed about him!), to this page:

For best flavor, tomatoes should stay on the vine until they're fully ripened.  This is a tall order for growers, who prefer to pick tomatoes while they're still green and sturdy, and then gas them with ethylene until they turn red.  Vine tomatoes, on the other hand, are picked after they begin to "break" or turn red, which allows them to develop fuller flavor.  Expect to pay more for the special handling required to bring these to market.

In other words, there's a bit more to the story than just the longer the vine stays attached, the more nutrition and flavor stays in the tomato. There's also the bit that the standard tasteless tomato is actually picked green and then gassed into pseudo-ripeness, and the relative costs attached to the two methods. (Yes, I know ethylene is a natural gaseous emission of ripening fruit. That doesn't make its application to manufacture "ripe" tomatoes off the vine any less unnatural.)

I have tried the various vine-ripened tomatoes in the market, both with the vine attached and those just with the notation "vine-ripened" on the package. IMO both are at least some kind of improvement over the styrofoam-tasting gassed tomatoes. However, as far as I can tell they're still of the same genetic seed-stock as the styrofoam tomatoes, so I don't think any of them will ever have the flavor of, say, an heirloom tomato lovingly ripened on the vine in one's own garden (or, for those who, like me, have the Black Thumb of Death when it comes to growing any kind of plant, from a friend's garden or the local farmers market). But when I don't have a gardening friend or a farmer's market handy, going with the vine tomatoes is a better option than the lowest-common-denominator 'mater.

P.S. When all other store tomatoes look totally wretched, I've learned to go with cherry or grape tomatoes instead. Even without the vine-ripened bit, they manage to pack a good bit more flavor than the alternatives.

Edited May 26, 2005 by mizducky (log)

[moosnsqrl]

Just being "on the vine" doesn't translate into good taste. But those gems that you buy on the vine are generally less-traveled, fresher, and have more/better taste.

Brent's right, though. Ain't nothin' like the real thing, baby.

I still rely on romas to get me through the hard times...for the value, they have way better flavor than the square-ish ones and more cost-effective fix than the vined ones.

[kiliki]

I think in all the markets I shop in (in non-tomato season), we only have a choice of vine ripened, organic or roma (which are always rock hard and terrible, even if the occasion calls for a roma). So vine ripened isn't even the most expensive option-organic is. I can't even think of what they used to sell as "regular" tomatoes in the winter.

[Busboy]

A moronic article about inedible tomatoes.

[Gifted Gourmet]

A moronic article about inedible tomatoes.

←

Please don't shoot the messenger ... just found it of some minor culinary interest ... I do buy vine tomatoes thinking, probably incorrectly, that they are more tasty ....

[Jaymes]

Well, those little "Nature Sweet" tomatoes on the vine ARE better than the usual supermarket ones that are as hard and flavorless as tennis balls.

And I buy them at Sam's. They're not that expensive at Sam's, and in the wintertime, they're worth every penny. They ship them up from warm, sunny Mexico. And they are beautiful little red jewels of flavor.

[malcolmjolley]

Gina Mallet's Last Chance to Eat (on which I have posted ad nauseum) tells the whole story of how "on the vine tomatoes" came to our supermarkets:

Around 1993, there were just too many round, red tomatoes on the world market, and the Dutch couldn't compete. One grower simply gave up; he couldn't afford to have his tomatoes picked, so he chopped up the vines and sold the tomatoes as they were.

The first "vine tomatoes" were actually mass produced Dutch hydroponics. Which explains why, when I was in Florida last spring, the only "vine" tomatoes I could find were from Ontario!

There's a reason the lady won a James Beard for Best Food Writing.

[Pam R]

I usually buy whatever looks best. At times that leaves me only with grape tomatoes (which I love, but aren't always the form one wants).

I noticed recently that the 'on the vine tomatoes' (red, orange and yellow) were actually the LEAST expensive tomatoes available at my local grocery stores. Eh? When did that happen. I thought it was a fluke, but it keeps happening. They are cheaper than romas and your regular, light pink grocery store variety. And for somebody who lives in my climate, the on-the-vines in the store are the best ones available right now.

[mizducky]

A moronic article about inedible tomatoes.

←

Please don't shoot the messenger ... just found it of some minor culinary interest ... I do buy vine tomatoes thinking, probably incorrectly, that they are more tasty ....

←

Gifted Gourmet: As another poster who teed off on the shortcomings of the article, I just want to make it clear that all my snippiness was 100% meant for the article and none of it meant for the messenger. In fact, I thank you for giving me a fun article to throw spitballs at. And even though the article itself has obvious problems, the question it raises (or attempts to raise) about tomatoes is indeed quite interesting in its own right.

Edited May 26, 2005 by mizducky (log)

[Gifted Gourmet]

And even though the article itself has obvious problems, the question it raises (or attempts to raise) about tomatoes is indeed quite interesting in its own right.

←

That's where I began as well, mizducky ... something which piques my interest may have resonances with others as well ... and so it seems ...

[Busboy]

A moronic article about inedible tomatoes.

←

Please don't shoot the messenger ... just found it of some minor culinary interest ... I do buy vine tomatoes thinking, probably incorrectly, that they are more tasty ....

←

Nothing against the messenger.

The article is astounding in its pointlessness and, more irritating, its bloviating self-congratulation. ("I'm an economist! I go beyond the obvious to ask important questions! I don't have to answer them, I'm an economist.")

And the tomatoes? I've always assumed that they are hydroponic -- hence their chemically-enhanced taste -- and that the vine is part of their marketing strategy, as is their unfortunate life-like coloration and the unnatural perfection of their skins. They're like a computer simulation of a tomato, and better than no tomatoes (or those picked-green-and trucked-north abominations from Mexico) to the same degree that an inflatable love doll is better than no love. In either case, desparation provides a certain justification for their purchase, but I'd hesitate to admit in a public forum that I'd bought one.

I expect they're allowed to "vine-ripen," which means, in addition to the added expense of chemically enhanced growth, that they are much more expensive to handle and ship than those Mexican pet rocks, and that their shelf-life is much shorter, hence the higher price.

More from the USDA:

"Market structure. Supermarkets carry many varieties of fresh tomatoes. In addition to displays of the standard field-grown round tomatoes, shoppers find plum (roma) tomatoes, grape and cherry tomatoes, and an array of greenhouse and hydroponic tomatoes in most areas of the country. Some greenhouse/hydroponic tomatoes (which were initially imported from places like the Netherlands) are marketed "on-vine" (in clusters) to convey the appearance of freshness to consumers. The tomatoes-sold-on-vine marketing approach is common in European nations. [emphasis added]

These more expensive hothouse alternatives have expanded rapidly from both imported and domestic sources. The volume of greenhouse/hydroponic tomato imports from countries such as Canada, the Netherlands, and Mexico has increased dramatically since the mid-1990s and now account for a significant share of all U.S. fresh-market tomato imports.

Domestic producers recognized opportunity in this market niche. As a result, new or expanded greenhouse/hydroponic operations in several States have begun production over the past decade. (Domestic hothouse vegetables, however, are not included in USDA annual production estimates.) In Mexico and Canada, firms have expanded hothouse tomato production, primarily to export to the United States."

PS, some of us geezers still remember these things being sold as "Holland Tomatoes."

[Busboy]

More interesting data, from Texas A&M.

Briefly: production cost of hydroponic tomatoes is more than twice that of Florida tomatoes and almost three times that of Mexican tomatoes. No transport costs for the hydroponics, though.

Cost Comparison of Field and Greenhouse Produced Tomatoes

Economic theory indicates that the long run price of any commodity produced in a competitive industry is equal to the average cost of production....

Production and marketing costs for Florida growers average $.255/lb ($.562/kg) plus approximately $.045/lb ($.099/kg) transportation costs (Ft. Pierce to Dallas) for a total grower delivery cost of $.304/lb (.661/kg).  Costs for Mexican tomato production was even less.  Production costs average $.205/lb ($.452/kg) plus $.031/lb ($.521/kg)... Production costs for greenhouse tomatoes, on the other hand, averaged over $.57/lb ($1.27/kg)...

Greenhouse packing, marketing, and transportation costs in most situations may be greater for greenhouse tomatoes than for field grown items....

The obvious conclusion from this comparison is that greenhouse tomatoes compete at a substantial competitive disadvantage.  They must have a price premium to achieve economic survival...their main advantages are: 1) freshness since they are grown close to retail centers and picked ripe; and 2) higher quality since they are grown in a highly controlled environment...In the final market analysis, the real key to marketing success is the availability, visual appearance and quality of available substitutes.

[emphasis added]

 

[anzu]

Having lived in quite a few countries, and bought and eaten tomatoes in all of them, I'd say that vine-ripened tomatoes taste considerablely better, and that those still on the vine generally taste better than those that were allegedly vine-ripened, but are not still on the vine. Just smell them, if packaging will allow, and you'll see what I mean.

That said, supermarket tomatoes in the US were generally worse quality than anywhere else (though the UK can be pretty dire as well), and vine-ripened tomatoes were way overpriced. Yes, they're leaving them longer on the vine, but I don't feel the extra time justifies that much difference in price (same goes for red vs green bell peppers), so I feel the price difference is partially hype, or simply charging what they think the consumer will pay. Or do people, and not just the producers, want harder and nastier tomatoes (nothing should surprise me).

In Western Europe, almost all the tomatoes are imported, and come from a wide variety of countries and in all stages from crap to luscious. Mostly they come from Holland, Spain, Italy, Greece, etc. That is, the difficulties of shipping, and shipping costs still have to be factored into the price here, but there is not such disparity in price between decent tomatoes and those which might better be used as tennis balls. (there must of course be other factors coming into this as well, such as different labor costs). On top of this, even most of the nasty totally cheap supermarkets will usually have a good selection of high quality vegetables, so I'm figuring that consumers in general are more picky about taste than in the US (?)

Growing the tomatoes in greenhouses does not per se change the taste. Tomatoes from Spain (Murcia for example) are almost always going to be grown in greenhouses, but they will definitely taste better than those grown in greenhouses in Holland. Hydroponics must also play their part as well, but I feel it is above all the hours of sunlight that make the difference ((not exactly an earth-shatteringly new finding, I know). Of course, places with less tendency to pick fruits too early, and with huge amounts of heat and sunlight, like India, for example, will produce the most flavorful tomatoes of all.

A couple of years back I was mad enough to have over fifty tomato plants in the ground, all fruiting prolifically at the same time. I reallly didn't find there was that much difference between their taste and those I had bought a few weeks before (here in Europe) that were greenhouse-grown, imported, and vine-ripened (and sold on the vine).

So maybe what it boils down to is the need for a bit more consumer agitation in the US. Decent tasting tomatoes at an affordable price must surely be possible, they're just not letting you have them.

[FabulousFoodBabe]

"Vine ripened" means that 10% of the ripening must take place while the tomato is actually on the vine. So "tomatoes on the vine" are just tomatoes that have been cut with the vines still attached. They haven't necessarily spent more time in the sun or drawing energy or nutrients from the soil.

I don't think they're worth the price and I don't like the flavor. I do think that heirlooms are worth the price, and cannot wait until they appear in my CSA basket.

[cakewalk]

They're like a computer simulation of a tomato ...

←

Very good.

I bought them once, and that was enough. Cost a fortune and had no taste anyway. I stick with grape tomatoes in the off-season.

[russ parsons]

it's important to get a few definitions right: vine-ripened and on-the-vine are not the same thing. vine-ripened means the tomatoes are left on the plant to at least breaking stage (when you begin to see pink). on-the-vine means that the tomatoes were clipped with the vines attached. but if the vines are not attached to the roots, there is precious little nutrition available. i think the reason people like tomatoes with the vine attached is a) they look like they should be better; and b) there is a smell to tomato vines and leaves that reinforces the impression of freshness. on-the-vine tomatoes can be just as good as any other supermarket tomato (which, inseason and picked right, isn't bad at all), but they are rarely any better than that.

[mrsadm]

I agree with Mr. Parsons' point that the smell of the vines adds to that "tomato feeling". I love the smell, as it reminds me of "real" tomatoes (summertime).

[rancho_gordo]

As the song says, I'd rather drink muddy water.

[srhcb]

Anyone who loves tomatoes, (or grandmothers, or good food writing), owes it to themselves to read "Sadies Tomatoes" , by Jack Foster, in the Spring 2005 issue of Gastronomica magazine.

SB