So..............Who does the NCBA really represent ?

[HAY MAKER]

Who does the ncba represent ?
good luck

 

[Anonymous]

That's an easy question, the NCBA represents various segments of the cattle and beef industry which includes cow/calf producers, stockers, and feeders. Their relation with the packing industry is based solely on their understanding that the value of cattle is tied directly to the value of beef and beef by products relative to the value of poultry and pork. They beleve that excessive government regulation on the packing industry will result in lower cattle prices due to the inability to differentiate between higher quality cattle.

They accept the results of numerous GIPSA investigations into "ALLEGED" market manipulation that resulted in no findings of wrong doing rather than a relentless pursuit of reasons to blame packers for cattle markets that are not what they think they should be. They opposed the unenforceable "M"COOL law that resulted in the CAN-MEX-USA beef labels because "M"COOL advocates didn't want a traceback system.

This may be general in nature but their focus is on the consumer, rather than the financial status of other segments of the industry. They believe in the importance of beef research, promotion, and education through the beef checkoff. They believe in real problems facing this industry such as the Endangered Species Act, excessive government regulation and higher taxes. They believe in being an active participant in the other segments of the industry or investing in those segments rather than baseless lawsuits against other segments of the industry. They believe in looking at what they can do to increase their income rather than blaming someone or something else for cattle markets that are not what they think they should be. They believe in less government regulations rather than more. They believe in investing in other factions of the industry rather than regulating those factions out of existance. They believe in making the most of what they have been given.

They represent me.

If the fact that they oppose regulations on the packing industry, based on empty conspiracy theories, that will result in lower cattle prices puts them on the same side as the packers and retailers on these issues, so be it. I would much rather support an organization that works with the other segments of the industry to capture more of the consumer's dollar away from poultry and pork rather than an organization that is 0 & 9 in court because their need to blame carries more weight than what the facts will support.

Wrong answer huh?


~SH~

 

[HAY MAKER]

That's an easy question, the NCBA represents various segments of the cattle and beef industry which includes cow/calf producers, stockers, and feeders. Their relation with the packing industry is based solely on their understanding that the value of cattle is tied directly to the value of beef and beef by products relative to the value of poultry and pork. They beleve that excessive government regulation on the packing industry will result in lower cattle prices due to the inability to differentiate between higher quality cattle.

They accept the results of numerous GIPSA investigations into "ALLEGED" market manipulation that resulted in no findings of wrong doing rather than a relentless pursuit of reasons to blame packers for cattle markets that are not what they think they should be. They opposed the unenforceable "M"COOL law that resulted in the CAN-MEX-USA beef labels because "M"COOL advocates didn't want a traceback system.

This may be general in nature but their focus is on the consumer, rather than the financial status of other segments of the industry. They believe in the importance of beef research, promotion, and education through the beef checkoff. They believe in real problems facing this industry such as the Endangered Species Act, excessive government regulation and higher taxes. They believe in being an active participant in the other segments of the industry or investing in those segments rather than baseless lawsuits against other segments of the industry. They believe in looking at what they can do to increase their income rather than blaming someone or something else for cattle markets that are not what they think they should be. They believe in less government regulations rather than more. They believe in investing in other factions of the industry rather than regulating those factions out of existance. They believe in making the most of what they have been given.

They represent me.

If the fact that they oppose regulations on the packing industry, based on empty conspiracy theories, that will result in lower cattle prices puts them on the same side as the packers and retailers on these issues, so be it. I would much rather support an organization that works with the other segments of the industry to capture more of the consumer's dollar away from poultry and pork rather than an organization that is 0 & 9 in court because their need to blame carries more weight than what the facts will support.

Wrong answer huh?

~SH~

I reckon it is,at least the poll thinks so.
good luck

 

[Sandhusker]

SH, "...their understanding that the value of cattle is tied directly to the value of beef and beef by products...."

Then why doesn't the price of cattle and the prices of boxed beef run parallel?

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker: "Then why doesn't the price of cattle and the prices of boxed beef run parallel?"

What do you mean by "run parallel"? I know my definition of "run parallel" but I'm not about to second guess what you might mean. You might mean that if boxed beef prices are $1.20 that live cattle prices should be a $1.20. I would hope you are not that ignorant. That would be like asking why live cattle prices are not as high as feeder cattle prices.

Live cattle prices do increase and decrease with boxed beef prices when all other factors are equal (meaning processing expenses, the value of hides, edible ofal, and the value of inedible ofal).


~SH~

 

[Sandhusker]

What I mean is; If cattle prices and beef prices were as closely related as you claim, charts of both prices would be in lock step - not necessarily the same, but they would resemble train tracks.

In reality, packers will always pay as little as they possibly can for cattle and and charge as much as they possibly can for beef.

 

[mrj]

This is probably equivalent to blowing in the wind, however, there are around 30,000 members of NCBA, most of them cattle producers or feeders or stocker operators. There may be some packer members, but they do not have the majority on the board.

What packers, and other allied members of NCBA have to gain from their membership is access to cattle producers as individuals who buy things they need for their ranches and sell above average quality cattle.

Sandhusker, do producer/sellers of "club calves" buy high and sell low, or vice versa????

mrj

 

[Shaft]

In reality, packers will always pay as little as they possibly can for cattle and and charge as much as they possibly can for beef.

You got a problem with the American Way, Sandy? I'm surprised at you.

 

[HAY MAKER]

In reality, packers will always pay as little as they possibly can for cattle and and charge as much as they possibly can for beef.

You got a problem with the American Way, Sandy? I'm surprised at you.

You either aint serious,or aint a cattleman,which is it,lemme guess promotin lower cattle prices and promotin captive supply,what does that say about you ?
good luck

 

[Shaft]

Hay Maker, who can take it seriously when you say you want an open-minded discussion/poll?

"Never try and reason the prejudice out of a man. It was not reasoned into him, and cannot be reasoned out."

Sydney Smith

 

[HAY MAKER]

Hay Maker, who can take it seriously when you say you want an open-minded discussion/poll?

"Never try and reason the prejudice out of a man. It was not reasoned into him, and cannot be reasoned out."

Sydney Smith

this is an open minded open discussion poll,you stated your opinion,i stated mine,you like packer monopolies putting down pressure on the market........I dont,matter of fact i caint think of a cattleman I know that likes lower markets. so i will just ask you bluntly,what do you think of packers driving down cattle prices with their captive supplies,you reckon that's a good thing for the cattleman,let the markets work right ?
good luck

 

[Shaft]

this is an open minded open discussion poll,you stated your opinion,i stated mine,you like packer monopolies putting down pressure on the market

Sure I said that. Not. Typical Texan; too busy listening to his own opinion to pay attention.

What I said was that the American Way is to buy low and sell high. Anybody that whines about corporations, or individuals for that matter, trying to maximize profit in the capitalist center of the universe is a fool.

Besides, last time I checked the packers were a small piece of the beef value chain compared to the retailers.

If you don't like packer monopoly, why not join a value chain, or better yet pay for custom killing and market the beef yourself? Lots of very successful producers do. Or start your own packing business and bust the monopoly. Should be small potatoes for a Texan. Blaming the ills of the world on the packers is a waste of time and energy.

good luck

 

[HAY MAKER]

this is an open minded open discussion poll,you stated your opinion,i stated mine,you like packer monopolies putting down pressure on the market

Sure I said that. Not. Typical Texan; too busy listening to his own opinion to pay attention.

What I said was that the American Way is to buy low and sell high. Anybody that whines about corporations, or individuals for that matter, trying to maximize profit in the capitalist center of the universe is a fool.

Besides, last time I checked the packers were a small piece of the beef value chain compared to the retailers.

If you don't like packer monopoly, why not join a value chain, or better yet pay for custom killing and market the beef yourself? Lots of very successful producers do. Or start your own packing business and bust the monopoly. Should be small potatoes for a Texan. Blaming the ills of the world on the packers is a waste of time and energy.

good luck

Explain this to me i would like to check it myself,or admitt you are so stupid you dont know the differnce between capitalism and a Monopoly.
where did you check on these poor poverty stricken packers that are just gettin by..................good luck

 

[Anonymous]

Sandhusker: "In reality, packers will always pay as little as they possibly can for cattle and and charge as much as they possibly can for beef."

In reality, the only way a processing plant can remain profitable is if they keep their plants full of cattle to process. The only way a packing plant is going to keep their plants full of cattle is to buy them. The only way a packing plant can buy cattle to keep their plants at capacity is to pay more or equal to their competition. Now that's reality.

Try operating a packing plant without cattle to process and remain profitable.

Packing plants running at capacity requires willing buyers and willing sellers.

It's simple business sense and for whatever reason, it escapes you.


~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Hayseed,

1. How can the packing industry be a monopoly if there is 5 major packers?

2. If packers can drive down prices, why do cattle markets go up just as often as they go down? Who or what is driving prices higher?

Now there's two questions to keep your blaming, conspiring mind spinning.


~SH~

 

[Soapweed]

What I mean is; If cattle prices and beef prices were as closely related as you claim, charts of both prices would be in lock step - not necessarily the same, but they would resemble train tracks.

In reality, packers will always pay as little as they possibly can for cattle and and charge as much as they possibly can for beef.

Don't even purveyors of petroleum products operate under much the same premise? :???:

 

[HAY MAKER]

What I mean is; If cattle prices and beef prices were as closely related as you claim, charts of both prices would be in lock step - not necessarily the same, but they would resemble train tracks.

In reality, packers will always pay as little as they possibly can for cattle and and charge as much as they possibly can for beef.

Don't even purveyors of petroleum products operate under much the same premise? :???:

The whole country operates under this premise,no one has a problem with that.
good luck

 

[Soapweed]

What I mean is; If cattle prices and beef prices were as closely related as you claim, charts of both prices would be in lock step - not necessarily the same, but they would resemble train tracks.

In reality, packers will always pay as little as they possibly can for cattle and and charge as much as they possibly can for beef.

Don't even purveyors of petroleum products operate under much the same premise? :???:

The whole country operates under this premise,no one has a problem with that.
good luck

So, why are packing plants considered the "bad guys" when they do the same? :???:

 

[HAY MAKER]

Don't even purveyors of petroleum products operate under much the same premise? :???:

The whole country operates under this premise,no one has a problem with that.
good luck

So, why are packing plants considered the "bad guys" when they do the same? :???:

they're not.
good luck

 

[HAY MAKER]

The Problem of Captive Supplies:
Meat packers acquire 50% to 100% of all cattle and hogs they slaughter through captive supplies. Captive supplies are livestock that packers own or control through contracts with farmers, ranchers and feedlot owners. By calling on captive supplies to fill slaughter needs, packers do not have to bid for cattle in an open, public manner. A false period of low demand is created and prices are driven even lower.
The use of captive supplies in a highly concentrated market has led to uncompetitive conditions in the markets for fed cattle.
Contracting cattle for future delivery, in itself, can be a good thing. However, packers are using a contract method known as "formula pricing" in which feeders are enticed to contract their cattle basing the contract price on the cash market on a delivery date, rather than a firm bid price. For example, a packer might offer the feeder 50 cents per hundred-weight over the cash market price on the day of delivery. Meanwhile, packers have enough cattle committed through captive supply so they do not need to buy on the cash market, driving down the cash price more than the premium offered the seller.