Cattlemen's Group Wrangles With Its Former Allies

[Sandhusker]

Believe what you want Randy, I don't care!

You haven't contradicted anything I have stated and you haven't brought anything to back your position that Tyson and Cargill wanted the border to stay closed.



~SH~

Is this an example of your self-proclaimed "record of accuracy", SH? Is this what you are so proud of?

Doesn't it tell you something about the outfit you are defending when you have to make stuff up to justify their actions?

 

[Anonymous]

Ankle biter: "Doesn't it tell you something about the outfit you are defending when you have to make stuff up to justify their actions?"

Talk is cheap Ankle biter!

Prove that I made something up!

Dance Sandman, dance!


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Yes, SH, talk is cheap, very cheap.

Why am I the dancer when it is you that can't back your statement with one shred of a fact? Isn't that what you like to call "factually void"? Who's doing the dancing?

Face it, your statement is pure bullshit. You know it, I know it, Kaiser knows it. Everybody following this post can see it. Why do you feel the need to deliberately lie? Is that what this board is going to? Someone lies and then everybody has to prove them a liar?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandman: "Face it, your statement is pure BS. You know it, I know it, Kaiser knows it. Everybody following this post can see it. Why do you feel the need to deliberately lie? Is that what this board is going to? Someone lies and then everybody has to prove them a liar?"

Ok big talkin' little boy, you said I lied about the fact that the profits in Canada were offset by the losses in the U.S. plants that used to slaughter Canadian cattle. You claimed I lied without one stitch of proof to back that allegation.

How about laying $100 on it?

If I am going to get the proof, it's damn sure going to be worth my time. I'm tired of your pathetic deception games.

PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS ANKLE BITER!

$100 from you to me if I provide the proof that gains in Canadian packing plants were offset by losses in U.S. plants that slaughtered Canadian cattle and no longer had those cattle available after the Canadian border closed. $100 to you from me if I can't provide the proof.

Now watch the dance folks!


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

I'm interested in your money. What will be the time frame and what plants will be involved?

 

[Murgen]

I guess my question would be, why would the multinationals be offsetting their losses in the US with capital purchases within Canada?

If they are so tied to the cattlemens groups in the US, do they know something we don't?

Where is beef going to be exported from, in the next couple of decades?

Are they going to import it from the "new' Canadian capacity to the US and then to Japan, or are they going to export direct?

Damn, no added value, that sucks! I wonder why there hasn't been a flood of Canadian cattle to the US?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandman: "I'm interested in your money. What will be the time frame and what plants will be involved?"

The bet is that financial gains in Canadian packing plants by Excel and/or Tyson, during the period of time when Canadian live cattle exports were banned from the U.S., were offset by the losses occuring in Tyson and/or Excel plants, in the U.S., that previously slaughtered Canadian cattle that no longer had Canadian cattle available to them. PARTICULARLY PLANTS IN THE NW.


Time frame ?

Time frame for me to collect the information - 1 month

Time frame in question - During the period of time when the Canadian border was closed to live cattle exports to the U.S.

$100 is the bet.

Are you in or are you out?



~SH~

 

[HAY MAKER]

Sandman: "I'm interested in your money. What will be the time frame and what plants will be involved?"

The bet is that financial gains in Canadian packing plants by Excel and/or Tyson, during the period of time when Canadian live cattle exports were banned from the U.S., were offset by the losses occuring in Tyson and/or Excel plants, in the U.S., that previously slaughtered Canadian cattle that no longer had Canadian cattle available to them. PARTICULARLY PLANTS IN THE NW.


Time frame ?

Time frame for me to collect the information - 1 month

Time frame in question - During the period of time when the Canadian border was closed to live cattle exports to the U.S.

$100 is the bet.

Are you in or are you out?



~SH~

You aint going to do a damn thing SH**,except twist and turn like always,tell you what, you post a copy of these packer SOB executive payroll account,then we will see "the real deal".It's not rocket science to pay yourself 26Mil then claim company losses.............good luck PS you oughta have to pay us $100 to read your "BS".

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandman: "I'm interested in your money. What will be the time frame and what plants will be involved?"

The bet is that financial gains in Canadian packing plants by Excel and/or Tyson, during the period of time when Canadian live cattle exports were banned from the U.S., were offset by the losses occuring in Tyson and/or Excel plants, in the U.S., that previously slaughtered Canadian cattle that no longer had Canadian cattle available to them. PARTICULARLY PLANTS IN THE NW.


Time frame ?

Time frame for me to collect the information - 1 month

Time frame in question - During the period of time when the Canadian border was closed to live cattle exports to the U.S.

$100 is the bet.

Are you in or are you out?



~SH~

You need a month to collect information? :lol: You're making statements like you know the facts, but now you need a month to back your statements? :lol: I'm thinking we need to bet more than $100.

However, just as Haymaker predicted, you're already weasling. What's this ".... that previously slaughtered Canadian cattle that no longer had Canadian cattle available to them. PARTICULARLY PLANTS IN THE NW."

Let me remind you of your original "questionable" statement; "That doesn't circumvent the fact that their NW U.S. plants were losing money which more than offset the gains in Canada."

NW plants are those in Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. Not "particularly", but "exclusively". If the plant is not in the NW, it is not part of this bet. Don't be trying to muddle this - this is simple. How much money did the Tyson plants located in the NW US lose - how much did the Tyson plants located in Canada make during the same time frame. For simplicity, I propose the time frame to be year 2004.

Wouldn't this be much simpler if you had the integrity to back your statements with facts? Particularly after you rail on others to "bring the facts"? Why the blatant hypocracy and subsequent weasling?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandman: "You need a month to collect information? You're making statements like you know the facts, but now you need a month to back your statements?"

Should be a pretty safte bet for you then huh?

Perhaps your right, perhaps I just pulled that out of clear thin air. Might be the easiest $100 you ever made.

Are you in or out?

Sandman: "I'm thinking we need to bet more than $100."

I'm listening!

Feeling weak in the knees yet?

Don't worry, this should be a slam dunk. After all, I'm lying, you said so yourself.

Sandman: "However, just as Haymaker predicted, you're already weasling."

All the more reason for you to take the bet slick!

When Haymaker speaks, people listen, BY GAWD!

He's probably typing on his computer right now as the flood waters from Rita rises to his knees as he ignores the sparks flying above him from the downed overhead powerlines that are plainly visible after his roof blew off.

Yup, shor nuff credibility with ol' Hayseed. PETUIE, SPLAT!

Sandman: "If the plant is not in the NW, it is not part of this bet."

Wonderful, I like that even better.

Sandman: "How much money did the Tyson plants located in the NW US lose - how much did the Tyson plants located in Canada make during the same time frame."

Nope, how much money did the Tyson and Cargill plants located in the NW lose on a dollars per head basis vs. how much money the Tyson and Cargill plants located in Canada made, on a per head basis during the time when the Canadian border was closed to exports of live cattle to the United States.

Sandman: "Wouldn't this be much simpler if you had the integrity to back your statements with facts?"

Hahaha!

Talk about the blackest of black pots calling the kettle black.

You're arrogance is entertaining as hell considering the fact that you've never backed a position in your life with supporting facts yet you demand it of others.

Sandman: "Why the blatant hypocracy and subsequent weasling?"

Are you ready to take the bet or not or do you feel confident enough to raise it?

Like I said, you are so sure I am lying this should be the easiest $100 you ever made.

Are you in or are you out?



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

I'm in. You prove to me that Tyson/Cargill lost more money in their NW plants than they made in their Canadian plants. Let's see it. Make your check out to R-CALF as that is where I'm donating it.

I still have to laugh that you can make a statement but then claim you need a month to try to back it. That's pretty rediculous. Let's see it a little sooner.

 

[Anonymous]

Sounds good!


~SH~

 

[fedup2]

This is going to be a tough one to break out! I already see the winner but will reserve judgement!

Tyson reports losses of $29million this year vs. $12 million gains last year in their futures positions. This from their risk management related to boxed beef sales. Also losses of $1million compared to $17 million of gains last period do to commodity risk management activities. They also state $61 million of bse related charges.

They claim operating income was impacted by 5 million because of write downs, increased live cattle prices, production declines and decreased capacity utilization for 04.

It goes on to state: these decreases were partially offset by higher average selling prices and increased volumes and margins at our Lakeside operation in Canada.

Go to your neutral corners. Keep it clean. No name calling or childish comments. When the bell rings, come out fighting! LOL!

 

[rkaiser]

First of all, could anyone tell me how many Cagill and Tyson Plants are in this NW United States zone we are working with?

As for dates, I would like to suggest that the salmon run began when the boxed beef started to flow south of the 49th some time in Sept. 2003. One last kick at the cat for the Tyson and Cargill plants up here last March when Rcalf paid off Cebull and prices in Canada dropped accordingly :roll: :roll: . Most of the losses Cargill and Tyson incurred from May 2003, to Sept. 2003 were offset by government of Canada cheques. In fact I think they made a few bucks.

SOOOO I say let's go from Sept. 30, 2003 to July 15, 2005.

I have my cheque for $100.00 payable to NCBA if SH shows proof of his fairy tale.

SH told the fairy tale -

"That doesn't circumvent the fact that their NW U.S. plants were losing money which more than offset the gains in Canada."

 

[Sandhusker]

Kaiser, "I have my cheque for $100.00 payable to NCBA if SH shows proof of his fairy tale."

Don't waste a check blank. SH has already lost the bet - first of all, there is no way he can get figures from Cargill - and that was part of the bet. I'll bet you another $100 that I'll never see a dime from him, though. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt before I call him a welcher, though.

That's what he gets for flapping his lips trying to BS us and steer other's opinions with his nonsense. He got caught in a lie.

SH, do you need my mailing address to send the check?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker: "SH has already lost the bet - first of all, there is no way he can get figures from Cargill - and that was part of the bet."

Let me remind you of exactly what you stated you weasel .......

On Sept. 24 at 9:14 am you wrote:

Sandman (to SH): Let me remind you of your original "questionable" statement; "That doesn't circumvent the fact that their NW U.S. plants were losing money which more than offset the gains in Canada."

Sandman: "NW plants are those in Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. Not "particularly", but "exclusively". If the plant is not in the NW, it is not part of this bet. Don't be trying to muddle this - this is simple. How much money did the Tyson plants located in the NW US lose - how much did the Tyson plants located in Canada make during the same time frame. For simplicity, I propose the time frame to be year 2004."

Is this the terms of the bet or not Sandman?

Are you going to start backpeddling on the terms that you agreed to???

You set the stage, not me!


You followed this up with....

Sept. 24 at 2:32 PM

Sandhusker: "I'm in. You prove to me that Tyson/Cargill lost more money in their NW plants than they made in their Canadian plants. Let's see it."

You specified Tyson in your first post than you said Tyson/Cargill which to me means either/or.

Are you going to start backpeddling now?

When I made the initial "supposedly questionable" statement above that has been referred to repeatedly by you and Randy, you called me a liar.

Here it is again..........

"That doesn't circumvent the fact that their NW U.S. plants were losing money which more than offset the gains in Canada."

You accused me of lying with that statement.


Based on that statement, the bet was that I prove that Tyson and/or Cargill plants in the NW lost more money than they made in their Canadian plants.

Is this the bet or not?

A simple yes or no is all that is needed!




~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, I knew you'd be squiming like a snake held by the tail.

Tyson/Cargill does NOT mean either or. Allow me to refesh your memory with the post you answered and birthed your lie;

Quote:
Randy: "Did Cargill and Tyson realize profits due to the closed border to Canada SH? A simple yes or no would suffice."

Your untruthful reply,"How many times do I have to answer that question for you? The answer is absolutely. I have said how many times that packers had an advantage in Canada due to more cattle than slaughter capacity. Have I said it a hundred times yet Randy? You can't hear it enough though can you? You also cannot accept that I understand that reality can you? That doesn't circumvent the fact that their NW U.S. plants were losing money which more than offset the gains in Canada.

NOW you're saying it "either/or"? Cargill and Tyson is either/or? Does the word "and" have any meaning in Randy's quote that you used?

I said, "I'm in. You prove to me that Tyson/Cargill lost more money in their NW plants than they made in their Canadian plants. Let's see it."

Yor reply, "Sounds good! "

Now, you either provide the numbers for the NW US and Canadian plants of Tyson AND Cargill to compare and be correct in your statement, or send me my $100 per the bet that YOU proposed.

I'd let you off and chalk this up to "not worth messing with an idiot" if you weren't such a hypocritical horse's patoot, but you just don't know when to back down.

What will your next dodge be?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandman: "Tyson/Cargill does NOT mean either or."

YOU SLIMY Son of a B!

I knew you'd weasel on me, I absolutely knew it. I told a number of people this is just what you would do when you started figuring it out.


When I called you out, here is exactly what I stated:

SEPTEMBER 24 8:12AM

SH: "The bet is that financial gains in Canadian packing plants by Excel and/or Tyson, during the period of time when Canadian live cattle exports were banned from the U.S., were offset by the losses occuring in Tyson and/or Excel plants, in the U.S., that previously slaughtered Canadian cattle that no longer had Canadian cattle available to them. PARTICULARLY PLANTS IN THE NW."

TO WHICH YOU REPLIED IN THE VERY NEXT POST:

SEPTEMBER 24 9:14AM

Sandman: "NW plants are those in Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. Not "particularly", but "exclusively". If the plant is not in the NW, it is not part of this bet. Don't be trying to muddle this - this is simple. How much money did the Tyson plants located in the NW US lose - how much did the Tyson plants located in Canada make during the same time frame. For simplicity, I propose the time frame to be year 2004."

Sandman, THOSE ARE YOUR EXACT WORDS now you are changing your story? You pathetic @%^#*$!@!!!!!!!!!!!!

I knew you'd start backpeddling on what you agreed to particularly if you looked into it.

I have your @ss nailed to the wall with the above bet and you know it!

You are everything I loathe in humanity.


~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

YOU SLIMY Son of a B!



You pathetic @%^#*$!@!!!!!!!!!!!!


I have your @ss nailed to the wall with the above bet and you know it!

You are everything I loathe in humanity.


~SH~

More facts- according to SH__ :wink: :lol: :lol:

 

[rkaiser]

Yip, SH is cornered. The name calling is getting worse.

The question still and always remains. "Can SH back up his fairy tale with facts?"

It's pretty obvious by his emotional outrage that he cannot.

Twist this one around for a little longer and everyone will forget. That is your only defence SH.