SH--Pushing Select vs Choice Beef

[GLA]

"Do you want to make the argument that CSU was biased in their CHB vs CAB "pepsi challenge" taste test? Are they not "EXPERTS"?? "

Scott, I knew you would get bent out of shape. I am not pushing the fact that there is alot of difference in taste between High Select and Low Choice. In fact, CAB has information to show that Slight 80 to Slight 99 and Small 0 to Small 20 can go either way, which says that in that area of grading, it is the grader's eye that makes the difference. In reality, it is extremely hard to see the difference........it's all up to your preference.

And NO, I don't call CSU experts in the meat business, but that comes from my personal perspective, just like your personal belief! I call the experts those people that are in the meat business everyday, who make their livings from the decisions they make on a daily basis.......they know what the customer wants.......on a daily basis........and it changes on a daily basis!

I don't think an Angus/Simmental CROSS is being a true Angus breeder. It is representative of the English-Continental cross I see in most feedyards. It seems to be producing the type of product that is working in parts of the beef industry....keep it up!

"FACT: There is only a 10% direct correlation between marbling and tenderness. Choice beef only has a 10% advantage over NON AGED Select. Age them and the difference is even less."

Angus has sold the "ILLUSION" that Choice is far better than Select but the research and taste tests wont back that claim.

The price difference between NON AGED choice and NON AGED select does not justify a 10% difference in quality ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU AGE IT.

When PM Beef conducted their research to determine what levels of marbling their beef should contain, the majority of consumers preferred "high select" and "low choice" levels of marbling.

You can argue forever that choice is better but the research only shows a 10% direct correlation between marbling and tenderness. The Beef Quality Audit showed a lot of overlap between poor choice steaks and quality select steaks. Age them both and the difference is even more miniscule.


Just read your statements Scott. It is just what I have been saying, you and others are trying to convince me and others.....that Select beef is what we want. That is NOT what I want. I know the difference and I STILL want Choice Beef and that is what I will try to raise.

What makes your decision better than mine??

GLA

 

[Econ101]

SH, you could argue there is not that much difference between low select and high cutter. Do you want to make that argument?

 

[Anonymous]

GLA: "Just read your statements Scott. It is just what I have been saying, you and others are trying to convince me and others.....that Select beef is what we want. That is NOT what I want. I know the difference and I STILL want Choice Beef and that is what I will try to raise.

What makes your decision better than mine??"

That's not true GLA. Don't spin my stating that NON AGED CHOICE, only having a 10% advantage over NON AGED SELECT, as promoting NON AGED SELECT. Nowhere did I say select was better. That's spin!

I'm telling you that NON AGED choice only has a 10% advantage over NON AGED select. I'm telling you that NON AGED CHB kicked NON AGED CAB's ash in 4 categories in a CSU side by side "pepsi challenge" type taste test. Keep in mind that CAB is the upper 2/3 of choice grade while CHB allows select in their program. I'm telling you PM BEEF's research showed most consumers wanting high select to LOW CHOICE levels of marbling in an AGED PRODUCT. I'm telling you the Beef Quality Audit showed a tremendous overlap between desirable NON AGED select and undesirable NON AGED choice. I'm simply presenting the facts.

How do you explain that in light of your "OPINION" that choice is a better product?

My issue with this is that the angus breed is selling the "ILLUSION" that NON AGED choice is always better than NON AGED select. That simply is not true according to the research. Age it and the gap narrows further.

I know for a fact that most consumers could not tell the difference between a properly aged and properly prepared select steak and a properly aged and properly prepared choice steak and I bet you couldn't either.

I don't care if you want to believe that NON AGED choice is a better product, the research gives NON AGED commodity CHOICE a 10% advantage over NON AGED commodity SELECT which is irrelevant. Age both and it's totally irrelevant.

Sure, I realize that consumers believe the same thing because that's what they have been sold. Give them a "pepsi challenge" and they can't tell the difference.

I don't care what you WANT TO BELIEVE, I only care about the facts.


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "My issue with this is that the angus breed is selling the "ILLUSION" that NON AGED choice is always better than NON AGED select. That simply is not true according to the research. Age it and the gap narrows further. "

Sounds to me that they are involved in deception. I thought the USDA had a policy against that.

 

[GLA]

SH,

Why should I continue this conversation. You have just proved again what I said.

You are giving me all the information you have to convince me that Select CHB is what I want. I am not going to buy Select over Choice.

I appreciate your efforts, but it ain't working!!

Thanks anyway.

GLA

 

[Jason]

I can accept that a high select product is acceptable to most consumers.

However, why would a person aim for that target when choice pays more?

The current trend for fat cattle is overfat when they hit choice, wouldn't the logical thing be to try to breed a leaner animal AT SLAUGHTER when they first hit choice?

If more yg 2 cattle were hitting choice, the current yg 3 and4's would be able to be pulled off feed and used as the high select product as yg 1 or 2.

Excess fat problem solved. Producers could effectively shut down the need for imported lean trim by breeding better cattle. Too bad some don't worry about being in the beef industry, they only sell calves.

 

[Mike]

Tyson is mainly a "Select" buyer. They said so in the Pickett trial anyway.

They pay less for select cattle and can charge less for it to the supermarkets.

Put a "Select" roast next to a "Choice" and the average housewife will pick up the "Select" first because #1, it's cheaper. And #2, it doesnt have all that fat and cholesteral the media is preaching. :???:

From my own personal observation.

 

[Jason]

Your right Mike, consumers need more education.

The same housewife that buys the leaner roast then complains she hasn't got enough drippings to make decent gravy.

Fortunately some that still actually cook are learning, but we still need the convienience products to get more consumers.

The ones with the biggest incentive to educate consumers are the producers. We basically get what's left after all the margin operators take their piece.

 

[Anonymous]

GLA: "You are giving me all the information you have to convince me that Select CHB is what I want. I am not going to buy Select over Choice."

Buy what you want GLA, I could care less. I simply presented the facts. If that doesn't match your bias, so be it. CHB is not a select product per say, CHB simply allows "select" within their mix. There is plenty of choice CHB.

Gosh, you act like I should apologize for presenting facts that doesn't happen to support your bias.


~SH~

 

[GLA]

SH,

You're competely missing the point. I can agree with your facts. Just read your statements...........you keep beating me over the head with this Select thing and that is what other folks are trying to do. You and others have not convinced me that producing or buying an "AVERAGE" product is what everyone will do.

Here's a question. Tell me why I should produce cattle that continually produce Select products! I've got lots of reasons why it may work, but let's here your reasons. Remember, I work with feedyards producing cattle going on all kinds of grids and packers paying all kinds of premiums for all kinds of cattle.

Your answer should have lots of interest to us all. And don't get off on your Select beef propoganda just give me your thoughts on the question...............please!!!

Have a great Christmas and eat just a little beef if you can.

GLA

 

[pknoeber]

...consumers need more education.

The same housewife that buys the leaner roast then complains she hasn't got enough drippings to make decent gravy.

Fortunately some that still actually cook are learning, but we still need the convienience products to get more consumers.

The ones with the biggest incentive to educate consumers are the producers. We basically get what's left after all the margin operators take their piece.

Jason maybe producers should produce what consumers want instead of trying to "educate" them into wanting what we produce? Maybe we should see the signals they're sending and go after that, instead of trying to change the signals they send.

As to the convenience products, you've hit the nail on the head, beef lags WAAAAY behind. But let's take a look at a lot of the convenience products currently out there... a lot of them break the beef down and then reform it into a "new" cut. This process almost guarantees tenderness and a consistent product. However, they can do this with a select carcass and still get a high quality product.

Maybe I'm wrong, but to many beef producers just keep shooting for a choice/prime carcass b/c that's what we all "know is the best there is." So we keep trying to tell the consumers that. Maybe we need to quit talking and start listening & providing what they ask for. Quick, consistent and tender. Ever had some of Hormel's convenience beef? It meets all 3.

 

[mrj]

My take on this information, and what the studies have shown, etc. is a little different.

Aren't those studies (Beef Quality Audits and consumer taste challenges, etc.) showing us what is/was the current state of affairs?


They are NOT trying to "convince" anyone of what they want or should want in a beef product........but to learn what they think of what is out there......and to show producers what they are, for the most part, producing.

It isn't to tell producers what they should or should not be producing, but to show us the current profile of our production, at least to a degree.

Maybe another point is: what can we afford to produce on the ranch we have; how can we fit the cattle to our particular ranches, figuring out how to improve our product and our profit, and make it all fit together and provide the consumer with the best beef they can afford to buy and we can afford to produce.

Personally, I believe we need to develop those methods to make 'Select' grade beef more palatable and appealing to the lower income consumer while we improve the product for the high end consumer, too.

There are probably plenty of producers who do not have a clue how bad some of the beef they raise is, and plenty of them/us who do not believe the beef we produce is not of the higher quality. Then, there are those unfortunate few who do not believe they produce 'beef'!!!!!

Point: many cattle producers need to know more about our own costs of production and what quality levels our cattle can and do reach.

Meanwhile, consumers need to be taught how to be better purchasers of the type of beef they want and how to prepare it so they do not make a mess of a good piece of beef when they cook it!

MRJ

 

[Andy]

Your right Mike, consumers need more education.

The ones with the biggest incentive to educate consumers are the producers. We basically get what's left after all the margin operators take their piece.

That may be the best quote ever on here. If every producer relized that, the beef industry would move forward very fast. To bad most producers just want to go back to the way things were.