Help Support Ranchers.net:
rkaiser said:
Randy if the levy is put on the animals you slaughter in your plant I say go for it and GOOD LUCK. But when you came out with a levy on all cattle sold in Canada to pay for one plant is where I objected and so did most I talked to. Why should any plant have to collect money for the cattle they process and turn it over to the competition just so the competition can compete with the big boys. How is that building a NEW INDUSTRY? I think if the Government wants to help the most, they should be taking two or three of these proposed plants getting the investors together and seeing if they can't work together to make one well backed plant fly. And then they should make sure that all their inspectors are enforcing the same rules and regulation instead of every inspector thinking he has the power to may the these people's life a living hell to get their plant ready for operation. How many times have you heard of a Plants construction having delays because of a new government inspector said something had to be done different from the way the old inspector said it was to be done. A waste of time and money when these guys and the industry are short on both. You ask what I want and I would have to say is a somewhat level playing field for the new investors to have half a chance of making a difference.
A
Anonymous
Guest
BE SPECIFIC!
How do you plan to create competition in the Canadian packing industry?
If you don't export to the U.S., where else do you plan to market your beef besides domestically (Canada)?
You certainly can't consume everything you produce domestically can you?
To the contrary, you will not find a more ardent supporter of producers owning and controlling their financial destiny than I am. No producer can blame the packer when they own the packing company like USPB does.
What do I have to offer? I offer the truth about packer profits. I offer the truth about baseless market manipulation conspiracy theories. I point out many of the falacies of the packer blamers. That's what I offer.
I offer encouragement for producers who are willing to own their product from pasture to plate.
What's more negative Randy, contradicting the lies about packers or the lies themselves?
Of course you would view the defense of the facts as being more negative than if I joined the packer blamers.
If you view truth and facts to offset lies as negativity I don't care!
BWAHAHAHAHA!
You just say things that pop into your head even if they don't make any sense don't you?
Think about it, since packer blaming has become such a popular sport for so many in the cattle industry, it should be quite obvious that I speak for myself. What do I have to possibly gain by pointing out the facts about packers when it just upsets you packer blamers so badly?
I have never spoken for anyone but myself.
What a stupid statement!
Absolutely not!
The system we have in place today is very flawed. Internal fighting between the segments of our industry is taking us down a destructive course.
This charge is led by R-CALF/LMA/OCM/CCMP!
The solution to our current system is for producers to have a vested financial interest in controlling their destiny. That would end the segmentation overnight. That's not what the LMA wants. They want to keep their commission dollars rolling in while they maintain segmentation and try to assume more control over the other segments legislatively.
The challenge to you to correct anything that I have stated that is untrue,
still stands................
~SH~
SH, I will say this, Randy is one of the few that is trying to make a difference in Canada. His group's ideas might be a change from the norm, but they are trying to make a difference.
That's a lot more than I can say for the groups that are sitting back and waiting for it "to all shake out", and blaming.
If you haven't already, maybe try to speak with Randy and you might help us get this thing figured out a bit, your knowledge would be appreciated.
That's a lot more than I can say for the groups that are sitting back and waiting for it "to all shake out", and blaming.
If you haven't already, maybe try to speak with Randy and you might help us get this thing figured out a bit, your knowledge would be appreciated.
Sandhusker
Well-known member
He knows a lot about false advertising! 
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Murgen said:
SH, he will tell you that selling tested beef to the Japanese is false advertising. :lol: :lol: Oh, yeah, deception,too.
:roll:He's just trying to blindly back the USDA - which is getting increasingly unpopular.
Cowgal
Well-known member
Get a life people. You RCAlf people just don't want any competition. Grow up the world doesn't revolve around you. Competition is good for the soul. It keeps life interesting. You can't trade just certain products. You want energy you gotta buy other products.
Tired of the bs literally!
Richard
Tired of the bs literally!
Richard
rkaiser
Well-known member
Finally words that are not about calling everyone down.
I will still argue that this process is not being made easy by the mutinational packers. Especially with the excessive profits and the war chest built in Canada over the past two years. Lobbying with less competition as the final goal is ruthless and cunning. Is that the only way to play this game SH? Should the money and power of Cargill and Tyson be left unchecked without question? You must call into question some aspect of mutinational packer activity.
What do you truely think of the fact that Smithfield's bid for Better Beef in Ontario was trumped by the tax writeoff windfall bid from Cargill?
Thank you SH.
I will still argue that this process is not being made easy by the mutinational packers. Especially with the excessive profits and the war chest built in Canada over the past two years. Lobbying with less competition as the final goal is ruthless and cunning. Is that the only way to play this game SH? Should the money and power of Cargill and Tyson be left unchecked without question? You must call into question some aspect of mutinational packer activity.
What do you truely think of the fact that Smithfield's bid for Better Beef in Ontario was trumped by the tax writeoff windfall bid from Cargill?
agman
Well-known member
the chief said:
I see you have not stopped blaming others for your demise. The problem in 1998 was in fact the result of supply exceeding the slaughter capacity even though some plants were operted on Sunday. Second, pork demand took a downturn after advancing during 1996 & 1997.
Contrary to your statement, while some plants were closed capacity was increased in other plants. Net slaughter capacity did not decline, it simply could not expand as rapidly as inventories expanded following two years of record producer profits in 1996 & 1997. Did you not have record profits in those years? If not, why not, with all the experience you had?
If you think Joe Luter manipulated everything then you, knowing that, should have been able to capatilize on what you claim you knew. Don't blame Joe for your inaction. That is your problem.
agman
Well-known member
feeder said:
If times change and you refuse to change who is wrong, the changing times or you? The world will move on with you, either get on the train or fall farther behind, it is your choice. There is no one else to blame. Change is inevitable, choice is optional.
Cowgal
Well-known member
By the way "Richard" is my husband......if he gets on here......well its going to be very entertaining to say the least..................LOL!!!!!!!
A
Anonymous
Guest
The fact that the process is not being made easy is your proof that competition does exist!
Which was invested in expanding slaughter capacity in Canada.
Is that a good thing or bad thing?
You see Randy, you want it both ways. You want expanded slaughter capacity AS LONG AS YOU OWN THE EXPANSION WHICH SHOULD BE PAID BY THE LARGE PACKERS PAYING MORE FOR YOUR CATTLE THAN THEY HAVE TO.
What a ridiculous notion when you know as well as I do that you don't pay any more for breeding stock than you have to and you see that as somehow being different.
I realize the Canadian situation is unique due to suddenly finding yourself with more cattle than slaughter capacity from a closed Canadian border. I sympathize with that plight but my sympathy doesn't change the situation.
The U.S. packer blamers have been bitching about these "HUGE" packer profits they "BELIEVE" have been created by concentration in the packing industry.
It's bullsh*t!
The 5 largest packers have to report their profits to GIPSA due to those who insist on government control of everything then they cuss the government when the results don't turn out how they'd like.
Through the nineties, the average per head profit for the 5 major packers was $3.88 per head. You tell me how the hell an industry could be any more efficient than to kill your cattle for $3.88 per head for a 10 year average?
Through the era of "supposed" market manipulation, ibp, the most efficient of the large packers, made $26 per head. This evidence was subpoenoed into court in Pickett vs. ibp.
The most efficient packer during the era of "SUPPOSED" market manipulation is making $26 per head when the packer blamers were telling everyone that the packer and retailers were making $400 per head profit.
Why shouldn't there be consequences for lying?
Mike Callicrate lied under oath in Pickett and the SD Stockgrowers still schedules him as a guest speaker. Why? Becuase blaming is more important to some than the truth.
Just goes to show what lengths packer blamers will go to in order to blame someone for lower cattle prices.
I present the facts on packer profits and you call me a "packer lover".
If I helped spread the bullsh*t about $400 per head profits, then I'd be a "GOOD OL' BOY" in your eyes wouldn't I?
Amazing what you can justify when you need someone to blame!
They are doing nothing wrong legally!
The Canadian packer clearly has the leverage due to more cattle than slaughter capacity. Those same companies have plants that are closing in the U.S. due to having more slaughter capacity than cattle. Nobody says anything about that situation even though it means that some producers are incurring a lot of extra trucking expense.
Do you want "socialism/communism" instead where the government controls everything?
"PUNISH ACHIEVEMENT"?
"REGULATE PROSPERITY"?
"STEAL FROM THE SUCCESFUL AND GIVE TO THE LESS SUCCESSFUL"?
Is that what you want?
This is really quite simple. If there is so much money to be had in the packing industry, you should have no problems making that money yourself. If the competition is tight between Cargill and Tyson, then you are at no advantage to try to compete with them because obviously they are competing with eachother for those cattle. It can only be one way or the other Randy.
You want to bitch about the lack of competition, yet you don't want to participate in the competition. So what's the alternative?
Government regulation on prosperity (ie "communism")!
Keep in mind there is men who died fighting communism.
Every major auction comes down to two bidders in the end. The two bidders with the deepest pockets. Competition is not defined solely by the number of bidders, competition is defined primarily by the buying power between 2 or more bidders.
The reason we have concentration in the packing industry, like so many other industries in the United States, is because less efficient companies could not compete with the efficiencies of the companies that replaced them. Concentration is not unique to the packing industry. It's in virtually every major industry in existance.
Do I see anything wrong with the current packing structure in the U.S.?
No!
USPB decided to enter the game and they have been successful proving that the right business plan can compete.
Do I see room for improvement?
Yes!
The room for improvement is for producers to become financially vested in processing cattle if they want to control that aspect of the industry as oppsed to just bitching about it.
I am not versed on the details of that situation.
Once again I challege you to correct anything I have stated that you believe is untrue with opposing facts.
~SH~
rkaiser
Well-known member
You continue to rant on about the USA, and Rcalf, and now this BS about communism. Give me a break.
Of course I am a free enterprise supporter, but as I said a umber of times. "Which free enterprise system do you support"
Not breaking any law - I agree, but whose lobbying and whose influence help create law. The people and the businesses in these Free countries we all live in.
Blab away about comparisons to the Canadian and America situations all you want, and lump me with what you call packer blamers forever. That kind of talk will only lead me back to lowering myself to your name calling level you packer lover.
No opinion about Cargill taking an even more monopolistic role in the Canadian industry hey? Is this not the challenge of every country in the free world to keep laws that make things fair for everyone.
You talked of bidding for the plant in Ontario being a sign of competition. I see it as another attempt by a fortunate few to quash competition.
If you want to bash Canadians looking for change, research Canada yourself. Tell me how much these companies have profitted in two years?
How can you not consider political influence. How fast did the border open to boxed beef SH, and why? Was that all about free enterprise, or was it partly about elimination of competition?The few plants owned by Cargill and Tyson south of the line did not loose anywhere near the moey that was gained north of the line so you might just as well stick that stupid arguement in a closet.
Can't admit that the BSE crisis was not caused by the packers, but has been used by the packers to there complete advantage for almost two years.
This is the largest economic event that has ever taken place in the history of the North American beef industry, and all you and Agman can talk about is spikes, and minor conflict brought on by challenges to ownership etc.
The only thing you can open your mind to concerning Canada is the Rcalf challenge. Take a good look at what is going on. There is vertually no new competition from all of what you call Canadian expansion. We are in dire need of capacity, but competition has to be part of the equation.
Your arguement about competion will be legitimate again once capacity to slaughter is reached. For now it is of limited value. Think about it. And tell me what I have been asking you and Agman and Brad for months, "How is price established in Canada?"
Of course I am a free enterprise supporter, but as I said a umber of times. "Which free enterprise system do you support"
Not breaking any law - I agree, but whose lobbying and whose influence help create law. The people and the businesses in these Free countries we all live in.
Blab away about comparisons to the Canadian and America situations all you want, and lump me with what you call packer blamers forever. That kind of talk will only lead me back to lowering myself to your name calling level you packer lover.
No opinion about Cargill taking an even more monopolistic role in the Canadian industry hey? Is this not the challenge of every country in the free world to keep laws that make things fair for everyone.
You talked of bidding for the plant in Ontario being a sign of competition. I see it as another attempt by a fortunate few to quash competition.
If you want to bash Canadians looking for change, research Canada yourself. Tell me how much these companies have profitted in two years?
How can you not consider political influence. How fast did the border open to boxed beef SH, and why? Was that all about free enterprise, or was it partly about elimination of competition?The few plants owned by Cargill and Tyson south of the line did not loose anywhere near the moey that was gained north of the line so you might just as well stick that stupid arguement in a closet.
Can't admit that the BSE crisis was not caused by the packers, but has been used by the packers to there complete advantage for almost two years.
This is the largest economic event that has ever taken place in the history of the North American beef industry, and all you and Agman can talk about is spikes, and minor conflict brought on by challenges to ownership etc.
The only thing you can open your mind to concerning Canada is the Rcalf challenge. Take a good look at what is going on. There is vertually no new competition from all of what you call Canadian expansion. We are in dire need of capacity, but competition has to be part of the equation.
Your arguement about competion will be legitimate again once capacity to slaughter is reached. For now it is of limited value. Think about it. And tell me what I have been asking you and Agman and Brad for months, "How is price established in Canada?"
Cowgal
Well-known member
Hi Reader,
Richard is my husband, he posted that inwhich you are making reference to. I am Cowgal - Michelle. He(Richard) was looking at the site and used my log on to post! Got it?
Soooooooo Cowgal is Cowgal - not Richard.
Richard is my husband, he posted that inwhich you are making reference to. I am Cowgal - Michelle. He(Richard) was looking at the site and used my log on to post! Got it?
Soooooooo Cowgal is Cowgal - not Richard.
SASH
Well-known member
Randy, as much as I repect you as an innovator in the Canadian cattle industry and all the work you've done trying to help the Canadian cattlemen through your work with BIG C, I'm going to have to step in on the other side of this argument. Price in Canada is still set by supply and demand. Before BSE we had a pipeline of cattle heading to the US. This pipeline was expanded significantly since the early eighties when free trade came into existence. The Americans built all these shiny new , efficient plants just across the border and that competitive edge combined with the greedy unions in Canada essentially put our slaughter industry out of business. So the analogy I'll use is imagine that pipeline and it's getting bigger and bigger as more cattle head to the States and suddenly somebody turns of the valve. You get a few little leaks where we can get rid of some of that flow like Cargill and Tyson and a few other plants but for the most part, everything is stuck in the pipeline and we are still pumping from the other end and pumping more into that pipeline so what we have is a continuous build up of time sensitive product that is not available because we don't have enough leaks (plants) to get rid of what is flowing in. The leaks (plants) are very selective about what they take out of the pipeline and so the dregs (second cut) is heavily discounted and will get left in the pipe if it is not. Its still all based on supply and demand. Big business' main goal is and always will be 'to maximize profit' and to that end, they will do what it takes to achieve that. I'll agree with you that its not an efficient market right now but I'm pretty sure that if there was 100 small plants rather than a couple of big ones, if the total processing capacity was the same, pricing would be about the same.
A
Anonymous
Guest
What do you mean "which free enterprise system do I want"?
What the heck does that mean?
Make your point!
What specific law do you disagree with?
What laws do you want that you don't have?
"More monopolistic" is an oxymoron.
If Cargill truly had a monopoly, they would have total control. Tyson wouldn't exist.
Monopoly is defined as: "exclusive control of the use, sale, or distribution of a commodity or service by one person or one group of persons"
You just mentioned Tyson and Cargill. Aren't they competing against eachother for the same cattle?
Well then? If they are competing for the same cattle than competition exists and nobody has a monopoly.
ok?
Now where the heck did that come from?
I never bashed Canadians looking for change. Show the readers where I bashed Canadians looking for change.
Like I said, you are so emotional that you don't even think before you type.
That statement is simply untrue! To the contrary, I support any producer effort to control their financial destiny.
In Canada or in the U.S.?
What's your point Randy?
Is profit making during a period where Canadian packers had more cattle than slaughtering capacity illegal???
If not, what's your point?
In Canada profits were definitely higher due to the closed Canadian border. In the U.S. these same companies had plants that are standing empty.
Majority still rules in a democracy!
What are you talking about now?
How is opening the Canadian border to boxed beef eliminating competition????
Explain yourself!
That doesn't even make sense!
Randy, this is not complicated. Canadian cattle used to be slaughtered in the U.S. Now those same cattle are slaughtered in Canada. What's not to understand about U.S. packing plants that used to kill Canadian cattle not having those cattle to kill now?
You simply refuse to look past your packer blame to see the bigger picture.
If that's the case, why does the AMI support the opening of the Canadian border?
Hmmmmm????
The fact that AMI has lobbied to open the Canadian border totally defeats your argument that they are using BSE as an excuse to keep it closed.
In fact, these same packers represented by AMI filed suit against the USDA to allow the importation of your slaughter cows. HOW IS THAT USING BSE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE SITUATION?????
You are just throwing sh*t against the wall hoping that something will stick and you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
You are confusing R-CALF's agenda with the agenda of the AMI.
WHAT??????
What are you talking about now?
Spikes?
Randy, you are really losing it!
Take a breath and go stack some bales or something.
Competition is part of the equation or you would not have Tyson and Cargill both competing for the same cattle.
AGAIN, IF THERE IS NO COMPETITION, YOU SHOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM OPENING A PACKING PLANT AND MAKING THAT MONEY YOURSELF??
GET 'R DONE!!!!!!
See how you are? You want to bitch about no competition but you don't want to do anything about it. If producers own their own packing plants, where does that leave Tyson and Cargill to get their cattle? Your cattle would be channeled away from them.
Price is established in Canada just like it is anywhere. Supply and demand. You just happen to have more supply than demand.
Here Randy, let me help you. The Canadian packer has you over a barrel and they are putting the screws to you. There? Feel better now? That really solved a lot didn't it? That's what you wanted to hear.
~SH~
rkaiser
Well-known member
Laws change every day SH. Free enterprise is not written in stone. Packers, just like every other business in the free world lobbies for change that will benefit themselves.
Tell me how disillusioned I am about that.
?
I don't know if it means a change of law, but do you honestly think that two years worth of excessive profits in one sector of the beef industry vs. excessive loss in the other should go on forever. BSE is only an excuse, if you jump to that conclusion. Nobody knows how long this debacle will last.
Should we just continue to watch equity erode on the farm while packers have a hayday, hayyear, haydecade?
Come up and see this well oiled free market work for yourself SH. Your arguements concerning competition are BS when it come to Canada since Sept. 2003.
As far as responding to the bashing of Canadians looking for change. You have lumped myself and others in your packer blamer category while not considering any of our movement forward in our "Free Market" producer ownership proposals. Iown beef til it hit's the restaurant plate. I am a director for BIG C who has a plant proposal with producers owning the plant.
Think before you type SH. Some of what we believe in is similar, your emotions are the ones not allowing you anything but bashing.
My point about packer profits in Canada is that this is the most severe event that the North American beef industry has ever experienced economically. Your complete lack of interest in discussing this shows total disregard for producers of Canada, who brought none of this on themselves. Sure it's legal, but is it not worthy of any discussion. I am sure that if the system would somehow work (which I know is impossible) whereby producers pocketed mutimillions and packers were going broke, discussion would run rampant.
Producers must however shut up and put up, or be labeled by packer lovers like yourself for ever more.
SH says Majority still rules in a Democracy!
Good answer for everything SH. Give me a break. Let's try one like MONEY TALKS
Depends on the time table I guess. Opening the border to boxed beef created a new market for product, but created no new competition. In fact it shut out the plants that could not access fats from Canada, thus eliminating competition.
You can't think about this from any other point of view but to defend the packers. Then you make it out as if I am the one who is lost. SH you are lost. Your perception is blurred by your entrenched thought. You are the one who cannot think and reason beyond blaming anyone who sees life different than you and maye Agman.
Once again a bunch of tunnel vision words without being able to see beyond defence of packers.
What kind of packing proposal would include marketing predictions based on today's market. (Who need to stack some bales now SH)
When competition does return to the Canadian market either by an open border or capacity built to get product off this continent, Cargill and Tyson will still be here. Producer owned plants may have a chance to bid against Cargill and Tyson and force them to pay a fair price once one of those two things happen, but the profits made in two years by these two mutinational giants have insured them a major role in Canada for many many years to come.
No it does not help a thing, but I am glad you found it in you to tell the truth.
How about me saying things are just fine down here on the farm SH, as long as I just stack bales and keep my mouth shut. And if I go broke it will be all my fault. That's what you want to hear from me isn't it.
rkaiser
Well-known member
Woops, almost agreed to something that is false.
Packers don't have ME over a barrel SH. I have sold about 3 cull bulls and 10 cull cows through the conventional market since May of 2003. All had great big bows glued on their backs.
The other almost 500 head have had added value either as breeding stock or through our complimentary integrated marketing scheme.
Packers don't have ME over a barrel SH. I have sold about 3 cull bulls and 10 cull cows through the conventional market since May of 2003. All had great big bows glued on their backs.
The other almost 500 head have had added value either as breeding stock or through our complimentary integrated marketing scheme.
