agman said:Econ101 said:agman said: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?
Agman, between the cattleman and the packer who gets the dollar first?
I am glad packers are investing in their business. They might not have it long if they didn't. If I can find positives in you and SH, I can find positives in anything. I am working on it.
I don't know what Bullard says. I am not a member of R-CALF and you must have me confused with Sandhusker.