Question on trim

[Econ101]

Conman your so uninformed about this industry that you just accentuated the point I made with a simple whole cow grind scenario.

Taking out the middle meats and selling them at a higher value leaves less lean grind on the cow. The extra dollar still goes back to the producer when they can substitute cheap import trim.

Do you even know grinders are not necessarily the packer?

Your cut and past blurb only lists 1 actual price $101.74/cwt. If you can explain what that price is for you might gain a shred of credibility. (hint it places live cow prices lower than in my example)

Jason, all of this doesn't even matter. You are the one who brought up the whole round (at $4.00 per lb.) in the grind and then cows in the grind arguments. In your beef to chicken comparison you used a 99 cent boneless breast comparison and it is 1.80 on the wholesale market.

You are still substituting foreign beef for domestic beef. The actual mechanics do nothing to alter that fact. Domestic beef producers lose in your arguments but they are just fake arguments. The U.S. has comparative advantages in fat because of low grain prices and a climate where you can put fat on. Just becuase you use some of that fat and trim with imported meats does not mean it brings value to domestic producers. It doesn't. It brings value to the people importing and to the consumers. And yes, I know that packers are not the only grinders. So what? The point is that with the cattle cycle, the domestic producers are not gaining on the high swing becuase of these factors. International agribusiness can keep different countries on different cycles and they are the ones that come out ahead, not the producers. Your last sentence challenge is processer knowledge. You must in some way be affiliated with them.

I guess if you mix a little extra trim and fat in import you confuse a lot of people. These are people who are easily confused. It is not me. That ground beef that was sold had the USDA stamp on it and it replaced cattle producer's product on the high swing. It did not help domestic producers to sell their extra fat as USDA ground beef. If the extra lean trimmings from Australia only cost a penny a lb. it still would not be beneficial for U.S. producers even if it increased the price of the trim that goes into hamburger. I am sorry it is so hard for you to understand that. It is a substitute for U.S. produced ground beef. Your "do it for the poor" arguments are arguments against capitalism and for some kind of socialism or fascism or communism. I haven't figured which category you fall into but you have a real packer bias. You need to do some of that reading I advised for you.

 

[Jason]

Conman you are so far out of your league discussing the beef industry it is hilarious.

Show me where I said anything about 99 cent chicken BREAST.

Show me where I said anything about grinding ROUND.

You don't even know what end of the animal your on.

I am not a processor, just an informed rancher.

This makes what about 4 or 5 questions you have no idea of the answer to?

 

[agman]

Conman your so uninformed about this industry that you just accentuated the point I made with a simple whole cow grind scenario.

Taking out the middle meats and selling them at a higher value leaves less lean grind on the cow. The extra dollar still goes back to the producer when they can substitute cheap import trim.

Do you even know grinders are not necessarily the packer?

Your cut and past blurb only lists 1 actual price $101.74/cwt. If you can explain what that price is for you might gain a shred of credibility. (hint it places live cow prices lower than in my example)

Jason, all of this doesn't even matter. You are the one who brought up the whole round (at $4.00 per lb.) in the grind and then cows in the grind arguments. In your beef to chicken comparison you used a 99 cent boneless breast comparison and it is 1.80 on the wholesale market.

You are still substituting foreign beef for domestic beef. The actual mechanics do nothing to alter that fact. Domestic beef producers lose in your arguments but they are just fake arguments. The U.S. has comparative advantages in fat because of low grain prices and a climate where you can put fat on. Just becuase you use some of that fat and trim with imported meats does not mean it brings value to domestic producers. It doesn't. It brings value to the people importing and to the consumers. And yes, I know that packers are not the only grinders. So what? The point is that with the cattle cycle, the domestic producers are not gaining on the high swing becuase of these factors. International agribusiness can keep different countries on different cycles and they are the ones that come out ahead, not the producers. Your last sentence challenge is processer knowledge. You must in some way be affiliated with them.

I guess if you mix a little extra trim and fat in import you confuse a lot of people. These are people who are easily confused. It is not me. That ground beef that was sold had the USDA stamp on it and it replaced cattle producer's product on the high swing. It did not help domestic producers to sell their extra fat as USDA ground beef. If the extra lean trimmings from Australia only cost a penny a lb. it still would not be beneficial for U.S. producers even if it increased the price of the trim that goes into hamburger. I am sorry it is so hard for you to understand that. It is a substitute for U.S. produced ground beef. Your "do it for the poor" arguments are arguments against capitalism and for some kind of socialism or fascism or communism. I haven't figured which category you fall into but you have a real packer bias. You need to do some of that reading I advised for you.

You really need to go back to what ever it was you were doing before appearing on these forums. You simply do not have a clue of the cattle cycle in this country let alone other parts of the world. Does international business control the weather-yes or no? Before international businesses evolved what caused the cattle cycle? Does international business control consumer spending? These are basic questions that must be answered which serve to demonstate the shallow nature of your many opinions.

Talk about bias; everything to you is a conspiracy or involves corruption. No wonder you believe your phone is tapped! Your comments are the product of your ignorance of the subject. Your dissertations have fooled no one but they do waste good space and provide some misguided humor.

 

[RobertMac]

Does international business control the weather-yes or no? [No]

Before international businesses evolved what caused the cattle cycle? [Same thing that causes them now]

Does international business control consumer spending?[Effect...one could argue that, but control...No]

Now question for you....Who is in a better position to take advantage of these factors than the international packers?

A cost analysis will show it advantageous to import meat from finished animals that sell for half the cost of domestic finished...domestic producer loses!

Jason, one real world problem with your cull cow/bull study...there are producers that know a cull cow/bull with a little doctoring and put on hay and corn will gain around 3 lbs./day...many of those pounds are fat adding to the fat problem. The fat problem is caused by cheap corn and lack of places to use it. Here's a better solution for excess fat...make tallow out of it and sell it to the food industry to replace hydrogenated vegetable oils and their bad trans-fats!!!! Profits in the processing industry is largely determined by profitability of byproducts.

Robert Mac may want to argue the benefits of brahman cattle down in Florida and the deep hot south, and they are benefical for those climates for production, but you must also breed some of the "negative" characteristics out. You can do that. Brangus bulls, Santa Gertrudis, and some of the King Ranch type cattle (Way south Texas) are some examples of doing this. Robert Mac, any comments on this?

Nolan Ryan Tender Aged Beef requires Brahman influence in their protocol along with being a Select product. They have about the same acceptance rate as CAB...around 20%(someone can correct me if I'm wrong about CAB). Their biggest problem with non-compliance carcasses is on grade...too much fat(marbling) grading choice!!!! :shock: NRTAB is also the only USDA certified guaranteed tender program(that I know of)....millions of dollars of sell and only a few thousand paid on their money back guarantee. Can American breeds(Brahman influence) produce acceptable quality beef? There's your real world proof! Econ, you tried NRTAB beef?

The problem of tender beef is greatly misunderstood within the industry because there is money to be made because of those misconceptions. One in four steaks are tough in all grades....improper cooking causes that number to go up. Fat is insurance against bad cooking and lubrication for the eating experience...therefore its value. Stress is the culprit of bad beef and stress is built into the industry. Producers can do much to correct this, but why do it if you won't get paid for it.

 

[Jason]

Robert, the cows in the example were a thin 1000 pound cow and a heavy fed 1600 pound cow.

CAB acceptance is 20% as you mention, but the major discounter is twofold, lack of marbling or too much fat cover. Marbling and fat cover are 2 different issues.

The Nolan Ryan brand is good for beef. It give consumers that want those specs a choice. Way better than grinding those cattle for burger.

Your last sentence is telling, why would a producer change unless he gets paid for it...I agree 100% and that is why branded programs, grids and more cattle selling on the rail is a good thing for the whole industry.

All the high end branded products mentioned argue more for imported trim to fill the void of generic burger meat for McD etc.

 

[PPRM]

One other great thing about the Beef Industry is that there are consumers that look for different things. Someone says I am looking for a good locker beef......What the heck does that mean? Some want Prime Fat, others want lean. Some percieve Grass fat as quality other spercive corn fed as quality.......

The neat thing s there's a market for the cattle produced in various environments, you just have to find where the premiums for your cattle are,

PPRM

 

[Econ101]

Does international business control the weather-yes or no? [No]

Before international businesses evolved what caused the cattle cycle? [Same thing that causes them now]

Does international business control consumer spending?[Effect...one could argue that, but control...No]

Now question for you....Who is in a better position to take advantage of these factors than the international packers?

A cost analysis will show it advantageous to import meat from finished animals that sell for half the cost of domestic finished...domestic producer loses!

Jason, one real world problem with your cull cow/bull study...there are producers that know a cull cow/bull with a little doctoring and put on hay and corn will gain around 3 lbs./day...many of those pounds are fat adding to the fat problem. The fat problem is caused by cheap corn and lack of places to use it. Here's a better solution for excess fat...make tallow out of it and sell it to the food industry to replace hydrogenated vegetable oils and their bad trans-fats!!!! Profits in the processing industry is largely determined by profitability of byproducts.

Robert Mac may want to argue the benefits of brahman cattle down in Florida and the deep hot south, and they are benefical for those climates for production, but you must also breed some of the "negative" characteristics out. You can do that. Brangus bulls, Santa Gertrudis, and some of the King Ranch type cattle (Way south Texas) are some examples of doing this. Robert Mac, any comments on this?

Nolan Ryan Tender Aged Beef requires Brahman influence in their protocol along with being a Select product. They have about the same acceptance rate as CAB...around 20%(someone can correct me if I'm wrong about CAB). Their biggest problem with non-compliance carcasses is on grade...too much fat(marbling) grading choice!!!! :shock: NRTAB is also the only USDA certified guaranteed tender program(that I know of)....millions of dollars of sell and only a few thousand paid on their money back guarantee. Can American breeds(Brahman influence) produce acceptable quality beef? There's your real world proof! Econ, you tried NRTAB beef?

The problem of tender beef is greatly misunderstood within the industry because there is money to be made because of those misconceptions. One in four steaks are tough in all grades....improper cooking causes that number to go up. Fat is insurance against bad cooking and lubrication for the eating experience...therefore its value. Stress is the culprit of bad beef and stress is built into the industry. Producers can do much to correct this, but why do it if you won't get paid for it.

Thanks, Robert Mac. I knew you had something to add to this. Maybe those brahmans were stressed during the killing. I know how jumpy some of them can be and I have seen how they are sometimes handled on their way to the kill floor. There was a good documentary on reducing stress in the kill part due to the unique understanding of an autistic woman. I was thinking about this from your last post when you brought stress up as a factor (a long time ago).

I think that is one of the best things about the beef industry to me. You get to talk to a lot of plain old folks. All of the breed people have their take on their breed and why it is the best. Going over and ribbing a neighbor on his bulls and listening to the stories is a lot of fun. Maybe we will get the traceback thing, Robert Mac, and be able to tell some of the quality differences in beef. It has such a range. A little accountability and info to get a better product would not be bad.

Robert Mac, I haven't tried that NRTAB beef yet. Sounds interesting. I am just kidding about your brahmans.