Subject: checkoff

[RobertMac]

Conversing with you and SH is always an adventure...you both rewrite what I say to enhance your position and usually something I never stated.

The loss in market share was hardly caused by the beef checkoff.

Please point out in my post just where in hell I said this...

The use of checkoff dollars proclaiming how great the checkoff has worked! Beef is a net loser in market share ever since there has been a checkoff!

Please prove your point with hardcore data.

So we can all keep this straight, this is the point I will prove with hardcore data from the USDA!

Beef is a net loser in market share ever since there has been a checkoff!

Beefs market share

1985.....73.8 lbs. of 156.4 lbs. total leading meats = 47.5% market share
2003.....62.0 lbs. of 168.1 lbs. total leading meats = 36.9% market share

In anybodies arithmetic, that is a NET LOSE in market share!!!!!!

The rest of the data...

1985....pork = 30.1% chicken = 27.6%
2003....pork = 28.9% chicken = 34.2%

The real kicker is that total beef consumption is essentially the same from 1985 to 2003...18.7M lbs.(1985) to 18.9M lbs. (2003)...essentially NO GROWTH!!!

So I ask...where does the checkoff have anything to brag about??? :???:

At least the high protein diets gave people a reason to eat beef and proved that animal fat doesn't make someone fat!!!!!

 

[Jason]

To complete the picture Robert post the figures for beef consumption for 1999

Agman has always said demand rose from 99-2003

The end result shows we haven't recleimed all the loss, but it did come back.

What was responsible for the net gain from 99?

 

[RobertMac]

per capita consumption of beef was lowest in 1993 at 61.0 lbs

% market share

1993...38.7%
1994...39.2%
1995...39.7%
1996...40.5%
1997...39.8%
1998...39.2%
1999...38.5%
2000...38.7%
2001...38.5%
2002...38.1%
2003...36.9%

Agman has always said demand rose from 99-2003

As Agman would say...demand is a price/consumption function. As you can see from the figures, consumption is having little to no effect on demand...changes in demand in this time frame are price driven.

 

[mrj]

WHY DON'T YOU GET AN ACCOUNTING OF CHECKOFF DOLLAR EXPENDITURES AND INCOME.

I tried to find one and couldn't, they just list so much for advertising, promotion and etc., but nothing is broke down. Does anyone know where you can get this info?

Rancher, did you contact the CBB and state what you want to know, specifically, since you apparently want more info than you were finding? The CBB serves all who pay the checkoff, and are good about contacting you if you do not suceed in getting a live person to talk to on the phone, or they will reply to the best of their ability to your email questions. The fact is, that Monte Reese likes to talk to discuss the checkoff with ranchers and that is part of his job. Telling him your problems with the checkoff system might even do more good than complaining to those who can do nothing about it.

Email: [email protected]

Phone: 1-303-220-9890

MRJ

 

[agman]

Conversing with you and SH is always an adventure...you both rewrite what I say to enhance your position and usually something I never stated.

The loss in market share was hardly caused by the beef checkoff.

Please point out in my post just where in hell I said this...

The use of checkoff dollars proclaiming how great the checkoff has worked! Beef is a net loser in market share ever since there has been a checkoff!

I

Please prove your point with hardcore data.

So we can all keep this straight, this is the point I will prove with hardcore data from the USDA!

Beef is a net loser in market share ever since there has been a checkoff!

Beefs market share

1985.....73.8 lbs. of 156.4 lbs. total leading meats = 47.5% market share
2003.....62.0 lbs. of 168.1 lbs. total leading meats = 36.9% market share

In anybodies arithmetic, that is a NET LOSE in market share!!!!!!

The rest of the data...

1985....pork = 30.1% chicken = 27.6%
2003....pork = 28.9% chicken = 34.2%

The real kicker is that total beef consumption is essentially the same from 1985 to 2003...18.7M lbs.(1985) to 18.9M lbs. (2003)...essentially NO GROWTH!!!

So I ask...where does the checkoff have anything to brag about??? :???:

At least the high protein diets gave people a reason to eat beef and proved that animal fat doesn't make someone fat!!!!!

I am really thrilled to see you do some research. You might teach yourself something worthwhile. Who are you kidding, by stating that beef lost market share since the checkoff. That is known, that is not news. What was your implication - it is the checkoff's fault or the checkoff did no good was that not your point? A valid point which you are oblivious to is that the loss would have been much more severe had it not been for the checkoff. Perhaps you should read the report on this matter by Dr Ron Ward, Florida State University.

You are also wrong in what you are saying ragarding consumption from 1985-2003. Per captia consumption declined during that entire period. To say as you do that total consumption was unchangd is a joke if not measured against population growth.

Please keep up the research. Perhaps you will figure out the many things, other than concnetration and captive supply, that have caused beef demand to decline and thus prices to weaken. There is a real world outside of the "conspiracy" world which you are enamored with.