What is happened to our cattle prices???

[Econ101]

Bill, here are some more real numbers, maybe you could post some from your end:

MG_LS150
Montgomery, AL Tue Mar 28, 2006 USDA-AL Dept Ag Market News

Florence, Al
Cattle Auction for Mon Mar 27, 2006

Receipts: 950 Last Week: 465 Year Ago: 284

Compared to last week, slaughter cows steady, bulls 1.00-2.00 higher.
All feeder steers and bulls mostly steady. Feeder heifers under 500 lbs.
1.00-2.00 lower, over 500 lbs. 2.00-3.00 lower. Replacement cows
mostly steady.



Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 1
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
7 400-450 420 135.00-145.00 141.15
8 450-500 478 131.00-135.00 132.23
5 500-550 532 123.00-126.00 123.99
2 550-600 582 116.00-118.00 117.00
1 650-700 690 105.00 105.00

Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 2
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
1 200-250 240 161.00 161.00
1 300-350 335 146.00 146.00
5 350-400 367 141.00-146.00 144.19
1 350-400 390 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
10 400-450 421 130.00-136.00 134.17
1 400-450 420 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
6 450-500 465 127.00-131.00 128.65
4 500-550 510 121.00-125.00 123.24
1 500-550 520 116.00 116.00 Brahman X
2 550-600 578 107.00-111.00 108.94 Brahman X
1 600-650 640 100.00 100.00 Brahman X

Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 3
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
1 200-250 235 147.00 147.00 Brahman X
1 250-300 275 142.00 142.00 Brahman X
1 300-350 340 138.00 138.00
1 300-350 335 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
5 350-400 373 130.00-136.00 132.54
2 400-450 425 123.00-130.00 126.34
1 450-500 470 121.00 121.00
1 500-550 505 116.00 116.00
2 550-600 580 107.00-111.00 108.95

 

[Econ101]

Bill, here is the result of following your advice in the cattle industry:

Just finished shipping a 3 year old bull for 20 cents. Sad On 8 weights, I slipped another nickel in the last 2 weeks (a dime slip the week before that). If I'd shipped in February with 80 - 100 lbs less animal, I would have made an additional $4000. When I asked why such a slip, I found out that Cargill has about 15,000 animals being custom fed in my area by Hutterites, and the market was adjusting to these animals being in the supply chain in another 3 months, about the same time my own 8 weights would have finished.

Rod

Where is there mention as to following my advice and in fact where have I ever given it? You are confused once again econ.

Is R-calf taken seriously or not, are they to be listened to or laughed at?

The supporters here like to credit them with making advances when the prices are high. Then look the other way when there is blame placed after media disasters initiated by R-Klan. Pretty tough to sell it both ways.

Bill you are talking about non existent data. I have just posted real numbers from real auctions. Captive supply is real and it affects the producer's bottom line.

I think these numbers I posted show who the real fool is. Keep chasing rainbows and barking up the wrong tree. You are only hurting your fellow producers.

If it weren't so serious, you would be the one being laughed at.

 

[mtrancher]

It never ceases to amaze me why the USA continues to import beef when we can't get our export markets back. I understand all the baloney about free trade agreements but in the global scheme of things, what point is there in importing beef from Australia or Argentina for example and to a lesser extent even Canada. Just think of the extra wastefull expense (energy)of shipping the meat here, while at the same time we are sitting here trying to get rid of our surplus. Absolute insanity. How much do we export to Australia for example? Reminds me of something I see happening here locally when you see hay trucks loaded going both ways down the highway, and I'm not talking short hauls necessarily either. I'm not up on the details and don't have time to even read all your guy's other threads. Just can't keep up with my busy ranch schedule especially this time of year. You people on here are amazing.

 

[Sandhusker]

Bill, "There have been many blunders on the part of USDA but R-Calf can take a large part of the credit if there is a decrease in the US appetitite towards beef."

:roll:

OK Sandhusker here's the question.

If R-Calf didn't impact consumer demand by playing the hazardous beef card when BSE eventually was reported in the US why not?

Is it your belief then that R-Calf isn't listened to anyways? If so why should they be supported if they have so little impact and credibility. Pretty hard to support both views isn't it Sandhusker? :roll: :roll:

Is R-Calf a group to be listened to or instead to be laughed at?

R-CALF affected consumer demand for beef? Prove it. Bring something to the table other than your biased opinion.

R-CALF never tried to hurt consumer demand for beef. That is a pretty good reason why consumers never listened to that message from them - it doesn't exist. :roll:

If it is your believe that nobody listens to R-CALF and that they are to be laughed at, why do you continually try to degrade them? Your actions don't match your purported beliefs.

 

[Bill]

Bill, "There have been many blunders on the part of USDA but R-Calf can take a large part of the credit if there is a decrease in the US appetitite towards beef."

:roll:

OK Sandhusker here's the question.

If R-Calf didn't impact consumer demand by playing the hazardous beef card when BSE eventually was reported in the US why not?

Is it your belief then that R-Calf isn't listened to anyways? If so why should they be supported if they have so little impact and credibility. Pretty hard to support both views isn't it Sandhusker? :roll: :roll:

Is R-Calf a group to be listened to or instead to be laughed at?

R-CALF affected consumer demand for beef? Prove it. Bring something to the table other than your biased opinion.

R-CALF never tried to hurt consumer demand for beef. That is a pretty good reason why consumers never listened to that message from them - it doesn't exist. :roll:

If it is your believe that nobody listens to R-CALF and that they are to be laughed at, why do you continually try to degrade them? Your actions don't match your purported beliefs.

Notice the question marks in my post Sandhusker? They look like this ? and are used when one is asking a question.

So what you are saying is that R-Calf is only responsible when prices increase and are misunderstood or taken out of context when they fall. Seems like the perfect world. :roll:

Thanks Sandhusker.

 

[Anonymous]

Bill, here is the result of following your advice in the cattle industry:

Just finished shipping a 3 year old bull for 20 cents. Sad On 8 weights, I slipped another nickel in the last 2 weeks (a dime slip the week before that). If I'd shipped in February with 80 - 100 lbs less animal, I would have made an additional $4000. When I asked why such a slip, I found out that Cargill has about 15,000 animals being custom fed in my area by Hutterites, and the market was adjusting to these animals being in the supply chain in another 3 months, about the same time my own 8 weights would have finished.

Rod

Where is there mention as to following my advice and in fact where have I ever given it? You are confused once again econ.

Is R-calf taken seriously or not, are they to be listened to or laughed at?

The supporters here like to credit them with making advances when the prices are high. Then look the other way when there is blame placed after media disasters initiated by R-Klan. Pretty tough to sell it both ways.

Bill- First I agree with Sandhusker that R-CALF's message did not hurt consumer demand- second, most of R-CALFs articles are in Ag publications and few ladies in the grocery store even know who R-CALF is, same as NCBA or AMI- but they do know who the USDA is-- and Americans are known for putting blind trust in government agencies (USDA, FDA, FBI, FEMA, etc.) to protect them..... But now its being shown that USDA has blatently violated that trust....

Did you read the Salt Lake City editorial? That is what consumers are reading and seeing......
http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8838

 

[Anonymous]

Bill

So what you are saying is that R-Calf is only responsible when prices increase and are misunderstood or taken out of context when they fall. Seems like the perfect world.

Bill - If I remember right R-CALF said that if we keep importing without having our export markets open the whole market would take a fall-- looks like its happening to me :wink: ....That and the fact that the Packer boys are building up and using their Canadian owned captive supplies again....

These market turns just helps R-CALF prove what they were saying about the "import glut".

 

[agman]

What Agman is saying is that supply is over taking consumptive demand and prices are going down. :?

Thanks RM, you got it.

 

[Manitoba_Rancher]

Bill, here are some more real numbers, maybe you could post some from your end:

MG_LS150
Montgomery, AL Tue Mar 28, 2006 USDA-AL Dept Ag Market News

Florence, Al
Cattle Auction for Mon Mar 27, 2006

Receipts: 950 Last Week: 465 Year Ago: 284

Compared to last week, slaughter cows steady, bulls 1.00-2.00 higher.
All feeder steers and bulls mostly steady. Feeder heifers under 500 lbs.
1.00-2.00 lower, over 500 lbs. 2.00-3.00 lower. Replacement cows
mostly steady.



Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 1
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
7 400-450 420 135.00-145.00 141.15
8 450-500 478 131.00-135.00 132.23
5 500-550 532 123.00-126.00 123.99
2 550-600 582 116.00-118.00 117.00
1 650-700 690 105.00 105.00

Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 2
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
1 200-250 240 161.00 161.00
1 300-350 335 146.00 146.00
5 350-400 367 141.00-146.00 144.19
1 350-400 390 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
10 400-450 421 130.00-136.00 134.17
1 400-450 420 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
6 450-500 465 127.00-131.00 128.65
4 500-550 510 121.00-125.00 123.24
1 500-550 520 116.00 116.00 Brahman X
2 550-600 578 107.00-111.00 108.94 Brahman X
1 600-650 640 100.00 100.00 Brahman X

Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 3
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
1 200-250 235 147.00 147.00 Brahman X
1 250-300 275 142.00 142.00 Brahman X
1 300-350 340 138.00 138.00
1 300-350 335 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
5 350-400 373 130.00-136.00 132.54
2 400-450 425 123.00-130.00 126.34
1 450-500 470 121.00 121.00
1 500-550 505 116.00 116.00
2 550-600 580 107.00-111.00 108.95

Econ these are prices for young feeder bulls NOT 3 year old slaughter bulls. Do you even know the difference? Rod shipped a 3 year old slaughter bull not a calf.

 

[Sandhusker]

OK Sandhusker here's the question.

If R-Calf didn't impact consumer demand by playing the hazardous beef card when BSE eventually was reported in the US why not?

Is it your belief then that R-Calf isn't listened to anyways? If so why should they be supported if they have so little impact and credibility. Pretty hard to support both views isn't it Sandhusker? :roll: :roll:

Is R-Calf a group to be listened to or instead to be laughed at?

R-CALF affected consumer demand for beef? Prove it. Bring something to the table other than your biased opinion.

R-CALF never tried to hurt consumer demand for beef. That is a pretty good reason why consumers never listened to that message from them - it doesn't exist. :roll:

If it is your believe that nobody listens to R-CALF and that they are to be laughed at, why do you continually try to degrade them? Your actions don't match your purported beliefs.

Notice the question marks in my post Sandhusker? They look like this ? and are used when one is asking a question.

So what you are saying is that R-Calf is only responsible when prices increase and are misunderstood or taken out of context when they fall. Seems like the perfect world. :roll:

Thanks Sandhusker.

I think OT answered your question as good as I could.

 

[Anonymous]

1700- 2200 lb bulls sold Tuesday in Miles City in the $62-$66 range.....Most around $63-$64......

 

[RoperAB]

Free Trade was the election issue up here. By voteing conservative I voted for free trade.
Truth is I now have mixed feelings about it. If we cant have fair trade we might as well not trade at all.
Example Alberta has the worlds second largest oil reserves second only to Saudi Arabia. American power plants and homes are feed Alberta Natural Gas through underground pipelines. Plus we export electricity directly on the grid to Americans like crazy.
Because of all this American demand for Alberta energy and because of free trade all our energy is sold on the internattional market to the highest bidder. So in other words here im living in the land of plenty with energy galore but yet im actually paying more for my energy than the guy is in California for alberta energy because im buying it back with Canadian dollars that are not worth as much as American dollars.
Anyway you guys do what you want but if that border is going to be closed to Canadian Beef, softwood lumber, or if your going to put tarrifs on our grain. Well as far as im concerned and the way I will vote in the next election is to close the border all together.
I do believe in free trade. I dont want the border to be closed. I want good US relations. But if you guys dont want Alberta beef, then you dont want our energy either. Well you may want it but if it was up to me you would not get it. Im just one guy with one vote but there are a lot of guys up here who feel the same way.

 

[Econ101]

Bill, here are some more real numbers, maybe you could post some from your end:

MG_LS150
Montgomery, AL Tue Mar 28, 2006 USDA-AL Dept Ag Market News

Florence, Al
Cattle Auction for Mon Mar 27, 2006

Receipts: 950 Last Week: 465 Year Ago: 284

Compared to last week, slaughter cows steady, bulls 1.00-2.00 higher.
All feeder steers and bulls mostly steady. Feeder heifers under 500 lbs.
1.00-2.00 lower, over 500 lbs. 2.00-3.00 lower. Replacement cows
mostly steady.



Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 1
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
7 400-450 420 135.00-145.00 141.15
8 450-500 478 131.00-135.00 132.23
5 500-550 532 123.00-126.00 123.99
2 550-600 582 116.00-118.00 117.00
1 650-700 690 105.00 105.00

Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 2
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
1 200-250 240 161.00 161.00
1 300-350 335 146.00 146.00
5 350-400 367 141.00-146.00 144.19
1 350-400 390 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
10 400-450 421 130.00-136.00 134.17
1 400-450 420 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
6 450-500 465 127.00-131.00 128.65
4 500-550 510 121.00-125.00 123.24
1 500-550 520 116.00 116.00 Brahman X
2 550-600 578 107.00-111.00 108.94 Brahman X
1 600-650 640 100.00 100.00 Brahman X

Feeder Bulls Medium and Large 3
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
1 200-250 235 147.00 147.00 Brahman X
1 250-300 275 142.00 142.00 Brahman X
1 300-350 340 138.00 138.00
1 300-350 335 131.00 131.00 Brahman X
5 350-400 373 130.00-136.00 132.54
2 400-450 425 123.00-130.00 126.34
1 450-500 470 121.00 121.00
1 500-550 505 116.00 116.00
2 550-600 580 107.00-111.00 108.95

Econ these are prices for young feeder bulls NOT 3 year old slaughter bulls. Do you even know the difference? Rod shipped a 3 year old slaughter bull not a calf.

Yes, MR, I know the difference. If you go look at those cattle reports I pulled up you will see the slaughter bull prices are mostly in the 50s and 60s.. My mistake in not posting those, but this cut and paste thing doesn't always do what I tell it to do. I was looking at the thread on coffee talk about castration and wanted the feeder bulls in there because what matters to the cattleman is the net amount of money he recieves and that fits into that discussion.

Here is the other part of that market report for that quote and the website:

Slaughter Bulls Y.G. 1-2
Head Wt Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
2 1500-1775 1732 62.00 62.00
2 1500-1845 1810 53.00-58.00 55.45 Low Dressing

Here is the website:
http://www.cattletoday.com/markets.htm

I noted on Rod's comment that some extraneous factors regarding his bull might have been in play. You will also note that the above quote is a pretty thin market, which I don't like to quote often, but I wanted an Alabama sale. Mike may have better sales to quote as that is not my part of the country.

Post some of your bull sales from Canada. Rod's sale could have been an anomolie, but the difference he got per lb. and what they are selling for in AL, excluding extraneous factors, blows Bill's arguments to pieces.

Here is the summary for AL:

MG_LS144
Montgomery, AL Thu Mar, 30 2006 USDA-AL Dept Ag Mkt News

Alabama Auctions Daily Summary

Alabama Livestock auctions that were held Wednesday Mar. 29, 2006

Compared to last week: Slaughter cows and bulls steady to 2.00 higher;
Feeder classes steady to 1.00 lower, instances 5.00 lower; Replacement
cows steady to 50.00 per head higher. Slaughter cows made up 9 per cent
of the run with bulls 2 per cent; Replacement cows and pairs 13 per cent;
Feeders made up 77 per cent of the run with 8 per cent over 600 lbs. In
the feeder run 6 per cent are steers, 49 per cent bulls, and 45 per cent
are heifers.


Receipts: 2,099 Last Week 1,824 Last Year 2,240


Slaughter Bulls Y.G. 1-2

Head Weight Range Avg Wt Price Range Avg Price
20 1075 - 2075 1530 $63.50-$68.00 65.59
9 1185 - 1785 1497 $53.50-$62.00 56.96 Low Dressing
5 1550 - 2100 1721 $69.00-$74.00 71.16 High Dressing

If you will remember, one of the things out of the Alberta report, and I did not read it, was that Love said market power was being exerted, but on cows (and I would say bulls also), not steers. What matters to the producer is not the reason but the fact that he is getting less money.

 

[mtrancher]

It doesn't make any sense to export products of any kind to another country unless they need those products. Only reason you folks in Canada want to export to the US is that our prices are higher than yours right now, soon you may have higher prices up there and we may want to send our cattle north, but I personally would not and have never done that. I guess I'm not a proponent of free trade. Nice idea but in reality it doesn't work.

 

[Econ101]

It doesn't make any sense to export products of any kind to another country unless they need those products. Only reason you folks in Canada want to export to the US is that our prices are higher than yours right now, soon you may have higher prices up there and we may want to send our cattle north, but I personally would not and have never done that. I guess I'm not a proponent of free trade. Nice idea but in reality it doesn't work.

Especially when "free trade" is being used by the packers to hurt producers on both sides of the border.

 

[Sandhusker]

Free Trade was the election issue up here. By voteing conservative I voted for free trade.
Truth is I now have mixed feelings about it. If we cant have fair trade we might as well not trade at all.
Example Alberta has the worlds second largest oil reserves second only to Saudi Arabia. American power plants and homes are feed Alberta Natural Gas through underground pipelines. Plus we export electricity directly on the grid to Americans like crazy.
Because of all this American demand for Alberta energy and because of free trade all our energy is sold on the internattional market to the highest bidder. So in other words here im living in the land of plenty with energy galore but yet im actually paying more for my energy than the guy is in California for alberta energy because im buying it back with Canadian dollars that are not worth as much as American dollars.
Anyway you guys do what you want but if that border is going to be closed to Canadian Beef, softwood lumber, or if your going to put tarrifs on our grain. Well as far as im concerned and the way I will vote in the next election is to close the border all together.
I do believe in free trade. I dont want the border to be closed. I want good US relations. But if you guys dont want Alberta beef, then you dont want our energy either. Well you may want it but if it was up to me you would not get it. Im just one guy with one vote but there are a lot of guys up here who feel the same way.

The US is running a pretty sizable trade deficit with Canada right now. You're clearly benefitting more from the open border than we are.

 

[agman]

Bill

So what you are saying is that R-Calf is only responsible when prices increase and are misunderstood or taken out of context when they fall. Seems like the perfect world.

Bill - If I remember right R-CALF said that if we keep importing without having our export markets open the whole market would take a fall-- looks like its happening to me :wink: ....That and the fact that the Packer boys are building up and using their Canadian owned captive supplies again....

These market turns just helps R-CALF prove what they were saying about the "import glut".

The mere fact that cattle on feed in the US are at a record and carcass weights are at a record high has nothing to do with the lower prices???

Th rise is domestic carcass weights alone has a greater negative impact on domestic cattle prices than the import of Canadian cattle.

 

[DiamondSCattleCo]

Post some of your bull sales from Canada. Rod's sale could have been an anomolie, but the difference he got per lb. and what they are selling for in AL, excluding extraneous factors, blows Bill's arguments to pieces.

Slaughter bulls have been running average 20 - 30 cents now since the border closed, with some minor fluctuations either driving down or up 10 cents over the past 3 years. The bull I sold was a lanky devil, so he needed some finish, but I didn't feel like putting 20 lbs of barley/day into him so I could still get 20 cents out of him.

As for the feeders, I shipped 8 weights. Those slipped 15 cents in 3 weeks due to the feedlots adjusting to a potential spike in supply from captive supplies that Cargill (and XL I found out) purchased in the fall.

Rod

 

[mtrancher]

June live moved 115 higher today to close at 75.90, maybe the speculaters have decided to become a little more optimistic.
Sorry to hear about your bull prices in Canada, no it doesn't make any sense to fatten up .20-.30 bulls.

 

[Econ101]

Bill

So what you are saying is that R-Calf is only responsible when prices increase and are misunderstood or taken out of context when they fall. Seems like the perfect world.

Bill - If I remember right R-CALF said that if we keep importing without having our export markets open the whole market would take a fall-- looks like its happening to me :wink: ....That and the fact that the Packer boys are building up and using their Canadian owned captive supplies again....

These market turns just helps R-CALF prove what they were saying about the "import glut".

The mere fact that cattle on feed in the US are at a record and carcass weights are at a record high has nothing to do with the lower prices???

Th rise is domestic carcass weights alone has a greater negative impact on domestic cattle prices than the import of Canadian cattle.

Sounds like you are saying the U.S. can just put on more weight if they need more beef, Agman, that Canadian cattle are not necessary for the domestic market. I thought that was rcalf's position. The fact is there is a lot of play in these markets that pricing by packers affects that you do not give credit to. You want to portray it as a change in demand.