Graded Superior. Discounted Anyway

Data from company presentations.

In the evolving world of land-based aquaculture, “superior grade” salmon has become a centerpiece of investor presentations and earnings calls — a shorthand for quality, market value, and operational success.

But lately, it’s worth asking: what does superior really mean?

Several leading producers are now reporting “97% to 99.8% superior grade” classifications — while simultaneously disclosing average harvest weights between 2.3 and 3.2 kg HOG (head-on gutted). These fish are notably below the conventional weight thresholds that typically define premium market readiness, especially in high-grade export markets like Japan and continental Europe.

This raises an increasingly uncomfortable question: has “superior” grading become more of a PR garnish than a meaningful indicator of product quality?

Defining “Superior”: The Old Rules

In traditional salmon farming, premium or “superior” grade fish are expected to meet rigorous criteria:

• Size: Typically ≥ 4.0 kg HOG to ensure full growth and yield.

• Pigmentation: Deep and uniform color, usually SalmoFan™ score 24–26.

• Conformation: Balanced musculature, symmetrical body shape, no visible defects.

• Texture: Firm, elastic flesh with high fillet integrity.

This level of quality is time-dependent. It takes a full grow-out cycle — and consistent feed management — to develop the muscle tone, color deposition, and fat distribution that the premium label implies.

Fish harvested at 2.3 kg HOG, especially those affected by smolt quality issues or system constraints, typically fall short of these standards. Pigment uptake is still in progress. Texture and yield are likely suboptimal. And yet, they are being classified — in remarkably high proportions — as “superior.”

This is applying a superior standard using its narrowest definition.

Premium on Paper, Discounted in Reality

In the land-based salmon sector, the word “superior” is doing a lot of work — often too much. Quality grading schemes are built for internal consistency and operational flexibility. That’s understandable. But investors should recognize that these classifications, while technically sound within a producer’s quality assurance framework, do not necessarily reflect the realities of price formation in the market.

At the production level, “superior” typically means the fish shows no deformities, exhibits acceptable pigmentation, and has survived to harvest weight without disease downgrades. That’s a useful operational marker. But it is not the same thing as “premium” in the market.

Markets care about one thing: will buyers pay more for this fish?

The Market View: Size as a Pricing Axis

In premium salmon markets — including Japan, Korea, and high-end European segments — size is not optional. It is central to both product performance and price realization.

Most major buyers begin offering premium prices at ~3.5 kg HOG, with clear price differentials for 4.0–5.0+ kg fish. Below that line, discounts apply — often disproportionately.

Smaller fish carry higher labor costs, lower fillet yields, and less flexibility in retail and food service formats. Even with good color and conformation, a 2.3 kg fish simply doesn’t compete on value per kg in these segments.

Grading vs. Pricing: The Disconnection

Disconnect between grading standards and market expectations

The Quiet Math Behind Premium

Price sheets from wholesale buyers (many behind paywalls such as Urner Barry, Undercurrent, or Euronext) consistently show what public releases don’t: size determines price tier, not just visual quality. Processors need yield. Retailers need consistency. Smaller fish fail on both.

Even major certification frameworks like Label Rouge and top-tier retailers prefer fish that can deliver both fillet presentation and consistency — often starting at 3.5–4.0 kg. The industry knows this. Producers know this. But grading frameworks are built to weather variability, not advertise commercial disadvantage.

“In difficult quarters, a fish doesn’t need to be premium — it just needs to pass.”

Final Thought

Land-based salmon producers are not lying when they say their fish are “superior grade.” They’re just speaking a different language — one built around process validation, not market pricing.

The problem is when that internal language gets exported into investor materials and earnings decks, dressed up as pricing power. That’s when terms lose meaning, and credibility begins to slip. Harvesting fish in these size categories is evidence that their systems are not working properly and investors should be asking pointed questions. If a conventional net pen producer were to harvest 2.3 kg fish, they’d probably report similar quality outcomes but would be hammered on price achievement. It would be a failure in every practical measure.

Calling a 2.3 kg salmon “premium” is a bit like swirling a juice box in a wine glass and calling it “unctuous.” It might check a few technical boxes. But in the market? It’s still a juice box.

Comments, criticism, fulsome praise can be delivered in the comment section below, via LinkedIn or email - info@AlanWCook.com.