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

Question for econ101

Richard Doolittle

Well-known member
For several reasons, I don't engage in longwinded debates on here. But there is a point of contention, that I would like you to explain and I quote you from the 6 page dialogue about shutting down the archives:

econ101 "What about generic crackers vs. branded Ritz crackers? When Ritz gets on TV and advertises how good their product is, does the fact that there are branded products out there help or hurt the cracker industry as far as more of the economic pie in terms of money? The answer, of course, is that product differentiation plays to the different motives of the buyers. When you separate the different motives, you are able to garnish a higher price for for those motives. If someone thought that white cattle with black stripes was better for them than commodity beef, were willing to pay more for it, and a producer could produce for that market, would it increase or decrease the dollar value brought into the overall cattle industry?

Market differentiation is what will increase the value to the industry. Commodity beef will not. It allows consumer preferences to be segregated and sold to. It increases the amount of money in the industry."


If I'm not mistaken, you are for mandatory COOL. Isn't your example here a little contradictory then? You quote above seems to make me think you believe in market forces driving what is produced for the market. Doesn't mandatory COOL make all US beef "commodity US beef" and thus make it more difficult for those who seek out the markets that are willing to pay the higher prices for it?
 

Jason

Well-known member
That's a very astute observation Richard.

Branded beef products based on QUALITY and source verification are what is driving the high end of the beef industry.

Trying to label an entire segment of commodity beef as superior is doomed to failure.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Richard Doolittle said:
For several reasons, I don't engage in longwinded debates on here. But there is a point of contention, that I would like you to explain and I quote you from the 6 page dialogue about shutting down the archives:

econ101 "What about generic crackers vs. branded Ritz crackers? When Ritz gets on TV and advertises how good their product is, does the fact that there are branded products out there help or hurt the cracker industry as far as more of the economic pie in terms of money? The answer, of course, is that product differentiation plays to the different motives of the buyers. When you separate the different motives, you are able to garnish a higher price for for those motives. If someone thought that white cattle with black stripes was better for them than commodity beef, were willing to pay more for it, and a producer could produce for that market, would it increase or decrease the dollar value brought into the overall cattle industry?

Market differentiation is what will increase the value to the industry. Commodity beef will not. It allows consumer preferences to be segregated and sold to. It increases the amount of money in the industry."


If I'm not mistaken, you are for mandatory COOL. Isn't your example here a little contradictory then? You quote above seems to make me think you believe in market forces driving what is produced for the market. Doesn't mandatory COOL make all US beef "commodity US beef" and thus make it more difficult for those who seek out the markets that are willing to pay the higher prices for it?

No. Hormone free, organic, grass fed can all be from any country and will be on top of what country the meat comes from. The country label itself is differentiation. So is "Canadian Beef--A Cut Above". So is Welsch beef, or 100% Angus beef. Same with Laura's lean beef. Each of these items denotes something "different" from the rest of the beef on the shelf. People pay for that perception or even the added value those type of products bring to consumers.

The "USDA Inspected" more accurately describes your point.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Jason said:
That's a very astute observation Richard.

Branded beef products based on QUALITY and source verification are what is driving the high end of the beef industry.

Trying to label an entire segment of commodity beef as superior is doomed to failure.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Jason said:
That's a very astute observation Richard.

Branded beef products based on QUALITY and source verification are what is driving the high end of the beef industry.

Trying to label an entire segment of commodity beef as superior is doomed to failure.

Not promoting your own product and providing your potential customers the ability to differentiate that product from your competitor's proves you should of taken that beginning marketing class instead of wood shop.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Jason said:
That's a very astute observation Richard.

Branded beef products based on QUALITY and source verification are what is driving the high end of the beef industry.

Trying to label an entire segment of commodity beef as superior is doomed to failure.

COOL is only an add-on label to all of the other labels, such as "USDA" Inspected", "Sterling Silver", "Natural Raised", etc. It would only be a fool to think that "Country of Origin" is anything other than "Country of Origin".

"COOL" does not designate a "brand" as we know it. It's the damn country of origin Jason. Just like our tools, T-shirts, and boots have. :roll: :shock: :???:
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Jason wrote -
Branded beef products based on QUALITY and source verification are what is driving the high end of the beef industry.

Thanks for the support Jason and you are right. Our shop in Calgary has about the highest priced beef in the country. we sell on our merits and not the bitter truth that you and the gang pulled out of my fingers on the other thread. Do you see a sign on our store fron saying "Buy ours the other stuff will kill you". If all you have is discredit Jason - go suck your thumb as Scotty used to say. If you want to bring more postive comments like the one on the top of this post - I thank you in advance.
As far as COOL - bring it on. Might stop some of the BS that Cargill and Tyson are pulling. Remeber Jason - over 80% of our harvest in Canada is done by two American owned companies who do not custom harvest cattle. How much "Canadian Beef" do you think that ABP/CCA/BIC/CBEF actually sells?
 

Jason

Well-known member
So how does a generic raised in the USA label help if you have to have the CAB, Laura's lean or Celtic beef label to actually set your product apart?

There is no law against you promoting a branded product and SOURCE VERIFYING it.

The same clan that says the packers can't be trusted to pay a fair price, are the same ones thinking they can be trusted not to switch higher quality Canadian cattle for some swampers.

If all the cattle are not carrying ID, it is easy to switch. Either mandate ID to make COOL work, or drop the idea as it will just add costs that have no benefit.
 

bse-tester

Well-known member
I recall a meeting in which Dr. Bob Church (Alberta) clearly stated that on a trip to Wales (Bristol or Cardiff I believe) he was shown around a plant there and when the topic of labelling was raised, the plant guy mentioned that they could simply attach whatever label the clent wanted on his product. It made no difference to them whatsoever. It makes one wonder what the heck we are getting on the shelf and what is there is simply there for the sake of generating the most profit for the product - no matter what it really might be. Perception sells huh???

Think about "President's Choice" for a moment. If "chuck" is labled "prime rib," do you honestly think the average consumer can tell the difference. The Packers think not!!
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Jason -
So how does a generic raised in the USA label help if you have to have the CAB, Laura's lean or Celtic beef label to actually set your product apart?

There is no law against you promoting a branded product and SOURCE VERIFYING it.

The same clan that says the packers can't be trusted to pay a fair price, are the same ones thinking they can be trusted not to switch higher quality Canadian cattle for some swampers.

If all the cattle are not carrying ID, it is easy to switch. Either mandate ID to make COOL work, or drop the idea as it will just add costs that have no benefit.

Do you have cattle on both sides of the border Jason? If not, why do you give a rats ass if producers south of the line want to waste their money on COOL.

What on earth is the CCA opinion on COOL anyway. Do they want to help Cargill and Tyson out with their scam or do they see it like I do as a waste of producer money and truly none of my business. In fact, I think it will help truly Canadian identified beef. What do you think Jason?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
Jason -
So how does a generic raised in the USA label help if you have to have the CAB, Laura's lean or Celtic beef label to actually set your product apart?

There is no law against you promoting a branded product and SOURCE VERIFYING it.

The same clan that says the packers can't be trusted to pay a fair price, are the same ones thinking they can be trusted not to switch higher quality Canadian cattle for some swampers.

If all the cattle are not carrying ID, it is easy to switch. Either mandate ID to make COOL work, or drop the idea as it will just add costs that have no benefit.

Do you have cattle on both sides of the border Jason? If not, why do you give a rats ass if producers south of the line want to waste their money on COOL.

What on earth is the CCA opinion on COOL anyway. Do they want to help Cargill and Tyson out with their scam or do they see it like I do as a waste of producer money and truly none of my business. In fact, I think it will help truly Canadian identified beef. What do you think Jason?

Hopefully MCOOL will allow consumers to see whether their beef is coming from a far away source like Australia or S. America. I think a very good inference could be that the meat is not as fresh as it would be if it came from N. America. I don't see Mexican beef being a big seller except maybe to that minority that is already in the US.

I hope both Canadian and Americans can benefit from MCOOL. There are reasons beef from hot humid areas don't grade out as well as the cooler temperate climates. If this is advertised, it might also give Canada and the U.S. a marketing edge.

Hopefully the costs of MCOOL will fall only on those who are importing. Canada has a real opportunity to use this as a "free" source of differentiation.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
bse-tester said:
I recall a meeting in which Dr. Bob Church (Alberta) clearly stated that on a trip to Wales (Bristol or Cardiff I believe) he was shown around a plant there and when the topic of labelling was raised, the plant guy mentioned that they could simply attach whatever label the clent wanted on his product. It made no difference to them whatsoever. It makes one wonder what the heck we are getting on the shelf and what is there is simply there for the sake of generating the most profit for the product - no matter what it really might be. Perception sells huh???

Think about "President's Choice" for a moment. If "chuck" is labeled "prime rib," do you honestly think the average consumer can tell the difference. The Packers think not!!

bse tester, labeling the grade fraudulently is against the law, but as I have shown before, the USDA's inspectors do not have a whole lot of support in enforcing the law. This is a problem with our system for sure.

Labeling registered brands fraudulently can lead to lawsuits.

I agree with you that labeling "freedom" has gotten out of hand and become misleading as your "President's Choice" brand shows. It is too close to the grade verbiage. No, I don't think the average consumer will be able to look at a piece of meat and tell the difference between the grade until after they cook it and eat it. Beef may get a bad wrap because of these misleading tactics. You should at least be telling the truth when you are labeling and not trying to steal some one else's brand/trademark. There should be enough penalties to prevent this kind of fraud. Too bad our govt. isn't competent in these areas. A few big fines and/or lawsuits could change this.
 
Top