Primer on how to kill a market

[Big Muddy rancher]

From R-CALF letter of support to Creekstone.


The letter from R-CALF USA President Leo McDonnell Jr., applauded Creekstone Farms Premium Beef and its entrepreneurial spirit.

"Creekstone is leading the beef processing industry into a new era -- one that is predicated on meeting the needs and wants of its customers," the letter states.


In Creekstone letter it said it wanted to import UTM cattle from Canada to to test. No where did it say in Creekstone's letter that the Canadian cattle would be for just domestic or export
R-CALF's letter suported Creekstone's "ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT" while going to court to prevent them from acting on it.

I would say Creekstone was doomed from the start With the USDA saying NO. The AMI as you guys say lobbying agaisnt them and R-CALF going to court to keep the border closed to limit their supply of cattle.

Like I said with friends like that who needs enemies.

Why not come clean and just say your intent is to interpret anything between Creekstone and R-CALF as antagonistic.

You choose to ignore that Creekstone's first plea to the USDA was to allow them to test for the Japanese market, which R-CALF supported. Had that common-sense request been granted, everything else would be moot.

Another thing you should think about - Creekstone didn't request that Canadian cattle be brought down here until AFTER they had a testing facility built and gathering dust. If the lack of Canadian cattle was limiting their supply, don't you think something would of been said before?

I appreciate you and Tam knocking R-CALF the way you do. Your weak arguements and transparent motives only serve to allow us members the opportunity to explain what R-CALF is doing to more people.

Sandhusker the letter I read included Canadian Cattle when Creekstone asked to test for Japan. R-CALF just has a sore crotch from riding the fence.
Why would they ask to test cattle for Japan before the supply of Canadian cattle was cut off? Wasn't BSE that closed the border?

Kinda funny Tommy is hanging on to this with the article that started this thread but Creekstone looks like it's moved on with Humane beef and the European market.
Also does Creekstone not have some vertical integration from supplier thru packer. Isn't that captive supply? What's R-CALF say about that?

 

[Sandhusker]

BMR, "Sandhusker the letter I read included Canadian Cattle when Creekstone asked to test for Japan."

The letter you provided was AFTER they had already been denied.

BMR, "Also does Creekstone not have some vertical integration from supplier thru packer. Isn't that captive supply? What's R-CALF say about that?"

Why don't you find out how Creekstone buys their cattle before even mentioning captive supply? R-CALF says do some research so you know what you're talking about.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Sandhusker doesn't this sound like vertical integration?

Feilding say" Yes, we have a nice advantage with our farm in Kentucky that John Stewart started. We have one of the best genetic experts in the country. We've got a staff of people there who are doing the best work in combining the best traits in the animal, not just for the finished product, but for the cow-calf side, the feedlot side of it, and the processing side of it, so that we end up having an animal that's going to work for the whole system and come up with a very high quality, consistent product. That's where we take them and show them how we work on that and what those judging factors are. They can see the bulls; they can see the offspring; they can see how we are working with feedlots and backgrounders and how we get those animals. We either sell bulls or we sell semen. Not all of the cattle we put through are coming from that [breeding program]. That's our long-term dream down the road, but our experts there will work with other producers that have large operations and help them. Or, [when] we identify a producer that has cattle that similar to what we think are the best, we try to track those cattle and place them in feedyards that are closer [to us]. We take our Japanese customers to farms, to feedlots, just trace the cattle all the way through. Usually when they come over here, they do a combination trip. They enjoy seeing it."

I say good for Creekstone they are taking charge of their destiny by controling all links in the chain. Some would call it Captive supply. Bet the LMA doesn't get many commission dollars from them.

 

[Econ101]

From R-CALF letter of support to Creekstone.


The letter from R-CALF USA President Leo McDonnell Jr., applauded Creekstone Farms Premium Beef and its entrepreneurial spirit.

"Creekstone is leading the beef processing industry into a new era -- one that is predicated on meeting the needs and wants of its customers," the letter states.


In Creekstone letter it said it wanted to import UTM cattle from Canada to to test. No where did it say in Creekstone's letter that the Canadian cattle would be for just domestic or export
R-CALF's letter suported Creekstone's "ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT" while going to court to prevent them from acting on it.

I would say Creekstone was doomed from the start With the USDA saying NO. The AMI as you guys say lobbying agaisnt them and R-CALF going to court to keep the border closed to limit their supply of cattle.

Like I said with friends like that who needs enemies.

BMR, if the science is there in tests like bse-tester's test to detect BSE even when it is not symptomatic, and it provides a safety for the BSE problem, why should anyone be against it?

You can come up with a lot of scenarios that are complicated but it still doesn't answer the above question.

As far as Canadian or other cattle coming into the U.S., the trade agreements should provide the same protections that the PSA provides producers here in the U.S. to those we are trading with and those protections should be able to be litigated by producers from both sides of the border to protect the markets from market frauds. If you want there to be a North American herd, you have to have North American rules. Right now, we don't.

Econ if and when BSE TESTER gets the urine test for live cattle working I will support a eradication program. I have already tested cattle in the CFIA program. A live test is all together differnt scenario then testing at slaughter. The USA and Canada have NAFTA that covered the trade of cattle between the countries . If the USA wanted the PSA enacted in Canada they should have done it when NAFTA was signed.

No, BMR, being a leader in the Canadian cattle businesss, you should have demanded those protections for Canadian producers. Where were you when this deal went through? At that point in time I was not involved in these agriculture issues at all.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

BMR, if the science is there in tests like bse-tester's test to detect BSE even when it is not symptomatic, and it provides a safety for the BSE problem, why should anyone be against it?

You can come up with a lot of scenarios that are complicated but it still doesn't answer the above question.

As far as Canadian or other cattle coming into the U.S., the trade agreements should provide the same protections that the PSA provides producers here in the U.S. to those we are trading with and those protections should be able to be litigated by producers from both sides of the border to protect the markets from market frauds. If you want there to be a North American herd, you have to have North American rules. Right now, we don't.

Econ if and when BSE TESTER gets the urine test for live cattle working I will support a eradication program. I have already tested cattle in the CFIA program. A live test is all together differnt scenario then testing at slaughter. The USA and Canada have NAFTA that covered the trade of cattle between the countries . If the USA wanted the PSA enacted in Canada they should have done it when NAFTA was signed.

No, BMR, being a leader in the Canadian cattle businesss, you should have demanded those protections for Canadian producers. Where were you when this deal went through? At that point in time I was not involved in these agriculture issues at all.

ECON, when Nafta was signed I was just a young married man working long hours to provide for my family. In 2000 when their was so much M'ID talk i decided I should be more involved as I felt it was to important to let other people take care of my business all the time. So I ran for a directors position on the SSGA . Most of my time has been directed towards land use issues. There I told you how i am involved you tell me how you are involved.

 

[Econ101]

BMR, if the Costa Ricans can make sure their people/businesses have protections from the large businesses, why couldn't the leaders of Canadian industry (like you) make sure that the producers in Canada had the protections laws like the PSA? Did you even ask for it? These large companies EASILY outhink people like you and then you and your wife cater to their every desire because you are not man enough to stand up to them and speak out for what is right. You then try to brown nose your way into their favor by taking their every position.

You are not a free man anymore. The next time you look at someone in your country with Mexican or Latin American descent, you need to realize that those people who may not speak the language and have risked a lot to get in our two countries, have given more for freedom than people like you ever will.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

BMR, if the Costa Ricans can make sure their people/businesses have protections from the large businesses, why couldn't the leaders of Canadian industry (like you) make sure that the producers in Canada had the protections laws like the PSA? Did you even ask for it? These large companies EASILY outhink people like you and then you and your wife cater to their every desire because you are not man enough to stand up to them and speak out for what is right. You then try to brown nose your way into their favor by taking their every position.

You are not a free man anymore. The next time you look at someone in your country with Mexican or Latin American descent, you need to realize that those people who may not speak the language and have risked a lot to get in our two countries, have given more for freedom than people like you ever will.

Econ for not telling us WHO you are and that info is just FLUFF you sure seem to worry alot about me and my wife. We both speak our own minds and are both involved in different ways of things that effect our lives. I ahve said before that this industry needs people involved. We have seen it in people like SW and Hanta Yo, and MRJ . I know everybody can't be active at the national lavel or even state level but just compaining about what others get done doesn't count for much.

 

[Sandhusker]

Sandhusker doesn't this sound like vertical integration?

Feilding say" Yes, we have a nice advantage with our farm in Kentucky that John Stewart started. We have one of the best genetic experts in the country. We've got a staff of people there who are doing the best work in combining the best traits in the animal, not just for the finished product, but for the cow-calf side, the feedlot side of it, and the processing side of it, so that we end up having an animal that's going to work for the whole system and come up with a very high quality, consistent product. That's where we take them and show them how we work on that and what those judging factors are. They can see the bulls; they can see the offspring; they can see how we are working with feedlots and backgrounders and how we get those animals. We either sell bulls or we sell semen. Not all of the cattle we put through are coming from that [breeding program]. That's our long-term dream down the road, but our experts there will work with other producers that have large operations and help them. Or, [when] we identify a producer that has cattle that similar to what we think are the best, we try to track those cattle and place them in feedyards that are closer [to us]. We take our Japanese customers to farms, to feedlots, just trace the cattle all the way through. Usually when they come over here, they do a combination trip. They enjoy seeing it."

I say good for Creekstone they are taking charge of their destiny by controling all links in the chain. Some would call it Captive supply. Bet the LMA doesn't get many commission dollars from them.

No, it doesn't sound like vertigral intregration. It sounds to me like a close rein on genetics.

 

[Econ101]

BMR, if the Costa Ricans can make sure their people/businesses have protections from the large businesses, why couldn't the leaders of Canadian industry (like you) make sure that the producers in Canada had the protections laws like the PSA? Did you even ask for it? These large companies EASILY outhink people like you and then you and your wife cater to their every desire because you are not man enough to stand up to them and speak out for what is right. You then try to brown nose your way into their favor by taking their every position.

You are not a free man anymore. The next time you look at someone in your country with Mexican or Latin American descent, you need to realize that those people who may not speak the language and have risked a lot to get in our two countries, have given more for freedom than people like you ever will.

Econ for not telling us WHO you are and that info is just FLUFF you sure seem to worry alot about me and my wife. We both speak our own minds and are both involved in different ways of things that effect our lives. I ahve said before that this industry needs people involved. We have seen it in people like SW and Hanta Yo, and MRJ . I know everybody can't be active at the national lavel or even state level but just compaining about what others get done doesn't count for much.

You were the one who said you had a leadership position in the Canadian cattle business, I was just trying to hold you accountable in those positions. You seem to want to allow every big packer get away with every thing they want, no matter if it hurts producer's markets. I wouldn't call that positive leadership. Kroger has already banned CO2 beef from its stores, the Japanese will not take our beef, and McDonalds is going for more chicken than beef because beef can't seem to produce a safe and profitable product for them to sell. I don't know how you could have hurt demand more-----bragging that a booth in small event just isn't going to overcome the policy issues and their implications for producers. You either are not smart enough to see these things or are a packer backer masquerading in a rancher's outfit. It may also be that you have an uncle that is giving undue influence. Tell us which it is.

 

[RobertMac]

The problem here is that producers think from a producer's perspective.
The thing that makes Rod's post informative is that he post with a corporative perspective.

Producers think...USA beef and Canadian beef
Reality...it's Tyson beef and Cargill beef

Producers think...beef vs. poultry vs. pork
Reality...it's matching production to market share while maintaining margins in a diversified company

Producers think...USA or Canadian or Aust. beef to the Japanese market
Reality (from the global-corporations)...it's who owns the companies and their market share in the Japanese market

If you are going to discuss 'global' marketing, don't do it with a 'national' perspective.

 

[Tam]

BMR, if the Costa Ricans can make sure their people/businesses have protections from the large businesses, why couldn't the leaders of Canadian industry (like you) make sure that the producers in Canada had the protections laws like the PSA? Did you even ask for it? These large companies EASILY outhink people like you and then you and your wife cater to their every desire because you are not man enough to stand up to them and speak out for what is right. You then try to brown nose your way into their favor by taking their every position.

You are not a free man anymore. The next time you look at someone in your country with Mexican or Latin American descent, you need to realize that those people who may not speak the language and have risked a lot to get in our two countries, have given more for freedom than people like you ever will.

Econ for not telling us WHO you are and that info is just FLUFF you sure seem to worry alot about me and my wife. We both speak our own minds and are both involved in different ways of things that effect our lives. I ahve said before that this industry needs people involved. We have seen it in people like SW and Hanta Yo, and MRJ . I know everybody can't be active at the national lavel or even state level but just compaining about what others get done doesn't count for much.

You were the one who said you had a leadership position in the Canadian cattle business, I was just trying to hold you accountable in those positions. You seem to want to allow every big packer get away with every thing they want, no matter if it hurts producer's markets. I wouldn't call that positive leadership. Kroger has already banned CO2 beef from its stores, the Japanese will not take our beef, and McDonalds is going for more chicken than beef because beef can't seem to produce a safe and profitable product for them to sell. I don't know how you could have hurt demand more-----bragging that a booth in small event just isn't going to overcome the policy issues and their implications for producers. You either are not smart enough to see these things or are a packer backer masquerading in a rancher's outfit. It may also be that you have an uncle that is giving undue influence. Tell us which it is.

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE BESIDES bench AND CALL OTHER THAT TRY MAKE THINGS BETTER NAMES?

 

[Econ101]

Tam, you will find out one day.

In the mean time, I wish you would get the global perspective that Robert Mac is talking about. Rcalf would not even be a factor without the numerous violations of the law by Tyson and their ruthless business practices that the regulatory agencies in the USDA have either corruptly or incompetently allowed to happen and in the Pickett case, the 11th circuit rubber stamped.

You need to stop defending them as they are the ones who gave rcalf their start by their abuses.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE BESIDES bench AND CALL OTHER THAT TRY MAKE THINGS BETTER NAMES?

This appears to be more than the SSGA has done for Saskatchewan cattle producers in recent years.

Just out of curiosity, I went to the SSGA website, just to see what was going on. Other than backing the TESA Environmental Stewardship stuff, just what is the SSGA doing for us? I sign onto the Alberta Beef Producer's website and I see they've sponsored stewardship, have given access to Canfax daily reports, have multiple educational initiatives, etc etc etc.

Rod

 

[mrj]

BMR, if the science is there in tests like bse-tester's test to detect BSE even when it is not symptomatic, and it provides a safety for the BSE problem, why should anyone be against it?

You can come up with a lot of scenarios that are complicated but it still doesn't answer the above question.

As far as Canadian or other cattle coming into the U.S., the trade agreements should provide the same protections that the PSA provides producers here in the U.S. to those we are trading with and those protections should be able to be litigated by producers from both sides of the border to protect the markets from market frauds. If you want there to be a North American herd, you have to have North American rules. Right now, we don't.

Econ if and when BSE TESTER gets the urine test for live cattle working I will support a eradication program. I have already tested cattle in the CFIA program. A live test is all together differnt scenario then testing at slaughter. The USA and Canada have NAFTA that covered the trade of cattle between the countries . If the USA wanted the PSA enacted in Canada they should have done it when NAFTA was signed.

No, BMR, being a leader in the Canadian cattle businesss, you should have demanded those protections for Canadian producers. Where were you when this deal went through?


At that point in time I was not involved in these agriculture issues at all.

Econ, does that last statement you made mean: a. you are not in the cattle or beef business in any way, shape, or form? or: b. that you were not active on issues concerning the cattle/beef business? at the time NAFTA was enacted.

MRJ

 

[mrj]

Econ for not telling us WHO you are and that info is just FLUFF you sure seem to worry alot about me and my wife. We both speak our own minds and are both involved in different ways of things that effect our lives. I ahve said before that this industry needs people involved. We have seen it in people like SW and Hanta Yo, and MRJ . I know everybody can't be active at the national lavel or even state level but just compaining about what others get done doesn't count for much.

You were the one who said you had a leadership position in the Canadian cattle business, I was just trying to hold you accountable in those positions. You seem to want to allow every big packer get away with every thing they want, no matter if it hurts producer's markets. I wouldn't call that positive leadership.

********************
Econ: "Kroger has already banned CO2 beef from its stores," ] MRJ: Sorry, Econ, you may get chastized by your buddy, Sandhusker for that 'error'. Kroger banned meat packaged with carbon monoxide (CO) rather than that packaged with oxygen (CO2). There are some mixed gasses used in such packaging, but the story indicated the CO was the one used in the Kroger incident.

MRJ
**********************


the Japanese will not take our beef, and McDonalds is going for more chicken than beef because beef can't seem to produce a safe and profitable product for them to sell. I don't know how you could have hurt demand more-----bragging that a booth in small event just isn't going to overcome the policy issues and their implications for producers. You either are not smart enough to see these things or are a packer backer masquerading in a rancher's outfit. It may also be that you have an uncle that is giving undue influence. Tell us which it is.

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE BESIDES bench AND CALL OTHER THAT TRY MAKE THINGS BETTER NAMES?

 

[Econ101]

You were the one who said you had a leadership position in the Canadian cattle business, I was just trying to hold you accountable in those positions. You seem to want to allow every big packer get away with every thing they want, no matter if it hurts producer's markets. I wouldn't call that positive leadership.

********************
Econ: "Kroger has already banned CO2 beef from its stores," ] MRJ: Sorry, Econ, you may get chastized by your buddy, Sandhusker for that 'error'. Kroger banned meat packaged with carbon monoxide (CO) rather than that packaged with oxygen (CO2). There are some mixed gasses used in such packaging, but the story indicated the CO was the one used in the Kroger incident.

MRJ
**********************


the Japanese will not take our beef, and McDonalds is going for more chicken than beef because beef can't seem to produce a safe and profitable product for them to sell. I don't know how you could have hurt demand more-----bragging that a booth in small event just isn't going to overcome the policy issues and their implications for producers. You either are not smart enough to see these things or are a packer backer masquerading in a rancher's outfit. It may also be that you have an uncle that is giving undue influence. Tell us which it is.

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE BESIDES bench AND CALL OTHER THAT TRY MAKE THINGS BETTER NAMES?

The ways you and Tam are pushing, MRJ, is actually hurting. You two don't even realize what you are doing. Like I said, you two belong in a packers group, not a ranchers group. Your policies you promote are BIG PACKER policies, not policies that allow the little packers to make a go of it. Your policies are only helping eliminate the competition between the packers. Ask any poultry grower what happens when that happens. Your policies are pushing the beef industry in the same direction.

 

[agman]

Sandhusker doesn't this sound like vertical integration?

Feilding say" Yes, we have a nice advantage with our farm in Kentucky that John Stewart started. We have one of the best genetic experts in the country. We've got a staff of people there who are doing the best work in combining the best traits in the animal, not just for the finished product, but for the cow-calf side, the feedlot side of it, and the processing side of it, so that we end up having an animal that's going to work for the whole system and come up with a very high quality, consistent product. That's where we take them and show them how we work on that and what those judging factors are. They can see the bulls; they can see the offspring; they can see how we are working with feedlots and backgrounders and how we get those animals. We either sell bulls or we sell semen. Not all of the cattle we put through are coming from that [breeding program]. That's our long-term dream down the road, but our experts there will work with other producers that have large operations and help them. Or, [when] we identify a producer that has cattle that similar to what we think are the best, we try to track those cattle and place them in feedyards that are closer [to us]. We take our Japanese customers to farms, to feedlots, just trace the cattle all the way through. Usually when they come over here, they do a combination trip. They enjoy seeing it."

I say good for Creekstone they are taking charge of their destiny by controling all links in the chain. Some would call it Captive supply. Bet the LMA doesn't get many commission dollars from them.

No, it doesn't sound like vertigral intregration. It sounds to me like a close rein on genetics.

That is a new twist!! What are they doing differently that other packers are not also doing in their marketing agreements-nothing is the answer. Creekstone was not the pioneer in this process. That said I wish them success.

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE BESIDES bench AND CALL OTHER THAT TRY MAKE THINGS BETTER NAMES?

This appears to be more than the SSGA has done for Saskatchewan cattle producers in recent years.

Just out of curiosity, I went to the SSGA website, just to see what was going on. Other than backing the TESA Environmental Stewardship stuff, just what is the SSGA doing for us? I sign onto the Alberta Beef Producer's website and I see they've sponsored stewardship, have given access to Canfax daily reports, have multiple educational initiatives, etc etc etc.

Rod

Rod are you a member of the SSGA? If you are you should be getting the magazine 6 times a year if not you get the super issue in September.
In the last year the SSGA and the SCFA have started up the Beef industry Committee which has hired Tim Highmoor from Western Beef to work as a economist on behalf of the cattlfe industry. He probably knows the CAIS program better then anyone in government and has been asked to meet with them to correct flaws in the progam. We have a land use committee that meets with Lands branch at least twice a year dealing on Crown land issues and taxation. We have people on the BIC and many CCA committees and Quality Starts Here. Carl Block past president of SSGA was instrumental in CCIA. We deal with SE on wildlife and hunting issues. A member sits on FACS and SPCA. The Brand inspection services and the SVMA. We were lead on the Corn duty case even before the cattle feeders. We supported CCIA in keeping age verification vouluntary. We lobbied on behalf of producers to keep the own use provision in on generic Ivomec. We chair the PCAP which has helped keep Sask. environmental community pro cows. They look at cows as a conservation tool rather then the problem like many other areas. PCAP also has a great education program called ECO-X that promotes sustainable use of range lands and the OWLS and COWS TOUR . They have presented these programs to thousands of kids in the prairie regions . On their second time around for some schools. We deal with water shed issues with SWA we partner to bring Cow Calf Schools , Grazing and grass programs .Native Prairie Appreciation Week every June.
Back in the 1970's the SSGA started and ran the Commercial cattle show and sale at the Agribition. World Class show now.
We do give out the Rangeland Scholarship and partner on the TESA award. Do you want me to keep going?
You get all this for a $100 membership. Sad thing is even if you don't join you still get the benefit of all the hard work the Directors and members do on your behalf.

 

[Sandhusker]

Agman, "That is a new twist!! What are they doing differently that other packers are not also doing in their marketing agreements-nothing is the answer. Creekstone was not the pioneer in this process. That said I wish them success."

Unlike Tyson, they're not using their marketing agreements to lower the cash prices of cattle. They don't have the market power to do so - Tyson does. If Creekstone doesn't buy for a week, the market doesn't notice. If Tyson doesn't buy for a week, .....

 

[Tam]

Tam, you will find out one day.

In the mean time, I wish you would get the global perspective that Robert Mac is talking about. Rcalf would not even be a factor without the numerous violations of the law by Tyson and their ruthless business practices that the regulatory agencies in the USDA have either corruptly or incompetently allowed to happen and in the Pickett case, the 11th circuit rubber stamped.
You need to stop defending them as they are the ones who gave rcalf their start by their abuses.

How would you know if R-CALF would be a factor or not? You said you didn't know anything about R-CALF and you just proved it by your statement here. As R-Calf was created to stop trade with Canada long before Tyson was ever in the Beef Business.