Interview: Nick Kastle, VP of Marketing, J.G. Boswell

In this interview, Madeleine Royere sits down with Nick Kastle, Vice President of Marketing for J.G. Boswell and incoming President of the WPTC, to explore the evolving landscape of the global tomato industry. With two decades of experience spanning the world’s largest processors and growers, Kastle provides a candid look at the challenges facing California’s Central Valley—from the long-term impact of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to the market shifts triggered by GLP-1 medications and global oversupply. Kastle discusses the strategic importance of vertical integration, the industry’s measured embrace of AI, and his vision for expanding global collaboration by bringing India into the WPTC. Ultimately, he argues that while technology and policy will continue to shift, the industry’s survival depends on the same “farmer-first” mentality and generational wisdom that has sustained J.G. Boswell for over a century.

Madeleine Royere: Good morning, good afternoon. It’s morning for you, afternoon for me at the time we are doing this. So, I have the pleasure to interview Nick Castle, Vice President Marketing for J.G. Boswell in California. Okay, so let’s start with introducing yourself and your career so far.

Nick Kastle: Hello Madeleine and thank you for having me. I’ve spent nearly 20 years in the tomato industry, the last 10 as Vice President of Marketing at J.G. Boswell—a 100-year-old company with operations spanning cotton, tomato paste processing, safflower, oilseed, and pistachios.

Prior to Boswell, I spent 10 years at Morning Star, the world’s largest processor of tomato paste and diced products. Moving from a 100% processor to the world’s largest processing tomato grower gave me a comprehensive understanding of both sides of the business.

Earlier in my career, I held roles across food service distribution, procurement, grocery wholesale, and brand management for retail private labels.

Okay, and now you’re staying in the tomato business. Well, I know it’s not just tomato, it’s cotton and a lot of other stuff.

Absolutely. As Roger Scriven used to say, once tomatoes get in your blood, it stays there—and that’s certainly true.

I feel the same! Now I can talk to my friends and people I meet about it a lot more easily than I did at the beginning. They’re like, “Oh my god, we didn’t know this existed!”—with the Congress and everything. I will stay in it until the end as well.

It’s a remarkably tight-knit community. The tomato industry has real competition, but it’s relationship-driven and collaborative—something that became very clear when I moved from Morning Star to Boswell. Other industries simply don’t share that same sense of camaraderie.

Yes, because I don’t know of any other industry that has the equivalent of Amitom, WPTC, and all that kind of stuff.

Cotton has associations and events, but the industry is far more dispersed—spanning multiple states and countries with a much broader supply chain. With tomatoes, the vast majority of U.S. production is concentrated in one state. Growers and processors are neighbors—often in the same towns, sharing the same communities. That proximity naturally fosters a much stronger sense of connection than you find in more geographically dispersed industries.

Yes, definitely. So, you mentioned it yourself, Boswell is vertically integrated because you’re growing and processing as well. What would you say are the advantages of this organization? Is it a question of saving money, or is it about controlling the quality, or what would you say?

Great question. Our primary strategic advantage is control over raw material. Processing capacity exists around the world, but without a reliable tomato supply, you have no paste. Owning our land and by extension our fruit, means we control and optimize availability, quality, and timing, which brings security of supply—eliminating the annual challenge of sourcing from third-party growers.

It all comes back to a farmer-first mentality. Our crops are the core focus of what we do, and that guaranteed supply underpins everything we do.

Our rotation schedule—which incorporates tomatoes as an essential component—also keeps the land healthy and productive long-term. The health of the fields and by extension the longevity of the ranch drive every decision.

In terms of volume, hectares, or acreage, how much is the tomato crop compared to the other crops? Would you know?

Cotton is our largest acreage crop. Tomato production is sized to optimize our processing plant capacity.

And do you rotate on three-year basis, or five years, or…

We operate on a five-year rotation comprising safflower, cotton, tomatoes, and in some cases fallow fields.

Thank you, just out of curiosity. So you also mentioned that Boswell is a 100-year-old company? Does it make it easier or harder to convince the team to adopt new things, like AI or new processing technology?

Not at all—if anything, the opposite is true. A willingness to innovate and adapt is precisely what made Boswell a 100-year-old company.

On AI specifically, we are actively embracing it. Certain team members have proven particularly adept and are helping the rest of the organization learn. We are collectively identifying where it fits and how to use it effectively, and the momentum has been encouraging.

So then it’s probably easier, as you say, since innovation is the main thing here.

Innovation has always defined Boswell, particularly on the farming and ranching side. That culture is foundational to how the operation has developed.

By the time a new technology appears on social media, we’ve often been deploying it for four or five years. That’s simply how the company operates—always moving forward.

There is a persistent misconception that farming is low-tech. Modern agriculture—especially in California’s demanding regulatory environment—is engineering, chemistry, science, and continuous optimization. Our teams excel at that.

Great, thank you. So, California this year is planting fewer tomatoes. Do you think it’s a question of the market balancing itself out, or do you think it’s simply getting really, really expensive to grow tomatoes here?

Both factors are real. Costs are significant, but the more pressing issue is oversupply. Accumulating inventory in a soft demand environment is not a sustainable strategy.

California has consistently demonstrated the discipline to constrain supply when necessary—a capability few other regions match. What concerns me is the perception abroad that California cutting back creates an opportunity. It does not. It signals the market is already globally oversupplied.

California growers are the most efficient in the world, and that will not change. Other countries should not interpret our restraint as an invitation to fill the gap—we will defend our market position.

Just on something you said, I’ve been wondering for a while whether GLP-1 medications are having an impact on our tomato products, and since you mentioned it, I’m thinking you might have some insights or an opinion on that.

The impact is real. Tomato-based products such  as pizza, ketchup, pasta sauce—tend to be among the first things eliminated when people reduce caloric intake.

Overall calorie consumption is down roughly 8–15% depending on the category. Lean proteins and yogurt have gained as beneficiaries of the same health-conscious shift.

We are in a broader market that is still rebalancing: post-COVID inventory normalization, inflation-driven shrinkflation and reformulation, and now GLP-1 headwinds compounding those pressures.

There is, however, a meaningful tailwind from the clean-label movement. What processors put into a drum straight from the field is 100% pure tomato paste—an inherently clean product.

Complexity is introduced downstream through brand formulation. If the push for simpler ingredient decks succeeds—and consumers on GLP-1s tend to prefer cleaner products—tomato processors are well positioned to benefit.

At the same time, GLP-1s are also a near-term headwind, but health and clean-label trends offer meaningful offsets. The long-term durability of GLP-1 adoption also remains uncertain—early data suggests 15–18% of users revert to prior eating habits after discontinuing, which has its own implications for demand recovery.

Okay, thank you. Let’s talk yields. The yield targets for California this year are kind of high, at 53 tons per acre, if I’m not mistaken. With the unpredictability of the weather, how is Boswell using technology to ensure you hit those numbers?

No technology can predict or control the weather—that remains a constant variable every farmer must accept. My read on the 53-ton estimate is that a shorter season may eliminate the late-harvest drag that typically pulls the average down. That said, looking at historical data, I’m skeptical we reach that number.

At Boswell, we manage weather risk the same way every farmer does: with preparation, resilience, and the understanding that conditions will change. That mindset is part of what sustains a 100-year-old farming operation.

The weather, and if we stay on the weather, my next question is about water and water availability. So far, so good, but how is Boswell, and maybe the rest of the industry, preparing for a future where it’s getting more and more complicated to get the water that you need for the crop?

SGMA—the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act—will fundamentally reshape the Central Valley’s agricultural economics, and the implications extend well beyond tomatoes. Competing crops must be monitored closely.

Cotton, rice, grain, and dairy silage markets all compete for the same finite water. Shifts in any one commodity’s pricing can cascade into significant acreage changes across the Valley.

Water allocation becomes a strategic economic decision: where does limited supply generate the best return? That calculation directly affects tomato acreage.

Permanent crops—orchards and vineyards—add another layer of pressure. Growers will prioritize water for assets they cannot afford to lose, which squeezes annual row crops further.

California farmers are among the most water-efficient in the world. But the current regulatory framework is not designed to optimize production—it is designed to reduce overall water usage. That distinction matters, and the full economic impact of SGMA has not yet been calculated.

Boswell will navigate it, as it has every challenge in its 100-year history. The short answer: we will see reduced acreage and higher prices in US production in the long-term.

Okay, thank you. In June, at the World Congress, right here in California, you are taking over the WPTC presidency. What is one big goal that you would like to achieve during your term?

I would like to integrate India into the WPTC. India has a substantial tomato farming and processing footprint, and I have direct business relationships there through our cotton operations. Bringing Indian companies into the Council, improving data visibility on their production and consumption, and incorporating that intelligence into the global picture would meaningfully advance the industry’s collective understanding.

Yes, we recently received some new data from Pakistan as well.

Exactly! I work in Pakistan as well. Their capacity is smaller than India’s, but the broader point stands: deeper engagement and more reliable data from that entire region would be invaluable for the Council.

Yes, good. Why do you believe WPTC is such an important organization for the industry globally, and for California as well?

The core value is information exchange. Understanding what other countries are planting, and how consumption is trending provides market intelligence that benefits everyone. Platforms like Tomato News are a critical part of that ecosystem.

Beyond market data, the technology and regulatory dialogue is equally valuable—learning how other regions are addressing climate and environmental challenges through innovation.

Yes, and as you mentioned earlier, to me, it’s also about the friendly competition, the fact that everybody can talk with their competitors, work toward common industry goals and maintain great professional relationships.

Exactly—entirely collaborative.

Collaborative, exactly. Okay, let’s move on to geopolitics, and the fact that a lot of the world’s fertilizer supply can get bottlenecked behind the Strait of Hormuz. Since Boswell grows their own tomatoes, do you have a buffer against these kinds of sudden price spikes?

The buffer is limited. Price escalations during recent disruptions were so rapid that strategic maneuvering was extremely difficult, even with Boswell’s long-standing relationships and operational depth. We were exposed to the spikes like everyone else.

As I told a customer recently who raised market uncertainty: the only thing we know for certain at this point is that uncertainty will continue.

For a grower, the choice is binary: buy the inputs and grow the crop, or withhold them and watch yields collapse. Most operators continue forward and adapt. When geopolitical events disrupt shipping lanes or trigger sudden price shocks, the response comes down to the quality of your people.

Experienced teams with the depth of knowledge to move quickly and decisively are the only real hedge against sustained uncertainty. The only preparation that matters is building an organization capable of rapid adjustment.

Do you think we will see the effect of that more next year, for the next crop, or are we already seeing a lot of it this year? Just wondering…

I think volatility will persist. Since COVID, we’ve absorbed inflation, shipping crises, tariffs, regional conflicts, and drone strikes—this level of disruption has become the operating baseline.

There will always be unpredictable variables—and I don’t think the political landscape changes that calculation, regardless of which party holds office.

We are operating in a new information era. Data moves faster than verification, and while AI offers real commercial benefits, we are beginning to see the societal friction that accompanies that pace of change.

Okay. And how do you see the current conflict affecting the global markets? Do you foresee some panic buying, or do you foresee new opportunities?

It depends on market position and shipping destination. Current disruptions will benefit some regions and hurt others. Product movement across the Middle East—including through informal channels—continues even through conflict, but it faces real constraints.

The structural positive remains: food demand does not disappear. Baseline consumption persists regardless of geopolitical disruption.

The structural concern centers on producers like Iran, whose logistics through the Strait of Hormuz face real constraints. Downstream manufacturers converting paste into finished goods across the region will feel that pressure acutely.

For California, our exposure is limited. The volume allocated this year is structured primarily for the domestic market and NAFTA regions—those channels should remain stable.

That links nicely to my next question: does California’s future depend on being a global exporter, or will it continue to focus mainly on the North American market?

California has the industrial processing capacity to be a major exporter, but I have serious doubts about long-term availability of acres and water to sustain that scale. We are currently in a state of overcapacity as an industry.

Full utilization of existing processing capacity requires export—the North American domestic market does not absorb that volume.

SGMA changes the calculus. A 13.5-million-ton crop requires favorable weather, adequate pricing, and reliable water access in combination. Price alone will not compel growers to plant if water is not physically available—and what water can be secured is increasingly expensive.

The crossroads is straightforward: California either exports meaningfully, or processing capacity must contract. Some facilities will run under-capacity, and eventually that excess steel will need to be rationalized.

Okay, thank you. So, let’s discuss the future now. Back in Budapest, we talked a lot about the next wave of technology. If you had to pick one specific area in our industry where AI is actually going to make a practical difference this year, what would it be?

Are you asking about near-term impact, or the longer-term outlook?

Well, let’s start with this year, and maybe the next few years.

I’ll say this: if AI were making supply decisions globally for all tomato processors, we would not be producing 40 million tons! The data would make the answer obvious!

But being completely honest, I don’t even like answering that question, and I’ll tell you why: it’s just too new. We don’t truly know what AI can do yet. Personally, I only started using AI about a month ago. People might read that and say, “Oh my gosh, AI has been out commercially for two or three years now!” So maybe I’m a late adopter, but I think it’s fascinating in terms of research and the information power it gives us.

The reliability issues are real—hallucination remains a genuine concern. The immediate impact I see is decision-making velocity: AI enables faster analysis on decisions we were already capable of making, and that is a meaningful benefit.

The most compelling near-term application for our industry is supply chain and inventory management. If AI could accurately track product at wholesale and customer locations, we could finally align true consumption data with actual production and inventory figures—that visibility would be transformative. Weather predictability is often cited, but I’d need to see concrete results before drawing conclusions there.

I suppose I can’t just ask AI to answer my question for you!

Fair point. And I’ll admit my track record on technology forecasting is poor—in graduate school, I wrote a presentation arguing the iPhone was a passing fad. I approach AI predictions with that humility firmly in mind.

Okay. You’ve spoken before, I think back in Budapest, about how inflation hurts consumers. With costs rising again this year alongside everything else that’s happening, how can you balance the need to raise prices with the reality that people can only afford so much for their pizza or pasta sauce?

Price escalation requires careful management across the supply chain. Tomato products carry a lower substitution risk than many commodities—paste and ketchup are core, difficult-to-replace ingredients in pizza and pasta sauce—but that doesn’t eliminate the need for discipline.

Brands and retailers manage the consumer-facing price tension directly, and their calculus involves many inputs beyond tomato paste. Our obligation is to secure a fair margin for our crop—a reasonable expectation at every level of the supply chain.

Managing that balance requires a collective approach. Processors and farmers have limited ability to unilaterally influence shelf pricing when brands are simultaneously managing packaging, proteins, and multiple other input costs.  In a frozen pizza, for example, tomato components are not the primary cost driver—proteins and dairy are. We operate within a broader system we do not control, alongside brands that must remain profitable and deliver consistent returns to shareholders.

What I push back on is the implicit assumption that farmers and processors are the appropriate shock absorbers when margins compress industry-wide. That model is not sustainable.

The structural positive is that demand is resilient. When budgets tighten, consumers trade down—private labels gain, discount channels grow—but consumption does not stop. As conditions improve, premiumization returns. That cycle is predictable, even if the timing is not.

The next few years will be consequential—federal policy, California elections, and geopolitical developments all feed into our cost structure and market environment.

So many variables…

There are many. Brands manage that volatility well—they need the consumer just as much as we do. And consumers are remarkably resilient. They continue buying because they have to eat. That baseline does not change.

Okay. Thank you. If we were to meet again in 10 years, do you think the California tomato industry will be more consolidated than it is now? Or do you think we will see, for instance, a major shift toward high-tech specialty products? What is your vision for the next decade?

Consolidation is coming—I have specific views on how it will unfold, but I’ll keep those to myself. What matters is context.

Other producing countries should not interpret California consolidation as an opportunity to capture U.S. market share. The industry is over-capacity; consolidation means right-sizing, not retreat. The outcome of this should be a steadier, more efficient industry—not necessarily booming, but far less prone to dramatic cyclical swings.

The traditional seven-year market cycle has compressed in recent years, driving heightened volatility. Consolidation should dampen those extremes and create a more manageable, normalized pattern.

The significant wildcard is policy. Any trade structure or regulatory framework that can change with a single legislative or executive decision represents both an opportunity and a risk.

For example; if the EU eliminated its tariffs tomorrow, California could find itself under-capacity overnight. Conversely, shifting U.S. import tariff policy over the next decade could fundamentally reshape competitive dynamics. That exposure to political decision-making is an inherent and ongoing risk.

What is not subject to political reversal is SGMA. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act is permanent, and its full agricultural impact is still unfolding.

I think SGMA is definitely there to stay.

Agreed. We also have to address climate change. Climate change is observable regardless of how one characterizes the cause. Weather patterns are shifting, and that is a reality we have to manage around.  In ten years, tomatoes will still be growing in the Central Valley. My guess is that one or two of the current processors will not be operating and their volumes will be absorbed by the remaining players. The resulting structure should be more balanced and resilient—assuming we navigate currency volatility and weather variability as we always have.

Yes, well, I’ll have to ask you again about that in a few years! To close things out, here is my last question for today: for someone starting out in the agricultural business today, given everything happening in the world, what is the number one survival skill that they need that they won’t ever learn in an average college classroom?

That’s a great question. I would say curiosity and agility.

Those are the things that matter. I reflect on when I first came in—I was finishing grad school and I thought I knew so much. I thought, look at me and what I went to school for. But then I started working at Morning Star, and I was exposed to all the amount of brilliant minds in the tomato industry. They are not only very bright, but they have weathered many, many storms. There is an experience component with people who have been in the industry for years beyond me. If someone asked me about my top mentors, they would all be from the tomato industry, and all of them are in their 60s and 70s now.

One of my favorite sayings is “I have been in the tomato industry for one year, twenty years in a row”. Every season presents new variables and no season or market is the same. Academic preparation establishes a foundation, but it does not substitute for accumulated experience. The willingness to recognize what you don’t know—despite your training—is essential.

Agility is the practical application of that recognition—the ability to adapt when conditions shift, which they will every year. Curiosity means actively seeking answers, and sourcing the knowledge of people who have navigated this many times before. At its core, what we do has not changed: we farm crops, process them, and move them.

It’s about paying close attention to what makes a senior operator worried, what gives them confidence, and what they treat as a meaningful signal. Those instincts come from decades of lived experience—not from school, AI or new processing technology. The tools evolve; the underlying judgment does not. That requires a genuine willingness to listen, learn, and adapt.

If they do that, the industry will reward those who commit for the long term. Farmers and processors are always here—the work does not disappear the way financial markets can. I hope more young people discover that it is an outstanding career. I wish there were more young people coming into agriculture and excited about it, because I feel like it’s overlooked since it’s not considered very sexy. But I think it’s pretty fantastic.

Well, thank you very much, Nick. I’ve gone through all my questions for today. Thank you so much for sharing your insights; it was really good talking to you today, and I wish you the absolute best of luck with your WPTC presidency.

Thank you, Madeleine. I appreciate the thoughtful conversation.