• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Twister

rkaiser

Well-known member
Ya gotta admit Rod, that we warmed the consumer up for this one with the influx of exotics over the past thirty years. They were ready for that big old steak with less flavour and the need for a sharper knife. Like I've said before, lucky if we have any conventional customers left after all this crap is over.
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
rkaiser said:
Ya gotta admit Rod, that we warmed the consumer up for this one with the influx of exotics over the past thirty years. They were ready for that big old steak with less flavour and the need for a sharper knife. Like I've said before, lucky if we have any conventional customers left after all this crap is over.

I won't blame just the exotics, but larger framed animals in general and there is no denying that the producer fell into the trap.

Not sure if you caught another thread that was going around earlier or not, but I feel that at least some of the lust for the large framed exotic animals comes from heavier and heavier carcass target weights set by the packers. I was disputed of course, but if the midline targets were lower, I can't help but think the frame size of the animals we see would start to shrink back to where they belong.

Rod
 

Jason

Well-known member
Do you have any Safeways in Sask? How about their guaranteed tender or double your money back?

I know age is a bigger factor on carcass tenderness than frame size is. As an animal ages the connective tissue becomes a barrier to tenderness.

It can be argued that bigger frames have to be older to kill, but only if not managed right. Also the exotics aren't as big as they used to be. I have seen a lot of runty simm crosses lately, their carcass quality hasn't improved with the smaller frame.

More producers need to get their acts together to provide a better raw material for consumers. The carcass quality can be affected by how those calves are handled at 3-4 months of age. Tough to blame the packers for that aspect of things.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Jason said:
Do you have any Safeways in Sask? How about their guaranteed tender or double your money back?

I know age is a bigger factor on carcass tenderness than frame size is. As an animal ages the connective tissue becomes a barrier to tenderness.

It can be argued that bigger frames have to be older to kill, but only if not managed right. Also the exotics aren't as big as they used to be. I have seen a lot of runty simm crosses lately, their carcass quality hasn't improved with the smaller frame.

More producers need to get their acts together to provide a better raw material for consumers. The carcass quality can be affected by how those calves are handled at 3-4 months of age. Tough to blame the packers for that aspect of things.

If the continental crosses you have seen are so small, why have them, Jason? Hybrid vigor is a more important factor than breed many times.

About 25 years ago at the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo, which is supposed to be the epitome of industry desires, the winning steer was a huge black chianina cross. While the industry may have wanted a monstrosity like that at slaughter, it sure didn't fit into the cattleman's needs.

The discounts of smaller wieght carcasses lead to the inversion of prices between steers/heifers based on consumer preferences of portion size as I previously discussed with Agman. It has also lead the checkoff funded programs to spend money educating and promoting butchering procedures that should be totally handled by the packers. The discounts and premiums for such things will be more and more capricous as the markets are more concentrated and competition diminishes. The value of good breeding programs and management can be abused this way.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
As always, those who cannot refute what Dittmer says, try to discredit Dittmer. I hope he takes that as complimentary.

Poor desperate little discrediting blamers.



~SH~
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
As always, those who cannot refute what Dittmer says, try to discredit Dittmer. I hope he takes that as complimentary.

Poor desperate little discrediting blamers.



~SH~

Dittmer said:
Cattle-Fax said the last data available shows Canadian packers have shipped a whopping 80,000 lbs. of beef to Japan this year, i.e. a trailer load or so.



JUDY MONCHUK_CNEWS said:
About 20 tonnes of beef a week is being sent to Japan from the youngest animals, believed at lowest risk of developing bovine spongiform encephalopathy, the clinical term for mad cow.

:???: :roll: :???: :?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
~SH~ said:
As always, those who cannot refute what Dittmer says, try to discredit Dittmer. I hope he takes that as complimentary.

Poor desperate little discrediting blamers.



~SH~

Dittmer said:
Cattle-Fax said the last data available shows Canadian packers have shipped a whopping 80,000 lbs. of beef to Japan this year, i.e. a trailer load or so.



JUDY MONCHUK_CNEWS said:
About 20 tonnes of beef a week is being sent to Japan from the youngest animals, believed at lowest risk of developing bovine spongiform encephalopathy, the clinical term for mad cow.

:???: :roll: :???: :?

Either Dittmer got his information on January 15, or somebody needs to tell him how much a ton is. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Murgen

Well-known member
One of these numbers is in metric and one is Imperial, and different dates.

What I'm wondering is if the increase in US exports to Canada correspond with Canada's exports to Japan?

The value of a kg of beef to the US is $3.90 CDN vs. $9.39 to Japan.

I guess age verification and MID, do come with a premium.
 

DiamondSCattleCo

Well-known member
Murgen said:
I guess age verification and MID, do come with a premium.

Yes, age verification does come with a premium that isn't currently being passed onto Canadian producers because our exports are so low. If we had sufficient numbers of age verified animals, there are many small packers who could make use of those animals and begin shipping increasing tonnage into Asia. China and Japan have both expressed an interest in obtaining age verified animals, and if Canada would just get off the dime, we could garner a healthy share of that market, instead of letting the Australians take it away from us.

Rod
 

rkaiser

Well-known member
Canada can't get off the dime Diamond, because Canada has little to do with exporting beef. Cargill and Tyson export beef, and they are happy to deal with their own domestic American customers and keep this captive North American supply thing just the way it is. ei - No BSE testing to satisfy export market demands.

Canada will start to export more beef when Ranchers beef gets up and running.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Murgen: "One of these numbers is in metric and one is Imperial, and different dates."


Aren't you going to challenge that Robert?

Thought you really had a live one again huh?

At least you had Sandbag to support your in your "ILLUSION" for whatever that's worth.


~SH~
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Murgen: "One of these numbers is in metric and one is Imperial, and different dates."


Aren't you going to challenge that Robert?

Thought you really had a live one again huh?

At least you had Sandbag to support your in your "ILLUSION" for whatever that's worth.


~SH~

It's Dittmer...DDDDDDDDDDDDUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :shock: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

one tonne metric = .9842 tons imperial or 1968.4 lbs.
200 tonnes/ week = 196.84 tons/week or 393680 lbs./week

393680 lbs./week is more than "a whopping 80,000 lbs. of beef to Japan this year." :!:

Twister
Colorado Springs, CO May 11, 2006
by Dittmer

vs.

April 16, 2006
Beef exports to Japan a fraction of pre-BSE levels
By JUDY MONCHUK

:roll: :???: :? :???:

Monchuk...real news service

vs.

Dittmer...one man bash R-CALF blog (with NCBA association)

:p :wink:

Does that clear things up for you, Dittmer-clone???????????
8)
 

Tam

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
~SH~ said:
Murgen: "One of these numbers is in metric and one is Imperial, and different dates."


Aren't you going to challenge that Robert?

Thought you really had a live one again huh?

At least you had Sandbag to support your in your "ILLUSION" for whatever that's worth.


~SH~

It's Dittmer...DDDDDDDDDDDDUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :shock: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

one tonne metric = .9842 tons imperial or 1968.4 lbs.
200 tonnes/ week = 196.84 tons/week or 393680 lbs./week

393680 lbs./week is more than "a whopping 80,000 lbs. of beef to Japan this year." :!:

Twister
Colorado Springs, CO May 11, 2006
by Dittmer

vs.

April 16, 2006
Beef exports to Japan a fraction of pre-BSE levels
By JUDY MONCHUK

:roll: :???: :? :???:

Monchuk...real news service

vs.

Dittmer...one man bash R-CALF blog (with NCBA association)

:p :wink:

Does that clear things up for you, Dittmer-clone???????????
8)

R-CALF math strikes again
JUDY MONCHUK_CNEWS wrote:
About 20 tonnes of beef a week is being sent to Japan from the youngest animals, believed at lowest risk of developing bovine spongiform encephalopathy, the clinical term for mad cow.

one tonne metric = .9842 tons imperial or 1968.4 lbs. RM posted figures
so 1968.4 lbs times 20 tonnes according to JUDY not 200 according to RM = 39,368 lbs. per week. not 393,680 It really is amazing what one little zero will do to a number. :wink:

and a metric tonnes is bigger than a imperial ton as it is 2205 lbs versas 2000 lbs so 2205 times 20=44100 which is still a far cry from 393,680 lbs.
 

TimH

Well-known member
Actually, one metric tonne(1000 kilos) = 2,204 pounds.......I'm stayin' out of it beyond that. :shock: :wink:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
OK Tam, you got me making a mistake...but Canadian beef exports to Japan were approved in December. Is 80,000 lbs. all that has been shipped to Japan since then?
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Canfax numbers are to the end of Feb. 2006 and show 99 MT being exported. They have ramped up since then. Dittmer's numbers were Cattle-Fax and not Can-Fax. The dates on the two quotes can not be compared without a date on each.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
RM: "Does that clear things up for you, Dittmer-clone???????????"


Hahaha!

Poor little Robert Mac! Forgot to add a zero!

GEE, YOU REALLY TOLD ME DIDN'T YOU?

R-CULT CLONE!


~SH~
 

Latest posts

Top