Question for anti-COOL people

[Sandhusker]

So now a question for the pro-COOL folks:

How do you reconcile consumer choice (supposedly what COOL is all about) with the new complaints about packers choosing to put Product of US beef into the mixed bag with Canadian and Mexican beef? Why should the consumer be the only one to have a choice? Shouldn't the packer be allowed to take the risk and allow the origin of his beef to be lost? I thought the real intent of COOL was to stop packers from labelling Canadian or Mexican beef as Product of US, not the other way around? Its certainly not misleading to have US, Canadian, and Mexican beef all mixed together in a bag and call it "Product of US, Canada and Mexico" now is it?

Rod

It's not misleading, but it's not the intent of the law. It's a end run around the rules and anybody promoting that in the USDA needs to be fired.

 

[Bill]

bill you're a little confused. sandhusker asks the questions. and if you don't give him the answer he's looking for he keeps asking and gets pretty shrill. i think he's working through some issues.

Yep with the biggest issue being treed once again!

I haven't been on this site much lately don but it is easy to see little has changed.

 

[Sandhusker]

Bill, you completely missed the whole point. Forget the product or what country it comes from. The point is that people will buy what they're told to buy.

Forget what country it comes from? That's what COOL is all about! Read the title of your thread.

How has that been working for the U.S. Auto manufacturers for the past 20 years?

Sure seems to be a lot of imports on the road. Maybe there should be a checkoff collected on every vehicle sold in the US and then given to Ford, Chrysler and GM to promote just their vehicles against the imports? But then I guess indirectly that does happen through the subsidies and bailouts they have recieved that still haven't made them any more successful.

No answer to the comparison of the US auto manufacturers Sadhusker? Not surprised!!

:roll:

And I'm not surprised that you asked a question where you could of came up with the answer yourself if you had thought it through.

You see ads for Ford, GM, Chevrolet, Toyota, Lexus, Lincoln, Saab, etc..... Every automaker has got an ad on TV, the radio, print, ..... When is the last time you saw a beef ad for Simmental, Maine, Holstein, Gelbveih, etc...? People on Chicago, LA, NY, etc.... can come up with a long list of autos off the tops of their heads, but do you think they can do the same with cattle breeds?

Again, you tell me why people with no knowledge of the Angus breed whatsoever are paying a premium for Angus beef. Little d can give it a shot, too.

 

[don]

oh just give us the answer you want everybody to come to. ever heard of straw men? believe me we're all suitably impressed by your superior intellect!

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

Forget what country it comes from? That's what COOL is all about! Read the title of your thread.

How has that been working for the U.S. Auto manufacturers for the past 20 years?

Sure seems to be a lot of imports on the road. Maybe there should be a checkoff collected on every vehicle sold in the US and then given to Ford, Chrysler and GM to promote just their vehicles against the imports? But then I guess indirectly that does happen through the subsidies and bailouts they have recieved that still haven't made them any more successful.

No answer to the comparison of the US auto manufacturers Sadhusker? Not surprised!!

:roll:

And I'm not surprised that you asked a question where you could of came up with the answer yourself if you had thought it through.

You see ads for Ford, GM, Chevrolet, Toyota, Lexus, Lincoln, Saab, etc..... Every automaker has got an ad on TV, the radio, print, ..... When is the last time you saw a beef ad for Simmental, Maine, Holstein, Gelbveih, etc...? People on Chicago, LA, NY, etc.... can come up with a long list of autos off the tops of their heads, but do you think they can do the same with cattle breeds?

Again, you tell me why people with no knowledge of the Angus breed whatsoever are paying a premium for Angus beef. Little d can give it a shot, too.

Well for one thing most North American autos have parts in them from the US, Canada and Mexico.

As far as the Angus beef . Angus did their own promotion to start with and partnered with packers and retailers. They didn't have the government do it for them.

 

[RobertMac]

Forget what country it comes from? That's what COOL is all about! Read the title of your thread.

How has that been working for the U.S. Auto manufacturers for the past 20 years?

Sure seems to be a lot of imports on the road. Maybe there should be a checkoff collected on every vehicle sold in the US and then given to Ford, Chrysler and GM to promote just their vehicles against the imports? But then I guess indirectly that does happen through the subsidies and bailouts they have recieved that still haven't made them any more successful.

No answer to the comparison of the US auto manufacturers Sadhusker? Not surprised!!

:roll:

And I'm not surprised that you asked a question where you could of came up with the answer yourself if you had thought it through.

You see ads for Ford, GM, Chevrolet, Toyota, Lexus, Lincoln, Saab, etc..... Every automaker has got an ad on TV, the radio, print, ..... When is the last time you saw a beef ad for Simmental, Maine, Holstein, Gelbveih, etc...? People on Chicago, LA, NY, etc.... can come up with a long list of autos off the tops of their heads, but do you think they can do the same with cattle breeds?

Again, you tell me why people with no knowledge of the Angus breed whatsoever are paying a premium for Angus beef. Little d can give it a shot, too.

Sure seems to be a lot of imports on the road.

You should be looking foward to all the Canadian beef being sold in the USA because of COOL! :shock: :roll: :roll: :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

 

[Sandhusker]

oh just give us the answer you want everybody to come to. ever heard of straw men? believe me we're all suitably impressed by your superior intellect!

The answer is obvious - I haven't seen you offer a better explaination. Why don't you bring something, little d?

What is the rationale in denying reality? That's how you run a successful business? Maybe that's part of the reason that we're all under the thumbs of a handful of packers and a sold-out USDA?

 

[don]

we get it, okay? you keep asking questions with a predetermined answer so that everybody should come to your conclusion. it's called setting up a straw man and then knocking it down. keep up the good work!

 

[Sandhusker]

BMR, "As far as the Angus beef . Angus did their own promotion to start with and partnered with packers and retailers. They didn't have the government do it for them."

At least you've got the sense to recognize WHY Angus is now viewed as a premium product. MARKETING. Moe and Joe want to argue about water being wet, even if it costs them money.

I'm not asking the government to promote US beef, and COOL isn't about that. The checkoff is the promoting tool. However, it would be in the governments best interests if they did take a role in promoting US beef - or any US product for that matter. That's called economic development.

 

[Sandhusker]

we get it, okay? you keep asking questions with a predetermined answer so that everybody should come to your conclusion. it's called setting up a straw man and then knocking it down. keep up the good work!

You have yet to offer a conclusion other than mine. Have you any?

 

[PORKER]

US COOL beef should be promoted by using the US beef checkoff collected funds. The law clearly states that products born, raised and slaughtered in the United States are to be labeled as a product of the United States

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

It's not misleading, but it's not the intent of the law. It's a end run around the rules and anybody promoting that in the USDA needs to be fired.

So are you ready to admit that you're protectionist, Sandhusker? Its not an end run around ANY RULES WHATSOEVER. Its obeying the law to its letter. Actually, a better question for you to answer: If you're so confident that US beef will sell, why shouldn't a packer be allowed to take the risk and mix US beef in with other country's beef should they so desire? Why should they be FORCED to segregate all the beef? What is the point in segregating beef as long as the countries of origin are CLEARLY marked? US consumers can still then buy US beef only or US beef mixed with other beef. You're the one who preaches demand and allowing the consumer to make the choice. Why the hypocrisy now?

Rod

 

[Sandhusker]

It's not misleading, but it's not the intent of the law. It's a end run around the rules and anybody promoting that in the USDA needs to be fired.

So are you ready to admit that you're protectionist, Sandhusker? Its not an end run around ANY RULES WHATSOEVER. Its obeying the law to its letter. Actually, a better question for you to answer: If you're so confident that US beef will sell, why shouldn't a packer be allowed to take the risk and mix US beef in with other country's beef should they so desire? Why should they be FORCED to segregate all the beef? What is the point in segregating beef as long as the countries of origin are CLEARLY marked? US consumers can still then buy US beef only or US beef mixed with other beef. You're the one who preaches demand and allowing the consumer to make the choice. Why the hypocrisy now?

Rod

What was the intent of the law, Rod?

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

It's not misleading, but it's not the intent of the law. It's a end run around the rules and anybody promoting that in the USDA needs to be fired.

So are you ready to admit that you're protectionist, Sandhusker? Its not an end run around ANY RULES WHATSOEVER. Its obeying the law to its letter. Actually, a better question for you to answer: If you're so confident that US beef will sell, why shouldn't a packer be allowed to take the risk and mix US beef in with other country's beef should they so desire? Why should they be FORCED to segregate all the beef? What is the point in segregating beef as long as the countries of origin are CLEARLY marked? US consumers can still then buy US beef only or US beef mixed with other beef. You're the one who preaches demand and allowing the consumer to make the choice. Why the hypocrisy now?

Rod

What was the intent of the law, Rod?

To label the origin of the beef that US consumers were eating. This is being accomplished. Now that I've answered your question, answer mine.

Rod

 

[Sandhusker]

Nooooo. Just a label was not the deal, it is the correct label. The intent was so that consumers would know what country their beef came from so that a determination on the purchase or nonpurchase could be made. It's about consumers being provided the most accurate information available so they know where their meat comes from and where it doesnt' come from.

I'm not a protectionist. A protectionist would be calling for an elimination of ALL imports from ALL countries. I haven't done that.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Nooooo. Just a label was not the deal, it is the correct label. The intent was so that consumers would know what country their beef came from so that a determination on the purchase or nonpurchase could be made. It's about consumers being provided the most accurate information available so they know where their meat comes from and where it doesnt' come from.

I'm not a protectionist. A protectionist would be calling for an elimination of ALL imports from ALL countries. I haven't done that.

And how is it not the correct label? If you have beef from three countries mixed together, then you label it as such. Just like pre-packaged foods with product from multiple countries. Completely and totally accurate origin marking.

So why won't you answer my questions, Sandhusker?

A protectionist doesn't have to call for elimination of imports from all countries. What you are calling for with the elimination of "the loophole" is a protectionist act, unless you can come up with some logical reason for your stance.

Rod

 

[PPRM]

Correct me if you can prove me wrong, but I believe the Certified Angus Beef (CAB) brand is verifiable as at least half Angus and has to meet standards for quality, such as above a certain USDA quality grade, among others. It has gained a reputation as very good beef. Isn't CAB also trademarked?

Obviously, some businesses are using that fact, plus the gullibility of some consumers, and calling their beef, which may or may not have similar or equal specifications or trademark status, "Angus".

IMO, that is comparable to a low price store in RobertMac or other 'branded' beef location calling their lower quality product by a very similar name and using a similar appearing label, possibly changed just enough to escape legal action....IF the other brand IS trademarked. In other words, an almost legal copy of a known and loved product.

COOL started out as a misleading law and it is ending by misleading!

Porker, what is the date of that 'story'? Weren't all those groups at the recent meeting in KC,MO where they all agreed on the final rules.......or is this another case of them agreeing, then changing their mind after the fact????

mrj

It has been awhile since I sold these type to Tyson mrj..They are being swallowed up by my direct marketing...

However, I think two years back I was getting CAB Premiums with n documentation of Angus blood. I say that as Once I had a Black Limousin Steer get a CAB Premium..... I had not sent him with the intent of trying for a CAb Premium. He got it because he had a Black Hide and graded well,

The rules may have changed int he last year or so and should of in my opinion... I never agreed with the CAB Premium on cattle not verified as having Angus Blood, even if it would of cost me,

PPRM

 

[Sandhusker]

What I'm saying, and what the law is intended, is that beef be HONESTLY labeled as ACCURATELY as possible. If you've got beef from an animal that spent 100% of it's life in the US, an honest and accurate label would reflect that. Same for a Canadian animal, Mexican, Australian, etc..... I don't know why I'm explaining this to when we both know what the lawmakers were intending and we both know that the packers are playing Clinton lawyer games. Why are you defending horseshit maneuvers designed to circumvent law and continue a practice of playing Canadian and US producers against themselves to keep cattle prices down?

How can I be a protectionist when I'm calling for the same treatment, the same labeling requirements for US and imports alike?

 

[PPRM]

mrj, I finally read the whole thread and see where you realized this, sorry...

Sandhusker, there are some points, but I believe you are either missing or not stating the entire CAB Program Success...

You mention every other breed that does not have a label, except two...

Certified Hereford Beef... Good enough Marketing, but I am not sure of the success...maybe time, maybe just not the consistent eating experience that people need to have..

The second is Wagyu beef. It is the Kobe end (Not to be mistaken with the Kobe Restaurants that do not really sell this Beef). It is sold by the ounce..Dollars per Ounce... It is high fat and high flavor and would in my mind be a success. It is marketed as an unbeliveable higher end and has a repeat following.

I am getting to my point. Kobe has standards. Angus Beef also has standards in grade. Not just choice, it is the higher end choice. The parts of the grading system that affect a true eating experience are part of the standard. That is the part that is veifiable. How the carcass measures against known indicators of eating experience. The Black hide is part of the standard, but it being there is not the reason for the programs success in my opinion...

You Point to Marketing..Marketing is important. But marketing will get someone to buy something once. The experience they have once owning it is what brings them back. Marketing can even work against you. If you give too high of expectations, and it does not live up to billing people won't buy a second time.

I say this in selling my meat. "Locally Grown" is a huge thing. But if the experience does not live to the standards.... Farmers markets are huge because the produce tastes so damn good. It does. The meat end varies a lot. There are people out there with no idea. The marketing gets customers once, customers to try it, but the eating experience either does or does not bring then back...

The problem with Cool is it is just one thing that distinguishes it. Most consumers do not know how to pick a good steak. The CAB Program pretty well does that for them and ties it up into a brand...

I am not Pro nor Anti COOL....I just think long term it won't be as much of a factor as well run branded programs could.

One thing I do see..The loopholes..I think that will be more of a deal where meat processed and packaged out of the country will be identifiable. For some smart Canadians, that could be a good thing. Get your own program and set high standards..Maple Leaf Beef...... With every problem there is an opportunity,

PPRM

 

[PPRM]

What I'm saying, and what the law is intended, is that beef be HONESTLY labeled as ACCURATELY as possible. If you've got beef from an animal that spent 100% of it's life in the US, an honest and accurate label would reflect that. Same for a Canadian animal, Mexican, Australian, etc..... I don't know why I'm explaining this to when we both know what the lawmakers were intending and we both know that the packers are playing Clinton lawyer games. Why are you defending horseshit maneuvers designed to circumvent law and continue a practice of playing Canadian and US producers against themselves to keep cattle prices down?

How can I be a protectionist when I'm calling for the same treatment, the same labeling requirements for US and imports alike?

I agree that the Loopholes don't align with the intent of the law. Actually, rather than "Product of US/Mexico or Canada", I would like to see "Source unkown"... That would be more accurate.

Perhaps COOL ultimately shows we really do not know where our meat comes from. Some products end themselves to source id much more easily than Beef...But that oes not mean we should Spin it into something it is not,

PPRM