A
Anonymous
Guest
An Interesting e-mail I recieved: (my highlighting)
The CommStock Report - 02/28/06
Copyright 2005 CommStock Investments, Inc.
David Kruse
Beef industry conservatives Steve Kay and Steve Cornett have come over to the realization that USDA/AMI/NCBA's handling of the Japanese beef market has been a failure, put politely, with Kay saying, "Many in the industry still don't grasp the complexity of trading with Japan." I'm not totally convinced Kay understands the nuances, but even he has figured out, "I can't imagine that we will see much beef to Japan this year." Farm Journal's Beef Today Editor, Cornett, conceded that selling Japanese consumers BSE tested beef may have not been such a bad idea after all saying, "I'm not suggesting that USDA's argument about unscientific trade restrictions wasn't a valid one. Let's just say it's over; it no longer applies. There is a difference between a government requiring superfluous tests and consumers wanting superfluous tests." Only Troy Marshall of Beef Magazine remains belligerent, wanting to pop Japanese consumers in the eye for refusing to buy our beef with trade sanctions threatening, "I'm getting dangerously close to calling for an all out trade war with Japan."
Such beef trade hardliners believe U.S. science trumps all, establishing the basis for all trade rules; yet they support the sale of organic, natural or hormone free beef, none of which is supported by science, as market opportunities recognizing consumer demand for such beef, while refusing to accommodate Japanese consumers request for BSE-tested beef on scientific grounds. Such a USDA/AMI/NCBA trade stance is hypocritical self service, benefiting special interests within the industry in control of the policy making apparatus. This trade policy will ultimately cost the U.S. beef industry hundreds of millions of dollars in lost trade that Troy Marshall wants to blame on Japanese consumers. When the Japanese heard the U.S. beef industry express its desire to fill consumer demand, they may have mistakenly assumed they were included. The U.S beef industry only fills consumer demand that doesn't slow the chain in U.S. slaughter plants. The difference in Japanese and U.S. business cultures is evident by example in the auto industry. Toyota is moving into No. 1 position because quality is first and foremost, represented by a zero defect policy. Any employee along Toyota's production line can shut the entire line down, bring it to a stop if any part of the process malfunctions. Toyota fixes things that aren't broken. Good enough is never good enough.
We don't operate that way. Something pretty darn serious has to happen to stop an IBP production line. Problems are overcome while production continues and a tolerance for an "acceptable" number of defects is practiced. You can call it a culture clash or just a different corporate philosophy, but what we are finding, even in the U.S., is that consumers recognize and demand the higher quality produced by the Japanese system. That's what ultimately scares the USDA/AMI/NCBA. Ford and GM are struggling to produce quality equal to Toyota and U.S. consumers are rewarding that quality with a choice. The Japanese consumer demands more from food safety than the U.S. system currently provides. While we test a few cattle for BSE, Japanese consumers demand all be tested, zero tolerance for defects and are willing to pay the cost. What the USDA/AMI/NCBA are really afraid of is that the U.S. consumer, which likes Toyota's, will figure out we produce beef like GM and Ford with production lines that aren't stopped and an "acceptable" number of defects tolerated based on economic considerations. If we produce beef the way the Japanese consumer demands it, which niche packers like Harris Beef, Creekstone and others can do, they will capture a market share IBP, Excel and Swift don't want to produce for, or will allow competitors to produce for either. The industry captured USDA does major packers bidding, joining the hypocrisy. The U.S. beef industry mistakenly thinks that they are negotiating with the Japanese government, when the Japanese government has actually been losing political popularity with Japanese consumers over concessions made to the U.S. to reopen beef trade. The Japanese consumer is a tough customer, far more complex and demanding than U.S. customers. The shallow, bullying, one size fits all U.S. beef industry tells the Japanese consumer how ignorant they are. Wonder how many Toyota's they'd sell if they treated U.S. consumers the same way we do Japanese beef customers? Probably they'd sell about as many cars in the U.S. as we do beef in Japan.
The CommStock Report - 02/28/06
Copyright 2005 CommStock Investments, Inc.
David Kruse
Beef industry conservatives Steve Kay and Steve Cornett have come over to the realization that USDA/AMI/NCBA's handling of the Japanese beef market has been a failure, put politely, with Kay saying, "Many in the industry still don't grasp the complexity of trading with Japan." I'm not totally convinced Kay understands the nuances, but even he has figured out, "I can't imagine that we will see much beef to Japan this year." Farm Journal's Beef Today Editor, Cornett, conceded that selling Japanese consumers BSE tested beef may have not been such a bad idea after all saying, "I'm not suggesting that USDA's argument about unscientific trade restrictions wasn't a valid one. Let's just say it's over; it no longer applies. There is a difference between a government requiring superfluous tests and consumers wanting superfluous tests." Only Troy Marshall of Beef Magazine remains belligerent, wanting to pop Japanese consumers in the eye for refusing to buy our beef with trade sanctions threatening, "I'm getting dangerously close to calling for an all out trade war with Japan."
Such beef trade hardliners believe U.S. science trumps all, establishing the basis for all trade rules; yet they support the sale of organic, natural or hormone free beef, none of which is supported by science, as market opportunities recognizing consumer demand for such beef, while refusing to accommodate Japanese consumers request for BSE-tested beef on scientific grounds. Such a USDA/AMI/NCBA trade stance is hypocritical self service, benefiting special interests within the industry in control of the policy making apparatus. This trade policy will ultimately cost the U.S. beef industry hundreds of millions of dollars in lost trade that Troy Marshall wants to blame on Japanese consumers. When the Japanese heard the U.S. beef industry express its desire to fill consumer demand, they may have mistakenly assumed they were included. The U.S beef industry only fills consumer demand that doesn't slow the chain in U.S. slaughter plants. The difference in Japanese and U.S. business cultures is evident by example in the auto industry. Toyota is moving into No. 1 position because quality is first and foremost, represented by a zero defect policy. Any employee along Toyota's production line can shut the entire line down, bring it to a stop if any part of the process malfunctions. Toyota fixes things that aren't broken. Good enough is never good enough.
We don't operate that way. Something pretty darn serious has to happen to stop an IBP production line. Problems are overcome while production continues and a tolerance for an "acceptable" number of defects is practiced. You can call it a culture clash or just a different corporate philosophy, but what we are finding, even in the U.S., is that consumers recognize and demand the higher quality produced by the Japanese system. That's what ultimately scares the USDA/AMI/NCBA. Ford and GM are struggling to produce quality equal to Toyota and U.S. consumers are rewarding that quality with a choice. The Japanese consumer demands more from food safety than the U.S. system currently provides. While we test a few cattle for BSE, Japanese consumers demand all be tested, zero tolerance for defects and are willing to pay the cost. What the USDA/AMI/NCBA are really afraid of is that the U.S. consumer, which likes Toyota's, will figure out we produce beef like GM and Ford with production lines that aren't stopped and an "acceptable" number of defects tolerated based on economic considerations. If we produce beef the way the Japanese consumer demands it, which niche packers like Harris Beef, Creekstone and others can do, they will capture a market share IBP, Excel and Swift don't want to produce for, or will allow competitors to produce for either. The industry captured USDA does major packers bidding, joining the hypocrisy. The U.S. beef industry mistakenly thinks that they are negotiating with the Japanese government, when the Japanese government has actually been losing political popularity with Japanese consumers over concessions made to the U.S. to reopen beef trade. The Japanese consumer is a tough customer, far more complex and demanding than U.S. customers. The shallow, bullying, one size fits all U.S. beef industry tells the Japanese consumer how ignorant they are. Wonder how many Toyota's they'd sell if they treated U.S. consumers the same way we do Japanese beef customers? Probably they'd sell about as many cars in the U.S. as we do beef in Japan.
