Costco butter: Wholesaler introduces purchase limits of 30 blocks but still sells out
Pak'nSave Westgate, just under 1.5km around the corner from Costco, was today selling the Pams Pure Butter 500g block for $8.29, or $1.66 per 100g, and the Anchor 500g was $9.99, or $2 per 100g.
Woolworths Westgate, just a kilometre away from Costco, was today pricing its store-brand Woolworths Butter 500g at $8.49, or $1.70 per 100g, and Anchor 500g was $9.90, or $1.98 per 100g.
It was no wonder there were reports of Costco's salted and unsalted varieties running out as shoppers took home trolley-loads of butter.
Loyal customers have shared photographs from inside the store this week, showing lines of people waiting to get their hands on the cheap produce.
Several customers have spoken of their disappointment after travelling some distance to the store specifically for the butter, only to find stocks had sold out.
And today, photographs were posted on the store's unofficial Facebook page of notices inside the shop about purchase limits.
'Limit 30 blocks of butter per membership (i.e. per household),' the store's notices said.
However, it seems the restrictions were not enough to keep enough stock on the shelves this morning.
One Costco customer reported the store had run out of salted and unsalted butter at 10.24am, less than half an hour after opening time.
Westpac economist Paul Clark has told the Herald that retail prices for butter generally moved in line with export prices.
'Given that, it is reasonable to suggest that, with Global Dairy Trade auction prices for butter having reached new highs, combined with a generally weaker New Zealand dollar … should see retail prices ratchet higher in coming months.
'It is also important to note that retail price adjustments do tend to lag as inventories decline.'
At the latest Global Dairy Trade auction last month, the price of butter rose 1.5% to an average of US$7679/MT (metric tonne). That compares to an average price of US$6815 ($11,546) on January 7.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Techday NZ
4 hours ago
- Techday NZ
US-China chip export debate highlights risks for AI leadership
DeepSeek. TikTok. Taiwan. And a White House shake-up on AI rules. The spiralling US-China technology rivalry landed at the heart of Johns Hopkins University last week, as a panel of top experts and policymakers took to the stage to debate whether restricting exports of advanced semiconductors to China can help the US maintain its edge in the race for artificial intelligence. The discussion, hosted by Open to Debate in partnership with the SNF Agora Institute, comes at a critical time. In Washington, the Trump administration has announced plans to roll back the Biden-era AI Diffusion Rule and introduce new chip export controls targeting China – a move seen by many as a signal that the technology contest between the two superpowers is only intensifying. On one side of the Johns Hopkins debate were Lindsay Gorman, managing director at the German Marshall Fund's Technology Program, and former CIA officer and congressman Will Hurd. They argued the answer is yes: semiconductor controls can give the US a real advantage in the AI race. Gorman pointed to DeepSeek, a Chinese AI model whose CEO has publicly lamented the impact of advanced chip bans. "Money has never been the problem for us. Bans on shipments of advanced chips are the problem. And they have to consume twice the power to achieve the same results," she quoted, highlighting how China's AI advances still depend heavily on imported hardware. "The United States has significant hard computing power advantages – the ability to produce high-end chips, designed specifically for training AI models," Gorman told the audience. She argued that, together with its allies, the US controls a "strategic choke point" on computing power. "Properly implemented controls can have an effect and also have an increasing and compounding effect over time in retarding China's AI advantages and giving the United States a head start," she explained. Will Hurd, who also served on OpenAI's board before running for US president, compared the AI contest to the nuclear arms race. "Artificial intelligence is the equivalent of nuclear fission. Nuclear fission controlled gives you nuclear power… uncontrolled, nuclear weapons can kill everybody," he said. Hurd emphasised the importance of first-mover advantage, warning that the US cannot afford to lose its technological lead. He also highlighted a lack of reciprocity in the tech relationship between the two countries. "Chinese companies like Baidu, DJI, and TikTok operate freely in the US, but American companies are not allowed to operate in China," Hurd pointed out. "If there was a level of reciprocity between our two countries, we wouldn't be here having this debate about chip controls." Yet, on the opposing side, former senior US diplomat Susan Thornton and technology strategist Paul Triolo insisted the US could not outpace China in AI simply by tightening export controls. Triolo argued that the controls are "not working and will not lead to US dominance in AI", describing them as a blunt instrument that creates confusion for industry and disrupts global supply chains. "Most experts believe that Chinese companies are only three months behind US leaders in developing advanced AI models," Triolo said, suggesting any technological gap is vanishingly slim. Thornton, who spent decades at the heart of US-China diplomacy, warned of unintended consequences. "The main thing we should be asking ourselves about this question… is what is the cost benefit of US policy actions?" she said. "We have to face the reality that China is already building AI… a third of the world's top AI scientists are Chinese. China is one third of the entire global technology market. So it's clearly a player." She cautioned that blocking China from critical technology could backfire, hurting US companies, alienating allies and raising the risks around Taiwan, the global centre of advanced chip manufacturing. "Certainly, the one thing we need to do is avoid going to war," Thornton warned. "Taiwan, the most sensitive issue in US-China relations, has now been dragged right into the middle of this AI issue because they're the place that produces all the cutting-edge chips that we're trying to control." Audience members pressed the panel on whether international collaboration on AI safety was possible, and whether the US could ever match China's data advantage, given the size of the Chinese population and its permissive data environment. Hurd conceded that "the US will always have less data because we have a little thing called civil liberties," but argued that superior algorithms and privacy-protective machine learning could level the playing field. For Triolo, the dynamic nature of the technology means that attempts to wall off China are self-defeating. "There are many ways to get to different ends. The controls have forced Chinese companies to work together, develop innovations, and become more competitive both domestically and globally," he said. Gorman, in closing, rejected what she called "a defeatism that says America can't out-compete China or slow its progress". "Our companies are doing well. There isn't an issue here with demand, it's with supply. Doing better means that we have to throw what we can at this problem now with a smart application of tools," she argued. But Thornton had the last word, urging caution. "Making the AI competition with China a zero-sum game, not only will not work, it is dangerous," she said. "We should focus on the things that are going to matter to our children and their children, which is the long-term AI competition, which if not constrained and bounded by international agreements and by cooperation among countries… it'll be a very dangerous world."
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
On the campaign trail, Elon Musk juggled drugs and family drama
As Elon Musk entered President Trump's orbit, his private life grew increasingly tumultuous and his drug use was more intense than previously known. As Elon Musk became one of Donald Trump's closest allies last year, leading raucous rallies and donating about US$275 million ($455m) to help him win the presidency,
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Building Resilience In The Food And Fibre Sector
Press Release – Westpac New Zealand The report recommends farmers increasingly adopt smart digital technologies and processes that provide greater visibility along the value chain and deliver on-farm efficiency improvements. Proofing against shocks While developments in US tariff policy have sowed concern among NZ exporters, a new report from Westpac NZ and MyFarm Investments suggests there's opportunity for the country's food and fibre sector to proof against this shock. The report – Proofing against shocks – increasing the resilience of the food and fibre sector – says diversification and cost efficiencies will be key for the sector in offsetting the threats posed by higher US tariffs. The report's co-author, Westpac Industry Economist Paul Clark, says while there is a risk that higher US tariffs could dampen export prices for several of New Zealand's key agricultural products, a proactive approach by farmers will go a long way to mitigating the impact. 'Businesses involved in export markets should be looking to diversify into markets that deliver consistency of demand,' Mr Clark says. 'While these may not deliver a higher price immediately, looking to the medium term we think they should provide superior returns.' 'Cost is something else the sector should be looking at. Again, rather than taking a short-term view, farmers should be looking at how they can minimise production costs over the long-term and improve their resilience. All the better if that can be accompanied by a drop in emissions per unit of production.' The report recommends farmers increasingly adopt smart digital technologies and processes that provide greater visibility along the value chain and deliver on-farm efficiency improvements. Mr Clark says: 'We believe the future of farming in New Zealand will see greater uptake of sensors, drones and robots, along with greater use of artificial intelligence, data analytics and the Internet of Things.' However, Mr Clark points out that the level of investment required for large-scale technology uptake could prove prohibitive, especially for the many small farmers that operate within the sector. 'In the future, it's likely that this investment requirement will mean that food and fibre sector production is dominated by bigger enterprises with the necessary scale and strong balance sheets.'
