The council members are instead calling for a return to generic international wool marketing, including using the Australian Wool Innovation-owned Woolmark Company and its Woolmark brand, to market crossbred wool A meeting last week of wool industry leaders rejected the Wool Industry Network initiative, which links supply and commercial interests, instead giving the exporter's council a mandate to open discussions with the Woolmark Company about New Zealand joining.
Council of Wool Exporters chief executive, Nick Nicholson, described the structure announced by new Wool Company chairwoman Theresa Gattung as "flawed", replicating what already existed and focusing on structure rather than on growing demand.
Exporters saw the new structure as competition at a time when the industry should be working together to grow international demand for wool.
But Mr Petersen said Meat and Wool New Zealand and the Wool Industry Network had consulted widely and the proposal should not be seen as a threat.
"It's not about progressing the Wool Company outside the existing structures, and there is a strong desire to bring existing players together to rejuvenate the wool industry."
He said the Wool Company could act as a catalyst for uniting the industry, adding the exporter's reaction showed an acceptance of what was good for growers being good for industry, and that the status quo was not an option.
Announcing the establishment of the Wool Company, Wool Grower Holdings Ltd chairman, James Aitken, said it aimed to create "internationally-branded New Zealand wool product reflecting the values sought by buyers of premium quality wool carpets and textiles".
The Wool Company was the result of work led by the Wool Industry Network, an initiative of Meat and Wool New Zealand and New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, and has PGG Wrightson as an industry partner.
Mr Nicholson said the world has forgotten the benefits of wool and exporters would match Meat and Wool dollar for dollar to fund international promotion.
"What's needed is a united worldwide promotion of the generic benefits of wool and the re-education of an entire generation of shoppers who have never been told about it."
Mr Nicholson said exporters had been largely excluded from discussions so far, creating the assumption that the Wool Company would compete for markets and consumers with existing exporters.
"We need to promote wool, not kiwi fur or whatever brand they are going to come up with.
"We need to promote wool and once we've got wool moving again, then we get to have our little scraps why our wool is better than theirs, which is all about country of origin."
To achieve this Mr Nicholson said the various industry factions needed to work together, but that had happened so far.
He accepted that some previous investment in international wool promotion had been poor, but others had succeeded in maintaining the fibre's profile.
But Meat and Wool appeared reluctant to go to growers with a proposal to promote wool.
Mr Petersen said Meat and Wool did not have a mandate from farmers to fund generic wool promotion.
He said it would not be in anyone's interests to revert to the generic promotions of the past.
"The overwhelming view from farmers is for more targeted marketing and branding for both meat and wool products through commercial companies.
"Given the low meat prices in recent years, there is renewed interest in obtaining significantly improved returns to farmers for strong wool from the market."