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

SH PAID UP!

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
I'd like to let you all know that SH did indeed pay up on his debt. Enclosed with a $100 bill was a cheery note as well.

SH, a brief reply; Quit your dang whining and blaming me. It was YOU who made untrue statements you couldn't back up. It was YOU who proposed a bet. It was YOU who agreed to the terms. It was YOU who couldn't offer a single financial of either of the three plants. No, I didn't refute your comments because YOU proposed that YOU could prove it. You claim I trapped you into year 2004 - what a laugh. You think you could prove your point using the entire time the border was closed? NO WAY. You would have to get financials from Tyson beginning and ending in the middle of a quarter. Since this information does not redily exist, I don't think you knew what your statement let on that you knew. I suggest that you learn from your mistake and stop flapping your lips so freely.

Per my promise, your money will be going straight to Billings. I was going to make it simple and deposit your cash into my account and then write a personal check, but if you want proof if where it went, I'll do a money order and send you a receipt - your call. On behalf of R-CALF, thanks for the donation.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
Congratulations, Sandhusker. And to you, SH, you get about a hundred dollars worth more respect from me. Don't try to stretch it to any more than that, however.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker,

The fact remains that what you called a lie ("Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants losing more money than Brook's Lakeside plant made while the Canadian border was closed") REMAINS THE TRUTH.

You will never prove otherwise but you will only continue to disagree with THAT position because disagreement is all you have to offer. You have nothing to back your position or contradict mine. You won't call the Tyson office to confirm either way because creating an illusion of being right and your need to blame is more important to you than the truth.

Looking at all the data of the shift cuts in Boise and Pasco against the added costs of SRM removal and lower retail beef prices in Canada creates the picture without needing individual plant profitability information. The call to Tyson headquarters only confirms this. Agman's data confirmed it.

YOU WILL OFFER NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE TO THE CONTRARY but statements, just like Econ in his blind Pickett defense. You are both a joke from the standpoint of supporting your position with anything of substance.

Not one person on this site can show me where you brought anything to the table to support your positon that I lied. NOT ONE! Your blaming fan club just lines up and assumes that you are right if it means a victory for the blaming side.

To the contrary, it was you that lied by saying that I lied when you had no proof either way. That typifies the type of parasite you really are. You shot your pathetic mouth off with the allegation that I lied and relied on Agman and my honesty to prove myself wrong, within calendar year 2004 only, which is the bet I agreed to.

Funny how you called Agman honest for his position within calendar year 2004, which cost me a $100, but apparently you don't believe Agman when he agreed with my original statement regarding Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants losing more money than Tyson's Lakeside plant made WHILE THE BORDER WAS CLOSED. Isn't that just like the pathetic SOB you are? Agman's honesty must be selective only to you collecting a $100 on a bet YOU CONTRIBUTED NOTHING TO!

I'll send anyone double the amount to prove me wrong on my original statement that you called a lie. The only lips that were flapping were yours by calling the truth a lie.

What I find so hilarious is that you even admitted that the bet revolved around my original statement in one of your last posts on the topic. Didn't stop you from taking the money though did it? Hahaha! You conveniently avoided my question regarding whether the bet involved my original statement or calendar year 2004. MY ORIGINAL STATEMENT DIDN'T HAVE A DAMN THING TO DO WITH CALENDAR YEAR 2004 and you knew it but you'd already stuck your foot in your mouth. I decided not to capitalize on it since I know that I had agreed to 2004 and I have a conscience. That was my only mistake. For you to win a bet with me requires you to rely on me proving myself wrong because you have never proven me wrong on anything.

WHAT YOU CALLED A LIE WAS THE TRUTH!

It's not the $100 for my mistake that bothers me, it's the fact that what you called a lie was the truth and you will never prove otherwise.

My $100 will add to R-CULT's lawyer fund because it sure as hell will never help the U.S. cattleman. You are on the losing side and more producers are waking up to R-CULT's lies.

Our calves sold for $8/cwt more than last year and the Canadian border is opened this year and closed last year. This is just one more example of how R-CULT continues to lie to the U.S. cattleman.



~SH~
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandman: "You claim I trapped you into year 2004 - what a laugh."

I never made any such claim you damn liar.

You specified calendar year 2004, in your words, for "simplicity" sake. Instead of referring back to the information that supported my original claim, I agreed to calendar year 2004 and that was my only mistake. The information I had showed the big losses in Boise and Pasco and the dwindling profits at Lakeside were mostly during the spring of 2005 as the Canadian feeder supply dwindled. You are not smart enough to trap me from a factual standpoint. The only trap you set was calling me a liar to get me to do your research for you, AGAIN. I learned a lesson.

The bottom line here is that you offered nothing to back your position and offered nothing to refute mine. You won $100 on a technicality and Agman's and my honesty ONLY!

My original claim stands as written and it will remain the truth.


~SH~
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
If only this could be left alone! But now SH comes back with even more statements to supposedly back his position.

SH
dwindling profits at Lakeside were mostly during the spring of 2005 as the Canadian feeder supply dwindled.

Come on SH, an over supply is an over supply. There was never a supply/ demand issue in the pricing of cattle in Canada during the border closure, and the situation has changed very little since. Canadian fat prices still do not reflect on American fat prices like they did prior to May 20, 2003.

SH
Looking at all the data of the shift cuts in Boise and Pasco against the added costs of SRM removal and lower retail beef prices in Canada creates the picture without needing individual plant profitability information. The call to Tyson headquarters only confirms this. Agman's data confirmed it.

Does SRM removal cost that much less in America SH? What the hell is this new statement about lower retail beef prices in Canada all about. Ever since the border was opened to boxed beef, price for beef from Cargill and Tyson's plants in Canada have been based on what they could get in America. As far as calling Tyson - give us all a break SH. That is simply your lamest excuse. Think about it. Do you think you could call any Canadian rancher and get him to admit that he never really lost anything due to the closed border.

Ask me SH. I am a producer, and a packer of sorts. I collected more money per fat steer in the summer of 2003 than I ever have in my life. Our conventional market hung around 30 to 40 cents live. Our wholesale price stayed the same because the wholesale price from Tyson and Cargill stayed the same. I collected a hefty cheque from the government for every steer I owned, just like Cargill and Tyson did. Now go and find another to admit that.

It was awfully nice of Sandman to let you off the hook by taking Cargill out of the bet. Even with them out, you could not prove your fairy tale. Why don't you just leave it alone?

Cargill and Tyson profitted excessively during the closed border. Enough, in fact, to offset their losses, due to the closed border, in America. If not in actual profits from each animal slaughtered, their gains were made from overall advantage over their competition in terms of their expansion and the competitions cutting back.

You know you cannot prove otherwise SH, so stop making yourself out to be the almighty holder of truth and proof. Thank you for paying up to Sandman, and I too respect your doing that. Your passion is obvious, and your will strong, but you're hooped on this one, so leave it alone.

Randy



[/b]
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
~SH~ said:
Sandman: "You claim I trapped you into year 2004 - what a laugh."

I never made any such claim you damn liar.

You specified calendar year 2004, in your words, for "simplicity" sake. Instead of referring back to the information that supported my original claim, I agreed to calendar year 2004 and that was my only mistake. The information I had showed the big losses in Boise and Pasco and the dwindling profits at Lakeside were mostly during the spring of 2005 as the Canadian feeder supply dwindled. You are not smart enough to trap me from a factual standpoint. The only trap you set was calling me a liar to get me to do your research for you, AGAIN. I learned a lesson.

The bottom line here is that you offered nothing to back your position and offered nothing to refute mine. You won $100 on a technicality and Agman's and my honesty ONLY!

My original claim stands as written and it will remain the truth.


~SH~

Fine, SH. You pick a time period, then. Pick any time period you want where you feel you can prove the two US plants lost more than Lakeside made. Lets see it. Fill in the blanks; From xxxx to xxxx, Lakeside made $xxxx and the two US plants lost $xxxx.
 

the chief

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
385
Reaction score
0
Location
midwest
:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:

Wah! Wah! Wah!

My daddy always said you can't be a good winner unless you can be a good loser first. 8)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandman,

When I stated that the Boise and Pasco plant lost more money than the Lakeside plant made WHILE THE CANADIAN BORDER WAS CLOSED, you called that a lie.

You also said that when someone around Cody, NE calls someone a liar, they better be able to back it. Well, when are you going to back your claim that I lied????

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF????

The answer is that you will never back your allegation that I lied because you never back anything and expect others to continually back their position. That's the type of parasite you are and you just did it again.

This time it's going to be different.

You claimed that I lied so WHERE IS YOUR PROOF TO BACK THAT ALLEGATION????


Watch this diversion....................


Randy: "Come on SH, an over supply is an over supply. There was never a supply/ demand issue in the pricing of cattle in Canada during the border closure, and the situation has changed very little since. Canadian fat prices still do not reflect on American fat prices like they did prior to May 20, 2003."


First off Randy, you took my statement out of context. Here is what I wrote.............


SH (previous): "The information I had showed the big losses in Boise and Pasco and the dwindling profits at Lakeside were mostly during the spring of 2005 as the Canadian feeder supply dwindled."

I was referring to the Canadian feeder supply in the U.S. Canadian feeders that were shipped to the NW states prior to the border closing were still being slaughtered in U.S. plants after the border was closed. After they were gone, there was no more Canadian feeders to replace them in the NW U.S. because the border was closed. That is why those plants cut back their slaughter rates.

Pretty common sense!


Randy: "Does SRM removal cost that much less in America SH? What the hell is this new statement about lower retail beef prices in Canada all about. Ever since the border was opened to boxed beef, price for beef from Cargill and Tyson's plants in Canada have been based on what they could get in America. As far as calling Tyson - give us all a break SH. That is simply your lamest excuse. Think about it. Do you think you could call any Canadian rancher and get him to admit that he never really lost anything due to the closed border."

The U.S. was not removing SRMs in cattle under 30 months of age. CANADA WAS!!!!

Missed that one didn't ya?


Why didn't you read the government study conducted on packer profitting during the closed Canadian border?

DIDN'T SAY WHAT YOU WANTED TO BELIEVE HUH?????

As far as calling Tyson, Tyson is a publicly traded company. They have no reason to lie about their profits or losses particularly if they want to maintain their investors. Secondly, they stated right in their financial report that the losses in Pasco and Boise were huge and they explained the shift cutbacks. Their financial report also showed the Lakeside profits dwindling towards the end of calendar year 2004.

Nobody ever said Tyson didn't profit from the border closing in Canada at their Lakeside plant. They just simply didn't profit as much as packer blamers like you think they did and they certainly didn't profit enough to offset the losses in Pasco and Boise.

I understand Randy, you need someone to blame and that is reflected in your bias.

You never offered anything to contradict anything I presented and you never offered anything to support your position and you won't either!


Randy: "It was awfully nice of Sandman to let you off the hook by taking Cargill out of the bet. Even with them out, you could not prove your fairy tale. Why don't you just leave it alone?"

Sandman specified Tyson then tried to weasel out of it knowing that he was in over his head. Sandman never had a clue either way. He was just betting on my inability to prove my position with individual plant data.

Tell me Randy, what did you bring to the table to support your position besides theories, speculation, supposition, and opinion?

Show me one fact that you brought to support your position that Lakeside made more money than Boise and Pasco lost while the Canadian border was closed. You won't!

Why don't I leave it alone? Sandman said I lied, he needs to prove that I lied instead of having me prove that I didn't lie. Sandman won't do that because he's never backed a position on this board yet. All he can offer is challenges to someone else's position as he just tried to again. He doesn't prove someone else wrong. Just like with his lame Pickett defense. I asked him 30 times to provide the facts that support his position. He didn't because he couldn't.

Sandman is a parasite that lets others do his work for him by challenging whatever he doesn't want to agree with.

He won "THE BET THAT I AGREED TO", he never backed his position to prove that I lied. He never brought a damn thing to the table to support his allegation that I lied. That's why I will not leave it alone.


Randy: "Cargill and Tyson profitted excessively during the closed border. Enough, in fact, to offset their losses, due to the closed border, in America. If not in actual profits from each animal slaughtered, their gains were made from overall advantage over their competition in terms of their expansion and the competitions cutting back."

That is absolutely untrue!

PROVE IT!!!!!

Prove your statement! You just made that up because that is what you want to believe. You can't prove it.

The losses in the Boise and Pasco plants were not offset by the profits in the Lakeside plant FOR THE PERIOD OF TIME WHEN THE BORDER WAS CLOSED TO LIVE CATTLE.

What part of Tyson's financial statement claiming "HUGE LOSSES" in Pasco and Boise and "DWINDLING PROFITS" in Lakeside do you not understand?

Do you have proof to the contrary of their own financial reports? Hell no you don't and you won't.


Randy: "You know you cannot prove otherwise SH, so stop making yourself out to be the almighty holder of truth and proof. Thank you for paying up to Sandman, and I too respect your doing that. Your passion is obvious, and your will strong, but you're hooped on this one, so leave it alone."

You are convinced of your position without any supporting facts. That's the same mentality that R-CULT operates on.

You are clearly wrong in your beliefs. The proof is in Tyson's financial reports and the Canadian government's study on packer profitting in Canada. You will offer absolutely nothing to the contrary.

RANDY, YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF SUBSTANCE TO BACK YOUR POSITION.


Chief: "My daddy always said you can't be a good winner unless you can be a good loser first."

Sandman said that I lied when I said that Tyson's Pasco and Boise plants lost more money than Tyson's Lakeside plant made while the Canadian border was closed. Sandman also said that when someone calls someone a liar around Cody, NE (his hometown), they better be able to back it.

Show me where Sandman backed the allegation that I lied. Show me Chief.

Watch this..............


Sandman collected $100 because I made the mistake of agreeing to calendar year 2004 instead of the entire period of time when the border was closed. I did the research and found out that the huge losses in Pasco and Boise occurred in FY 2005. Sandman didn't prove me wrong on that. He didn't have a clue either way. I proved myself wrong on calendar year 2004 only. My original statement was true and the data confirms it. Sandman will offer nothing to back his position that I lied but he'll take the money on a bet he contributed nothing to after claiming the bet revolved around my original statement which had nothing to do with calendar year 2004. That's the type of parasite Sandman is.



~SH~
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary Alberta
SH has proof - He asked a fellow at Tyson and this fellow agreed. :roll:

Randy has no proof. Cargill and Tyson's multimillion dollar expansions and ability to buy out competitors had nothing to do with the spread between fat prices in Canada and fat prices in the USA since Sept. 2003. No one has ever taken on the issue of price in Canada on this board including SH. We still see a spread that allows for excessive profits and still we cower at the thought of pissing off Cargill or Tyson.

Keep blabbing SH, you have proven nothing, and you choose to ignore the power and control weilded by the packers due to these excessive profits.

Keep that cape flying in the wind, the wind coming out of your mouth and the other end as well. You are pathetic.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
rkaiser said:
SH has proof - He asked a fellow at Tyson and this fellow agreed. :roll:

Randy has no proof. Cargill and Tyson's multimillion dollar expansions and ability to buy out competitors had nothing to do with the spread between fat prices in Canada and fat prices in the USA since Sept. 2003. No one has ever taken on the issue of price in Canada on this board including SH. We still see a spread that allows for excessive profits and still we cower at the thought of pissing off Cargill or Tyson.

Keep blabbing SH, you have proven nothing, and you choose to ignore the power and control weilded by the packers due to these excessive profits.

Keep that cape flying in the wind, the wind coming out of your mouth and the other end as well. You are pathetic.

SH certainly has. He was just wrong. He said that the cash price followed the boxed beef price and implied a relationship between the two that does not exist. As you correctly pointed out, RKaiser, it is a function of supply and demand. SH was caught in another one of his bogus statements that has lost him credibility with everyone but himself and possibly Agman. He had to come back and adjust his statement to mean only the U.S. market and not the Canadian market.

Packers are able to play both sides of the border to thier advantage against the interests of producers. Arguments are being mixed so that the events can be spun. In their march to allow Agribusiness to be the most competitive they are ruining the profitability of the farmer/rancher in the U.S. and in Canada. It is funny that the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture asked how we can get new farmers in this business (because of the aging farmer base) in his forums. The answer, of course, is to allow it to be profitable. These games that the packers and the ADM s of the world engage in create their own problems. The wrong questions are being asked. We will continue to get the wrong answers if the wrong questions are being asked.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
SH, maybe I owe you an apology. I said that you were lying. Now that I sit back and evaluate who I’m dealing with, I realize you have time and time again exhibited the ability to ignore facts, reason, and common sense to believe what you want to believe. I’m sure that, in your world, your statement was correct. I will now move to strike the words “lie” and “lair”, and insert the words “hopelessly and completely full of crap”. Do you feel better now that this unforgivable challenge to your honor has been revoked? Can you get on with your life?

The facts remain, my fellow R-CALF financier, you have yet to prove your statement in the real world. Some other facts; I specified Tyson even though your original statement you keep wanting to go back to included Cargill. I let you off and gave you a chance because none of us are privy to Cargill’s records. You can’t prove ANYTHIING regarding their financials. You would of lost on that point alone.

I gave you another chance specifying year 2004 because it would be possible for you to get Tyson’s financials – fiscal years are easy to work with and the information is there.

Again, back to your original statement you now choose to reference; do you actually think you can provide numbers for the time period the border was closed? YOU CAN’T. That would require financials beginning and ending in the middle of quarters - more information that is not available that would be needed to prove you knew what you were talking about. I let you off a hook there, too. But, I'm a parasite. According to you, I'm also a blamer, clone, lemming, deceiver, illusionist, etc...

Why do you keep carping that I never proved you were wrong? Didn’t YOU propose in your bet that YOU would provide the proof? Speaking of the proof, where is it? Where is anything? You moan and whine like a liberal, but you have yet to post a single financial from any of the three plants for ANY time period. What's the problem, SH, why have we not seen any dollar figures?

You dug yourself in a hole by blowing your usual hot air and then trying to BS your way out of it and you got caught. The more you wail, the deeper you get. You need to learn from your mistakes and move on.

What should we argue about next?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
HOW COMPLETELY PREDICTABLE. The three "factually void" amigos respond and not one of them has anything more to offer than empty statements, just like always.

Not one of you can refute anything I have stated with facts to the contrary. NOT ONE!

DENY, DISCREDIT, DECEIVE, DIVERT.....same old blamer's MO!


Randy: "Keep blabbing SH, you have proven nothing, and you choose to ignore the power and control weilded by the packers due to these excessive profits."

Randy why do you insist on being so ignorant? Tyson's financial reports showed a loss during this time period. What part of the word "LOSS" can't you understand? Are you so conspiracy oriented that you would actually believe they lied to their investers in their financial reports? If so, how could you explain the times when they show a profit? Was the shift cut backs and closed plants in the U.S. part of this conspiracy to hide their profits? How can you possibly be so naive as to think Tyson was making excessive profits while their financial reports are showing losses? Is your need to blame the packer overriding any and all common sense?

Tyson and Cargill's expansion in Canada doesn't have a damn thing to do with profits in Canada because their profits in Canada were offset by their losses in the United States and that is a fact you will not refute. Tyson and Cargill's expansion in Canada has to do with the fact that Canada doesn't have the slaughter capacity to kill all of their production so the opportunity for expansion is justified by the number of cattle.

You can't even reason!


Kindergarten: "SH certainly has. He was just wrong."

Keep telling yourself that Kindergarten because you've never brought anything of substance to the table to back your position EVER and this time is no different. You've proven yourself to be nothing more than a "cheap talker". Good thing you blamers have eachother for moral support because you certainly have nothing to back your packer blaming positions.

Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost more than their Lakeside plant made during the period of time when the Canadian border was closed to live cattle. You will offer nothing to refute that fact. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!


Kindergarten economics: "He said that the cash price followed the boxed beef price and implied a relationship between the two that does not exist. As you correctly pointed out, RKaiser, it is a function of supply and demand."

If boxed beef prices are not a function of "DEMAND", WHAT THE HECK ARE THEY???

Live cattle prices in the United States do follow boxed beef prices. You will offer absolutely nothing to contradict that fact.


What do you think drives cattle prices Kindergarten? I would love to hear what kind of a conspiracy explanation you can come up with.


Kindergarten: "SH was caught in another one of his bogus statements that has lost him credibility with everyone but himself and possibly Agman. He had to come back and adjust his statement to mean only the U.S. market and not the Canadian market."

If you are too ignorant to realize that the closing of the Canadian border creating a situation of more cattle than slaughter capacity in Canada is not a normal supply and demand situation, then you are absolutely hopeless.

You will be unable to prove that live cattle prices do not follow boxed beef prices in the United States. All you can offer is empty, unsupported statements, as always.


Kindergarten: "Packers are able to play both sides of the border to thier advantage against the interests of producers."

Total bullsh*t!

You can make statements like that but you will never offer supporting proof because you can't just like you couldn't defend your Pickett support with anything of substance. Empty statements and a need to blame is all you will ever have.

You have yet to contradict a single thing I have stated with facts to the contratry. In contrast, I have lost track of how many times I have corrected your never ending ignorant statements. You couldn't back your position if your life depended on it.



As I predicted, Sandman diverts having to back his allegation like the plague. GEE, WHODA THOUGHT????

Sandman: "Now that I sit back and evaluate who I’m dealing with, I realize you have time and time again exhibited the ability to ignore facts, reason, and common sense to believe what you want to believe."

More cheap talk with nothing of substance to support it.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Sandman, if you could refute anything I have stated with facts to the contrary you would do it so fast your keyboard would start on fire. Since you can't, the only option you have is to make more empty statements like the one above. You accuse me of exactly what it is you do best.

You have never brought any facts to support your position EVER nor have you brought anything of substance to contradict anything I have presented. All you have is empty rhetoric like the statement above.

It is you that ignores facts, reason, and common sense to believe what you want to believe, not me.

You proved it again by you inability to back your allegation that I lied.


Sandman: "I will now move to strike the words “lie” and “lair”, and insert the words “hopelessly and completely full of crap”."

PROVE IT!!!

BACK YOUR DAMN POSITION WITH SOMETHING OF SUBSTANCE FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE!!!!

PROVE THAT TYSON MADE MORE MONEY IN CANADA THAN THEY LOST IN THE U.S. WHILE THE BORDER WAS CLOSED.

BACK YOUR POSITION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You said I am full of crap. Any ankle biter can say that. Proving it is quite another matter.

Why do you want everyone here to see that you are nothing more than an ankle biter that can't back his position? Here's your big chance to finally back your position. What seems to be the holdup?

YOU SAID I LIED, EITHER PROVE IT OR SHOW THE READERS WHAT A WORTHLESS PARASITE YOU REALLY ARE.


~SH~
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
18,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Nebraska
Good buddy, my position was that you were full of crap and could not back your statement. As you have yet to provide a single financial from ANY of the three plants in question, it appears my position is on solid ground.

We need to make another bet - this time for $40. Your $100 got you a two-year membership. For $140, you can get a three year membership and save $10.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Sandhusker said:
Good buddy, my position was that you were full of crap and could not back your statement. As you have yet to provide a single financial from ANY of the three plants in question, it appears my position is on solid ground.

We need to make another bet - this time for $40. Your $100 got you a two-year membership. For $140, you can get a three year membership and save $10.

I like that Sandhusker. Always looking out for your fellow man and trying to save him his hard earned money. You must be an excellent banker. :shock:
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2005
Messages
7,060
Reaction score
0
Location
TX
SH, You are so wrong on so many things tha you are like the little kid in the classroom you know will never "get it". But, for the benefit of everyone else who may be in the classroom that has to hear your take on the world, I will answer your post. I am sure most people watching these forums know how all of your functions are "normal" so you do not have to offer that again.

SH-- Hawker:

Keep telling yourself that Kindergarten because you've never brought anything of substance to the table to back your position EVER and this time is no different. You've proven yourself to be nothing more than a "cheap talker". Good thing you blamers have eachother for moral support because you certainly have nothing to back your packer blaming positions.

Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost more than their Lakeside plant made during the period of time when the Canadian border was closed to live cattle. You will offer nothing to refute that fact. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

I never said anything about that. It is apparent that Tyson used the opportunity of the USDA closing the border because of BSE to gobble up another competitor who was hurt by the border closing. Do you disagree?

As with the Hudson buyout, Tyson used USDA policies to further its own means. Do you disagree?


SH Hawker:
Quote:
Kindergarten economics: "He said that the cash price followed the boxed beef price and implied a relationship between the two that does not exist. As you correctly pointed out, RKaiser, it is a function of supply and demand."


If boxed beef prices are not a function of "DEMAND", WHAT THE HECK ARE THEY???

Live cattle prices in the United States do follow boxed beef prices. You will offer absolutely nothing to contradict that fact.

Was that the case for Mike C. and some of the other cash sellers caught in the price manipulation game?

SH Hawker:
Quote:
Kindergarten: "SH was caught in another one of his bogus statements that has lost him credibility with everyone but himself and possibly Agman. He had to come back and adjust his statement to mean only the U.S. market and not the Canadian market."


If you are too ignorant to realize that the closing of the Canadian border creating a situation of more cattle than slaughter capacity in Canada is not a normal supply and demand situation, then you are absolutely hopeless.

You will be unable to prove that live cattle prices do not follow boxed beef prices in the United States. All you can offer is empty, unsupported statements, as always.

I am not the ignorant one here. You made the statement that live prices follow boxed beef prices. I accurately pointed out that was not the case in Canada. You then narrowed it to the U.S..

If Tyson could increase the spread between boxed beef and cash prices they would. It just so happens that they make more money and create barriers of entry when they do not. They get away with a lot more when people like you can argue that they did not profit from market manipulation in beef when swinging the beef market. That does not bring in the anti-trust case as much.

If for some reason the supply of U.S. cattle could not meet the demand prices would rise. If Tyson could get more of their beef from other countries, that spread could increase due to these circumstances. The spread increase would not be between U. S. cash prices and boxed beef prices, it would be between the imported meat cash prices and boxed beef. Is this not what has just happened?

SH Hawker:

PostPosted: Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:27 pm Post subject:
HOW COMPLETELY PREDICTABLE. The three "factually void" amigos respond and not one of them has anything more to offer than empty statements, just like always.

Not one of you can refute anything I have stated with facts to the contrary. NOT ONE!

DENY, DISCREDIT, DECEIVE, DIVERT.....same old blamer's MO!


Quote:
Randy: "Keep blabbing SH, you have proven nothing, and you choose to ignore the power and control weilded by the packers due to these excessive profits."


Randy why do you insist on being so ignorant? Tyson's financial reports showed a loss during this time period. What part of the word "LOSS" can't you understand? Are you so conspiracy oriented that you would actually believe they lied to their investers in their financial reports? If so, how could you explain the times when they show a profit? Was the shift cut backs and closed plants in the U.S. part of this conspiracy to hide their profits? How can you possibly be so naive as to think Tyson was making excessive profits while their financial reports are showing losses? Is your need to blame the packer overriding any and all common sense?

Tyson and Cargill's expansion in Canada doesn't have a damn thing to do with profits in Canada because their profits in Canada were offset by their losses in the United States and that is a fact you will not refute. Tyson and Cargill's expansion in Canada has to do with the fact that Canada doesn't have the slaughter capacity to kill all of their production so the opportunity for expansion is justified by the number of cattle.

You can't even reason!


Quote:
Kindergarten: "SH certainly has. He was just wrong."


Keep telling yourself that Kindergarten because you've never brought anything of substance to the table to back your position EVER and this time is no different. You've proven yourself to be nothing more than a "cheap talker". Good thing you blamers have eachother for moral support because you certainly have nothing to back your packer blaming positions.

Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost more than their Lakeside plant made during the period of time when the Canadian border was closed to live cattle. You will offer nothing to refute that fact. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!


Quote:
Kindergarten economics: "He said that the cash price followed the boxed beef price and implied a relationship between the two that does not exist. As you correctly pointed out, RKaiser, it is a function of supply and demand."


If boxed beef prices are not a function of "DEMAND", WHAT THE HECK ARE THEY???

Live cattle prices in the United States do follow boxed beef prices. You will offer absolutely nothing to contradict that fact.


What do you think drives cattle prices Kindergarten? I would love to hear what kind of a conspiracy explanation you can come up with.


Quote:
Kindergarten: "SH was caught in another one of his bogus statements that has lost him credibility with everyone but himself and possibly Agman. He had to come back and adjust his statement to mean only the U.S. market and not the Canadian market."


If you are too ignorant to realize that the closing of the Canadian border creating a situation of more cattle than slaughter capacity in Canada is not a normal supply and demand situation, then you are absolutely hopeless.

You will be unable to prove that live cattle prices do not follow boxed beef prices in the United States. All you can offer is empty, unsupported statements, as always.


Quote:
Kindergarten: "Packers are able to play both sides of the border to thier advantage against the interests of producers."


Total bullsh*t!

You can make statements like that but you will never offer supporting proof because you can't just like you couldn't defend your Pickett support with anything of substance. Empty statements and a need to blame is all you will ever have.

You have yet to contradict a single thing I have stated with facts to the contratry. In contrast, I have lost track of how many times I have corrected your never ending ignorant statements. You couldn't back your position if your life depended on it.

Did not the above logic sink in? I believe you are in your own little world still. I used to love making bets with people like you when I was much younger. It just cracks me up that Sandhusker does it with you.

At least you put a smile on my face when I remember those days. You do have some worth, SH. Entertainment is worth a lot nowdays. I just love your "facts to the contrary" saying. You are in a little trouble however: sleeping is not allowed in class.

I hope all of your functions are normal but it really is too much information. Can you remember the questions I asked?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandman: "We need to make another bet - this time for $40. Your $100 got you a two-year membership. For $140, you can get a three year membership and save $10."

You said in Cody, NE if someone calls someone a liar, they better be able to back it. When I said that Tyson lost more more money in Pasco and Boise than they made in Brooks while the border was closed, you said I lied.

I'll bet you my $100 back that you will not practice what you preach by backing your allegation that I lied.

Watch this pathetic parasite dance folks........................



~SH~
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Kindergarten: "SH, You are so wrong on so many things tha you are like the little kid in the classroom you know will never "get it"."

More cheap talk with nothing to support it.


Kindergarten: "It is apparent that Tyson used the opportunity of the USDA closing the border because of BSE to gobble up another competitor who was hurt by the border closing. Do you disagree?"

R-CULT further concentrated this industry by hurting the small packers by keeping the Canadian border closed. They claim to be concerned about packer concentration yet their short sighted actions contributed to just that.

The large packer did not want the border to stay closed and hurt their competition, R-CULT wanted the border to stay closed because they are too ignorant to understand the true impacts of Canadian imports.


Kindergarten: "Was that the case for Mike C. and some of the other cash sellers caught in the price manipulation game?"

Mike Callicrate has made all kinds of baseless allegations that he cannot support. Trying referencing someone with credibility.


Kindergarten: "I am not the ignorant one here. You made the statement that live prices follow boxed beef prices. I accurately pointed out that was not the case in Canada. You then narrowed it to the U.S.."

I was never referring to Canada in my statement. You spun my statement to Canada. The fact remains live cattle prices in the U.S. do follow boxed beef prices and you will not prove otherwise.


Kindergarten: "If Tyson could increase the spread between boxed beef and cash prices they would."

Congratulations!

I'll take that as your admission that Tyson cannot manipulate the markets.


Kindergarten: "They get away with a lot more when people like you can argue that they did not profit from market manipulation in beef when swinging the beef market."

Cheap talk!

You cannot prove your market manipulation conspiracy theory.


Kindergarten: "If for some reason the supply of U.S. cattle could not meet the demand prices would rise. If Tyson could get more of their beef from other countries, that spread could increase due to these circumstances. The spread increase would not be between U. S. cash prices and boxed beef prices, it would be between the imported meat cash prices and boxed beef."

How do you explain that in light of a recent increase in Canadian imports while U.S. cattle prices have never been higher?



Kindergarten: "Did not the above logic sink in? I believe you are in your own little world still. I used to love making bets with people like you when I was much younger. It just cracks me up that Sandhusker does it with you.

At least you put a smile on my face when I remember those days. You do have some worth, SH. Entertainment is worth a lot nowdays. I just love your "facts to the contrary" saying. You are in a little trouble however: sleeping is not allowed in class.

I hope all of your functions are normal but it really is too much information. Can you remember the questions I asked?"

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

More cheap talk with nothing to back it!


~SH~
 

Latest posts

Top