Just for you gunslinger

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag: "You think the packers don't know what the other guy's ceiling is? It's not like they have a whole lot of other buyers to keep track of..."

If all the packers present the same price, why do the bids vary among packers?

Sometimes the obvious is simply too obvious for the conspiring mind isn't it?


~SH~

I asked a local well respected feeder about the "competition" between packers in his experience (50+ years). He physically laughed at me. His reply, "They have the same price at the same time. When one is buying, they're all buying and when one isn't buying, nobody is buying. You call that competiton?"

I'll take his word.

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "I asked a local well respected feeder about the "competition" between packers in his experience (50+ years). He physically laughed at me. His reply, "They have the same price at the same time. When one is buying, they're all buying and when one isn't buying, nobody is buying. You call that competiton?"

I'll take his word."

Of course you'll take his word for it because he said what you wanted to hear. The packers don't all offer the same price at the same time.

As another classic example here of who can back their position and who can't, according to the Nebraska Cattlemen Market Reporting Service, on Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 11.54, Greater Omaha bid $143, at 12:00PM, XL bid $144 in Eastern Nebraska, at 12:01 Swift bid $144.50., and at 12:27 Swift bid $145.

At 12:43, Swift bid $91 live, ibp bid $92 live, and XL bid $91.50 BUT SANDBAG SAYS THEY ALL BID THE SAME BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT A FEEDER TOLD HIM BY GOLLY!

Busted again!



~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Sandbag: "I asked a local well respected feeder about the "competition" between packers in his experience (50+ years). He physically laughed at me. His reply, "They have the same price at the same time. When one is buying, they're all buying and when one isn't buying, nobody is buying. You call that competiton?"

I'll take his word."

Of course you'll take his word for it because he said what you wanted to hear. The packers don't all offer the same price at the same time.

As another classic example here of who can back their position and who can't, according to the Nebraska Cattlemen Market Reporting Service, on Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 11.54, Greater Omaha bid $143, at 12:00PM, XL bid $144 in Eastern Nebraska, at 12:01 Swift bid $144.50., and at 12:27 Swift bid $145.

At 12:43, Swift bid $91 live, ibp bid $92 live, and XL bid $91.50 BUT SANDBAG SAYS THEY ALL BID THE SAME BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT A FEEDER TOLD HIM BY GOLLY!

Busted again!



~SH~

"As another classic example here of who can back their position and who can't, according to the Nebraska Cattlemen Market Reporting Service, on Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 11.54, Greater Omaha bid $143, at 12:00PM, XL bid $144 in Eastern Nebraska, at 12:01 Swift bid $144.50., and at 12:27 Swift bid $145."

Looks like tight supplies to me!!! Competitive bidding is great. It gives value to producers. It needs to happen all the time, not just selected times. Pickett proved that the cash market was being discriminated against compared to the other captive supplies during certain years. I wish you would get off of this all or nothing kick you are on, SH. All or nothing applies sometimes, but not in this argument and not with this meaning.

How many times do I have to tell you that marketing agreements and captive supplies are used selectively for market manipulation, and not all the time?

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag: "I asked a local well respected feeder about the "competition" between packers in his experience (50+ years). He physically laughed at me. His reply, "They have the same price at the same time. When one is buying, they're all buying and when one isn't buying, nobody is buying. You call that competiton?"

I'll take his word."

Of course you'll take his word for it because he said what you wanted to hear. The packers don't all offer the same price at the same time.

As another classic example here of who can back their position and who can't, according to the Nebraska Cattlemen Market Reporting Service, on Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 11.54, Greater Omaha bid $143, at 12:00PM, XL bid $144 in Eastern Nebraska, at 12:01 Swift bid $144.50., and at 12:27 Swift bid $145.

At 12:43, Swift bid $91 live, ibp bid $92 live, and XL bid $91.50 BUT SANDBAG SAYS THEY ALL BID THE SAME BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT A FEEDER TOLD HIM BY GOLLY!

Busted again!



~SH~

No, SH, I take his word because he is well respected, a straight shooter, and was dealing with the packers long before you were weaned.

In the report that you hang your hat on, were these bids for the same pen of cattle? Why is Swift raising their own bids when they already have the highest? Your report obviously doesn't tell the complete story as you would care to believe.

 

[Anonymous]

Conman: "Looks like tight supplies to me!!!"

Hahaha! As if you could determine tight supplies by the prices being paid when demand is just as much a function of price as supplies are.

Conman: "Competitive bidding is great. It gives value to producers. It needs to happen all the time, not just selected times."

Oh, you mean there is times when Excel, ibp, USPB, and Swift don't need cattle? Interesting! Are they aware of this phenomina?

Conman: "Pickett proved that the cash market was being discriminated against compared to the other captive supplies during certain years."

Pickett never proved a damn thing except that they couldn't back their allegations and neither can you.

Conman: "How many times do I have to tell you that marketing agreements and captive supplies are used selectively for market manipulation, and not all the time?"

You don't have to tell me anything because you don't know anything. Your opinion is totally irrelevant because you have no research or facts to back it.

Selective manipulation? What a crock! PROVE IT!


~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "In the report that you hang your hat on, were these bids for the same pen of cattle?"

The bids were for the same level of quality of cattle which is also reported. I thought you said they all bid the same? Why don't you admit that you were just proven wrong instead of playing your "illusionist" games again?

Sandbag: "Why is Swift raising their own bids when they already have the highest?"

Those two bids were not for the same pen of cattle.

Sandbag: " Your report obviously doesn't tell the complete story as you would care to believe."

It proves that all the packers do not offer the same bids at the same time which is what you implied.


NEXT!



~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "Those two bids were not for the same pen of cattle."

BINGO! You've just pointed out why all those bids you presented don't mean a thing. Are you trapping yourself again?

 

[gunslinger]

OK Sandhusker,
what do you actually want to see happen? What is your solution?

 

[agman]

Agman, "The war was won by the defendants for no other reason than the plaintiffs lost on all accounts per the Appellate Court Ruling which unamiously affirmed Judge Strom's ruling. The PSA is there to insure competition amongst packers contrary to your review."

PSA was written to insure competiton amongst packers? Good grief, Agman, I know even you don't believe that. I'm shaking my head in disbelief that you would say that. Other than Judge Strom's misguided opinion, where did you get that idea? Have you ever seen PSA? I've got a copy in my office. I'd be happy to fax it to you.

No need to fax it; you might just read it with an open mind.

 

[Sandhusker]

Agman, "The war was won by the defendants for no other reason than the plaintiffs lost on all accounts per the Appellate Court Ruling which unamiously affirmed Judge Strom's ruling. The PSA is there to insure competition amongst packers contrary to your review."

PSA was written to insure competiton amongst packers? Good grief, Agman, I know even you don't believe that. I'm shaking my head in disbelief that you would say that. Other than Judge Strom's misguided opinion, where did you get that idea? Have you ever seen PSA? I've got a copy in my office. I'd be happy to fax it to you.

No need to fax it; you might just read it with an open mind.

You point out the parts about competition between packers and I'll read it.

 

[Sandhusker]

OK Sandhusker,
what do you actually want to see happen? What is your solution?

I want to see PSA interpreted and enforced as it was written, just like any other law.

 

[agman]

OK guys,
Quote wars aside. I am not saying that R-Calf is bad or that the Packers are right or wrong. But in the pickett case obviously the war cannot be won with that argument. Argue something else and don't waste producer money, got knows we don't have it to waste. New fight Sandhusker, why stay on the sinking ship. So flame away I can take it

Great point, the best bang for the buck is to help improve beef demand. Every one dollar increase in per captia spending on beef brings $298 million additional dollars to the beef industry. Now that is an accomplishment to be proud of and benefits everyone within the beef industry. All the other stuff is virtually a total waste of time that provides little if any benefit to anyone.

 

[Econ101]

OK guys,
Quote wars aside. I am not saying that R-Calf is bad or that the Packers are right or wrong. But in the pickett case obviously the war cannot be won with that argument. Argue something else and don't waste producer money, got knows we don't have it to waste. New fight Sandhusker, why stay on the sinking ship. So flame away I can take it

Great point, the best bang for the buck is to help improve beef demand. Every one dollar increase in per captia spending on beef brings $298 million additional dollars to the beef industry. Now that is an accomplishment to be proud of and benefits everyone within the beef industry. All the other stuff is virtually a total waste of time that provides little if any benefit to anyone.

Since the packers get the buck first, Agman, why are they not doing that?

 

[gunslinger]

Honorable aim Sandhusker, but respectfully, what are you doing to make that happen.

 

[Sandhusker]

Honorable aim Sandhusker, but respectfully, what are you doing to make that happen.

Mostly just bitching about it! :lol:

I've made my feelings known to my trade organization, R-CALF, and they have put out their comments nationaly and have bent ears in Washington. Other than that, I don't know what I can do.

Congress is going to have to step in - it's their laws that are being re-written. The sad thing is this bench legislating is a virtual epidemic.

 

[agman]

OK guys,
Quote wars aside. I am not saying that R-Calf is bad or that the Packers are right or wrong. But in the pickett case obviously the war cannot be won with that argument. Argue something else and don't waste producer money, got knows we don't have it to waste. New fight Sandhusker, why stay on the sinking ship. So flame away I can take it

Great point, the best bang for the buck is to help improve beef demand. Every one dollar increase in per captia spending on beef brings $298 million additional dollars to the beef industry. Now that is an accomplishment to be proud of and benefits everyone within the beef industry. All the other stuff is virtually a total waste of time that provides little if any benefit to anyone.

Since the packers get the buck first, Agman, why are they not doing that?

Sorry, but the retailer is first in line to get the dollars from the consumer, not the packer. Your comment shows how truly removed you are from the marketing system, par for an R-CAlf member though.

Packers are investing millions to imporve beef demand but you are either too ignorant of the positive things they are doing or you are too biased to give them credit. I believe it is combination of both on your part. You waste too much time looking for negatives to ever see the positives.

BTW, you must believe Bullard's statement that producers did not share in the beef demand gains from 1999-2002. You collected $100 from SH with my assistance. Any bets on Bullard's statement?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandbag: "BINGO! You've just pointed out why all those bids you presented don't mean a thing."

Hahaha! Ah.....ok?

I'll take this as your admission that you do not support Mandatory Price Reporting?

Gosh, pretty soon you won't be agreeing with R-CULT on anything.

At least the prices I reported were part of a voluntary service and they do have meaning because they also include quality information. It also disproves your falacy that these packers all bid the same. Typical of the bullsh*t you have been brainwashed into believing. Poor little packer blamer you!

What the hell difference does it make if it's not the same pen of cattle. When these packers bid in the cash market, they pretty much bid a flat price because paying more for higher quality cattle only causes them grief with socialist whiners like you who think a pen of dairy heifers are worth as much as a good pen of thick crossbred calves. If feeders want value based marketing, they go to the grids that you packer blamers want to make obsolete.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandbag: "BINGO! You've just pointed out why all those bids you presented don't mean a thing."

Hahaha! Ah.....ok?

I'll take this as your admission that you do not support Mandatory Price Reporting?

Gosh, pretty soon you won't be agreeing with R-CULT on anything.

At least the prices I reported were part of a voluntary service and they do have meaning because they also include quality information. It also disproves your falacy that these packers all bid the same. Typical of the bullsh*t you have been brainwashed into believing. Poor little packer blamer you!

What the hell difference does it make if it's not the same pen of cattle. When these packers bid in the cash market, they pretty much bid a flat price because paying more for higher quality cattle only causes them grief with socialist whiners like you who think a pen of dairy heifers are worth as much as a good pen of thick crossbred calves. If feeders want value based marketing, they go to the grids that you packer blamers want to make obsolete.


~SH~

How do you draw the conslusion I don't support mandatory price reporting from pointing out your numbers didn't prove anything?

Like I said before, I have every reason in the world to believe what I was told because of the person who told me. The fact that it counters what you claim only reinforces the credibility.

 

[agman]

Conman: "What do you think formula pricing based off of a discriminated cash market is, SH?"

The cash market is not discriminated against because there is more than one packer bidding for those cattle and there is more than one marketing arrangement available.

NEXT!


~SH~

You think the packers don't know what the other guy's ceiling is? It's not like they have a whole lot of other buyers to keep track of...

If he knows what the ceiling is why would he ever bid more which he very often does?

 

[Sandhusker]

The cash market is not discriminated against because there is more than one packer bidding for those cattle and there is more than one marketing arrangement available.

NEXT!


~SH~

You think the packers don't know what the other guy's ceiling is? It's not like they have a whole lot of other buyers to keep track of...

If he knows what the ceiling is why would he ever bid more which he very often does?

From what I hear, he very often doesn't.