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

What factors have the most impact on our cattle prices?

RobertMac

Well-known member
Mike said:
To say packers alone control the carcass size is flawed thinking.

Tyson admitted in the Pickett trial that they seek larger higher yielding carcasses for the grocery market they dominate.

Seems they look at it like it takes as much time and effort to process a small carcass as it does a large one. Time is money.

Carcass weights and yields vary in closed, linebred purebred herds.
Higher weight per carcass handled and higher % retail yield equals more profit! Upper weight limits are for equipment and labors ability to handle.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
The packers are going to do whatever combination it takes to maximize profits. That's their business - making as much money as they can. Just because a consumer prefers something does not mean that is the route they will automatically take. If they can make a buck more by not catering to consumers, that is what they will do. It's all bottom line.
 

IL Rancher

Well-known member
Sometimes the consumer in general doesn't know what they want. I found it interesting all of the complaints about pork for example when I worked at the shop. Criticism for no flavor and poor texture and how salty it was... The salination of pork was a process that basically made pork almost bullet proof in its preperation. Great for the cook who doesn't know how to cook and about the only thing you can do to give the fatless pork any "juiciness". Now, the average consumer I talked to hated this and yearned for days of the old pork.

This old pork of course produced lots of lard, fatty hams and bacons and was overal crtiized for being unhealthy. And it tastes better, lol. The leaner pork of course doesn't produce near the amounts of lard and the animals have very little IM fat or back fat. Makes for far less waste but I don't think it made for a better product. Perhaps a cheaper product.

Of course this is pork and not beef but looking back at pork in the 50's I wonder how many saw the pork industry heading in this direction?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandbag: "If they can make a buck more by not catering to consumers, that is what they will do."

Hahaha!

Tyson: "WE HAD RECORD PROFITS LAST YEAR BY NOT GIVING THE CONSUMER WHAT THEY WANT".

Hahaha!

Another gem from little Sandcheska the banker from Cody!


All the little packer blamers group together into their little support groups and make their little statements and present their little opinions but none can refute the facts.


~SH~
 

Econ101

Well-known member
~SH~ said:
Sandbag: "If they can make a buck more by not catering to consumers, that is what they will do."

Hahaha!

Tyson: "WE HAD RECORD PROFITS LAST YEAR BY NOT GIVING THE CONSUMER WHAT THEY WANT".

Hahaha!

Another gem from little Sandcheska the banker from Cody!


All the little packer blamers group together into their little support groups and make their little statements and present their little opinions but none can refute the facts.


~SH~

SH, this continual switch between your 5 year old persona and an occasional adult is dizzying.

Would you mind just arguing with yourself by yourself for a while?
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
IL Rancher said:
Sometimes the consumer in general doesn't know what they want. I found it interesting all of the complaints about pork for example when I worked at the shop. Criticism for no flavor and poor texture and how salty it was... The salination of pork was a process that basically made pork almost bullet proof in its preperation. Great for the cook who doesn't know how to cook and about the only thing you can do to give the fatless pork any "juiciness". Now, the average consumer I talked to hated this and yearned for days of the old pork.

This old pork of course produced lots of lard, fatty hams and bacons and was overal crtiized for being unhealthy. And it tastes better, lol. The leaner pork of course doesn't produce near the amounts of lard and the animals have very little IM fat or back fat. Makes for far less waste but I don't think it made for a better product. Perhaps a cheaper product.

Of course this is pork and not beef but looking back at pork in the 50's I wonder how many saw the pork industry heading in this direction?

Animal fats were criticized as unhealthy by the edible oil industry so they could sell their products. The information is coming out that it is these edible oil products that are unhealthy...trans fats!!!! The public would be healthier and enjoy their food more if they when back to eating 'old style' beef and pork!
 

TimH

Well-known member
RobertMac said:
IL Rancher said:
Sometimes the consumer in general doesn't know what they want. I found it interesting all of the complaints about pork for example when I worked at the shop. Criticism for no flavor and poor texture and how salty it was... The salination of pork was a process that basically made pork almost bullet proof in its preperation. Great for the cook who doesn't know how to cook and about the only thing you can do to give the fatless pork any "juiciness". Now, the average consumer I talked to hated this and yearned for days of the old pork.

This old pork of course produced lots of lard, fatty hams and bacons and was overal crtiized for being unhealthy. And it tastes better, lol. The leaner pork of course doesn't produce near the amounts of lard and the animals have very little IM fat or back fat. Makes for far less waste but I don't think it made for a better product. Perhaps a cheaper product.

Of course this is pork and not beef but looking back at pork in the 50's I wonder how many saw the pork industry heading in this direction?

Animal fats were criticized as unhealthy by the edible oil industry so they could sell their products. The information is coming out that it is these edible oil products that are unhealthy...trans fats!!!! The public would be healthier and enjoy their food more if they when back to eating 'old style' beef and pork!

Bingo, RobertMac!! The pork(and beef) industries did not head towards "leaner" product on their own. They were steered in that direction by consumer demand or perception.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
TimH said:
RobertMac said:
IL Rancher said:
Sometimes the consumer in general doesn't know what they want. I found it interesting all of the complaints about pork for example when I worked at the shop. Criticism for no flavor and poor texture and how salty it was... The salination of pork was a process that basically made pork almost bullet proof in its preperation. Great for the cook who doesn't know how to cook and about the only thing you can do to give the fatless pork any "juiciness". Now, the average consumer I talked to hated this and yearned for days of the old pork.

This old pork of course produced lots of lard, fatty hams and bacons and was overal crtiized for being unhealthy. And it tastes better, lol. The leaner pork of course doesn't produce near the amounts of lard and the animals have very little IM fat or back fat. Makes for far less waste but I don't think it made for a better product. Perhaps a cheaper product.

Of course this is pork and not beef but looking back at pork in the 50's I wonder how many saw the pork industry heading in this direction?

Animal fats were criticized as unhealthy by the edible oil industry so they could sell their products. The information is coming out that it is these edible oil products that are unhealthy...trans fats!!!! The public would be healthier and enjoy their food more if they when back to eating 'old style' beef and pork!

Bingo, RobertMac!! The pork(and beef) industries did not head towards "leaner" product on their own. They were steered in that direction by consumer demand or perception.

Outmanuevered in the propaganda campaign by the grain industries again. Funny thing, the increase in consumption of these oils didn't hit the farmer's pocket book in a profitable manner. It isn't just about increased sales, it is also about profitable prices that a free market can bring---not the current "cheap food policy".

Beef checkoff better get off its ____.
 

TimH

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
TimH said:
RobertMac said:
Animal fats were criticized as unhealthy by the edible oil industry so they could sell their products. The information is coming out that it is these edible oil products that are unhealthy...trans fats!!!! The public would be healthier and enjoy their food more if they when back to eating 'old style' beef and pork!

Bingo, RobertMac!! The pork(and beef) industries did not head towards "leaner" product on their own. They were steered in that direction by consumer demand or perception.

Outmanuevered in the propaganda campaign by the grain industries again. Funny thing, the increase in consumption of these oils didn't hit the farmer's pocket book in a profitable manner. It isn't just about increased sales, it is also about profitable prices that a free market can bring---not the current "cheap food policy".

Beef checkoff better get off its ____.

Ya, whatever Econ. None of that changes the fact that if the consumer perceives that animal fat is "BAD", it is pretty hard to sell "fatty" meat. The animal protein industry responded by providing leaner product. Period.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
TimH said:
Econ101 said:
TimH said:
Bingo, RobertMac!! The pork(and beef) industries did not head towards "leaner" product on their own. They were steered in that direction by consumer demand or perception.

Outmanuevered in the propaganda campaign by the grain industries again. Funny thing, the increase in consumption of these oils didn't hit the farmer's pocket book in a profitable manner. It isn't just about increased sales, it is also about profitable prices that a free market can bring---not the current "cheap food policy".

Beef checkoff better get off its ____.

Ya, whatever Econ. None of that changes the fact that if the consumer perceives that animal fat is "BAD", it is pretty hard to sell "fatty" meat. The animal protein industry responded by providing leaner product. Period.

I will not dispute that fact, TimH. The meats industry has also veered towards poultry too. Neither one of those moves was good for the beef industry. It doesn't matter how fat tyson's chickens are, they always compare the skinless breast with other meats when making their "health claims".

The checkoff is losing the P R war because of an inability to counter these claims and incompetency, plain and simple.
 

Latest posts

Top