Totally predictable responses to BSE announcement.

[the chief]

Agman: buy the USDA.


How appropriate.

I meant to include parity pricing, but could not find it. Take a breath, agman, and keep in mind: You don't believe me and I don't believe you.
Your agenda, I'm guessing, is different than mine. I hope for the survival of family-owned ranches and farms. You hope for something different.

You see, I didn't want to become a livestock caretaker in Illinois. I hoped to raise and own my own hogs. But consolidation and vertical integration did myself and thousands of others in. I know you call it "progress". I call it destruction of rural America.

So don't call me ignorant, agman, until you've walked a mile in my shoes and the shoes of thousands more like me that didn't want to fight corporate control, the government, and the commodity groups all at once. I know you won't understand. Because you just don't get it.

Have a profitable day.

 

[rkaiser]

Hey chief. I guess you are the only ignorant one ON THE PLANET this week according to Agman. Last week I was the only IGNORANT one on the planet challenging his thoughts on Canadian packer profits.

Powerful words from a man with an obvious self esteem problem.

 

[the chief]

There's obviously many of us that are to ignerint to poste heer. sorree wee ar sich moroons. :wink:

 

[Sandhusker]

Hey, don't count me out! Everything is over my head! :lol:

 

[agman]

Agman: buy the USDA.


How appropriate.

I meant to include parity pricing, but could not find it. Take a breath, agman, and keep in mind: You don't believe me and I don't believe you.
Your agenda, I'm guessing, is different than mine. I hope for the survival of family-owned ranches and farms. You hope for something different.

You see, I didn't want to become a livestock caretaker in Illinois. I hoped to raise and own my own hogs. But consolidation and vertical integration did myself and thousands of others in. I know you call it "progress". I call it destruction of rural America.

So don't call me ignorant, agman, until you've walked a mile in my shoes and the shoes of thousands more like me that didn't want to fight corporate control, the government, and the commodity groups all at once. I know you won't understand. Because you just don't get it.

Have a profitable day.

Consolidation and vertical integration did not do you in. You did yourself in. Others have succeeded, why didn't you? If you were as factually wrong and misled regarding your business as you have been with some of your posts you only need to look in the mirror.

You don't believe in me yet where are your facts to dispute what I post. The industry that needs parity pricing will become extinct just like the packers and other producers who are not efficient enough to compete. I have been directly and indirectly involved in agriculture my entire life. There is no secret as to who wins, who loses and why. Thankfully, I recognized that at a very young age. The excuses are always the same,"it is someone else's fault". That is the battle cry of R-Calf and NFU members.

 

[agman]

Hey chief. I guess you are the only ignorant one ON THE PLANET this week according to Agman. Last week I was the only IGNORANT one on the planet challenging his thoughts on Canadian packer profits.

Powerful words from a man with an obvious self esteem problem.

I clearly stated ignorance of the marketing system. Can't you discern the difference? I know, you posted nothing of value regarding his use of the consumer share of the retail dollar. Could you be as misinformed regarding that matter as he is? I suspect you are preparing a dissertation explaining to me what you think I do not know per this subject. Please engage, you can go down on two subjects, packer profits and the consumer share of the retail dollar. Perhaps you two should partner. In math two negatives make a positive. It might work the same way in real life - give it a try and pump up your self esteem.

 

[mrj]

I MUST FOLLOW THE LEADERSHIP OF NCBA BECAUSE THEY KNOW ALL. WHO CARES THAT PRODUCER SHARE OF THE CONSUMER DOLLAR IS SHRINKING FASTER THAN ITS LOYAL FOLLOWERS, WE MUST FOLLOW UNTIL BANKRUPT OR DEATH. LONG LIVE THE ALMIGHTY LEADERS OF NCBA WHO ALSO HAPPEN TO OWN PACKING PLANTS.


THAT IS ALL. :wink:

{So, chief, why is it wrong for leaders of NCBA to own packing plants? IF, in FACT, that accusation is even true.........so what????

How does that differ from R-CALF, self-proclaimed champion of the "little guy cattle producer" having so many really BIG players in leadership?

Consider, too, that NCBA leadership is not entrenched for years at a time, serving usually only a year in office.

MRJ

 

[rkaiser]

My self esteem is just fine Agman. I am not the one who somehow has to call everyone on this site down who does not agree with your opinion.

Your notion of teaching me anything about the Canadian Packer profits is as much a dream as your truth. I sir, am the one who taught you, and found your lack of knowledge about the topic troubling.

If you are the best that the industry can come up with, packers and producers alike are all in big trouble. Somehow both these groups seem to take your notions seriously. Sad Sad Sad.

Keep pushin that pencil Agman. Did your boss ever hear about you silly intentions for the Canadian packers yet? Must not have if you still have a job hey.



You know, I was thinking the other day about the lucky break we Canadians had concerning American multinational ownership of packing plants in our country.

Fortunate because these hero's were able to influence the opening of the border to boxed beef so quickly. My theory is that these same hero's are behind the finding of the illusive American BSE cow. Get that border opened now that the end is in site for these obscene profits. Squash hopes of Canadian owned packing plants and avoid that dreaded BSE testing everyone is talking of these days.

There you go Aghead, lots of reasons to call me names now!!!!! :roll:

 

[feeder]

Agman, How dare you tell the chief he did himself in. Just because their are many of us that don't believe in consolidation and vertical bull****, doesn't make us all wrong. You have a great day!!!!

 

[the chief]

Agman: Consolidation and vertical integration did not do you in. You did yourself in.

CAN YOU SAY "$8 HOGS IN 1998"?

Oh, that's right. It was overproduction and lack of shackle space. One question: Who overproduced and who bought and closed packing plants?

Does the name Smithfield ring a bell? Was Wendell Murphy a complete moron? He HAD to sell to Smithfield because he was losing $1million/day.
I guess HE did himself in too.

So did tens of thousands of other producers who were doing quite well until that year.

I guess we were all just morons. Never mind the 150 accumulative years of experience in our family raising purebred and commercial hogs. Never mind the years and years of equity that were lost by "overproduction and lack of shackle space" that was manipulated by Joseph Luter.

No! It's all my fault.

Tell you what, agman, I'm glad to be out of hogs. Because it wasn't FUN anymore. That's right, FUN. Hogs were wonderful to my family and our community. In my little county in Illinois in 1990, there were 25 hog producers that cooked and promoted pork at county fairs and gatherings every year.

Today there are 2 pork producers raising hogs for Cargill. Good for them. They made a business decision that I WOULD NOT WANT TO. That is my choice and I'm proud of it. I am no longer tied to a nursery 24/7. I can enjoy my family and take a vacation now and then.

Again, until you walked in my shoes, don't you DARE criticize me. I won't say anymore, because my blood was starting to boil. So I will refrain from saying anymore because I am a bigger man than you can ever be.

End of discussion.

 

[Mike]

Chief, Just a question. When hog prices bottomed out in 98 (I think that's what you said) did the retail price go down commensurately? I really can't remember. Did the consumer get to take advantage of the producers plight? Just wondering?

 

[Anonymous]

Chief, randy, and feeder,

If you guys are so convinced that the packing and retail industries are making so much money off of poor little you WHY DON'T YOU INVEST IN A PACKING COMPANY AND MAKE THAT MONEY YOURSELF?????

WHAT SEEMS TO BE THE HOLDUP??????

Since when does the packing and retail industry owe you a living????

If the profit is really there for the taking, GET 'R DONE!!!!!!!!!!

Put your money where your packer and retailer blame is!

Nah, you'd rather bathe in self pity and tell everyone how you have been victimized by the evil corporate packer and their $3.88 per head 9 year average profit margin. POOR YOU!

You are so concerned about "packer concentration" why are you not equally concerned about "RANCHER CONCENTRATION" OR "FEEDLOT CONCENTRATION"?????

If you are going to hate larger, more efficient, and more successful, hate larger, more efficient, and more successful in every segment of the industry. Spread your resentment to everyone who is successful.

Callicrate has been telling us all about those "HUGE" $400 per head profits that the retailers and processers are making of the backs of the poor little packer victims. Now he has a retail beef business that is charging consumers 10% to 20% more for the beef AND HIS COMPANY HAS YET TO REALIZE A PROFIT ACCORDING TO THE R-CULT PUBLICATION!!!!!!!!!

The facts just don't jive with the blame do they?

randy: "I am not the one who somehow has to call everyone on this site down who does not agree with your opinion."

All opinions are not equal. An opinion is only as good as the facts that support it. You have opinions but you have nothing to support them nor can you provide anything to refute what Agman has presented.

Agman's right! The retail to fat cattle price spread has been hashed and rehashed and only a handful of industry blamers don't realize what a shallow comparison the retail to fat cattle price spread really is.

Have you ever heard of "FEATURED PRICES"????

Have you ever heard of "SELECT OR STANDARD BEEF"?????

Have you ever heard of "DISCARDED PRODUCT NOT SOLD BY EXPIRATION DATE"?????

DIVE IN and become introduced to your own ignorance of the beef processing and retail beef industry.

The retail beef price data, used in most retail to farm price spreads, uses the "ALL CHOICE" series which even USDA said does not give a true picture of total retail profits.

How ironic that guys like "CHIEF" think they know more about USDA's retail to fat cattle price spread data than USDA themselves. Imagine that?

randy: "I sir, am the one who taught you, and found your lack of knowledge about the topic troubling."

Yeh and Saddam claimed victory after the gulf war too!

Name one thing you taught us about the Canadian packing industry besides how to blame them for profiting during a period of excessive supplies thanks to R-CULT keeping the border closed.


You still haven't admitted whether you buy your breeding stock as cheaply as you can at a sale with more bulls than buyers????

I suppose you donate to the poor seedstock producer and pay the average of the better sales huh?

Ah, gee, ah, well, ah.....that's different isn't it?

randy: "If you are the best that the industry can come up with, packers and producers alike are all in big trouble."

Talk is cheap!

If you can disprove anything Agman has said with opposing facts, why don't you?????

IT'S JUST EASIER TO "BWAME DA PACKAH" ISN"T IT????



~SH~

 

[Anonymous]

Chief,

My father and I raised hogs for many many years. Like so many others, the profit wasn't there anymore so we got out. You don't see me crying in my beer.

Guess what? There is still people raising hogs and some hog producers expanded their operations. Somebody apparently raised hogs more efficiently than you and I did OR THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY HOGS WOULD THERE?????

BLAME VERTICAL INTEGRATION!

BLAME THE CORPORATIONS!

Bottom line is that someone did it better than we did and I have accepted that reality! You have to blame!


If you want to blame someone for $8 hogs, blame the consumer for not buying more pork. At least that would be accurate!

There was simply too much "OTHER WHITE MEAT".


~SH~

 

[agman]

My self esteem is just fine Agman. I am not the one who somehow has to call everyone on this site down who does not agree with your opinion.

Your notion of teaching me anything about the Canadian Packer profits is as much a dream as your truth. I sir, am the one who taught you, and found your lack of knowledge about the topic troubling.

If you are the best that the industry can come up with, packers and producers alike are all in big trouble. Somehow both these groups seem to take your notions seriously. Sad Sad Sad.

Keep pushin that pencil Agman. Did your boss ever hear about you silly intentions for the Canadian packers yet? Must not have if you still have a job hey.



You know, I was thinking the other day about the lucky break we Canadians had concerning American multinational ownership of packing plants in our country.

Fortunate because these hero's were able to influence the opening of the border to boxed beef so quickly. My theory is that these same hero's are behind the finding of the illusive American BSE cow. Get that border opened now that the end is in site for these obscene profits. Squash hopes of Canadian owned packing plants and avoid that dreaded BSE testing everyone is talking of these days.

There you go Aghead, lots of reasons to call me names now!!!!! :roll:

I am the boss, I own the company. Can't you be right just once with your assumptions or theories? I can truly say I have forgotten more about packer margins then you may ever know. You fell off the ship as soon I discussed marginal profitability. It was over your head - admit to it. You never recovered. You can keep telling yourself how knowledgeable you think you are about packer operations. You fell overboard when the first wave hit.

If you truly understood packer margins then you should be able to assist your friend the "chief" out of his dilema with the "producers share of the retail dollar". I am left to conclude that subject is also over your head also. Question: They are linked are they not?

Regarding your other theory mentioned above; it is as baseless as your packer margin theroy.

 

[the chief]

SH: If you want to blame someone for $8 hogs, blame the consumer for not buying more pork. At least that would be accurate! :roll:

That has got to be the funniest thing I've ever read. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

And you said it with such a straight face, too. :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Chief: "That has got to be the funniest thing I've ever read."

Not surprising considering your inability to understand that if pork were in demand relative to the supply, hog prices would not have ended up at $8.

Sure, consumers bought it up after it was dirt cheap. Combine a lack of demand and an oversupply and what do you get????? $8 HOGS!

As always, when you have nothing of relevance to add to the discussion, you divert.


~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

This thread was started well with the words "totally predictable responses"

SH lining up anyone who has anything but good to say about his beloved packers, and calling them all blamers.

Your contribution to discussion on this forum is about as useless as tits on a boar. All you do is run anyone down who doesn't kiss a packers butt each day. No facts, lots of opinion, and lots and lots of twisting to try to make people look bad.

You know my position in Canada SH, and you know that the Canadian situation is far different than America. We are trying to expand capacity with new producer owned competition, and you also know the challenges brought on by the excessive profits made by Tyson and Cargill. Call that an unproven opinion. Call that packer blaming.

Chop this post up and run down everything I say again, it seems to make you feel good.

All of the opinions and FACTS that I have brought to these discussions mean nothing to you as you are far to entrenched to see beyond Cargill's butt. Call it all ignorance while I call your post ignorant. Sure is getting us all somewhere isn't it?

Call me a packer bwamer for this one to you childish jerk.

 

[the chief]

Chief: "That has got to be the funniest thing I've ever read."

Not surprising considering your inability to understand that if pork were in demand relative to the supply, hog prices would not have ended up at $8.

Sure, consumers bought it up after it was dirt cheap. Combine a lack of demand and an oversupply and what do you get????? $8 HOGS!

As always, when you have nothing of relevance to add to the discussion, you divert.


~SH~

Now I know how fake you are. Sir, didn't you realize that when hogs went to $8, the grocery price REMAINED THE SAME. Thus, consumers NEVER saw dirt cheap pork.
Reasoning from NPPC and retailers: CONSUMERS will respond negatively if we lower pork prices to where they should be relative to hog prices. If it gets too cheap, then they won't buy pork when it returns to normal.

It wasn't demand that caused $8 hogs! My God man, didn't you listen to the NPPC? They didn't blame demand, they blamed lack of shackle space and overproduction

What you stated above shows me that you will Spout the corporate philosophy NO MATTER what the truth is. Sorry, SH, you have been had and you have lost all sense of belief with that one statement.

Now I know you will have to respond and call me a liar and cheat and bastard, but you know what, I don't care. I am comfortable knowing that I am right and that I don't need the last word like you do.

 

[Anonymous]

randy: "SH lining up anyone who has anything but good to say about his beloved packers, and calling them all blamers."

Blame is defined as "holding responsible for" or "attributing guilt to".

Are you suggesting that you do not hold packers responsible for lower cattle prices or that you do not believe packers are guilty of lowering cattle prices to reflect cattle numbers relative to slaughter capacity in Canada?

If you hold packers accountable for lower cattle prices and you believe they are guilty of this action, then you are a "packer blamer" by definition.

If you don't like the definition of "packer blamer" there isn't much I can do about that. I am not going to quit using certain descriptive terms simply because you don't like their definitions.


My "beloved" packers? I don't own a packing company and I have no investments in a packing company so how can I have any bias towards packers? Funny how there is no truth or fact with a packer blamer. You are either a packer blamer or a packer defender. The facts of the issues don't enter in.

I am a defender of the free enterprise system free of excessive, unjustified government regulation.

If someone thinks packers are making so much money, rather than regulating them out of existance they can invest in a packing company. That's the free enterprise system at it's finest.

randy: "All you do is run anyone down who doesn't kiss a packers butt each day. No facts, lots of opinion, and lots and lots of twisting to try to make people look bad."

randy: "All of the opinions and FACTS that I have brought to these discussions mean nothing to you as you are far to entrenched to see beyond Cargill's butt."

Yeh, yeh, yeh!

If I have stated anything that is untrue it should be a simple matter for you to contradict it with opposing facts.

What seems to be the holdup?

No facts huh?

Is that why you can't contradict anything I have stated with opposing facts? I thought so!


Why haven't you answered the following question yet.............

DO YOU BUY BREEDING BULLS AS CHEAPLY AS YOU CAN WHEN THE SUPPLY EXCEEDS THE DEMAND?

YES OR NO?

Why do you keep diverting that question?


I heard yesterday on the radio that Canada's slaughter capacity will be able to slaughter their entire production within a year. Is that true? If it is, then Canadian packers have obviously reinvested in expanded slaughter capacity. Isn't that a good thing?

randy: "We are trying to expand capacity with new producer owned competition, and you also know the challenges brought on by the excessive profits made by Tyson and Cargill."

So you think it's ok for you as a producer to invest in expanded slaughter capacity but not for the existing packers to do the same.

Amazing what you can justify with a little imagination!

randy: "Call me a packer bwamer for this one to you childish jerk."

ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Ok, your "childish jerk" (true name calling) trumps my "packer blamer" (descriptive term).

Feel better now?

Chief: "Sir, didn't you realize that when hogs went to $8, the grocery price REMAINED THE SAME.'

Retail pork prices did not remain the same. Haven't you ever heard of the term "FEATURED PRICES"???? Don't you read your grocery adds?

Regular pork prices may not have dropped enough to reflect $8 hog prices but they were certainly lower than they normally were at that time and "featuring" increased to clear out the supply.

The only way the retailers can move increasing supplies without increased demand is to lower the prices. The way this is usually done is with "featured pricing" such as "buy one get one free" adds. In that situation, the price of one package may not have changed that much but the retailer profits certainly did by giving a second package away for free.

You are flat wrong about pork prices remaining the same just like you are about most things.

Chief: "Reasoning from NPPC and retailers: CONSUMERS will respond negatively if we lower pork prices to where they should be relative to hog prices. If it gets too cheap, then they won't buy pork when it returns to normal."

That's a true statement but that doesn't mean that pork prices were not already lower than they normally were and that retailers were not featuring more pork to move it. The overall price of pork dropped to move the product during that time period.

Chief: "It wasn't demand that caused $8 hogs! My God man, didn't you listen to the NPPC? They didn't blame demand, they blamed lack of shackle space and overproduction."

So do you agree with NPPC or are you afraid to committ to a position youself so you quote NPPC rather than presenting your own opinion?

Demand is part of the supply/demand equation.

Demand did play a roll in $8 hogs as well as over production and limited shackle space. One does not preclude the other.

Demand is also a price/quantity relationship.

Chief: "Sorry, SH, you have been had and you have lost all sense of belief with that one statement."

When you think you can contradict what I have stated with more than an unsupported opinion or with more than a presentation of 1/2 of the equation, BRING IT.

Prove to me that consumer demand for pork did not play a role in $8 hogs as well as over production.

You can't! You'll just make another statement like you always do!

Chief: "Now I know you will have to respond and call me a liar and cheat and bastard, but you know what, I don't care."

I have never called anyone a bastard and I don't remember using the word cheat.

As always, the "factually defenseless" make things up as they go in order to play the poor little victim of namecalling. POOR YOU! Anything to divert the issues.

Anyone can do a search on the word "bastard" and see that you are lying again.

Typical packer blamer!


~SH~

 

[rkaiser]

You are the best SH. The hero of this site. The one who can twist and turn and work youself into a frenzy trying to prove yourself right.

Compare buying a bloody bull to two years of astronomical profits if you like; it's garbage.

Call it blaming or call it wrong, or call it whatever you like.

One side of the so called BEEF industry profitting profusely for two years while the other side mires in destruction is a problem.

This is what you defend. Call it free enterprise. Call yourself the DEFENDER OF FREE ENTERPRISE all you like. I suggest that there is a problem with this picture.

Twist my words all you like Packer Lover. Your position is clear. Or is it?

SH DEFENDER OF FREE ENTERPRISE!!!!

What a joke!