Yesterday I bought a Cook's Spiral Sliced Ham. It cost $1.79/lb, weighed
10.02 lbs... cost $17.94. It's in the oven now, according to directions
275ºF for 2 1/2 hours.

Okay, here's my thoughts... this ham has included in its outer wrapping (a
mesh netting) a package of glaze, consists of mostly water, sugar, a bit of
oil, and like 10 things only a chemist can explain... essentially it's sugar
syrup (mostly water), and says to keep refrigerated (doesn't indicate how
long for safe use). In the past Cook's ham glaze consisted of a packet of
ordinary brown granulated sugar with some dehy maple granuales and some
anticaking stuff (weighs like 3 ozs - have a packet I just weighed). This
packet of glaze weighs 1/2 pound (I weighed it because it's not marked),
which means since it was weighed with the ham for pricing this glaze cost me
90¢, same price as a half pound of ham. Now I realize it's no fortune but
millions of Cook's hams are sold so those 90¢s add up quickly to a lotta ham
gelt. I don't use the glaze on ham, never did, but at least with the
granulated type that needed no refrigeration I could save it and use it for
other purposes, typically in my case glazed Spam, but I've used it for baked
goods too, makes nice topping for quick breads, sticky buns, even pineapple
upsided down cake, has as many uses as ordinary brown sugar. Anyway after
putting the ham in the oven and putting the package of glaze in the fridge I
got to thinking, I have no use for that glaze in the immediate future and
since it appears it has a rather short shelf life, I'm thinking that Cook's
ripped me off for 90¢... costs 4 times more than Aunt Jemima syrup - just
checked my 24 oz bottle - and AJ is essentially a pure sugar product, I'll
probably just toss that chemicals laden packet. Multiplied by just one
million hams comes to $900,000 (I'm sure they sell many millions more). And
of course the retailer shares in this bohamza. The consumer is always the
one to get shafted, and in this economy it's the royal shaft (Cook's must be
hurtin'). I feel this is a slick/smarmy way to cheat the public, they
should sell their liquid glaze seperately, or at least return to the
granulated, even that should not be sold at ham prices, I'm sure if you
asked Cook's they'll say they allocated for the of glaze by selling hams for
a few cent's less a pound, which of course we all know is BS. I don't mind
paying for stuff, what I resent is how they think they're pulling the wool
(in this case plastic net) over my eyes. How say yoose?

I don't like that plastic netting either, it pollutes, but much more
important it creates a life threatening danger to critters... I always cut
it into small bits, I do that with all plastic wrap.

"brooklyn1" > wrote in message
...
> Yesterday I bought a Cook's Spiral Sliced Ham. It cost $1.79/lb, weighed
> 10.02 lbs... cost $17.94. It's in the oven now, according to directions
> 275ºF for 2 1/2 hours.
>
> Okay, here's my thoughts... this ham has included in its outer wrapping (a
> mesh netting) a package of glaze, consists of mostly water, sugar, a bit
> of oil, and like 10 things only a chemist can explain... essentially it's
> sugar syrup (mostly water), and says to keep refrigerated (doesn't
> indicate how long for safe use). probably just toss that chemicals laden
> packet. Multiplied by just one million hams comes to $900,000 (I'm sure
> they sell many millions more). And of course the retailer shares in this
> bohamza. The consumer is always the one to get shafted, and in this
> economy it's the royal shaft (Cook's must be hurtin'). I feel this is a
> slick/smarmy way to cheat the public, they should sell their liquid glaze
> seperately, or at least return to the granulated, even that should not be
> sold at ham prices, I'm sure if you asked Cook's they'll say they
> allocated for the of glaze by selling hams for a few cent's less a pound,
> which of course we all know is BS. I don't mind paying for stuff, what I
> resent is how they think they're pulling the wool (in this case plastic
> net) over my eyes. How say yoose?

Cooks may or may not weigh before adding the glaze. The retailer certainly
weight the entire package though and he is getting the benefit. I wonder
how you'd do if you asked the meat counter to remove the packet and re-weigh
the ham. Do the say "fee glaze" on the label? On the web site is says
included so legally, they can sell it at any price

Cook’s Spiral Sliced, Bone-In Hams are an established holiday tradition and
have become increasingly popular for year-round entertaining and everyday
meals. Cook’s dedication to the use of natural ingredients in the curing
process and authentic, old-world, hickory-wood smoking helps create a flavor
that is unrivaled. The convenient Cook’s signature, ready-to-use liquid
glaze and dipping sauce is included with every Spiral Sliced Ham.

brooklyn1 said...

> Yesterday I bought a Cook's Spiral Sliced Ham. It cost $1.79/lb,
> weighed 10.02 lbs... cost $17.94. It's in the oven now, according to
> directions 275ºF for 2 1/2 hours.
>
> Okay, here's my thoughts... this ham has included in its outer wrapping
> (a mesh netting) a package of glaze, consists of mostly water, sugar, a
> bit of oil, and like 10 things only a chemist can explain... essentially
> it's sugar syrup (mostly water), and says to keep refrigerated (doesn't
> indicate how long for safe use). In the past Cook's ham glaze consisted
> of a packet of ordinary brown granulated sugar with some dehy maple
> granuales and some anticaking stuff (weighs like 3 ozs - have a packet I
> just weighed). This packet of glaze weighs 1/2 pound (I weighed it
> because it's not marked), which means since it was weighed with the ham
> for pricing this glaze cost me 90¢, same price as a half pound of ham.
> Now I realize it's no fortune but millions of Cook's hams are sold so
> those 90¢s add up quickly to a lotta ham gelt. I don't use the glaze on
> ham, never did, but at least with the granulated type that needed no
> refrigeration I could save it and use it for other purposes, typically
> in my case glazed Spam, but I've used it for baked goods too, makes nice
> topping for quick breads, sticky buns, even pineapple upsided down cake,
> has as many uses as ordinary brown sugar. Anyway after putting the ham
> in the oven and putting the package of glaze in the fridge I got to
> thinking, I have no use for that glaze in the immediate future and since
> it appears it has a rather short shelf life, I'm thinking that Cook's
> ripped me off for 90¢... costs 4 times more than Aunt Jemima syrup -
> just checked my 24 oz bottle - and AJ is essentially a pure sugar
> product, I'll probably just toss that chemicals laden packet.
> Multiplied by just one million hams comes to $900,000 (I'm sure they
> sell many millions more). And of course the retailer shares in this
> bohamza. The consumer is always the one to get shafted, and in this
> economy it's the royal shaft (Cook's must be hurtin'). I feel this is a
> slick/smarmy way to cheat the public, they should sell their liquid
> glaze seperately, or at least return to the granulated, even that should
> not be sold at ham prices, I'm sure if you asked Cook's they'll say they
> allocated for the of glaze by selling hams for a few cent's less a
> pound, which of course we all know is BS. I don't mind paying for
> stuff, what I resent is how they think they're pulling the wool (in this
> case plastic net) over my eyes. How say yoose?
>
> I don't like that plastic netting either, it pollutes, but much more
> important it creates a life threatening danger to critters... I always
> cut it into small bits, I do that with all plastic wrap.


You really need to practice breaking up your run-on paragraphs. It would
probably make your posts more interesting to read.

Andy
--
Eat first, talk later.

"Andy" > wrote in message ...
| brooklyn1 said...
|
| > Yesterday I bought a Cook's Spiral Sliced Ham. It cost $1.79/lb,
| > weighed 10.02 lbs... cost $17.94. It's in the oven now, according to
| > directions 275ºF for 2 1/2 hours.
| >
| > Okay, here's my thoughts... this ham has included in its outer wrapping
| > (a mesh netting) a package of glaze, consists of mostly water, sugar, a
| > bit of oil, and like 10 things only a chemist can explain... essentially
| > it's sugar syrup (mostly water), and says to keep refrigerated (doesn't
| > indicate how long for safe use). In the past Cook's ham glaze consisted
| > of a packet of ordinary brown granulated sugar with some dehy maple
| > granuales and some anticaking stuff (weighs like 3 ozs - have a packet I
| > just weighed). This packet of glaze weighs 1/2 pound (I weighed it
| > because it's not marked), which means since it was weighed with the ham
| > for pricing this glaze cost me 90¢, same price as a half pound of ham.
| > Now I realize it's no fortune but millions of Cook's hams are sold so
| > those 90¢s add up quickly to a lotta ham gelt. I don't use the glaze on
| > ham, never did, but at least with the granulated type that needed no
| > refrigeration I could save it and use it for other purposes, typically
| > in my case glazed Spam, but I've used it for baked goods too, makes nice
| > topping for quick breads, sticky buns, even pineapple upsided down cake,
| > has as many uses as ordinary brown sugar. Anyway after putting the ham
| > in the oven and putting the package of glaze in the fridge I got to
| > thinking, I have no use for that glaze in the immediate future and since
| > it appears it has a rather short shelf life, I'm thinking that Cook's
| > ripped me off for 90¢... costs 4 times more than Aunt Jemima syrup -
| > just checked my 24 oz bottle - and AJ is essentially a pure sugar
| > product, I'll probably just toss that chemicals laden packet.
| > Multiplied by just one million hams comes to $900,000 (I'm sure they
| > sell many millions more). And of course the retailer shares in this
| > bohamza. The consumer is always the one to get shafted, and in this
| > economy it's the royal shaft (Cook's must be hurtin'). I feel this is a
| > slick/smarmy way to cheat the public, they should sell their liquid
| > glaze seperately, or at least return to the granulated, even that should
| > not be sold at ham prices, I'm sure if you asked Cook's they'll say they
| > allocated for the of glaze by selling hams for a few cent's less a
| > pound, which of course we all know is BS. I don't mind paying for
| > stuff, what I resent is how they think they're pulling the wool (in this
| > case plastic net) over my eyes. How say yoose?
| >
| > I don't like that plastic netting either, it pollutes, but much more
| > important it creates a life threatening danger to critters... I always
| > cut it into small bits, I do that with all plastic wrap.
|
|
| You really need to practice breaking up your run-on paragraphs. It would
| probably make your posts more interesting to read.

No it wouldn't.

pavane

"pavane" ha scritto nel messaggio
>
> "Andy" > wrote in message > | brooklyn1 said...
> |
> | > Yesterday I bought a Cook's Spiral Sliced Ham. It cost $1.79/lb,
> |
> | You really need to practice breaking up your run-on paragraphs. It would
> | probably make your posts more interesting to read.
>
> No it wouldn't.
>
> pavane

Correct. Plus, it seems strange to me for someone to pay $1.79 a pound for
meat to provide which an animal had first to be reared, then slaughtered and
then be cured and claim he was ripped off because the package was by his
estimate 90 cents short on animal.

The only meat I can get for that price is chicken backs.

"Giusi" > wrote
> Correct. Plus, it seems strange to me for someone to pay $1.79 a pound
> for meat to provide which an animal had first to be reared, then
> slaughtered and then be cured and claim he was ripped off because the
> package was by his estimate 90 cents short on animal.
>
> The only meat I can get for that price is chicken backs.
>

Wow. I would hate that. I paid 99 cents a pound for a ham butt portion last
week, it was wonderful. I was reading up on the nutrient content in this
kind of ham and it is not as fatty as I thought it would be. The salt and
nitrites are still a concern, but it is a fairly lean cut.

"Ham gelt"....isn't that a bit incongruous? It gave me a good laugh!

Peace,

Ellie

> wrote
>
> "Ham gelt"....isn't that a bit incongruous? It gave me a good laugh!
>
> Peace,
>
> Ellie
>
Thanks for noticing. LOL

pavane said...
>
> "Andy" > wrote in message ...
>| You really need to practice breaking up your run-on paragraphs. It would
>| probably make your posts more interesting to read.
>
> No it wouldn't.
>
> pavane


pavane,

There's a name I've not seen in quite some time!

[waving!]

Andy
--
Eat first, talk later.

Andy > wrote in :

> You really need to practice breaking up your run-on paragraphs. It would
> probably make your posts more interesting to read.

You really need to practice snipping, rather than quoting the entire thing
to add a short comment at the bottom. It would probably make your posts
more interesting to read.

elaich said...

> Andy > wrote in :
>
>> You really need to practice breaking up your run-on paragraphs. It would
>> probably make your posts more interesting to read.
>
> You really need to practice snipping, rather than quoting the entire
thing
> to add a short comment at the bottom. It would probably make your posts
> more interesting to read.


elaich,

Touché.

I did that on purpose. To drive home a point.

Aside from poor readability (tiring the reader), smaller concise paragraphs
make it easier to pick and choose more easily what you want to quote,
should you wish to, in the form of a reply. Imho.

Best,

Andy
--
Eat first, talk later.

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 13:59:26 GMT in rec.food.cooking, "brooklyn1"
> wrote,
>Okay, here's my thoughts... this ham has included in its outer wrapping (a
>mesh netting) a package of glaze, consists of mostly water, sugar, a bit of
>oil, and like 10 things only a chemist can explain... essentially it's sugar
>syrup (mostly water),

Complete and utter rip-off. Even worse than the dry ones. As I was
bitching about in another thread recently.

If anybody wanted that junk, you would see it on the shelf by itself.
I've never seen that. I don't think anybody I know would actually use
it, anyway.

"brooklyn1" > wrote in message
...
> Yesterday I bought a Cook's Spiral Sliced Ham. It cost $1.79/lb, weighed
> 10.02 lbs... cost $17.94. It's in the oven now, according to directions
> 275ºF for 2 1/2 hours.
>
> Okay, here's my thoughts... this ham has included in its outer wrapping (a
> mesh netting) a package of glaze, consists of mostly water, sugar, a bit
> of oil, and like 10 things only a chemist can explain... essentially it's
> sugar syrup (mostly water), and says to keep refrigerated (doesn't
> indicate how long for safe use). In the past Cook's ham glaze consisted
> of a packet of ordinary brown granulated sugar with some dehy maple
> granuales and some anticaking stuff (weighs like 3 ozs - have a packet I
> just weighed). This packet of glaze weighs 1/2 pound (I weighed it
> because it's not marked), which means since it was weighed with the ham
> for pricing this glaze cost me 90¢, same price as a half pound of ham.
> Now I realize it's no fortune but millions of Cook's hams are sold so
> those 90¢s add up quickly to a lotta ham gelt. I don't use the glaze on
> ham, never did, but at least with the granulated type that needed no
> refrigeration I could save it and use it for other purposes, typically in
> my case glazed Spam, but I've used it for baked goods too, makes nice
> topping for quick breads, sticky buns, even pineapple upsided down cake,
> has as many uses as ordinary brown sugar.

I bought my Cooks ham on Wednesday ($1.49 per pound), and I was a little
disappointed in the fact that it had more fat on it than any other Cooks I
have bought in the past. I have never used the glaze package on the ham as
we do not like it that sweet. I did put a little of the glaze on some
carrots, and it was great. Then tossed the rest of the glaze. I do wish the
glaze was not a required purchase with the ham. Most of my ham is in the
freezer, as there is just two of us and we go to family on Easter. The ham
has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by Smithfield, so I
think the changes are not going to be for the good.

Dale P

"Dale P" > wrote
>
> I bought my Cooks ham on Wednesday ($1.49 per pound), and I was a little
> disappointed in the fact that it had more fat on it than any other Cooks I
> have bought in the past. I have never used the glaze package on the ham
> as we do not like it that sweet. I did put a little of the glaze on some
> carrots, and it was great. Then tossed the rest of the glaze. I do wish
> the glaze was not a required purchase with the ham. Most of my ham is in
> the freezer, as there is just two of us and we go to family on Easter.
> The ham has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by
> Smithfield, so I think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>

Gwaltney butt portion hams are wonderful, and the best looking ones wind up
being the 30% less fat, lower salt ones. (I bought one for the second time
last week not noticing the lower fat and salt on the label. Wrapped it in
foil, baked 20 minutes a pound at 325, and it was wonderful. Glazes are
unnecessary, to me. And spiral cut hams dry out faster in my experience.

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:

>The ham
>has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by Smithfield, so I
>think the changes are not going to be for the good.

That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

sf wrote:

> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?

I guess we'll find out. I splurged on a Smithfield yesterday -- the one
with Paula Deen's mug on the blue foil wrapper. $3.47/lb on sale. At
least the Smithfield doesn't seem to be as loaded up with the
injectables the less costly hams have.

I'll let y'all know how it turns out. If it's that good, I might wait
till they mark the ham prices down after Easter and pick up a couple
more, or at least some of the currently cheaper butt portions. Those are
always great in beans or for ham steaks.

I've got Brussels sprouts and asparagus to use (is that too much green?)
and will be making a macaroni and cheese instead of my traditional
potato salad. I must make deviled eggs, too!

--Lin (coloring eggs with our guests tonight)

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 12:38:53 -0700, Lin >
wrote:

>I've got Brussels sprouts and asparagus to use (is that too much green?)

Not as far as I'm concerned, I just happen to be making both of those
too. We already had some sprouts in the refrigerator and Easter lamb
*must* be accompanied by asparagus, so I bought some today.

>and will be making a macaroni and cheese

I adore mac and cheese with pork!

>instead of my traditional potato salad.

I wouldn't turn my nose up at potato salad, but since you decided on
M&C... there's no turning back now.

>I must make deviled eggs, too!

Oh, you just reminded me! Thanks.



--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sat 11 Apr 2009 04:46:56p, sf told us...

> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 12:38:53 -0700, Lin >
> wrote:
>
>>I've got Brussels sprouts and asparagus to use (is that too much green?)
>
> Not as far as I'm concerned, I just happen to be making both of those
> too. We already had some sprouts in the refrigerator and Easter lamb
> *must* be accompanied by asparagus, so I bought some today.
>
>>and will be making a macaroni and cheese
>
> I adore mac and cheese with pork!
>
>>instead of my traditional potato salad.
>
> I wouldn't turn my nose up at potato salad, but since you decided on
> M&C... there's no turning back now.
>
>>I must make deviled eggs, too!
>
> Oh, you just reminded me! Thanks.
>
>
>

I colored enough eggs in order to make deviled eggs tommorow and for egg
salad sandwiches for early in the week. Meantime, David made a couple of
Easter platters with the colored eggs, chocolate eggs, and jelly beans, all
nestled down in "grass". :-)


--
Wayne Boatwright
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rice is born in water and must die in wine. ~Italian Proverb

In article >,
Lin > wrote:

> sf wrote:
>
> > That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
> > that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?
>
> I guess we'll find out. I splurged on a Smithfield yesterday -- the one
> with Paula Deen's mug on the blue foil wrapper. $3.47/lb on sale. At
> least the Smithfield doesn't seem to be as loaded up with the
> injectables the less costly hams have.
>
> I'll let y'all know how it turns out. If it's that good, I might wait
> till they mark the ham prices down after Easter and pick up a couple
> more, or at least some of the currently cheaper butt portions. Those are
> always great in beans or for ham steaks.
>
> I've got Brussels sprouts and asparagus to use (is that too much green?)
> and will be making a macaroni and cheese instead of my traditional
> potato salad. I must make deviled eggs, too!
>
> --Lin (coloring eggs with our guests tonight)

There is _never_ such a thing as too much green. <g>
I'm planning on making more onion skin dyed eggs to give away at my
doc's office. :-) I'm taking pics this year too.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

sf wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:
>
>> The ham
>> has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by Smithfield, so I
>> think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>
> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?
>
That was my thought too.

--
Jean B.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:
>
> >The ham
> >has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by Smithfield, so I
> >think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>
> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?

It's been going on for decades, but the latest iteration is:

"famous name" + "bought out" = "lowest bidder from China"

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"[Don't] assume that someone is "broken" just because they behave in ways
you don't like or don't understand." --Miche

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:
>
> >The ham
> >has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by Smithfield, so I
> >think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>
> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?

Smthfields are $.99 per lb. this week at our local Grocery store.
I really need to pick up a couple of them at that price while they are
still on sale. One for me and one for Sis'. :-)

I'll have mine sliced there (they will slice it up for free for me) so I
can freeze it in portions since there are just the two of us.

At least dad is finally eating solid food again! I really thought I was
going to lose him there for awhile.
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

Omelet wrote:

> At least dad is finally eating solid food again! I really thought I
> was going to lose him there for awhile.

Hey, that's nice to hear, Om.

nancy

In article >,
"Nancy Young" > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
>
> > At least dad is finally eating solid food again! I really thought I
> > was going to lose him there for awhile.
>
> Hey, that's nice to hear, Om.
>
> nancy

Thanks Nancy!
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

"Omelet" > wrote in message
news
> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
> I'll have mine sliced there (they will slice it up for free for me) so I
> can freeze it in portions since there are just the two of us.
>
> At least dad is finally eating solid food again! I really thought I was
> going to lose him there for awhile.
> --
> Peace! Om
>

Oh, I'm so happy to hear that! It's a scary feeling. I'm glad he enjoyed
the ham

Jill

jmcquown wrote:

> "Omelet" > wrote in message
> news
> > In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> > I'll have mine sliced there (they will slice it up for free for me) so I
> > can freeze it in portions since there are just the two of us.
> >
> > At least dad is finally eating solid food again! I really thought I was
> > going to lose him there for awhile.
> > --
> > Peace! Om
> >
>
> Oh, I'm so happy to hear that! It's a scary feeling. I'm glad he enjoyed
> the ham


I bet you laced your old man's ham with strychnine...


--
Best
Greg

In article >,
"jmcquown" > wrote:

> "Omelet" > wrote in message
> news
> > In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> > I'll have mine sliced there (they will slice it up for free for me) so I
> > can freeze it in portions since there are just the two of us.
> >
> > At least dad is finally eating solid food again! I really thought I was
> > going to lose him there for awhile.
> > --
> > Peace! Om
> >
>
> Oh, I'm so happy to hear that! It's a scary feeling. I'm glad he enjoyed
> the ham
>
> Jill

Thanks Jill. :-)
--
Peace! Om

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass.
It's about learning to dance in the rain.
-- Anon.

I just cooked our Easter ham, also a Cook's Spiral and it was a mess.
When I picked it up to place in the pan, a big hunk of it fell off.
Then I noticed that only the bottom quarter was 'spiralled". The rest
was just one big hunk of ham, with quite a bit of fat. The area that was
spiral was very uneven, some of the slices were paper thin, others about
a half inch thick. I'm glad we didn't have company, it looked awful.

It was $1.39 a lb at Stop and Shop, with the courtesy card. It tasted
fine, though. I served it with asparagus and fried rice. Not my usual
holiday meal, but it was just me, hubby and 31 year old son. I think
next time, I'll look for something else besides Cook's.

I do use the glaze, but like Sheldon, I don't care for the liquid
package either. I weighed it and it was 6.5 oz. The stuff in the dry
package makes a nice crisp edge to the meat, the liquid just melted off,
leaving very little behind. I cooked it with fresh pineapple rings. All
in all, not a bad meal, but disappointing presentation.

Denise

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:
>
>>The ham
>>has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by Smithfield, so
>>I
>>think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>
> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?
>
> --
> I love cooking with wine.
> Sometimes I even put it in the food.

I had never heard of Smithfield hams until Paula Deen put her name on some
of them. They were $.99 and the only place I found them the first year was
K Mart. I did not care for it. I have a package of Smithfield bacon in the
fridge right now, and it is about the worst bacon I have ever had. It was
the brand on sale and I thought I would give it a try. Never again.

It is interesting that many do not like the idea of a spiral sliced ham. I
agree that it should not be heated as it will only dry out. They are great
for a party as you can serve at room temperature and people can easily serve
themselves. I buy them because they are so easy to break down to put into
the freezer. Just two of us, and I like to pack it onto portions that will
work for us and I can defrost what we need. We really don't eat just ham,
but like soups, casseroles, omelets and so on with ham.

We go to a wonderful Easter Sunday buffet. They have a huge table of cold
foods, including shrimp, crab, sushi, salmon, cheeses, deviled eggs, fruit,
and salad. I fill up at that table, skip the omelets and other hot foods
except for one slice of prime rib. On to the dessert bar after that. It is
a great meal, and a great family time together. Plus ex-step father-in-law
pays for it!!!

Later,

DP

"Dale P" > wrote
>
> It is interesting that many do not like the idea of a spiral sliced ham.

I used them for years. I prefer regular, unsliced, unglazed butt portion
hams.

"Dale P" > wrote in message
>
> I had never heard of Smithfield hams until Paula Deen put her name on some
> of them.

Same ham, different porker on the package.

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dale P" > wrote in message
>>
>> I had never heard of Smithfield hams until Paula Deen put her name on
>> some of them.
>
> Same ham, different porker on the package.
>

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dale P" > wrote in message
>>
>> I had never heard of Smithfield hams until Paula Deen put her name on
>> some of them.
>
> Same ham, different porker on the package.

A real southern oinker!! She has gone over the top with her eccentric
southern lady act.
She was better when she first started, and now her name is on everything!!

DaleP

OOPS, I sent a blank message, SORRY

On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:00:27 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:
>
>>The ham
>>has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by Smithfield, so I
>>think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>
> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?

i was wondeering the same thing. smithfield has some pretty good products.

your pal,
blake

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:


> i was wondeering the same thing. smithfield has some pretty good products.

I posted something yesterday. After, it just didn't seem right, and
other posts didn't fit in either. I did some checking.

It appears that Smithfield, like Champagne, was a geographical
designation. Champagne seems to be keeping up the battle. I don't know
the exact story for Smithfield. Smithfield is a city in the state of
Virginia in the US. By law, a Smithfield ham came from that city. Now,
Smithfield is the name of a company that is a huge conglomerate.

As always, "let the buyer beware". When you see champagne for US$3 a
bottle, don't expect Champagne from France. When you see Smithfield Ham
for US$2 a pound, don't expect a traditional ham.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"[Don't] assume that someone is "broken" just because they behave in ways
you don't like or don't understand." --Miche

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 14:31:26 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:

>In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>
>> i was wondeering the same thing. smithfield has some pretty good products.
>
>I posted something yesterday. After, it just didn't seem right, and
>other posts didn't fit in either. I did some checking.
>
>It appears that Smithfield, like Champagne, was a geographical
>designation. Champagne seems to be keeping up the battle. I don't know
>the exact story for Smithfield. Smithfield is a city in the state of
>Virginia in the US. By law, a Smithfield ham came from that city. Now,
>Smithfield is the name of a company that is a huge conglomerate.
>
>As always, "let the buyer beware". When you see champagne for US$3 a
>bottle, don't expect Champagne from France. When you see Smithfield Ham
>for US$2 a pound, don't expect a traditional ham.

And that fight for geographical origin/ indicators is being fought on
many fronts. Kona Coffee, some kind of Missouri walnuts, French
Roquefort cheeses, etc. are all trying to keep their geographical
origin as the lead indicator. Our Kona Coffee Farmers group belongs
to ORIGIN a French or Swiss organization. Go here if you want to
know about ORIGIN: http://www.origin-gi.com/ Pretty cool group.

It is an extremely tough fight. As for 100% Kona Coffee- we have
rip-off people selling "Kona Blend" (10% Kona), "Kona Style", etc.
They are all out to make a buck off a respected heritage. Always
check the fine print if you are unsure.

Thanks for allowing the rant.

aloha,
Cea

On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 14:31:26 -0700, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> i was wondeering the same thing. smithfield has some pretty good products.
>
> I posted something yesterday. After, it just didn't seem right, and
> other posts didn't fit in either. I did some checking.
>
> It appears that Smithfield, like Champagne, was a geographical
> designation. Champagne seems to be keeping up the battle. I don't know
> the exact story for Smithfield. Smithfield is a city in the state of
> Virginia in the US. By law, a Smithfield ham came from that city. Now,
> Smithfield is the name of a company that is a huge conglomerate.
>
> As always, "let the buyer beware". When you see champagne for US$3 a
> bottle, don't expect Champagne from France. When you see Smithfield Ham
> for US$2 a pound, don't expect a traditional ham.

well, sure. it's just that i don't think of smithfield when i think of
companies that routinely put out dog food or worse.

your pal,
blake

sf wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:
>
>> The ham
>> has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by Smithfield, so I
>> think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>
> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?
>

There are two very different "Smithfields". One is a mega giant packer
that produces products for big box that according to some friends that
are in food production and follow that stuff is owned by the Chinese:

http://www.smithfieldfoods.com/

then there is Smithfield:

http://www.smithfield.com/

George wrote:
> sf wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:
>>
>>> The ham has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by
>>> Smithfield, so I think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>>
>> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
>> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?
>
> There are two very different "Smithfields". One is a mega giant packer
> that produces products for big box that according to some friends that
> are in food production and follow that stuff is owned by the Chinese:
>
> http://www.smithfieldfoods.com/
>
> then there is Smithfield:
>
> http://www.smithfield.com/
>
>
>
Yeah, but! If you click on the Smithfield icon on your first URL it
leads you to the second URL. Smithfield foods owns Armour, Smithfield,
etc. and Smithfield.com is just the home page for the Paula Deen recipes
and Smithfield hams. What difference is there in the two.

George Shirley wrote:
> George wrote:
>> sf wrote:
>>> On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 11:01:32 -0600, "Dale P" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> The ham has a great texture and taste. Cooks has been acquired by
>>>> Smithfield, so I think the changes are not going to be for the good.
>>>
>>> That's an interesting comment. I would think "Smithfield" and think
>>> that's good... but you don't seem to think so. Why?
>>
>> There are two very different "Smithfields". One is a mega giant packer
>> that produces products for big box that according to some friends that
>> are in food production and follow that stuff is owned by the Chinese:
>>
>> http://www.smithfieldfoods.com/
>>
>> then there is Smithfield:
>>
>> http://www.smithfield.com/
>>
>>
>>
> Yeah, but! If you click on the Smithfield icon on your first URL it
> leads you to the second URL. Smithfield foods owns Armour, Smithfield,
> etc. and Smithfield.com is just the home page for the Paula Deen recipes
> and Smithfield hams. What difference is there in the two.

I confused things. I talked to my friend and he said that Smithfield is
owned by the Chinese including what used to be the better than big box
quality Smithfield ham brand. He also said Hatfield (Hatfield, PA) which
is a large pork packer is now owned by the Chinese.