I had an awful trip to a rose nursery today. I came away digusted at what I saw. The roses were in terrible shape and most of the pots had not seen a refreshing of the potting mix for a long time. Almost all of the 5 gallons had only about 1 gallon of soil and the one gallons were not any better. The thing that made it bad is they were charging a premium price for obviously negelected plants. To ask $18 for a one gallon and $30 for a five gallon made me sick. When I lived in Oregon I did some mail order with these folks and got some good plants. But if they keep this up I don’t think they will be around much longer. The thing that pissed me off the most is IMO they are giving roses a bad name. I sure wouldn’t want to grow them if this is what they will look like. Even their demonstration garden looked horrific. I did buy the only two rugosas that looked decent, but that may have been a stretch. This was the first rose specialty nursery I’ve visited other than a rose specialty nursery by Salem, Oregon. I plan on making a trip to Vintage Gardens north of San Francisco next month. I’m sure hoping for better and healthier plants.
I guess the reason I brought up is due to the basic state of the rose industry. Not much is available except KO and DKO and the like and with nursries like I saw today, it’s no wonder that some of the pre-moderns are falling from favor.
Sort of sounds like I’m talking about a puppy mill.
I guess the reason I brought up is due to the basic state of the rose industry
Yes that sux.
Such nursery crap is seen around here a lot, as well.
People who sell these things (even some rose agents and rose growers) are telling me when they hear I am breeding roses just to have a bit of “fun” things like: “you know…there is no money in roses…”
Whether there is money in their sale or not is their problem not mine (I never care to enquire about that aspect, nor do I care, period). But that immediate negative reaction does send a definite signal to me about the local “rose industry”.
There seems a lot of indifference to the sale of roses in many of the nurseries round here, there are one or two small exceptions maybe. I think such merchants look at the roses as magnets to attract people to the real money spinners like collateral sales in things like gardening chemicals / gardening supplies.
Also, roses here are competing with things like “zero-fuss” beautiful natives (roses are not natives here) that can be plonked in the ground, and then thrive, grow beautiful leaves and flowers through the seasons, without even the need to water!
I’m sure there will always be a niche for roses in my location, but my hunch is that it is shrinking, and fast!
I’m sure there will always be a niche for roses in my location, but my hunch is that it is shrinking, and fast![/quote]
George that is why a few of us are looking at entering Europe, Australia only has a population of 20 million with a limited market ,the wheels are turning.
Maybe a somewhat related rant from someone who sells roses retail…
I sell bare root roses on-site to my retail customers. We wrap them up in a bag and send them home. Typically I order roses from Bailey Nurseries, and have been usually impressed with their quality. A consumer can’t be expected to properly baby their new roses. After all, we are telling them about how easy it is to plant bare root. So it is critical that I get bare root plants to sell that are hefty and vital.
This year I made the leap and reduced my Bailey order by about half so I could order and sell more Radler roses from Star Roses. While not approaching the quality of Bailey’s, luckily most of the roses from Star are saleable.
What is interesting is that I ordered Double Knockout from three different sources, partly as a trial. Only the ones from Star were budding and viable. From Baileys and McKay they were basically dead…green but without any shoots (in my experience unlikely to survive.) unfortunately some of these went out the door before I could pull them off the shelf.
I’m wondering if Star doesn’t force Baileys to buy the KO roses from them, and maybe the additional handling of them results in the decline in vitality. My rant is that this brand protection thing has gone way too far. If Baileys is a better producer of roses, why not let them do what they do best? How does forcing them to sell your inferior and nearly dead product help the industry? Just let them propagate DKO themselves and send you the patent money.
One random note that might be of interest is that Baileys grows their roses in Arizona, but roots them at their facilities in Minnesota. They Fed Ex unrooted cuttings from their AZ fields up to MN, stick them, and send the rooted cuttings back to AZ for growing.
Joe, that is interesting to hear a perspective from a retailer selling roses. Looks like it sux at various “industry levels”, not just from the perspectivce of the poor lil consumer.
I wonder if it also sux like this in EU as well for poor lil consumers and smaller rose retailers?!
I doubt that Star Roses would give inferior plants to Bailey’s. Most large outfits like that will have a sub-license agreement and will grow their own plants. I am sorry that your experience has been bad.
For me, I don’t mind going to a nursery that has been neglected (no spray), because I like to see what still looks good under adverse conditions. I agree however, that it is a bad reflection on roses.
For me, I don’t mind going to a nursery that has been neglected (no spray), because I like to see what still looks good under adverse conditions.[/quote]
+1 for this… this is why ‘Pink Emely’ came home with me last week… I’ve been watching this plant in a pot for a whole year and it STILL looked good… don’t know why it didn’t sell (well… I kinda can… the flower is about as exciting as watching grass grow).
Julie, Jim is right we do not “resell” our roses to Bailey they are growing their own Knock Outs under licence from Conard-Pyle. We never force anyone to buy our roses.