You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A joyous day for Tyson foods
- Thread starter rkaiser
- Start date
Help Support Ranchers.net:
rkaiser
Well-known member
And once again you want to avoid your utterly stupid statements and make it look like I am some dummy.
Congradulations on being successful with your company. Do all of your employees use lip balm for all of the ass kissin that goes on around your office as well?
Congradulations on being successful with your company. Do all of your employees use lip balm for all of the ass kissin that goes on around your office as well?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Randy you are so pathetic.
You are obviously too damn insecure in your position to enter the debate on the facts so you throw your little fit at anyone who doesn't share in your packer blame and chuck your harmless little discrediting rocks at anyone who rains on your parade by presenting factual informaion that is contrary to your packer blaming position.
BACK YOUR POSITION FOR ONCE WITH SUPPORTING FACTS!
CONTRADICT WHAT I OR AGMAN HAS PRESENTED WITH FACTS TO THE CONTRARY!
You can't!
All you can do is make your little packer blaming statements and chuck harmless little rocks.
You say Packers want to keep the border closed TO MAKE MORE MONEY.
R-CULT says the packers want the border opened TO MAKE MORE MONEY.
YOU JOIN HANDS WITH R-CULT TO BLAME PACKERS FOR SEPERATE REASONS.
Hahaha!
NOW WHO IS THE JOKE????????????
YOU GUYS CAN'T EVEN AGREE ON THE PACKER'S MOTIVE! Yet you join hands to "BWAME DA PACKAH".
You'd prefer socialism?
PLEASE GOVERNMENT, SAVE US FROM OURSELVES WITH ANOTHER MANDATE!
PUNISH ACHIEVEMENT!
REGULATE PROSPERITY!
HOW DARE ANYONE BE SUCCESSFUL IF I'M NOT!
Yeh, you really should join R-CULT, you'd fit right in randy! They prefer "socialism too".
Well that explains a lot!
Let me recap the situation for you and you can correct any part of it you think you have the courage to.
1. BSE WAS DISCOVERED IN CANADA.
2. R-CULT LIED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF CANADIAN BEEF AND LIVE CATTLE TO STOP CANADIAN IMPORTS.
3. R-CULT FILED SUIT AGAINST USDA TO CLOSE THE BORDER TO STOP CANADIAN IMPORTS.
4. R-CULT FOUND A JUDGE WHO WAS SYMPATHETIC TO THEIR CAUSE AND EVEN RECITED THEIR MISPELLED WORDS.
5. THE CANADIAN BORDER WAS CLOSED TO LIVE CATTLE.
6. CANADA FOUND THEMSELVES IN A SITUATION OF MORE CATTLE THAN SLAUGHTER CAPACITY.
7. CERTAIN AREAS OF THE U.S. FOUND THEMSELVES IN A SITUATION OF MORE SLAUGHTER CAPACITY THAN CATTLE.
8. PACKERS PAID LESS FOR CATTLE IN CANADA BECAUSE THEY COULD.
9. PACKERS PAID MORE FOR CATTLE IN THE U.S. BECAUSE THE SUPPLIES WERE REDUCED.
10. YOU BLAME PACKERS FOR WANTING TO KEEP THE BORDER CLOSED.
11. R-CULT BLAMES PACKERS FOR WANTING THE BORDER TO OPEN.
12. PACKERS IN CANADA EXPANDED SLAUGHTER CAPACITY WHICH HELPED THE CANADIAN PRODUCER. That is a fact! Was that their "PRIMARY" motive? No, their primary motive was to kill more cattle. Either way, Agman is correct, expanded slaughter capacity helped Canadian producers. He never said it was their primary motive. The result was the same. I would love to see your argument to the contrary.
13. PACKERS IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE U.S. CLOSED PLANTS AND CUT SHIFTS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE REDUCTION IN CANADIAN CATTLE.
Now if you think you can argue anyone of those points, you just get with it.
While you are at it, why don't you explain your initial allegation in this post. WHAT THE HELL WAS YOUR POINT?????
That a Swift plant, WHICH IS OWNED BY A LARGE PACKING COMPANY, closed to the benefit of TYSON AND CARGILL???
Was that your point?
If not, what the hell was your point or did you even have one?
If I am not presenting truthful information, STEP UP TO THE DAMN PLATE AND PROVE ME WRONG!
You can't!
You'd rather resort to your childish fits because someone rained on your packer blaming parade by presenting the facts.
You skipped over everything I stated in my initial post to throw a fit instead. What a pathetic little packer blamer you are.
There, that should fire you up! LOL!
~SH~
You are obviously too damn insecure in your position to enter the debate on the facts so you throw your little fit at anyone who doesn't share in your packer blame and chuck your harmless little discrediting rocks at anyone who rains on your parade by presenting factual informaion that is contrary to your packer blaming position.
BACK YOUR POSITION FOR ONCE WITH SUPPORTING FACTS!
CONTRADICT WHAT I OR AGMAN HAS PRESENTED WITH FACTS TO THE CONTRARY!
You can't!
All you can do is make your little packer blaming statements and chuck harmless little rocks.
You say Packers want to keep the border closed TO MAKE MORE MONEY.
R-CULT says the packers want the border opened TO MAKE MORE MONEY.
YOU JOIN HANDS WITH R-CULT TO BLAME PACKERS FOR SEPERATE REASONS.
Hahaha!
NOW WHO IS THE JOKE????????????
YOU GUYS CAN'T EVEN AGREE ON THE PACKER'S MOTIVE! Yet you join hands to "BWAME DA PACKAH".
randy: "But unlike yourself and your SH I understand the root word in the word capitalism. To be a capitalist you capitalize."
You'd prefer socialism?
PLEASE GOVERNMENT, SAVE US FROM OURSELVES WITH ANOTHER MANDATE!
PUNISH ACHIEVEMENT!
REGULATE PROSPERITY!
HOW DARE ANYONE BE SUCCESSFUL IF I'M NOT!
Yeh, you really should join R-CULT, you'd fit right in randy! They prefer "socialism too".
Well that explains a lot!
Let me recap the situation for you and you can correct any part of it you think you have the courage to.
1. BSE WAS DISCOVERED IN CANADA.
2. R-CULT LIED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF CANADIAN BEEF AND LIVE CATTLE TO STOP CANADIAN IMPORTS.
3. R-CULT FILED SUIT AGAINST USDA TO CLOSE THE BORDER TO STOP CANADIAN IMPORTS.
4. R-CULT FOUND A JUDGE WHO WAS SYMPATHETIC TO THEIR CAUSE AND EVEN RECITED THEIR MISPELLED WORDS.
5. THE CANADIAN BORDER WAS CLOSED TO LIVE CATTLE.
6. CANADA FOUND THEMSELVES IN A SITUATION OF MORE CATTLE THAN SLAUGHTER CAPACITY.
7. CERTAIN AREAS OF THE U.S. FOUND THEMSELVES IN A SITUATION OF MORE SLAUGHTER CAPACITY THAN CATTLE.
8. PACKERS PAID LESS FOR CATTLE IN CANADA BECAUSE THEY COULD.
9. PACKERS PAID MORE FOR CATTLE IN THE U.S. BECAUSE THE SUPPLIES WERE REDUCED.
10. YOU BLAME PACKERS FOR WANTING TO KEEP THE BORDER CLOSED.
11. R-CULT BLAMES PACKERS FOR WANTING THE BORDER TO OPEN.
12. PACKERS IN CANADA EXPANDED SLAUGHTER CAPACITY WHICH HELPED THE CANADIAN PRODUCER. That is a fact! Was that their "PRIMARY" motive? No, their primary motive was to kill more cattle. Either way, Agman is correct, expanded slaughter capacity helped Canadian producers. He never said it was their primary motive. The result was the same. I would love to see your argument to the contrary.
13. PACKERS IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE U.S. CLOSED PLANTS AND CUT SHIFTS TO ACCOUNT FOR THE REDUCTION IN CANADIAN CATTLE.
Now if you think you can argue anyone of those points, you just get with it.
While you are at it, why don't you explain your initial allegation in this post. WHAT THE HELL WAS YOUR POINT?????
That a Swift plant, WHICH IS OWNED BY A LARGE PACKING COMPANY, closed to the benefit of TYSON AND CARGILL???
Was that your point?
If not, what the hell was your point or did you even have one?
If I am not presenting truthful information, STEP UP TO THE DAMN PLATE AND PROVE ME WRONG!
You can't!
You'd rather resort to your childish fits because someone rained on your packer blaming parade by presenting the facts.
You skipped over everything I stated in my initial post to throw a fit instead. What a pathetic little packer blamer you are.
There, that should fire you up! LOL!
~SH~
rkaiser
Well-known member
Doesn't fire me up a bit SH. It is simply your typical post.
Try to personally degrade anyone who doesn't agree with you and Agman.
No I do not prefer socailism, and I have discussed that many times.
But I also do not support the thoughts you have about packers holding hands and working together to help the industry.
You know damn well that every packer is a capitalist and every packer is in competition with the other. Don't twist that into a statement about price competition because you know what I am talking about.
You can continue to pull one or two lines out of everything I write and hope that somebody other than Agman and Jason agree that I am stupid, or you can go to the post that asks you the ultimate question about Cagill and Tyson profits and get to work.
I will read your facts when you post them, and will back down when you show me that these two packers lost money in North America due to BSE.
Or just keep talking as if I blame the packers for everything in life.
Is there a type of socialism ideal in the "packer world" SH? That seems to be the world you live in.
ALL PACKERS GOOD.
ALL PACKERS WRK TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF CATTLE AND BEEF INDUSTRY.
Who is the pathetic follower of mantra like that.[/quote]
Try to personally degrade anyone who doesn't agree with you and Agman.
No I do not prefer socailism, and I have discussed that many times.
But I also do not support the thoughts you have about packers holding hands and working together to help the industry.
You know damn well that every packer is a capitalist and every packer is in competition with the other. Don't twist that into a statement about price competition because you know what I am talking about.
You can continue to pull one or two lines out of everything I write and hope that somebody other than Agman and Jason agree that I am stupid, or you can go to the post that asks you the ultimate question about Cagill and Tyson profits and get to work.
I will read your facts when you post them, and will back down when you show me that these two packers lost money in North America due to BSE.
Or just keep talking as if I blame the packers for everything in life.
Is there a type of socialism ideal in the "packer world" SH? That seems to be the world you live in.
ALL PACKERS GOOD.
ALL PACKERS WRK TOGETHER FOR THE GOOD OF CATTLE AND BEEF INDUSTRY.
Who is the pathetic follower of mantra like that.[/quote]
rkaiser
Well-known member
The beef cattle industry in North America needs packers. And it needs lots of packers to function properly.
BSE shut off Canada's access to packers. Packers that Canada's beef industry needs to function properly.
Canada should not be shipping live cattle anywher, and neither should any country with a raw resource such as this if they hope to move away from third world status.
SH has a one track mind when it comes to packers. Anyone who disagree with what they do is labeled his usual name calling garbage.
What Randy Kaiser does not like is the opportunity given to Tyson, and Cargill and their two operations in Canada due to BSE.
Don't talk like that Randy Kaiser, you socialist, you packer blamer, you ignorant, uneducated fool.
Is domination by two companies in one country a good thing? Is that the true meaning of capitalism? Is that the freedom the we all fight for in a democratic society? I guess it is in SH and Agman's world. Because you sure can't question it or you become the list of labels noted above.
If I am such a packer blamer, why would I want the Swift plant in Idaho to stay open? Why would I throw away a year of my life trying to have producers see the merits in building a packing plant? Why would I support a bid by Swift to buy the Better Beef plant in Ontario rather than let Cargill take it over? Why would I support the Price plant being built in Calgary in every way, including a deal to federally kill our own supply of vertically integrated cattle?
No SH, I am not a packer blamer, I am a packer supporter. And I will admit, a supporter of any packer that will supply competition to the Cargill plant in Highg River Alberta, and the Tyson plant at Brooks Alberta.
BSE shut off Canada's access to packers. Packers that Canada's beef industry needs to function properly.
Canada should not be shipping live cattle anywher, and neither should any country with a raw resource such as this if they hope to move away from third world status.
SH has a one track mind when it comes to packers. Anyone who disagree with what they do is labeled his usual name calling garbage.
What Randy Kaiser does not like is the opportunity given to Tyson, and Cargill and their two operations in Canada due to BSE.
Don't talk like that Randy Kaiser, you socialist, you packer blamer, you ignorant, uneducated fool.
Is domination by two companies in one country a good thing? Is that the true meaning of capitalism? Is that the freedom the we all fight for in a democratic society? I guess it is in SH and Agman's world. Because you sure can't question it or you become the list of labels noted above.
If I am such a packer blamer, why would I want the Swift plant in Idaho to stay open? Why would I throw away a year of my life trying to have producers see the merits in building a packing plant? Why would I support a bid by Swift to buy the Better Beef plant in Ontario rather than let Cargill take it over? Why would I support the Price plant being built in Calgary in every way, including a deal to federally kill our own supply of vertically integrated cattle?
No SH, I am not a packer blamer, I am a packer supporter. And I will admit, a supporter of any packer that will supply competition to the Cargill plant in Highg River Alberta, and the Tyson plant at Brooks Alberta.
agman
Well-known member
rkaiser said:The beef cattle industry in North America needs packers. And it needs lots of packers to function properly.
BSE shut off Canada's access to packers. Packers that Canada's beef industry needs to function properly.
Canada should not be shipping live cattle anywher, and neither should any country with a raw resource such as this if they hope to move away from third world status.
SH has a one track mind when it comes to packers. Anyone who disagree with what they do is labeled his usual name calling garbage.
What Randy Kaiser does not like is the opportunity given to Tyson, and Cargill and their two operations in Canada due to BSE.
Don't talk like that Randy Kaiser, you socialist, you packer blamer, you ignorant, uneducated fool.
Is domination by two companies in one country a good thing? Is that the true meaning of capitalism? Is that the freedom the we all fight for in a democratic society? I guess it is in SH and Agman's world. Because you sure can't question it or you become the list of labels noted above.
If I am such a packer blamer, why would I want the Swift plant in Idaho to stay open? Why would I throw away a year of my life trying to have producers see the merits in building a packing plant? Why would I support a bid by Swift to buy the Better Beef plant in Ontario rather than let Cargill take it over? Why would I support the Price plant being built in Calgary in every way, including a deal to federally kill our own supply of vertically integrated cattle?
No SH, I am not a packer blamer, I am a packer supporter. And I will admit, a supporter of any packer that will supply competition to the Cargill plant in Highg River Alberta, and the Tyson plant at Brooks Alberta.
What evidence can you provide that ten smaller packers would provide you with higher prices-none, absolutely none? I submit the only increase you will see is in your weekly coffee and donut bill as those ten buyers BS you to death but bid you no more and ultimately will bid you less due to their lack of efficiency.
I am all for your efforts in a new plant. You will soon realize the truth of my comments when they start calling you for additional capital to keep the operation afloat. You are not the first producer who has had a grandiose idea of capturing those massive packer profits by investing in a plant of your own.
Jason
Well-known member
rkaiser said:No SH, I am not a packer blamer, I am a packer supporter. And I will admit, a supporter of any packer that will supply competition to the Cargill plant in Highg River Alberta, and the Tyson plant at Brooks Alberta.
Randy, I appreciate the tone of this last post more than any in the thread yet. You had been a bit erratic at the start of it.
The problem with being off the numbers is that people read it and repeat it to many others creating huge misconceptions.
The closure of Swfit's cow plant in Idaho will have no effect on Tyson's operation in Alberta. Tyson here has to kill fed cattle with no cows. If they switch to cows they lose the ability to send boxed beef to the States.
The other issue you seem to harp on is that with 1 plant each making huge profits in a small market like Canada, Tyson and Cargill more than made up for losses suffered in the States with ?? plants the same size operating? That just doesn't make sence even if they were making what you think they were.
I still like the idea the big plants invested back in our industry, admit it or not, the extra capacity will benefit us more than if they stayed status quo.
How will Cargill have more control of our fat supply by owning Better Beef? The plants are 2000 miles apart. Its not like they will be able to force lower prices in either area by threatening to transport most of the cattle the other way. The only advantage they will experience is that they know the exact price and yield of cattle killed in their other plant as soon as the data is available.
A
Anonymous
Guest
As expected, you cannot contradict a single thing I or Agman have posted yet run off on yet another tangent in a feeble attempt to discredit what you BELIEVE our position to be AND YOU CAN'T EVEN GET THAT RIGHT.
YOU GOT NOTHING RANDY until you can prove anything I have stated incorrect with opposing facts.
Once again, allow me to introduce you to yourself.....
Which way is it Randy????
If every packer is in competition and Cargill and Tyson both have plants in Canada, how can there be no competition in the packing industry in Canada?
You see, you can't even keep your arguments straight.
Let's get right to the heart of this issue and stay focused for once.
YOU BELIEVE THAT CARGILL AND TYSON WANT THE CANADIAN BORDER TO STAY CLOSED.
R-CULT SAYS THAT GARGILL AND TYSON WANT THE CANADIAN BORDER OPENED.
WHICH WAY IS IT RANDY AND WHAT CAN YOU PRESENT TO BACK YOUR POSITION?
Now watch this as randy avoids the debate to run off on another tangent.......
And what would that "one track mind" be randy?
If anything I have stated is incorrect, all you have to do is quote me and prove me wrong. How difficult can that be? You can't do that. Instead, you try to label me as a packer defender instead of what I really am which is a defender of the facts and the truth with no other bias.
You are the problem here, not me.
You are the one who ignores the facts, refuses to enter the debate and prove me wrong, and insists on blaming Tyson and Cargill for conducting business as you would conduct business if you were in their shoes.
YOU AND I AGREE ON THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't like the opportunity handed to Tyson and Cargill in Canada either.
WHO HANDED THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY RANDY????
WHO LIED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF YOUR CATTLE TO PUT YOU IN THAT SITUAITON??????
DID CARGILL AND TYSON USE BSE AS AN EXCUSE TO KEEP THE BORDER CLOSED OR DID THEY WORK TO GET IT OPENED?????
R-CULT disagrees with you!
If you think Cargill and Tyson created that situation, WHERE THE HELL IS YOUR PROOF????
It doesn't exist!
That's where you and I differ Randy! You believe Tyson and Cargill used BSE as a convenient excuse to keep the border closed WHILE WE HAVE PROVIDED YOU WITH PROOF POSITIVE THAT R-CULT DID THAT EXACT THING, yet you offer nothing to back your position that Cargill and Tyson wanted the border closed.
YOU ARE EMPTY HANDED TO SUPPORT YOUR POSITION RANDY
Don't paint me as a packer defender just because I challenge you to present the facts to support your Tyson and Cargill blaming position.
GET THIS THROUGH YOUR THICK HEAD RANDY!
As far as I'm concerned, two major companies dominating a single industry like Coke and Pepsi is not, I REPEAT IS NOT AS GOOD A THING as having 5 major companies competing for the same market share like most industries have.
You would be better off with 5 major packers like we have and a couple producer owned plants for niche marketing to boot.
Can you understand and comprehend what you just read?
You will find absolutely nothing I have ever stated to the contrary to supoprt your position of what you believe my position is. I have said it only takes two to compete but never did I say that only having two companies was the perfect situation as you imply.
WITH THAT SAID, YOU JUST LIED ABOUT MY POSITION!
You are just like the R-CULT blamers from that perspective.
You just said "I guess it is in SH and Agman's world" and NOWHERE DID I EVER STATE THAT WE WOULD BE BETTER OFF WITH JUST TWO PACKING COMPANIES.
Just because you are so emotional when it comes to blaming Tyson and Cargill, you have to lie about my position to justify your position rather than taking a direct quote of mine and proving me wrong with facts to the contrary.
Typical of a Tyson and Cargill blamer!
Ok Randy, fair enough! By your own admission you are a Tyson and Cargill blamer, not a packer blamer. Fair enough!
~SH~
YOU GOT NOTHING RANDY until you can prove anything I have stated incorrect with opposing facts.
Once again, allow me to introduce you to yourself.....
Randy: "You know damn well that every packer is a capitalist and every packer is in competition with the other."
Which way is it Randy????
If every packer is in competition and Cargill and Tyson both have plants in Canada, how can there be no competition in the packing industry in Canada?
You see, you can't even keep your arguments straight.
Let's get right to the heart of this issue and stay focused for once.
YOU BELIEVE THAT CARGILL AND TYSON WANT THE CANADIAN BORDER TO STAY CLOSED.
R-CULT SAYS THAT GARGILL AND TYSON WANT THE CANADIAN BORDER OPENED.
WHICH WAY IS IT RANDY AND WHAT CAN YOU PRESENT TO BACK YOUR POSITION?
Now watch this as randy avoids the debate to run off on another tangent.......
randy: "SH has a one track mind when it comes to packers."
And what would that "one track mind" be randy?
If anything I have stated is incorrect, all you have to do is quote me and prove me wrong. How difficult can that be? You can't do that. Instead, you try to label me as a packer defender instead of what I really am which is a defender of the facts and the truth with no other bias.
You are the problem here, not me.
You are the one who ignores the facts, refuses to enter the debate and prove me wrong, and insists on blaming Tyson and Cargill for conducting business as you would conduct business if you were in their shoes.
Randy: "What Randy Kaiser does not like is the opportunity given to Tyson, and Cargill and their two operations in Canada due to BSE."
YOU AND I AGREE ON THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't like the opportunity handed to Tyson and Cargill in Canada either.
WHO HANDED THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY RANDY????
WHO LIED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF YOUR CATTLE TO PUT YOU IN THAT SITUAITON??????
DID CARGILL AND TYSON USE BSE AS AN EXCUSE TO KEEP THE BORDER CLOSED OR DID THEY WORK TO GET IT OPENED?????
R-CULT disagrees with you!
If you think Cargill and Tyson created that situation, WHERE THE HELL IS YOUR PROOF????
It doesn't exist!
That's where you and I differ Randy! You believe Tyson and Cargill used BSE as a convenient excuse to keep the border closed WHILE WE HAVE PROVIDED YOU WITH PROOF POSITIVE THAT R-CULT DID THAT EXACT THING, yet you offer nothing to back your position that Cargill and Tyson wanted the border closed.
YOU ARE EMPTY HANDED TO SUPPORT YOUR POSITION RANDY
Don't paint me as a packer defender just because I challenge you to present the facts to support your Tyson and Cargill blaming position.
Randy: "Is domination by two companies in one country a good thing? Is that the true meaning of capitalism? Is that the freedom the we all fight for in a democratic society? I guess it is in SH and Agman's world. Because you sure can't question it or you become the list of labels noted above."
GET THIS THROUGH YOUR THICK HEAD RANDY!
As far as I'm concerned, two major companies dominating a single industry like Coke and Pepsi is not, I REPEAT IS NOT AS GOOD A THING as having 5 major companies competing for the same market share like most industries have.
You would be better off with 5 major packers like we have and a couple producer owned plants for niche marketing to boot.
Can you understand and comprehend what you just read?
You will find absolutely nothing I have ever stated to the contrary to supoprt your position of what you believe my position is. I have said it only takes two to compete but never did I say that only having two companies was the perfect situation as you imply.
WITH THAT SAID, YOU JUST LIED ABOUT MY POSITION!
You are just like the R-CULT blamers from that perspective.
You just said "I guess it is in SH and Agman's world" and NOWHERE DID I EVER STATE THAT WE WOULD BE BETTER OFF WITH JUST TWO PACKING COMPANIES.
Just because you are so emotional when it comes to blaming Tyson and Cargill, you have to lie about my position to justify your position rather than taking a direct quote of mine and proving me wrong with facts to the contrary.
Typical of a Tyson and Cargill blamer!
Randy: "No SH, I am not a packer blamer, I am a packer supporter. And I will admit, a supporter of any packer that will supply competition to the Cargill plant in Highg River Alberta, and the Tyson plant at Brooks Alberta."
Ok Randy, fair enough! By your own admission you are a Tyson and Cargill blamer, not a packer blamer. Fair enough!
~SH~
rkaiser
Well-known member
I applaude you tenacity as usual SH. Cut and paste little peices and leave out others.
the rest of the story
Keep convincing yourself that I am the only one who doesn't know what he's talking about SH.
You are son focused it's frightening. But so is Superman to us bad guys!
Quote:
Randy: "You know damn well that every packer is a capitalist and every packer is in competition with the other."
the rest of the story
You know damn well that every packer is a capitalist and every packer is in competition with the other. Don't twist that into a statement about price competition because you know what I am talking about.
Keep convincing yourself that I am the only one who doesn't know what he's talking about SH.
You are son focused it's frightening. But so is Superman to us bad guys!
Kathy
Well-known member
Question - do you want to eat meat from a cloned animal?
This is what I do not wish to do, thank you.
This is what I do not wish to do, thank you.
Maple Leaf Angus
Well-known member
Jason said:How will Cargill have more control of our fat supply by owning Better Beef? The plants are 2000 miles apart. Its not like they will be able to force lower prices in either area by threatening to transport most of the cattle the other way. The only advantage they will experience is that they know the exact price and yield of cattle killed in their other plant as soon as the data is available.
Jason, you are in error on this point. In the past, particularly since the BSE cow, there have been cattle moved 2000 miles across the country to even out supply/price differentials. Some of my own cattle sold at a stockyard close to home have been killed in Alberta.
And there are those who post here that would lead us to believe that it was being done for the producers benefit!?!? :lol: :lol: :lol:
I would say to them, in spite of their obvious superiority and condecension, that they are badly misguided.
What supports the healthy scepticism that many seem to hold for them, is the fact that they must constantly be running their opponents in debate into the ground. In my experience, a scathing personal attack has seldom strengthened anyone's argument. When this approach is their norm, it simply throws everything they say into just another second rate, extreme opinion.
Indeed, it simply shows, when used constantly, that the attacker has very poor self-esteem and is speaking from a weak or hollow position.
A
Anonymous
Guest
What becomes even more glaringly obvious is that those who cannot support their positions with factual information will make statements and resort to any divertionary method they can think of to avoid the debate.
Maple Leaf the challenge stands.
Take anything I have stated and prove me wrong with opposing facts. If you can't, then resort to statements and divert the debate as most do.
Those who bring nothing to the table will always find something about the table to talk about.
~SH~
Maple Leaf the challenge stands.
Take anything I have stated and prove me wrong with opposing facts. If you can't, then resort to statements and divert the debate as most do.
Those who bring nothing to the table will always find something about the table to talk about.
~SH~
rkaiser
Well-known member
Talking about the table all right. SH can never talk about anything. The first response he has to anything in disagreement to packer holiness is name calling and put downs. I don't mind joining in. In fact it's rather fun at times. But talk about talking about the table. That's SH in a nutshell.
Still running from telling me about Cargill and Tyson profits in Canada vs. their losses in America hey SH!
Still running from telling me about Cargill and Tyson profits in Canada vs. their losses in America hey SH!
Jason
Well-known member
Maple Leaf Angus said:Jason said:How will Cargill have more control of our fat supply by owning Better Beef? The plants are 2000 miles apart. Its not like they will be able to force lower prices in either area by threatening to transport most of the cattle the other way. The only advantage they will experience is that they know the exact price and yield of cattle killed in their other plant as soon as the data is available.
Jason, you are in error on this point. In the past, particularly since the BSE cow, there have been cattle moved 2000 miles across the country to even out supply/price differentials. Some of my own cattle sold at a stockyard close to home have been killed in Alberta.
And there are those who post here that would lead us to believe that it was being done for the producers benefit!?!? :lol: :lol: :lol:
Did the fact that your cattle were killed in Alberta mean that you were manipulated into a lower price? Likely the price you got was the higest bid, lower than it would have been if you could have shipped them to the States granted, but still the best you could do at that time.
Would you have rathered that they simply not bid your cattle?
How would Cargill be able to manipulate the bid if they had owned Better Beef at the time? They would know what you were bid from the East plant and would bid a similar amount less transport from the West. Now the border is open you can get competing bids from US plants. If the bids are higher Cargill Canada doesn't get the cattle.
I am surprized Western plants would need Ontario cattle. From what Randy says they didn't do any favors to any producers. Why didn't they just buy local cattle? They must have needed those cattle at that time, or else you were settling for less money than Alberta cattle were selling for. If you did, shame on you :roll: I guess free enterprize only applies when it helps us? So did Cargill or Tyson hold you hostage to get those cattle? I didn't think so, it was your best move at the time.
A producer owned plant would do the same, find out what cattle are worth and pay accordingly. If they need more they would buy the cheapest they could get. Lose money for too long and go broke, make money for a while and expand to be more competitive.
Maple Leaf Angus
Well-known member
Jason, nowhere in my post did I make any hint of a complaint or boast about the price I received.
I made the point that there is movement of cattle 2000 miles, and in either direction, according to the market conditions at the time. As for your intimation that I was upset by the packer that bought them, well, that is your construction of the illustration that I presented and is entirely incorrect as well.
Why should I care where they went, particularly in a time when bids were very scare?
I made the point that there is movement of cattle 2000 miles, and in either direction, according to the market conditions at the time. As for your intimation that I was upset by the packer that bought them, well, that is your construction of the illustration that I presented and is entirely incorrect as well.
Why should I care where they went, particularly in a time when bids were very scare?
Jason
Well-known member
I know you wouldn't care where the cattle went MLA, that's why I said it. You however said they could move 2000 miles to contradict my statement that they couldn't move ALL their kill 2000 miles to manipulate the market in either the East or West.
Yes cattle can be trucked 2000 miles or more to slaughter, but a plant 2000 miles away can't compete for all the cattle in that area if there is a packer there, even if it is their own.
So again back to Better Beef and Cargill owning it, I don't see how it is a bad thing. The fact is they outbid the competition to buy it. They still have to outbid Tyson for cattle, and pay more than the Americans for Eastern cattle.
I am glad Better Beef is still operating instead of being mothballed.
Yes cattle can be trucked 2000 miles or more to slaughter, but a plant 2000 miles away can't compete for all the cattle in that area if there is a packer there, even if it is their own.
So again back to Better Beef and Cargill owning it, I don't see how it is a bad thing. The fact is they outbid the competition to buy it. They still have to outbid Tyson for cattle, and pay more than the Americans for Eastern cattle.
I am glad Better Beef is still operating instead of being mothballed.
Maple Leaf Angus
Well-known member
Most certainly I agree with you on the plant staying operational.
And I will admit that I did not catch the part of your post where you said "most" of their production . . .and that changes things somewhat, but I'm not sure how much.
It would be an interesting study to see what percentage of available supply one would have to re-distribute to have a significant impact on the price in a locality. As far as markets are concerned, the word "locality" is almost obsolete, I think, unless you happen to be a producer in that "locality!
And I will admit that I did not catch the part of your post where you said "most" of their production . . .and that changes things somewhat, but I'm not sure how much.
It would be an interesting study to see what percentage of available supply one would have to re-distribute to have a significant impact on the price in a locality. As far as markets are concerned, the word "locality" is almost obsolete, I think, unless you happen to be a producer in that "locality!
rkaiser
Well-known member
Ya it was going to be mothballed Jason. Keep up bud. Cargill outbid Swift to buy the plant. With profits made from the Canadian Salmon run.
You talk just like SH and Agman about packer hate. We need packers bud, and lots of them. We need competition or we'll end up in the same boat again the next time some bogus border closure comes along.
You talk just like SH and Agman about packer hate. We need packers bud, and lots of them. We need competition or we'll end up in the same boat again the next time some bogus border closure comes along.
Jason
Well-known member
We have competition. The fact that Swift bid on Better Beef was competition.
Do you think Tyson is willing to let Cargill have the entire Canadian market? Do you think XL is ready to roll over and die?
This business has evolved over the last 30 years more than most any other business in existance. It will continue changing as new innovations and challenges come along.
Those that just whine about the big boys will never succeed. Those that learn from their mistakes will be the next generation.
This is why most of the new proposed plants up here will never happen. They just see $$$. Those that see the problems will have a chance.
No one disagrees that we need more capacity. But the fact remains that losing the capacity we do have was a real concern right after May 20/2003
Losses mounted to nearly $600 per head. How long would a plant remain in operation at that rate? Prices for fats fell to 30 cents. How long would any feeders last at that rate? 30 cent fats 40 cents to put on a pound of gain...rancher would have to pay to get rid of their calves. As it turned out, a subsidy helped the border was opened to boxed beef and ranchers got normal prices for their calves fall 2003. It bought the industry time.
Those who keep whining about the money Cargill and Tyson made are just jealous they weren't the ones to make it. Those that will try to run their own plants and complain the big boys make that kind of money will soon have customers that think "if the big guys make it and you are in the same business, you must be making that kind of money too".
Take care of business and if you do a good job you'll be around another day.
Do you think Tyson is willing to let Cargill have the entire Canadian market? Do you think XL is ready to roll over and die?
This business has evolved over the last 30 years more than most any other business in existance. It will continue changing as new innovations and challenges come along.
Those that just whine about the big boys will never succeed. Those that learn from their mistakes will be the next generation.
This is why most of the new proposed plants up here will never happen. They just see $$$. Those that see the problems will have a chance.
rkaiser said:Ya it was going to be mothballed Jason. Keep up bud. Cargill outbid Swift to buy the plant. With profits made from the Canadian Salmon run.
You talk just like SH and Agman about packer hate. We need packers bud, and lots of them. We need competition or we'll end up in the same boat again the next time some bogus border closure comes along.
No one disagrees that we need more capacity. But the fact remains that losing the capacity we do have was a real concern right after May 20/2003
Losses mounted to nearly $600 per head. How long would a plant remain in operation at that rate? Prices for fats fell to 30 cents. How long would any feeders last at that rate? 30 cent fats 40 cents to put on a pound of gain...rancher would have to pay to get rid of their calves. As it turned out, a subsidy helped the border was opened to boxed beef and ranchers got normal prices for their calves fall 2003. It bought the industry time.
Those who keep whining about the money Cargill and Tyson made are just jealous they weren't the ones to make it. Those that will try to run their own plants and complain the big boys make that kind of money will soon have customers that think "if the big guys make it and you are in the same business, you must be making that kind of money too".
Take care of business and if you do a good job you'll be around another day.
rkaiser
Well-known member
Oh I'll be here Jason.
But a lot of my neihbors who should have had a chance will not.
And you can be happy about that because you never lifted a finger to help them. In fact your ass kissing attitude is the same one our producer groups chose and that did nothing to help the producers they promised to serve.
Read my posts a little closer Jason. It is you and Agman and SH who have me labeled a blamer. I am simply stating the other side of the story. I agree that nothing was illegal. But you guys only want to harp on how it was doen the only possible way it could have been done.
Well it's done now. And where are we at. Two packer superpowers with more leverage than before this debacle started. And a whole bunch of Ranchers with less equity and a whole lot less hope.
Congradulations on surviving yourself Jason, nw you can lead us on the path of salvation. Are you running for ABP? I'll sign your nomination papers, and support your run for Chairman.
But a lot of my neihbors who should have had a chance will not.
And you can be happy about that because you never lifted a finger to help them. In fact your ass kissing attitude is the same one our producer groups chose and that did nothing to help the producers they promised to serve.
Read my posts a little closer Jason. It is you and Agman and SH who have me labeled a blamer. I am simply stating the other side of the story. I agree that nothing was illegal. But you guys only want to harp on how it was doen the only possible way it could have been done.
Well it's done now. And where are we at. Two packer superpowers with more leverage than before this debacle started. And a whole bunch of Ranchers with less equity and a whole lot less hope.
Congradulations on surviving yourself Jason, nw you can lead us on the path of salvation. Are you running for ABP? I'll sign your nomination papers, and support your run for Chairman.
