Sandhusker said:
Tam said:
No I didn't and I guess I didn't because ECON never posted that analyst opinion he posted the opinion from WALL STREET. Although if Econ wants us to believe Tyson is using their market power to destroy us the other opinion would have been a better one to post as I personally think that a company that is strong and holding on to their shareholder confidence is much more dangerous than one that is loosing share value because of the bad time they have gone through and according to Wall Street Analyst will be going through for sometime at least long enough to warrent downgrading their stock.
And let me take a wild stab in the dark on the why companies diversify their product line. Could it possibably be they see a market with alot of future potentual and think to themselves not unlike the farmers that if the product I'm producing has bad times I may need a backup plan to help me through them, and this other product has alot of good things going for it. So I'll invest in it to insure that I don't lose my shirt plus the shirts of all those shareholders that are trusting me to invest their money in a MONEY MAKING DEAL. Is that about why companies diverify Sandhusker or is it just because they want to sc**w as many people as they can in the time that have on this earth.
Econ posted what is probably the consensus among analysts. My statement was just to show you that , as far as stock analysts are concerned, you need to take everything with a grain of salt. For each one saying "buy", there is one saying "sell". You took that one opinion and jumped to a number of conclusions, which was a mistake.
I agree with Econ that Tyson is using their market power to corral the industry. I don't think there is any doubt about it, it's not hard to figure it out. They're not the first ones to do it. Maybe that is why that one analyst is bullish on them? He may be taking a longer term view while the others are catering more to the traders. That's the reason I bought Tyson a few years ago - I saw what they were doing. I sold my holdings a while back (with a dang tidy profit) because I didn't want to be a part of the way they do business - I think there are other ways to make a buck.
Sure, companies are going to invest in product lines where they think they can make a profit. However, they look for products that compliment what they already have. Tyson buying into beef and the position in the beef industry attained via the IBP purchase was a no-brainer. They never would of bought IBP if that purchase would not also help their chicken business and visa versa. Econ has tried repeatedly to show you folks how Tyson can and does use chicken and beef to increase their power (and long-term profitability for their shareholders), but all you want to do is fight with him and talk of conspiracies. Tyson isn't involved in a conspiracy, they're just smart business people. They're using their strengths to promote their agenda. Their strengths are political and market power. It's not hard to figure out.
Econ posted what is probably the consensus among analysts. My statement was just to show you that , as far as stock analysts are concerned, you need to take everything with a grain of salt. For each one saying "buy", there is one saying "sell". You took that one opinion and jumped to a number of conclusions, which was a mistake.
Consensus- meaning general agreement
among meaning - by many, with many
analysts meaning the plural of one analyst a person who analyzes
Now the next highlighted comment
One meaning being of single thing or unit.
Opinion meaning a belief not based on absolute certainty or positive knowledge but what seems truth, vaild, or probable to one's mind, what one thinks, judgement.
Now if what Econ posted was a consensus among analysts how did I take one opinion and jump to a number of conclusions? :???:
I agree with Econ that Tyson is using their market power to corral the industry. I don't think there is any doubt about it, it's not hard to figure it out. They're not the first ones to do it.
But the question is are they doing anything illegal Sandhusker? If they were already violating court orders by being in 4 or 5 different sectors of the meat and food industry why did the US courts force them to go through with the IBP deal when Tyson wanted out of it?
Sure, companies are going to invest in product lines where they think they can make a profit. However, they look for products that compliment what they already have. Tyson buying into beef and the position in the beef industry attained via the IBP purchase was a no-brainer. They never would of bought IBP if that purchase would not also help their chicken business and visa versa.
1952 By 1952, 19 other companies in the Springdale area had jumped on the poultry bandwagon. Don Tyson left his agricultural studies at the University of Arkansas to join his father's battle against a vulnerable and fluctuating market. When their rollercoaster ride hit a low, with the market and poultry diseases taking their toll, the Swanson Company offered to buy the Tyson business. But now, as in the past, adversity fueled John's determination. With his son at his side, the "Tyson Team" pushed forward.
1957 Tyson built its first processing plant on the north side of Springdale.
1961 Tyson entered the commercial egg business.
1963 The corporation went public. The name was changed to Tyson's Foods. The circle already complete from egg to processing plant, Tyson made its first significant acquisition with the purchase of Garrett Poultry Company in Rogers, Arkansas. With an "expand or expire" strategy, 19 other acquisitions marked the path between 1966 and 1989.
1968 Tyson opened retail outlets called "Chicken Huts."
1977 Tyson purchased hog-production facilities in North Carolina. By the end of 1979, Tyson was shipping 7,500 hogs a week, distinguishing it as the nation's largest hog producer.
1983 Diversification continued with the purchase of Mexican Original in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Before long, Tyson was the leading producer of corn and flour tortilla products in the nation.
1986 Tyson advanced to the number-one position for poultry processing. The Tyson Management Development Center, located in Russellville, Arkansas, was opened.
1989 Pushing forward with the acquisition of Holly Farms, the nation's third largest poultry firm, Tyson nearly doubled its already impressive 13.5 percent of the national market share.
1992 Marking another big diversification, Tyson leaped into the seafood business with the purchase of Arctic Alaska Fisheries, Inc., and Louis Kemp Seafood.
1995 Tyson brought both Cargill's U.S. broiler operations and McCarty Farms, Inc., into the fold. Tyson also purchased Culinary Foods of Chicago, which manufactures some 700 complementary food items from French toast to seafood entrees. About 45 percent of Culinary's business is supplying food for airlines.
1997 Tyson acquired Mallard's Food Products of Modesto, California, an innovator in culinary development and manufacture of refrigerated-fresh entrees. Mallard's is also the nation's third-largest producer of refrigerated gourmet pasta and sauce products.
1998 Tyson solidified its position as the world's largest poultry producer by merging with long-time competitor Hudson Foods. John Tyson becomes Chairman of the Board.
1999 Tyson reorganized to concentrate more on the customer. Business groups were created to realign as specific marketing groups, such as retail, foodservice and international.
2001 Tyson becomes the world's largest processor and marketer of not only chicken, but also red meat with the acquisition of beef and pork powerhouse, IBP, Inc.
Now Tyson is in the FOOD SERVICE INDUSTRY is BEEF NOT FOOD IN YOUR EYES? Why do you think they used the beef to help the chicken sector maybe just maybe they used it to help their Pasta and sauces product , have you ever heard of pasta in meat sauce maybe Spagetti and meatballs, or Beef lasagne or Hamburger Stroganoff Sandhusker have you ever ate any of them. Gee I also think it would be nice to see everyone flying the great blue sky to be eating a Beef meal how about you Sandhusker. or did you miss this part
About 45 percent of Culinary's business is supplying food for airlines. Besides, Would you invest 3.5 billions dollars and take over another 1.5 billion in debt if you thought it wasn't going to help out the rest of your business. The question is did they break the law in doing it. or does it just make them smart businessmen looking out for their bottom line.
That's the reason I bought Tyson a few years ago - I saw what they were doing. I sold my holdings a while back (with a dang tidy profit)
The same bottom line you looked at when you bought your TYSON STOCK and the same bottom line that the investor was looking at when he bought your TYSON STOCK AT A DANG TIDY PROFIT. :wink:
