Shaft
Well-known member
http://www.youtube.com/user/AnnBarnhardt?feature=mhum#p/u/0/IJPPGSdFfsQ
Brilliant!
Brilliant!
The truth about R-CALF
- Thread starter Shaft
- Start date
Help Support Ranchers.net:
Kato
Well-known member
And then the fight started...............
:wink: :wink:
:wink: :wink:
burnt
Well-known member
Well as a cow/calf guy, I'm not sure why the feeder sector is supposed to make more profit by paying less for feeders. I'm tried of subsidizing the feeder sector, the packer and the consumer by supplying a calf at far below cost of production levels.
While I understand the intent, the whole clip is rather contrived and unrealistic in both sides of the "argument".
It might have been more credible if it would just have made one simple statement - "rcalf = epic fail".
While I understand the intent, the whole clip is rather contrived and unrealistic in both sides of the "argument".
It might have been more credible if it would just have made one simple statement - "rcalf = epic fail".
Shaft
Well-known member
Brother burnt, for me the burning revelation was that the O in OT apparently actually stands for Olga! Who knew?
burnt
Well-known member
Shaft said:
:wink:
Soapweed
Well-known member
Sandhusker
Well-known member
mpw said:
They've got to fight NCBA every step they take.
R-CALF has to spend most of their time finding and exploiting, or manufacturing, crisis in order to keep cattle producers in a state of panic which opens their checkbooks, keeping the 'leaders for life' happy believing that is how to "work for you"!!!!
The two I had time for now were funny and as typical of good humor, had at least a grain of truth.
Looking forward to the others.
Thanks for sharing.
mrj
The two I had time for now were funny and as typical of good humor, had at least a grain of truth.
Looking forward to the others.
Thanks for sharing.
mrj
A
Anonymous
Guest
Sandhusker: "They've got to fight NCBA every step they take."
They certainly think they do if for no other reason than they can't see the forest for the trees.
NCBA members realize what factors actually affect cattle markets and to what degree. Understanding this means their focus is on selling more beef which requires working with packers, not against them. If NCBA members had proof that there was as much money in the packing industry ON A PER HEAD BASIS as R-CALF members would like to believe, they would invest in that segment of the industry. Some have invested in the packing industry and found out the hard way how much money is to be had in that segment. In contrast R-CALF members are blame and conspiracy oriented. Facts mean very little to them which is testimony to their dismal record in court.
The biggest difference I see between NCBA and R-CALF members is in their understanding of what actually drives cattle prices.
R-CALF members believe packer concentration, captive supplies, and imports are the reasons for lower cattle markets but when you ask them what has changed about any one of these factors when markets go higher, they change the subject or look at you like you had two heads. Common sense would tell anyone that if these three factors were the only factors to play on lower cattle markets, that one or more of these factors would have to change to allow markets to go higher. $1 per bushel of corn change will result in a $20 per cwt difference on feeder cattle but how often have you ever heard an R-CALF member talk about rising corn prices corresponding with lower feeder cattle prices. I'm sorry but it's the truth. To an R-CALF member, lower cattle prices are always the result of packer concentration, captive supplies, and imports but they can't explain $100+ fat cattle with the same level of packer concentration, captive supplies and imports.
Look no further than the current effort by R-CALF to socialize the marketing of fat cattle through the proposed GIPSA regulations. What an absolute joke. This legislation was driven by the same sale barn managers and the cow/calf producers that believe them. This bogus socialist marketing legislation will remove incentive for raising higher quality beef producing cattle. All based on a factually void conspiracy theory that packers are making too much money and manipulating the markets which countless GIPSA investigations and court cases failed to prove.
This bodes the question, why sell the cattle? If you sold the cattle, why should you be concerned about whether the feeder or packer are making too much money? You don't own those cattle anymore. If you think feeders and packers are making so much money off your cattle, why wouldn't you invest in those segments of the industry and make that money yourself?
Talk certainly is cheap when it comes to R-CALF and what they believe.
In contrast, NCBA members do not buy into these same populist conspiracy theories because there is no factual basis to support them. You find far more NCBA members than R-CALF members that actually feed cattle to finish and understand fat cattle marketing arrangements and competition in the packing industry for the same cattle.
R-CALF's roots, unfortunately, are buried in ignorance of the entire industry and what aspects truly affect cattle markets.
~SH~
They certainly think they do if for no other reason than they can't see the forest for the trees.
NCBA members realize what factors actually affect cattle markets and to what degree. Understanding this means their focus is on selling more beef which requires working with packers, not against them. If NCBA members had proof that there was as much money in the packing industry ON A PER HEAD BASIS as R-CALF members would like to believe, they would invest in that segment of the industry. Some have invested in the packing industry and found out the hard way how much money is to be had in that segment. In contrast R-CALF members are blame and conspiracy oriented. Facts mean very little to them which is testimony to their dismal record in court.
The biggest difference I see between NCBA and R-CALF members is in their understanding of what actually drives cattle prices.
R-CALF members believe packer concentration, captive supplies, and imports are the reasons for lower cattle markets but when you ask them what has changed about any one of these factors when markets go higher, they change the subject or look at you like you had two heads. Common sense would tell anyone that if these three factors were the only factors to play on lower cattle markets, that one or more of these factors would have to change to allow markets to go higher. $1 per bushel of corn change will result in a $20 per cwt difference on feeder cattle but how often have you ever heard an R-CALF member talk about rising corn prices corresponding with lower feeder cattle prices. I'm sorry but it's the truth. To an R-CALF member, lower cattle prices are always the result of packer concentration, captive supplies, and imports but they can't explain $100+ fat cattle with the same level of packer concentration, captive supplies and imports.
Look no further than the current effort by R-CALF to socialize the marketing of fat cattle through the proposed GIPSA regulations. What an absolute joke. This legislation was driven by the same sale barn managers and the cow/calf producers that believe them. This bogus socialist marketing legislation will remove incentive for raising higher quality beef producing cattle. All based on a factually void conspiracy theory that packers are making too much money and manipulating the markets which countless GIPSA investigations and court cases failed to prove.
This bodes the question, why sell the cattle? If you sold the cattle, why should you be concerned about whether the feeder or packer are making too much money? You don't own those cattle anymore. If you think feeders and packers are making so much money off your cattle, why wouldn't you invest in those segments of the industry and make that money yourself?
Talk certainly is cheap when it comes to R-CALF and what they believe.
In contrast, NCBA members do not buy into these same populist conspiracy theories because there is no factual basis to support them. You find far more NCBA members than R-CALF members that actually feed cattle to finish and understand fat cattle marketing arrangements and competition in the packing industry for the same cattle.
R-CALF's roots, unfortunately, are buried in ignorance of the entire industry and what aspects truly affect cattle markets.
~SH~
RobertMac
Well-known member
Have you looked at the market lately????????????????SH said:
Tommy
Well-known member
SH wrote:
$1 per bushel of corn change will result in a $20 per cwt difference on feeder cattle but how often have you ever heard an R-CALF member talk about rising corn prices corresponding with lower feeder cattle prices. I'm sorry but it's the truth.
RobertMac...Have you looked at the market lately????????????????
With Scott's predictions feeders should be around 80 dollars right now. Glad I didn't listen to him!!!
$1 per bushel of corn change will result in a $20 per cwt difference on feeder cattle but how often have you ever heard an R-CALF member talk about rising corn prices corresponding with lower feeder cattle prices. I'm sorry but it's the truth.
RobertMac...Have you looked at the market lately????????????????
With Scott's predictions feeders should be around 80 dollars right now. Glad I didn't listen to him!!!
Sandhusker
Well-known member
SH, "The biggest difference I see between NCBA and R-CALF members is in their understanding of what actually drives cattle prices. "
Is any further comment really needed? :lol: :lol: :lol:
Is any further comment really needed? :lol: :lol: :lol:
A
Anonymous
Guest
I didn't make a prediction Tommy.
I simply stated that $1 bushel change on corn results in a $20 per cwt. change in the price of feeder cattle (ALL OTHER FACTORS BEING EQUAL).
Did you hear me say that corn was the only factor affecting cattle markets? I didn't think so. So why would you make that assumption?
Are you guys really so desperate to contradict me that you have to take my statements out of context?
Once again, i never said or suggested that corn was the only factor playing on the markets.
Are we clear or do I need to explain myself further?
You simply can't enter a discussion without your typical deceptive antics can you?
I in no way suggested that corn was the only factor playing on feeder cattle prices. Unlike you, I am well aware of the many factors that affect cattle prices. The fact remains that feeder cattle prices would be much higher than they are if corn prices were lower.
I am well aware of the fact that consumer demand as well as decreased cattle/beef supplies has played a large role in current cattle prices.
The point you missed was simply this, there's a heck of a lot more factors playing on rising and falling markets than R-CALF's scapegoat conspiracy theories of packer concentration, captive supplies, and imports.
The best entertainment I can think of is attending an R-CALF seminar on the factors that affect cattle markets with you being the master of ceremonies.
~SH~
