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

Packers and retailers win, everyone else loses

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
8,789
Location
Texas
GUEST EDITORIAL

FOR REPRINT

April, 20 2006


Big meatpackers manipulate global beef trade

By Mike Callicrate


Never before have so many people been exploited


U.S. cattle producers aren't selling beef to Japan, but the biggest U.S. based beef packers are.


Tyson and Cargill are approved to export to Japan from their Canadian plants and Swift has access to Japan from their Australia Meat Holdings.*


"Swift Australia continues to capitalize on the void left by the absence of North American beef in the Asian marketplace," said John N. Simons, President and CEO of Swift and Company in April 2005.


Cargill hasn't been hurt by the loss of the Asian export market as they continue to sell out of their High River, Alberta, Canada plant.


The single largest impact on packer/retailer beef profitability is the cost of live cattle. The U.S. live cattle market is the biggest and best beef consuming market in the world and sets the world price, so isn't it in the best interest of the packers to lower the U.S. price as much as possible?


If the big packers can keep the Japanese market closed to the U.S., while dumping their inferior, mostly non-inspected foreign beef and cattle imports into the U.S. market, they hurt smaller U.S. packing competitors and are better able to lower U.S. cattle prices, thereby dropping cattle prices globally.


Why does USDA keep the export markets closed to Japan by refusing to allow testing for Mad Cow? Because the big packers don't want competition from smaller, higher quality packers like Creekstone, and because they don't want the premium export market reopened for the U.S., driving up their biggest cost - cattle.


So where does USDA's arrogance and disrespect for the highly valued Japanese customer come from? Why do the USDA and the big packers refuse to deliver what the Japanese customer wants? Like any business organization, the USDA's offensive personality comes from their leadership and bosses – the big packers.


We know from the white paper, *"USDA Inc.", that the big packers run USDA - from writing the rules for HACCP, mandatory price reporting and country of origin labeling. We know from the recent *GAO report that the packer run USDA is ignoring market protecting antitrust laws.


Packers and retailers win, everyone else loses


Market leader Tyson is demanding a 13.25% return on their investment in order for John Tyson, CEO & Chairman, to receive his bonus. Much of the unreasonable profit demand is coming via their Lakeside Packers plant at Brooks, Alberta, Canada where cattle are cheap and the lucrative export markets are now open. Demanding a 13.25% return in a commodity market mandates that abusive political and market power be applied aggressively, from playing countries against each other through global trade to abusing workers to leveraging captive cattle supplies. What is easier for Tyson: selling beef to Wal-Mart at higher prices, or buying cattle from powerless independent farmers and ranchers for less? After all, most farmers and ranchers have no other market and are desperate to sell what they produce to survive financially.


The big packers and retailers are standing on the neck of producers everywhere while picking consumers pockets. They have rigged the market into a fool's game, quietly cheering and sneering at all of us who have naively trusted that the economic system is fair.


Independent producers and consumers are easy prey. Producers only hope to farm and ranch, raise healthy families and live in rural communities that aren't being starved of a fair and stable income. Consumers just want good food at affordable prices.


Never before have so many people been exploited. Never before has food quality and food safety been so lacking. Never before have the markets been so concentrated and unfair.


One hundred years ago, Upton Sinclair's "Jungle 1906" described a powerful and dangerous beef trust standing between producers of livestock and consumers. We have an even more powerful beef trust today scamming the public and playing games with the common good to accomplish their own self-serving ends.



Perhaps some of the same solutions to the Jungle of 1906 should be applied today.


* The following webpage states that the following Canadian establishments are eligible, as of February 20, 2006, to export beef products to Japan: 38, 51, 93, 96, 136, 235A, 523, 597. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/meavia/mmopmmhv/chap11/jape.shtml

You can look up the establishments' names at : http://active.inspection.gc.ca/active/reglst/RegResults.asp?l=E

Among the establishments eligible to export beef to Japan are Lakeside Packers, Brooks, Alberta; Cargill Canada, Guelph, Ontario; Cargill Foods.

* USDA Inc.: How Agribusiness has hijacked regulatory policy at the US Department of Agriculture: http://www.agribusinessaccountability.org/page/325/1



*Office of Inspector General audit on Packers and Stockyards can be seen at: http://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/30601-01-HY.pdf
 
HAY MAKER said:
If the big packers can keep the Japanese market closed to the U.S., while dumping their inferior, mostly non-inspected foreign beef and cattle imports into the U.S. market

I had some respect for Callicrate because he was going up against the packers, but this sounds like he's referring to Canadian Beef as non-inspected (if beef is packaged here, its federally inspected) and inferior (which it most certainly is not). Does anyone know if this was his intention?

Rod
 
DiamondSCattleCo said:
HAY MAKER said:
If the big packers can keep the Japanese market closed to the U.S., while dumping their inferior, mostly non-inspected foreign beef and cattle imports into the U.S. market

I had some respect for Callicrate because he was going up against the packers, but this sounds like he's referring to Canadian Beef as non-inspected (if beef is packaged here, its federally inspected) and inferior (which it most certainly is not). Does anyone know if this was his intention?

Rod

Rod, When I first read it, the first thing that came to mind was Mexican and South American beef. I think if he had been referring to Canadian Beef he would have said so.
 
DiamondSCattleCo said:
HAY MAKER said:
If the big packers can keep the Japanese market closed to the U.S., while dumping their inferior, mostly non-inspected foreign beef and cattle imports into the U.S. market

I had some respect for Callicrate because he was going up against the packers, but this sounds like he's referring to Canadian Beef as non-inspected (if beef is packaged here, its federally inspected) and inferior (which it most certainly is not). Does anyone know if this was his intention?

Rod

Diamond, your bull probably went into hamburger meat. Possibly sold at Taco Bell or one of those places where they mix it to make it taste good. I wouldn't worry about the statement, however. I don't think he was talking about quality meat, which is all most Canadians have except for old bulls. :wink: :wink:

Here is a good article on imports and exports of beef in the U.S. We imported YTD 160 and exported 66.

I think he is more concerned about market concentration and the international trade helping concentrate the industry with a handful of companies. They are doing the same thing with their other meats like poultry.

http://www.ams.usda.gov/LSMNpubs/pdf_monthly/international.pdf
 
DiamondSCattleCo,I too wondered about that one statement,but I believe he was refering to south America beef and packer manipulations...........good luck
 
Mexico and South America are never even refered to in this article.

Canada is targeted and Australia is mentioned in passing.

To believe Tyson is making more from 1 plant in Canada sending beef to Japan while they can't get the premiums from their many US plants is just rediculous.

Calicrate hasn't offered one bit of proof for his rants. I doubt many even give his chatter a second thought.
 
Jason said:
Mexico and South America are never even refered to in this article.

Canada is targeted and Australia is mentioned in passing.

To believe Tyson is making more from 1 plant in Canada sending beef to Japan while they can't get the premiums from their many US plants is just rediculous.

Calicrate hasn't offered one bit of proof for his rants. I doubt many even give his chatter a second thought.

Jason, if they were not making more money in Canada from that one plant by sending the meat to Japan, they wouldn't be sending it to Japan, they would be sending it to the U.S. There are extra transportation costs of shipping to Japan also.

I posted a website so you could find the countries that were importing and exporting to the U.S., did you not see the actual facts?

Your $350 bushel corn has done you in. I wouldn't give your chatter a second thought.
 
DiamondSCattleCo said:
HAY MAKER said:
If the big packers can keep the Japanese market closed to the U.S., while dumping their inferior, mostly non-inspected foreign beef and cattle imports into the U.S. market

I had some respect for Callicrate because he was going up against the packers, but this sounds like he's referring to Canadian Beef as non-inspected (if beef is packaged here, its federally inspected) and inferior (which it most certainly is not). Does anyone know if this was his intention?

Rod

Rod, Callicrate should have been more clear in saying " non-[USDA] inspected foreign beef" and imported cattle killed in USA plants are USDA inspected. For imported beef, the USDA requires documentation of 'equivalency' to USDA regulations...the actual inspection is done, as you say, by inspectors in the importing country. I would trust Canadian inspectors as opposed to some other countries!

The important point is that multi-national packers have other avenues to sell to Asian markets other than USA beef. And it is far more profitable(improved margins) to have their biggest expense in their largest market to go down...the price of USA live cattle. Close plants, cut shifts, and increase imports will eventually backup cattle in the feed lots and increase supply.
 
RobertMac said:
DiamondSCattleCo said:
HAY MAKER said:
If the big packers can keep the Japanese market closed to the U.S., while dumping their inferior, mostly non-inspected foreign beef and cattle imports into the U.S. market

I had some respect for Callicrate because he was going up against the packers, but this sounds like he's referring to Canadian Beef as non-inspected (if beef is packaged here, its federally inspected) and inferior (which it most certainly is not). Does anyone know if this was his intention?

Rod

Rod, Callicrate should have been more clear in saying " non-[USDA] inspected foreign beef" and imported cattle killed in USA plants are USDA inspected. For imported beef, the USDA requires documentation of 'equivalency' to USDA regulations...the actual inspection is done, as you say, by inspectors in the importing country. I would trust Canadian inspectors as opposed to some other countries!

The important point is that multi-national packers have other avenues to sell to Asian markets other than USA beef. And it is far more profitable(improved margins) to have their biggest expense in their largest market to go down...the price of USA live cattle. Close plants, cut shifts, and increase imports will eventually backup cattle in the feed lots and increase supply.

Callicrate didn't specify non USDA inspected foreign beef because he was slamming all foregin product including Canada.

The packers are not shipping the same amount of beef to Japan from 1 plant in Canada as they would from all their plants in the US.

Knocking the margins down in their biggest market isn't good for their bottom line.

I would rather make $1 on 1 million units than $10 on 1000.
 
Jason said:
RobertMac said:
DiamondSCattleCo said:
I had some respect for Callicrate because he was going up against the packers, but this sounds like he's referring to Canadian Beef as non-inspected (if beef is packaged here, its federally inspected) and inferior (which it most certainly is not). Does anyone know if this was his intention?

Rod

Rod, Callicrate should have been more clear in saying " non-[USDA] inspected foreign beef" and imported cattle killed in USA plants are USDA inspected. For imported beef, the USDA requires documentation of 'equivalency' to USDA regulations...the actual inspection is done, as you say, by inspectors in the importing country. I would trust Canadian inspectors as opposed to some other countries!

The important point is that multi-national packers have other avenues to sell to Asian markets other than USA beef. And it is far more profitable(improved margins) to have their biggest expense in their largest market to go down...the price of USA live cattle. Close plants, cut shifts, and increase imports will eventually backup cattle in the feed lots and increase supply.

1. Callicrate didn't specify non USDA inspected foreign beef because he was slamming all foregin product including Canada.

2. The packers are not shipping the same amount of beef to Japan from 1 plant in Canada as they would from all their plants in the US.

3. Knocking the margins down in their biggest market isn't good for their bottom line.

4. I would rather make $1 on 1 million units than $10 on 1000.

1. A mind reader again. I think he was slamming you specifically, Jason.

2. The packers are not shipping beef from any plants in the U.S. (that we know of)

3. They are knocking down the price of beef in the U.S. by the USDA not allowing extra supply go to foriegn markets. Margins don't have a lot to do with it except that their Canadian plants get larger margins than the domestic plants with shipments to Japan. Jason, food is inelastic. It matters.

4. Don't worry about the packers making money. They have people like agman to figure out how to do it.
 
Econ101 said:
Jason said:
RobertMac said:
Rod, Callicrate should have been more clear in saying " non-[USDA] inspected foreign beef" and imported cattle killed in USA plants are USDA inspected. For imported beef, the USDA requires documentation of 'equivalency' to USDA regulations...the actual inspection is done, as you say, by inspectors in the importing country. I would trust Canadian inspectors as opposed to some other countries!

The important point is that multi-national packers have other avenues to sell to Asian markets other than USA beef. And it is far more profitable(improved margins) to have their biggest expense in their largest market to go down...the price of USA live cattle. Close plants, cut shifts, and increase imports will eventually backup cattle in the feed lots and increase supply.

1. Callicrate didn't specify non USDA inspected foreign beef because he was slamming all foregin product including Canada.

2. The packers are not shipping the same amount of beef to Japan from 1 plant in Canada as they would from all their plants in the US.

3. Knocking the margins down in their biggest market isn't good for their bottom line.

4. I would rather make $1 on 1 million units than $10 on 1000.

1. A mind reader again. I think he was slamming you specifically, Jason.

2. The packers are not shipping beef from any plants in the U.S. (that we know of)

3. They are knocking down the price of beef in the U.S. by the USDA not allowing extra supply go to foriegn markets. Margins don't have a lot to do with it except that their Canadian plants get larger margins than the domestic plants with shipments to Japan. Jason, food is inelastic. It matters.

4. Don't worry about the packers making money. They have people like agman to figure out how to do it.

Econ, would you please tell us which packers "employ" Agman?

I know he has farmer/rancher clients, but do not know that he has any packer clients. Since you make that claim, you should back it with facts.

MRJ
 
MRJ said:
Econ101 said:
Jason said:
1. Callicrate didn't specify non USDA inspected foreign beef because he was slamming all foregin product including Canada.

2. The packers are not shipping the same amount of beef to Japan from 1 plant in Canada as they would from all their plants in the US.

3. Knocking the margins down in their biggest market isn't good for their bottom line.

4. I would rather make $1 on 1 million units than $10 on 1000.

1. A mind reader again. I think he was slamming you specifically, Jason.

2. The packers are not shipping beef from any plants in the U.S. (that we know of)

3. They are knocking down the price of beef in the U.S. by the USDA not allowing extra supply go to foriegn markets. Margins don't have a lot to do with it except that their Canadian plants get larger margins than the domestic plants with shipments to Japan. Jason, food is inelastic. It matters.

4. Don't worry about the packers making money. They have people like agman to figure out how to do it.

Econ, would you please tell us which packers "employ" Agman?

I know he has farmer/rancher clients, but do not know that he has any packer clients. Since you make that claim, you should back it with facts.

MRJ

Why do you ask the question, MRJ?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top