mrj said:
Tex, you obviously do not know anything about my financial picture, nor should you. It simply is none of your business!
And whatever made you think I don't want or need product differentiation???? That is specifically what NAIS can provide for producers, in addition to the trace-back to help control ANIMAL diseases NAIS was initially designed to do.
How did you miss my point that I do NOT support mandatory NAIS? Definitely for "product differentiation" reasons, NOT due to the foolish conspiracy theory reasons being promulgated by too many who want the industry to go backwards!
You clearly mis-understand my point. NAIS tags or chips allow producers to meet dual capabilities: tracing for animal health reasons; and providing the information he chooses to those who purchase his animals, ADDING VALUE to his animals. Some buyers are willing ot pay for that information.
A more accurate assumption that yours would be that producers who want and/or need maximum prices from their cattle NEED to use NAIS tags to market their value adding information. Not all auction barns do a great job of marketing the cattle for all their customers, after all. Producers can do better in many cases.
The Beef Checkoff provides the most current information and advertises the nutrient superiority of beef. Any Extension office can give the basics for all proteins and people who want the best will choose beef when they can afford it.
How can we expect beef to compete with chicken on price? There are any number of reasons to choose beef over other proteins........all trumped by INCOME.
Advertising can be the best, yet if income is not available, consumers are not able to buy beef. People will buy beef when they can afford it and thankfully, many will use some lower cost foods so they can afford beef as often as possible.
mrj, NAIS will allow packers to benefit from the differentiation, not producers. You seem to think that packers like to pass on profits to producers. They do not. They like to keep them.
mrj, I am very familiar with the poultry biz. I was in the store the other day and PP (Pilgrim's Pride) had chicken for sale for fifty cents per lb.
People were still buying beef.
You make assumptions that do nothing but give excuses for packers to reduce cattlemen's price they receive. The cheap poultry argument is one of them.
As long as packers can break the law, put in corrupt judges that overturn plain meaning of laws, and cater to packers, profits for suppliers will hurt. If they do this to poultry or to pigs, they will lower the value of beef. You seem to think that you can "compete" with this system by simply lowering your price. You are wrong.
I am glad that you are so financially set as to not get this right but others are not so endowed. You should stop undermining them with your silly arguments that reduce the value of their products in your attempt to cater to packers.
On your point on NAIS providing added value: What makes you think packers care? The Pickett case showed that they care more about market manipulation than paying for good cattle. They discriminated against better cattle when they thought it would lower their prices on the market as a whole and as a basis for lowering the grid prices.
Tex