• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

for EJ & OT, re. "implementation fee" & mo

mrj

Well-known member
Ernie, maybe you didn't get the whole story on the "implementation fee". Some years back, in answer complaints that "NCBA must be profiting from contracts with CBB", the decision was made to separate, for greater transparency, the direct costs such as heat, lights, rent, salaries etc. from the indirect costs, such as hired outside contracts (researchers, for instance). THERE STILL IS NO PROFIT TO NCBA on contracts with CBB!!!! It is cost recovery ONLY!

IMO, other contractors who do not differentiate implementation costs separately from other costs have an advantage in that their costs are not so transparent. There is no way to know how much 'blue sky' may be figured into the overhead costs.

You should have known this, Ernie, as a SD BIC director. Did you? If you did, why have you attempted to deceive people into thinking NCBA must be profiting from the contracts? If you did NOT know, you are not serving the producers who pay the checkoff effectively.

OT, your argument here is tiresome and offbase. First, I'm not so sure you are quoting Monte accurately. He and I had a conversation about that long ago, and he didn't recall it the same as you do. My money would be on his accuracy and honesty well before I'd place such trust in you, based in being able to look him in the eye, as well as never finding him off base in any way previously.

Secondly, NCBA dues div., IMO, does have a positive impact on the successes of the beef checkoff projects. Many of the superior staff being shared and paid on a pro-rated basis for work for the two divisions would not be there if not for the dues div. If there is some small benefit gained from mentioning NCBA and the checkoff in the same sentence, or having the logo on the same page, it is well earned by BOTH divisions of NCBA.

You ought to attend a convention, or even REALLY dig into the web sites and see some of the excellent research projects and other work being done! You could stand to learn more about the outfit! You will hurt no one but yourself by keeping your head in that hate NCBA mentality. Others can check and find you 'facts' lacking far too easily for you to influence anyone who isn't already in your camp.

mrj
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
mrj said:
Ernie, maybe you didn't get the whole story on the "implementation fee". Some years back, in answer complaints that "NCBA must be profiting from contracts with CBB", the decision was made to separate, for greater transparency, the direct costs such as heat, lights, rent, salaries etc. from the indirect costs, such as hired outside contracts (researchers, for instance). THERE STILL IS NO PROFIT TO NCBA on contracts with CBB!!!! It is cost recovery ONLY!

IMO, other contractors who do not differentiate implementation costs separately from other costs have an advantage in that their costs are not so transparent. There is no way to know how much 'blue sky' may be figured into the overhead costs.

You should have known this, Ernie, as a SD BIC director. Did you? If you did, why have you attempted to deceive people into thinking NCBA must be profiting from the contracts? If you did NOT know, you are not serving the producers who pay the checkoff effectively.

OT, your argument here is tiresome and offbase. First, I'm not so sure you are quoting Monte accurately. He and I had a conversation about that long ago, and he didn't recall it the same as you do. My money would be on his accuracy and honesty well before I'd place such trust in you, based in being able to look him in the eye, as well as never finding him off base in any way previously.

Maxine- I know very well what we discussed and what the man said...We exchanged several instances of NCBA taking credit for Checkoff projects or checkoff funded projects...In fact one time we discussed another new one that had just came out in the major media...He made it quite clear- that NCBA continuing to do that was wrong- and that if anything lost us the checkoff in a court case- it could well be the NCBA's continued misuse of the Checkoff....
He might not put it as strongly to you knowing that your are a NCBA cultist follower- and that they have a lot of say in who has a job and who doesn't...
:roll:
Secondly, NCBA dues div., IMO, does have a positive impact on the successes of the beef checkoff projects. Many of the superior staff being shared and paid on a pro-rated basis for work for the two divisions would not be there if not for the dues div. If there is some small benefit gained from mentioning NCBA and the checkoff in the same sentence, or having the logo on the same page, it is well earned by BOTH divisions of NCBA.

Its wrong and forbidden is the main reason.....
Yep-- just bend the laws/rules a little- then a little more- then well Hell throw the rule out the door for your buddies and cronies....I'll bet you're a GW backer too....


You ought to attend a convention, or even REALLY dig into the web sites and see some of the excellent research projects and other work being done! You could stand to learn more about the outfit! You will hurt no one but yourself by keeping your head in that hate NCBA mentality. Others can check and find you 'facts' lacking far too easily for you to influence anyone who isn't already in your camp.

Maxine- some of us don't own a bank- and still work for a living and can't take a couple weeks off to go partying and backslapping with the "good ole boys"....

mrj
 

EJ

Well-known member
I never said anything about profits. But if we`re goin done that trail we`ll call them: "convieniant justifiable expense", in addtion to the completion of an awarded bid. That Mrs Jones is the reason I am a heck of a lot more comfortable dispenseing our 50% from the state rather then sending it on. { In reality it`s more like 30%]

In the "checkoff task force" meetings in the summer of 2006, a lot of recomendartions were brought forward. The least importatant being raiseing the checkoff. Now in 2008 NCBA`s answer to checkoff enhancement is: raiseing the checkoff. NCBA "dues" and Federation "checkoff" have a "firewall" dividing them. BUT THEY ARE THE SAME PEOPLE WITH THE SAME AGENDA. And the CBB isn`t far from the den. This Mrs Jones is reality not deception.
 

Latest posts

Top