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

Haymaker answer this. If you can.

Help Support Ranchers.net:

B

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,755
Reaction score
1,223
Location
Big Muddy valley
Haymaker if your selling calves would you sell them to the person that bid the most for them?

Would it not make sense that the person that can make most money from them could pay the most?


How can it be that calves that go thru a sale barn three or four times can return the most to the producer then one's that have a retained ownership?
 
Big Muddy rancher said:
Haymaker if your selling calves would you sell them to the person that bid the most for them?

Would it not make sense that the person that can make most money from them could pay the most?


How can it be that calves that go thru a sale barn three or four times can return the most to the producer then one's that have a retained ownership?
Click to expand...


Four packers controll eighty percent of the market BMR,more packers and a more even playing field,and IM happy. All these packer programs do is add to captive supply,sure you get a few bucks more by side stepping sale barns with you calves,but what about your neighbors?I know the hell with my neighbor right?let him fend for his self right?I got a better idea its called the CAPTIVE SUPPLY REFORM ACT,it will create fairness for all,Why dont you feed your steers yourself,to much work? then sell on the cash market ...............good luck PS no packer should own a head of cattle more than 7 days
 
no packer should own a head of cattle more than 7 days
Click to expand...

All i can see that doing is causing volatility. If there are more cattle on offer than what the packers need, they will just leave what they can't use. If there's not enough cattle, they will have to pay more. The thing is if the packer just leaves those cattle when there is a glut, they will be worth less as they come back to the salebarn overfed. I don't know how things operate in the US but most guys up here calve in the spring. If you say 14 months to finish an animal that gets them ready for about barbecue season the next year. Later in the year when the previous year's fall calves are ready, demand will be higher for fewer calves but guys who are calving in the spring will get less as there will be a glut when the feedlots want to sell those. N'est ce pas?
 
SASH said:
no packer should own a head of cattle more than 7 days
Click to expand...

All i can see that doing is causing volatility. If there are more cattle on offer than what the packers need, they will just leave what they can't use. If there's not enough cattle, they will have to pay more. The thing is if the packer just leaves those cattle when there is a glut, they will be worth less as they come back to the salebarn overfed. I don't know how things operate in the US but most guys up here calve in the spring. If you say 14 months to finish an animal that gets them ready for about barbecue season the next year. Later in the year when the previous year's fall calves are ready, demand will be higher for fewer calves but guys who are calving in the spring will get less as there will be a glut when the feedlots want to sell those. N'est ce pas?
Click to expand...

So then if we could get 12 zones running north and south and everybody in their zone would start calving at the first of their month, then we would have a staggered supply of cattle coming on and off from feed. Would it work?

If so why?

If not why?

Bonus points to the first one to agree.

More bonus points for the best answer.

And that is your pop quiz for the day, boys and girls. :lol:
 
I agree that it would work in the long run but the reason I calve when I do, like most cattlemen, has to do with my personal situation, my facilities and what works for me. As soon as my calving dates are being mandated by the feedlots or the packers then I have lost my ability to run my operation as I see fit and have basically become a 'packer employee'
 
Ten bonus points to Sash!!!

But Sash, if we have vertical integration, as some see coming, then you will no longer be needed to have an opinion or say what you want to do, or you will be out on your kiester! We can't have any of this personal opinion stuff! You Vill vall into line, und do as you are told to do, dumkoff! (that is said with my best German Nazi accent) :wink:
 
Jinglebob said:
Ten bonus points to Sash!!!

But Sash, if we have vertical integration, as some see coming, then you will no longer be needed to have an opinion or say what you want to do, or you will be out on your kiester! We can't have any of this personal opinion stuff! You Vill vall into line, und do as you are told to do, dumkoff! (that is said with my best German Nazi accent) :wink:
Click to expand...

I'm of the opinion that the producers need to get hold of the supply side of this equation. I'm not sure that having all cattle go through the auction yard is good for anybody but the auction yard. I think that if we as producers could get a consensus and market all the beef in North America through one organization with a set price and a guaranteed delivery of however many animals the packers need on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis, that would work the best. It would lower the risk for the producers and lower the risk for the packers. It would take alot of the volatility out of the market and take out alot of the middlemen who seem to be profiting off the producers back. If you knew exactly how many you needed next week and in the months to come, you could push animals or slow down their feed accordingly. JMHO.
 
The lines for the zones need to be drawn east and west to corespond to the north movement of green grass and warm temperature.I think you and sash have the start to amarketing dynasty.Keep up the good ideas.Positive action always beats the naysayer in the long haul.
 
Sash and smalltime;

If we did as Sash suggests, would we be socialists? :shock: :lol:

Dad always said that if we would all just say we were only going to breed half of our cows, then the market would shoot up. I disagree as there is always someone who will fall out with the rest and screw the deal up.

Can you imagine the good folks of NCBA and R_Calf agreeing to the same plan.

But it is kind of an interesting proposition! :lol:
 
No.You would be abig corperation abusing the poor packer.But you would have the usda on your side and plentey lawyer power.
 
Jinglebob said:
Sash and smalltime;

If we did as Sash suggests, would we be socialists? :shock: :lol:

Dad always said that if we would all just say we were only going to breed half of our cows, then the market would shoot up. I disagree as there is always someone who will fall out with the rest and screw the deal up.

Can you imagine the good folks of NCBA and R_Calf agreeing to the same plan.

But it is kind of an interesting proposition! :lol:
Click to expand...

I've heard this socialist argument when I've suggested this before. I guess it depends on how you look at it. What I am trying to do is set up a 'Just In Time' inventory system for the Packers where I manage the supply side of the scenario. It is exactly the same thing that companies like 'Magna International' does for the automobile manufacturers. The only difference is that I'm trying to turn us into 'price setters' instead of 'price takers' which we are now. To a point, you can guarantee a price through the futures market but it is never a perfect hedge because the size and quantity of animals that you have will not be exactly the same as your futures contract. Also, what if the futures price is not high enough to make a profit?
Your point about 'someone falling out and screwing it up' is well taken. There are people up here who spend their time railing against the Wheat Board and yes they can get a better price if they market independently because of the admin costs of the Wheat Board but all they are doing is cannibalizing the market for all their neighbors.
Farming is different than any other business because you have millions of tiny little businesses worldwide who are producing, more or less, the same line of products and selling them based on an artificially based commodity price. No other business in the world operates that way. Every normal business sets its own price for its products. Good Luck.
 
SASH said:
Jinglebob said:
Ten bonus points to Sash!!!

I'm of the opinion that the producers need to get hold of the supply side of this equation.

Attempting to manipulate supply is a prescription for disaster. Do you remember the price freeze of 1973? Have a great day.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
i'm of the opinion that producers will never "get control" of the supply side: case in point: today's feeder market. the cow-calf man will see the almighty dollar sign for his calves now, he'll sell all but the best replacement heifers until he figures out that ANY replacement heifer is worth more due to the high-priced calf she raises (long-run), then heifers will be retained, the calf crop increases, the fed-cattle supply increases, until it's AGAIN, no longer profitable to keep/breed every heifer on the place.

it's called "the cattle cycle", it's FAIRLY predictable, and the border being open to live cattle imports from Canada is just a small bump in the overall picture. i will admit that with the export market (or lack there-of), it could have an impact going forward, but the worst of it's already been seen. the question is: do we want to have any part of it in the future? and if so, what needs to be done to assure that?
 
I think the answer is vertical integration. Not the kind of vertical integration that the big corporations want. :? It needs to be driven by the primary producer. In other words, from the bottom. That's where we are right now, at the bottom of the pile.

For example, there's a producer driven plant being developed right now in Saskatchewan and Manitoba that has a lot of brand new ideas and innovations that we could all use. The plant is run unlike any I have seen yet. Producers buy hooks. A hundred dollars buys a hook for four years. The catch is that these hooks have marketing dates attached to them. This keeps the plant running at a steady pace, because the cattle come in year round. The fall calving guys would sign up for a different time of year than the spring calvers, and so on. The cattle are processed, and their yields of different cuts are tracked. Those cuts are priced and sold. The seller gets the retail return on those cuts, less a processing fee.

Not much for the middleman in this setup. The plant has a confirmed steady supply. Everyone can find a marketing time to fit their managment. Pricing based on retail is a lot more predictable, since the retail market doesn't have nearly the volatility as the market we live with now. This beef is marketed as 'natual'. No antibiotics after weaning. (This alone makes it much more small operator friendly than big feedlot friendly.)

This just may be a viable alternative to the dog eat dog world we live in now. :!:
 
you know, i'm really just a beginner in this industry (which, BTW, i call the beef industry), but i've been hearing vertical integration touted by all the big guns at universities as the best way to maximize income for over 20 years now. is this JUST NOW in the literature that's available to everyone who has access to university studies???!!! OMG!!!!!

all the land-grant universities are out of paper to disseminate this knowledge because the tax-payers are broke, because the tax-payers didn't have access??????????

HELLO!!!!!!!!!!!! Can you hear me now????

who is it that says there is NO EXCUSE for ignorance?? (or poor spelling?)
 
Agman: "Attempting to manipulate supply is a prescription for disaster. Do you remember the price freeze of 1973? Have a great day."

You got that right, Agman. Convince the consumer that hamburger is health food (which it is when it's on a whole wheat bun, fries cooked in beef tallow, and a big glass of SOUTHERN ice tea) and that will solve all supply problems. If you want more for your cattle, get closer to the consumer...that's were ALL the money comes from!!!

Sorry I missed your race...I would have ridden with you...if my wife would let me!?!? Take care, Robert
 
i find it mildly interesting that no-one responded to my post asking basically "WHERE HAVE YOU ALL BEEN THE LAST 20 YEARS?".....hmmmm....

does this mean no-one here has access to university research? do you guys realize that YOUR tax dollars fund this? so why not take advantage? i don't understand.... :?
 
Here's some research that was done a bit ago, still true today. a little bit of reading, but well worth it.

http://www.viewtrak.com/track/trends/index.php?tid=1&id=1
 

Latest posts

Top