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

Real Cost of Hamburger

I don't need to fill in the blanks to know that 2 plants running at 35% of capacity and paying their workforce for a 32 hour week is going to be losing more money than a Canadian plant of equal capacity with the cost of SRM removal. Tyson's financial reports confirmed what I had read as did the call to the Tyson office. Alberta's government study confirmed my beliefs about the Lakeside plant. I don't care what you want to believe Randy Schneider. You didn't prove anything here just like you normally don't. All you have is cheap talk!


~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
I don't need to fill in the blanks to know that 2 plants running at 35% of capacity and paying their workforce for a 32 hour week is going to be losing more money than a Canadian plant of equal capacity with the cost of SRM removal. Tyson's financial reports confirmed what I had read as did the call to the Tyson office. Alberta's government study confirmed my beliefs about the Lakeside plant. I don't care what you want to believe Randy Schneider. You didn't prove anything here just like you normally don't. All you have is cheap talk!


~SH~

You've got Agman's data, a phone call to your brother-in-law's former roommate's cousin at Tyson, a government study from Alberta, Tyson's financial reports, etc..... and you can't fill in the blanks :lol: :lol:

I think you're the one full of cheap talk.

Hugs and Kisses,
Randy A. Schneider
 
Sandbag: "I think you're the one full of cheap talk."

More cheap talk!


Sandbag: "Randy A. Schneider"

Hahaha! Atta boy! You gained a tiny bit of respect there! Now all you have to do is call me a liar to my face. When are we going fishing?




~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "I think you're the one full of cheap talk."

More cheap talk!


Sandbag: "Randy A. Schneider"

Hahaha! Atta boy! You gained a tiny bit of respect there! Now all you have to do is call me a liar to my face. When are we going fishing?




~SH~

You know, SH, I would go fishing with you. I'd even bring the beer - or schnapps if we were on the ice. I think it is possible that we would have a good talk, we might even enjoy each other's company. I'll bet you're a whole lot calmer and less abrasive in real life. We might even find common ground somewhere.

However, the issue at hand is still that you demand proof of others and won't reciprocate. We both know that the reason here is because you can't provide the proof. You don't have it. You can't fill in the blanks. I'd be satisfied if you would admit it and quit making that statement as fact - admit it is only your opinion and refrain from stating it again as it only misleads those who may think it is a fact. OR, if you won't bring any proof, stop making demands that others do. Practice what you preach. Is that asking a whole lot?
 
Sandhusker,

When I made my statement, it was based on my understanding of the situation in the NW plants, particularly Boise and Pasco. Swift even had a plant in Utah that was threatened to be closed. I had read where Excel had been negatively impacted by the closed Canadian border. I had read the information regarding Tyson's NW plants running far below capacity previous to my making my statement. When I made that statement, I knew that Lakeside was running at full capacity but I know enough about packing plants to know that they could not profit enough to offset the losses of two plants, of equal capacity to Lakeside, running at 35% capacity. I had forgot about the expense of SRM until I had read the Canadian government's study into packer profitability. I never even had a chance to present that information because I knew you wouldn't accept anything. Your pride simply wouldn't allow you to. The costs of SRM removal in Canada solidified my point. I had more than enough to go on.

You continually challenge me to prove every statement I make that you do not agree with. You know it and I know it. Yet you seldom ever provide any proof to back your position. It is you that is hypocritical from that standpoint. You really think it's cute how you can spin an issue and create your illusions while taking advantage of my honesty. Take this debate for example, you offered absolutely nothing to contradict anything I stated. Your whole position was based on discrediting what I brought to the table. You called me a liar with absolutely nothing to go on simply based on your belief that I couldn't prove I was telling the truth rather than basing your allegation on the fact that you could prove me wrong. That says everything about the type of person you are.

I made the bet because if I was going to have to prove myself ONCE AGAIN, it was going to be worth my time. My mistake was that I agreed to calendar year 2004 in the process of singling out Tyson because I knew that most of the information I had read pertained to Tyson and not as much to Cargill. Tyson financial data is also more readily available. My mistake was not changing your 2004 recommendation (for simplicity sake) to the entire period of time when the border was closed per my original statement. Had I done that, I would still have my $100. My anger for you calling me a liar got the best of me and you won when I overlooked a small detail of the bet, calendar year 2004. You know what buttons to push. Your calling me a liar doesn't bother me anymore because I now realize that you've just figured out which buttons to push. I now laugh at myself for actually letting you get the best of me one time.

You made your mistake when you thanked Agman for his honesty after he admitted that my original statement was correct but you'd just as soon forget about that. There's a big difference between you and I and it's in each of our level of integrity. You have very little.

When I started digging into the information I had that I posted, I quickly discovered that the greatest losses in Pasco and Boise were in 2005 while the greatest profits at Lakeside were in 2004. Agman confirmed my concerns. I could have easily taken your statement, "The bet revolved around SH's original statement" and slithered around it. I knew what I had agreed to, I admitted that my own research proved me wrong, and I paid up. That has to stand for something when you provided absolutely nothing but a critique of what I brought to the table.

What did I find?

1. Boise and Pasco running at 35% capacity while paying workers for a 32 hour work week. "HUGE LOSSES" reported in these plants. No surprise.
2. Agman provided the slaughter capacity of these two plants as compared to Canada.

3. Agman has provided the data on expenses to process an animal.

4. Lakeside profits had dwindled in 2005 and there was actually a quarter, while the border was closed, where they lost money

5. According to the Alberta study conducted by their government, the costs of SRM removal was the biggest reason packers were paying such low prices in Canada.

6. I called the head of cattle procurement from Tyson to find out the the losses in Boise and Pasco were "WAY MORE" than the profits in Lakeside.

I am absolutely, positively convinced that I am right. I would send a check of $500 to anyone who could prove me wrong and God knows I can't afford it. I have more than enough information to go on. I don't need individual plant financial records to know that I am right. Nobody will prove me wrong on this. If this is not good enough for you, fine. So be it. But you damn sure never came close to proving that I lied and I wouldn't lie. If I was a liar, you wouldn't have my $100. I don't care whether you call me a dumb ash, or an idiot, or a moron, or a hundred other names but calling me a liar is fighting words and you know it and that's why you do it. I don't lie. Accuracy and honesty is imperative to me.

Think about it. I live in the heart of R-CULT country and work for the state. Do you honestly think I have anything to gain by presenting the facts in contrast to the theories of those I work for? This causes me nothing but daily grief but the truth is that important to me. I don't have any connections to the packing industry other than typical tug of wars in the sale of fat cattle just like other feeders. I care about the truth. Whether you chose to believe that or not is up to you but the facts and the truth matters greatly to me. Unlike most R-CALFers, I am not driven by a need to blame. I am driven by a need to understand every aspect of this industry to find the truth. I have debated these issues with many producers and those debates all turn out the same. The opposition gets mad when they can't back their beliefs. They get mad when they can't explain why cattle prices are where they are with an opened Canadian border. They get mad when they can't define "captive supplies". Why? Because they are simply repeating what everyone else is saying and noboby takes the time to search for the truth.

I used to support R-CULT until I started doing my own research. Agman gave a presentation in Pierre SD and literally ate the R-CALFers alive with hard data. That opened my eyes and my fathers eyes. Agman also left the same impression in Martin, SD last year when he spoke to many of "OUR" friends. Nobody could refute his data. Agman's data is consitent with the data of University leaders like Purcelle, and Schroeder. Cattle Fax's data is also consistant. You can't alter the truth. Leo, Bill, Mike and the Livestock Marketing Police tell blamers what they want to hear but their positions will not stand up to scrutiny.

Look at R-CALF's phony import/export graph. Do you think it serves anyone's best interest to leave out hides and beef variety meats simply so Bill Bullard isn't exposed for his phony statement about the beef industry being in a trade deficit for two years? Rather than admit to being wrong, they try to justify their position by providing half of the information. WHO IS SERVED BY THAT???? That is where my resentment comes from. Who is served by R-CULT lying about the safety of Canadian beef than changing their storty to fit the U.S. situation??? What was gained anyway? Did Canadian beef disappear off the world market? Hell no! Eventually Canada would have absorbed an equal portion of our export market so who was served by stabbing the Canadian's in the back. That is what absolutely infuriates me about R-CULT. They are so misinformed, so emotionally driven, and they don't have a clue about the consequences of their actions. They're lost!

If R-CULT was in a true debate with industry leaders like Agman, Schroeder, and Purcelle at a major university, R-CULT leaders would be laughed out of the room by bright young economists. Their arguments cannot hold water against the facts. Their positions have already stood the test in court and they've lost every time. Look at cattle prices with an opened border? Is that what they predicted? Did they admit to being wrong? Hell no and they won't! They go on to the next blaming issue as if they never said it. Everything I loathe in humanity.

If you don't want to believe me on this issue, I don't care but you called me a liar and that won't be forgotten. Anyone that knows me knows that I am not a liar regardless what the consequences. I learned that lesson as a kid.

Remember, a lie is not saying something that is untrue. A lie is saying something that is untrue WITH THE INTENT TO MISLEAD. Conman does it every day.


~SH~
 
Conman: "SH, we have all heard this before.

Make no mistake about something Conman, there is no "WE". You don't speak for anyone but yourself. If the PM's I have received are any indication, any supporters you may have had are leaving you like rats leaving a burning ship. Many here have you figured out.

Rest easy, this is my last post for the day but I'll be back to correct your bullsh*t as soon as time allows. Your lies will not dominate this forum.



~SH~
 
That's a real nice letter, but you can't get away from the fact that you can't fill in the blanks.

What you have is a strong opinion based upon partial knowledge - that's it. Slaugher numbers, SRM removal, etc... gives you a basis for theory. However via your attacks on Dr. Taylor, you demand theories be tested - so why don't you test yours? Why don't you fill in the blanks and see if you are right? You notice the blanks are asking for a dollar figure, not a slaughter number....

You claim you were wrong in year 2004 only but your original statement stands - I'm offering to give you back your $100 if you can prove that and you can't do it. To prove you are correct, you have to be able to fill in the blanks.

You are absolutley positive you are right, but you can't fill in the blanks. Might be good enough for someone who wants to believe that, but not up to the standards you demand of others, is it?

If Agman has all the data, why can't you use it to fill in the blanks? Why?

SH, "Remember, a lie is not saying something that is untrue. A lie is saying something that is untrue WITH THE INTENT TO MISLEAD."

I'll agree with you on that. What is your intent on vehemently stating your opinion as fact? What is your intent on continually stating you have proof and have provided it when you can't fill in those dang blanks?

This is like you and I having a bet on the Nebraska-Colorado game and I gave you 7 points. If I told you that I know Nebraska covered the spread and you need to pay up, wouldn't you want to know what the score was? What if instead of the score I gave you data on first downs and turnovers and demanded you accept that as proof? Wouldn't you demand to know what Nebraska scored and what Colorado scored so you could subtract 7 from Nebraska and determine if that number was indeed higher than Colorado's? You would need me to fill in the blanks otherwise all I had was talk.

Until you can fill in the blanks, all you have is talk. Considering how you jump on others and berate and belittle them, I think it says a lot about you.
 
~SH~ said:
Conman: "SH, we have all heard this before.

Make no mistake about something Conman, there is no "WE". You don't speak for anyone but yourself. If the PM's I have received are any indication, any supporters you may have had are leaving you like rats leaving a burning ship. Many here have you figured out.

Rest easy, this is my last post for the day but I'll be back to correct your bullsh*t as soon as time allows. Your lies will not dominate this forum.



~SH~

I am scared.
 
Gopher trapper squeaks -
What did I find?

1. Boise and Pasco running at 35% capacity while paying workers for a 32 hour work week. "HUGE LOSSES" reported in these plants. No surprise.
2. Agman provided the slaughter capacity of these two plants as compared to Canada.

3. Agman has provided the data on expenses to process an animal.

4. Lakeside profits had dwindled in 2005 and there was actually a quarter, while the border was closed, where they lost money

5. According to the Alberta study conducted by their government, the costs of SRM removal was the biggest reason packers were paying such low prices in Canada.

6. I called the head of cattle procurement from Tyson to find out the the losses in Boise and Pasco were "WAY MORE" than the profits in Lakeside.

1. Who says that the fact that they were running at your so called 35% was completely due to the border being closed. Nice theory if you are a packer lover though.

2. Who cares. Look to #1

3. What does that have to do with anything goof.

4. The gambling started in early 2005 goof. That was when the border was supposed to open. The all powerful USDA had confidence that they could walk past Cebull. Check the spread again in early Feb. when Cargill and Tyson once again had the opportunity to drop their offerings.

5. :lol: :lol: :lol: Whatever you want to believe Gopher Trapper. No use presenting numbers to you and Jason and the gang. You will always be right, (or left depending on your view of corporate welfare. :roll: )

6. This is the best one and I'm so glad you saved it for last. YOU CALLED. Think about it Gopher Man. What the hell else do you think this fellow who works for Tyson was going to say.

"No Scott, we lost money due to the high demand for beef in the US, but our company more than made up for those losses with the boxed beef salmon run coming down from Canada. Our other plants could have shared some of our loss of numbers by sending some cattle up, but we had to make things look bad." In fact, as you have pointed out, we were loosing money on every carcass slaughtered in our plant so bringing more in would have meant more losses. One of those things Scott, that we just have to live with for the overall good of Tyson."

Call ghost busters next time Gopher man, your argument will likely be more believable. :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
If Agman has all the data, why can't you use it to fill in the blanks? Why?

Does it ever occur to anybody that some are priviledged to info. that would jeopardize a person's job (credibility), if disclosed? If that was not the case, why do we all use aliases here?

I'm not sticking up for SH (or packers) here, but I have been in the situation many times where I "let on" about confidential info. but not disclose it.

Sandhusker, what did "John Doe", one of your customers profit last year? You can fill in the blanks, but will you give us the numbers? "NO", and I would hope you don't, that's confidential, and your integrity keeps you from disclosing those numbers!
 
Murgen said:
If Agman has all the data, why can't you use it to fill in the blanks? Why?

Does it ever occur to anybody that some are priviledged to info. that would jeopardize a person's job (credibility), if disclosed? If that was not the case, why do we all use aliases here?

I'm not sticking up for SH (or packers) here, but I have been in the situation many times where I "let on" about confidential info. but not disclose it.

Sandhusker, what did "John Doe", one of your customers profit last year? You can fill in the blanks, but will you give us the numbers? "NO", and I would hope you don't, that's confidential, and your integrity keeps you from disclosing those numbers!

Tyson is a public company, Murgen.

The issue here is SH demanding proof from others to the point of childish names like "factually void", "cheap talker" "liar" etc.. (you know what I'm talking about) and then not being able to back his own "truths" - over and over. Anybody else you could let it go as it really does'nt matter, but the way he treats others and puffs himself up with comments like "The truth is my only bias" and "I have never been refuted" begs for a taste of his own medicine - that and the fact that he's a militant hyper-biased anti-R-CALFer gives me pleasure in exposing him.


He's either lying or BSing that he's right, and he's certainly lying that he proved any financials that pertain. He KNOWS he's right, but he can't fill in the blanks. :roll: Do you buy that line, Murgen?
 
Do you buy that line, Murgen?

Actually, my contacts at said companys are telling me the same thing that SH is saying, but!

I know for a fact that I can't spill the beans, or my credibility would be done!

That's why I mentioned it!

It will all come out soon, and how the closed border affected things, will you still be willing to send SH his $100 back?
 
Murgen said:
Do you buy that line, Murgen?

Actually, my contacts at said companys are telling me the same thing that SH is saying, but!

I know for a fact that I can't spill the beans, or my credibility would be done!

That's why I mentioned it!

It will all come out soon, and how the closed border affected things, will you still be willing to send SH his $100 back?

If he can prove the statement he KNOWS is true and keeps yapping about (but can't fill in the blanks).

Murgen, if he knows he is telling the truth, don't you think he would be able to fill in the blanks?
 
Murgen, if he knows he is telling the truth, don't you think he would be able to fill in the blanks?

Depends on who he is willing to offend by disclosing confidential info., until it becomes public!

He might just be setting you up for a later date, when the info. is made public.

I'd be careful I'm not playing into his hand!
 
Murgen said:
Murgen, if he knows he is telling the truth, don't you think he would be able to fill in the blanks?

Depends on who he is willing to offend by disclosing confidential info., until it becomes public!

He might just be setting you up for a later date, when the info. is made public.

I'd be careful I'm not playing into his hand!

Murgen, I thought you were one of the leveler heads around here until now! Tyson is a public company, earnings are not confidential - Cargill yes, Tyson no.

Secondly, if SH thought he had some confidential information (how would he get it?), he would of said something long ago. There is no confidential information. SH is a gopher trapper, not Maxwell Smart.
 
yes, they are a public company, do they break down their financials in small enough terms to decipher the bet that you originally made?

That being profit/loss during the complete border closure, at the time of the post containing the bet?

Or do the numbers have to be broken down into smaller numbers (divisions)?
 
Murgen said:
yes, they are a public company, do they break down their financials in small enough terms to decipher the bet that you originally made?

That being profit/loss during the complete border closure, at the time of the post containing the bet?

Or do the numbers have to be broken down into smaller numbers (divisions)?

I'm sure they could break down their financials to individual days if they really wanted to, but who does? SH said "the entire time the border was closed". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that is May 20, 2003 to July 14, 2005.
 
If July 14 is the date that live imports started crossing the 49th, then you are right.

Is that the timeline we are agreeing on?

I'm sure they could break down their financials to individual days if they really wanted to, but who does?

Or you could take the average cost of production, average cattle price, etc in each country and figure out some rough numbers?

What do you think?
 
Murgen said:
If July 14 is the date that live imports started crossing the 49th, then you are right.

Is that the timeline we are agreeing on?

I'm sure they could break down their financials to individual days if they really wanted to, but who does?

Or you could take the average cost of production, average cattle price, etc in each country and figure out some rough numbers?

What do you think?

I don't think SH would ever accept guesses based on averages - he'd have to have it straight from Tyson's front office with John Tyson's notarized signature. Have you EVER seen him accept anything from anybody other than Agman? This whole sordid drawn out affair is about SH living up to the same standards he demands of others.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top