Selling at auction.

[Murgen]

Boy it sure is nice selling in a seller's market. A feller might think he can get rich in this business.

What seller's market?

The packers use ever means at their disposal to manipulate prices and take advantage! They use a tool to slide this down the curve, and this tool to slide that up the curve! Damn market power! How many calves do they own anyway?

They control the spot market, futures etc.

They are raking in the dough, and never give any back. I would think in another two years, independent producers will be out of business. Not taking in to account the ones retiring, do to age!

Or is it the feeders who make all the money, I'm confused! Do Branded Beef Products make any headway? Why are producers chasing quality, if not getting paid for it?

 

[Anonymous]

When you look at the bigger picture and listen to all the conflicting bitches from the "doomsday profits", it just doesn't add up does it Murgen?

That's what happens when you have industry blamers that are never challenged to back their positions. They keep making their baseless allegations and never have to provide any proof that they exist.

Speaking of industry blamers.........

Elementary economics: "SH, I don't have a problem with packers making money. Not one bit at all. I do have a problem with them using their buying power and market power to alter the supply/demand equilibrium. It always leads to economic ineffiencies via deadweight losses.

In seller's markets, there is limited supply and higher prices. Go ask your local real estate person what that means. Sometimes it is a buyers market. Sometimes market manipulation makes it a buyers market.

That is what Pickett proved to the jurors. We are living with the economic consequences of the packer's artificial slide down the supply curve now. Packers want to cry that domestic supplies are tight---they are, in part because the packers supressed the prices that ranchers got for their cattle. Boom and bust, but because of the market's invisible hand of equilibrium prices giving signals to producers, but because of market manipulation giving false signals.

Most cattle producers want a more stable price for their cattle than the current boom bust cycle that currently exists with packer manipulation. The years of high prices are the result of low prices for a long period of time. "Imports" cry the packers, "That is the solution to our supply problems." Maybe price stability by getting rid of market tricks is the answer."

You cannot prove your buying power and market power leads to lower cattle prices theory. You don't have the slightest clue what factors affect cattle markets. All you can do is keep rattling off the same empty statements with your same inability to back them. Same old elementary economics from an industry blamer who looks to bigger government for the solution to his perceived problems.

Just as I suspected, you can't explain why packers can "SUPPOSEDLY" only manipulate markets under certain conditions. You can't explain why the formula price is periodically lower than the cash market. All you can do is blame.

Pickett never proved anything. They only convinced an ALABAMA jury (hardly considered a cattle feeding state) that dropping your price as your needs are met is market manipulation. Judge Strom and the 11th circuit saw right through it.

If Pickett proved it to the jury, PROVIDE THAT PROOF! Talk is cheap!



~SH~

 

[Econ101]

SH:

Just as I suspected, you can't explain why packers can "SUPPOSEDLY" only manipulate markets under certain conditions. You can't explain why the formula price is periodically lower than the cash market. All you can do is blame.

In this analysis you look for statistically significant differences, which discounts anomolies in the data. There are always anomolies. If there are no anomolies, then someone has too good of information and market control.

 

[Anonymous]

Provide the proof of market manipulation or prove that you can't!



~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Provide the proof of market manipulation or prove that you can't!





~SH~

SH, I wasn't involved in the Pickett case. I was not an attorney for them, I was not an economist for them, and I was not a witness for either side. Pickett had to bring that proof into the courtroom and convince the jurors, not I. He had to show what was happening in the cattle markets, not I.

He convinced 12 jurors of his view and all of the arguments that you and the packer backers have brought up have smelled like sardines. You are so wrong on so many issues in regards to the allegations that show total contempt for any credible knowledge of the case. Do you want to bring up your numbered points and go over them again as an example of this? Proof is for juries and all this type of forum can do is explain the case or interpret the evidence.

Many years ago my grandfather was suffering from arthritus. He had it really bad. He could not lift his arms over his shoulders and he could not lift his legs over his knees. He went to doctor after doctor. No one could help him. In desperation he went down to Piedras Negres (sp?) and had one of their DMSO (sp?) treatments. That was the first time my grandfather had ever been out of the country. When he got back, he could lift his arms, and lift his legs. He felt like a new man. When before he felt as if his life was not worth the pain and suffering, when he got back, he had a new lease on life.

My grandfather went to his family doctor to show him how his life had changed. The doctor looked at him and said, "Pete, it is all in your head."
My grandfather asked the doctor to come around in front of him, that he wanted to show him something. He turned the doctor around and gave him a kick in in his butt. The doctor turned around surpised and my grandfather told him. "Dr. Sewell, you have been my family doctor for 30 years. I came to you with this problem and you put me on medication after medication. You sent me to this doctor and that doctor. Before I went to Mexico, I could not lift my legs or lift my arms. I was in constant pain. Now I have none of that and the proof hit you in the butt. If all of that is in my head, I want it to stay there."

Sometimes, SH, I think you are related to Dr. Sewell, although I think Dr. Sewell learns a lot faster than you. If you want to discuss these issues to get a better understanding, lets do it. Please just stop bringing up fish and asking for the proof in the Pickett case to be replayed on this forum. It isn't going to happen, and quite frankly, you wouldn't admit to being wrong even if it is shown. GIPSA did not collect the data necessary to do the kind of analysis that is required. It doesn't mean that it is not there, it just means that the data was not the complete set that could have shown what was happening. On the stand Tyson did not answer the question about their smoking gun. They refused to answer. I do believe that in this instance it was a case of intelligent design. GIPSA had the authority to get the information but did not require it. An oversight, you might say. Same thing with Hillary's trades. Whose oversight?

 

[Anonymous]

Elementary economics: "SH, I wasn't involved in the Pickett case. I was not an attorney for them, I was not an economist for them, and I was not a witness for either side. Pickett had to bring that proof into the courtroom and convince the jurors, not I. He had to show what was happening in the cattle markets, not I."

Keep dancing, diverting, and dodging. I would expect nothing less from someone as factually void as you are.

You keep saying that Pickett offered the proof but you can't tell anyone what that proof was. All you can do is create the "ILLUSION" that the proof was provided. You are so empty!

Elementary economics: " You are so wrong on so many issues in regards to the allegations that show total contempt for any credible knowledge of the case. Do you want to bring up your numbered points and go over them again as an example of this?"

DENY, DISCREDIT, DIVERT, & DECEIVE! You got it down to a science!

Keep telling yourself that I am wrong on so many issues you phony. As long as you can talk your cheap talk without ever having to back anything, you can continue to convince yourself that I am wrong.

Prove me wrong on anything I have stated. You can't! All you can do is make the allegation just like you keep making the allegation that Pickett provided the proof than dodge having to provide that proof. What a phony you are. It's guys like you that are the scourge of this industry. Blamers looking for someone or something to blame that never back their allegations with supporting proof. Just throw out some econ phsychobabble that sounds impressive to you.

Wake me up when you have something relevant to add to the discussion rather than a synoposis of what you WANT TO BELIEVE.


~SH~

 

[Econ101]

Elementary economics: "SH, I wasn't involved in the Pickett case. I was not an attorney for them, I was not an economist for them, and I was not a witness for either side. Pickett had to bring that proof into the courtroom and convince the jurors, not I. He had to show what was happening in the cattle markets, not I."

Keep dancing, diverting, and dodging. I would expect nothing less from someone as factually void as you are.

You keep saying that Pickett offered the proof but you can't tell anyone what that proof was. All you can do is create the "ILLUSION" that the proof was provided. You are so empty!

Elementary economics: " You are so wrong on so many issues in regards to the allegations that show total contempt for any credible knowledge of the case. Do you want to bring up your numbered points and go over them again as an example of this?"

DENY, DISCREDIT, DIVERT, & DECEIVE! You got it down to a science!

Keep telling yourself that I am wrong on so many issues you phony. As long as you can talk your cheap talk without ever having to back anything, you can continue to convince yourself that I am wrong.

Prove me wrong on anything I have stated. You can't! All you can do is make the allegation just like you keep making the allegation that Pickett provided the proof than dodge having to provide that proof. What a phony you are. It's guys like you that are the scourge of this industry. Blamers looking for someone or something to blame that never back their allegations with supporting proof. Just throw out some econ phsychobabble that sounds impressive to you.

Wake me up when you have something relevant to add to the discussion rather than a synoposis of what you WANT TO BELIEVE.


~SH~

Do cash prices always follow boxed beef prices?

 

[Anonymous]

Elementary: "Do cash prices always follow boxed beef prices?"

In the United States where slaughter capacity is equal to cattle numbers, Yes cash prices follow boxed beef prices.

The Canadian situation of having more cattle than slaughter capacity due to R-CULT lying about the safety of Canadian beef and keeping the Canadian border closed is not a situation the U.S. has been faced with.

Nice Try!

NEXT!


~SH~