What Were the Forces Behind the Canadian Cattle Subsidy(BSE)

[Tam]

I'm sorry if I have been leaving out the Nielsens Tam. Just like Tyson and Cargill, they were in the right spot at the right time. They must be even better than Cargill at hiding their cattle in nubered companies as their is nothing showing in the list for how much their cheque is.

I don't have anything good to say about them either Tam. They took advantage as much as their big brothers. The only reason Cargill hasn't bought them out yet is because that old $hithole plant in Calgary wouldn't be worth ten bucks to the next guy.

Tam -

This packing plant was supplying most of the beef eaten in Canada as Tyson and Cargill were slaughtering UTM cattle for export. But Randy doesn't want to compete with these guys in a market that really needs the competition so we don't hear about what they are doing to the Canadian producers.

I see Tam. The plant in Moose Jaw was supplying Canadians with MOST of their beef. :lol: :lol:

Still showing how little you are able to read hey Tam. BIG C is all about killing OTM cattle.

I thought you were going to competeing with the big boys as in Tyson and Cargill. They slaughter UTM Randy and export it to the US so how will you be competeing with them if you are slaughtering OTM? You also said your guys were talking to the Asian markets as in China and Japan now are you telling us Big C convinced the Japanese Government to allow OTM meat into Japan Via the BIG C plant? And if you are going to be competeing with Nillsons why aren't you posting their information and bashing them so producers won't sell to them?

 

[rkaiser]

Do you really think that my bashing of Cargill and Tyson will stop lemmings like yourself for selling to Tyson and Cargill Tam? I told you that I don't have anything good to say about Nillsons. Why not cut and paste the part about my post that says "They took advantage as much as their big brothers." Why is it that you are able to bash Nillsons (like I could give a rats ash) and not your Hero's. You are a joke Tam.

Just like your attempt to bring some Facts to the board.

Take a quick look at the cafax figures for yourself missy.

http://www.canfax.ca/

Canada exports about 30% of production.

 

[rkaiser]

Oh yes, keep twisting you own pathetic crap into trying to discredit BIG C Tam.

You are simply pissed with Randy the Packer Bwamer and can't even read the website to see what it's all about.

You go ahead and post the Nillson bashing stuff Tam, it only proves my point that Cargill and Tyson recieved even more benefit than their little brother from the closed border.

 

[Tam]

Do you really think that my bashing of Cargill and Tyson will stop lemmings like yourself for selling to Tyson and Cargill Tam? I told you that I don't have anything good to say about Nillsons. Why not cut and paste the part about my post that says "They took advantage as much as their big brothers." Why is it that you are able to bash Nillsons (like I could give a rats ash) and not your Hero's. You are a joke Tam.

Just like your attempt to bring some Facts to the board.

Take a quick look at the cafax figures for yourself missy.

http://www.canfax.ca/

Canada exports about 30% of production.

First Randy I couldn't find anytrhing about what % we exported but I want you to read something and tell me if it is a lie or not?

According to the last current stats prior to BSE in May/03, Canada produced approximately 2% of the World's Beef, yet we were the 4th largest exporting nation of Beef. That is a very dangerous postion to be in, But even more so when you couple this stat with the fact that we only consume domestically 28% of our nations' production, and at all times are forced to market 72% of our production as an export

Randy can you tell all of us where I found this Quote and Who wrote it?

 

[Northern Rancher]

Oldtimer you are a typical R-Calf mushroomas long as Leo keeps you in the dark and feeds you b...t your happy. Was just talking to a sane Montana residant on the phone yesterday -he was predicting the collapse of Leo's little house of lies. Maybe if all the non R-Calfer's boycotted the Midland test he'd get the message that an organization founded on lies and deceit can never last.

 

[Tam]

BIG C is all about killing OTM cattle.

Well Randy now I'm really confused you said

This paydown of the loan from the side would be the advantage that BIG C would have over investor funded plants in that profits would not go towards loan payment or returns to investors until the plant was paid down. Your honey Tam might see this as some unfair advantage over her plant, but I see it as a well thought out business idea. Like I said before, the competition that will squash your plant will not come from BIG C who are also considering export to countries other than the USA as their top priority.

Now according to the BIG-C plan, ONE of your plants will be processing OTM cattle and they will not be competeing with exsisting plants. Isn't Nillsons processing OTM cattle? And if a investor funded plant was processing OTM wouldn't you be competeing with them for cattle no matter where you plan to sell the meat? and wouldn't you be squashing their business with your Checkoff funded Plant? Big C also talks about the other plant would be processing UTM cattle. So now we are talking two plants? :? and according to the Plan Big C is not asking for a $1 per head but a manditory $3 to $5 per head levy, to raise an esimated 25 million dollars per year. That is a pretty heavy chunk of change coming out of an industry that is already struggling to make ends meet.
According to BIG-C's plan

the levy would have a sunset clause. When construction and operating costs are recovered from the levy, the levy would terminate upon repaymant of government bridge- financing.

Now tell us Randy what does BIG-C mean by operating costs? They could go on for as long as the plant is running?
Another quote from BIG-C

Opening new packing plants privately-owned by Canadians will not solve the problem. They will either be destroyed financially by the predatory, monopolistic pricing practices of the American-packers; or if they suceeed, will eventually be bought out by the American-packers in a few years.

Now Randy if My investor funded plant is processing OTM cattle and your Checkoff funded plant is processing OTM cattle and you have all your profits to compete for cattle as you are not paying back your debt like I am, just who's predatory monopolistic pricing practices will my investor funded plant have to fear? According to BIG-C the American packers are processing UTM cattle so they aren't the ones competeing for the cattle my plant needs.

Something needs to change. And change will never come if turtles like yourself want to continue with your games. Tam and SH support producer owned plants ------- WHY?

Randy why are you asking why we support producer owned isn't that what BIG-C wants is a Producer owned plant? I just don't think that it should be manditory that all producers own one. I feel if some producers want to invest in a packing plant they should have a level playing field, not one that is slanted to provide your plant with a huge advantage which will result in them loosing their investment.

The mandatory levy (voted on) that I support will likely never happen in this country. People are too scared and want to keep twisting it into something it is not. Big Muddy talked about anger holding BIG C back. What about you and Tam and good old SH. All to angry with Randy's opinion to ever see the merits of a plan to bring more competition into the Canadian industry, and possibly change some direction in America as well .

When you are done their will only be one big packer left competeing for OTM cattle as you will have the Big Advantage over the investor funded plants and will be putting them out of the business like Tyson and Cargill did to most of their competition. Great plan then we will have two competeing for UTM and you buying all OTM. And about the second plant that will be processing UTM, unlike the investor funded plants and the OTM cattle, I think Tyson and Cargill will give you a run for our money.
Hey Randy on the sequence of requirements to move proposal forward the first thing on the list is

Funding must be available for a professionally executed feasibility study to fully determine the advantages and risks to producers-ownership in the Canadian meat packing sector as well as the details relateing to a checkoff, location, labour requirements, testing, etc.

The second thing on the list is

If the feasibility study proves that this proposal is viable, it will then be necessary to obtain a consensus from the cattle producers in Western Canada or nationwide. In order to make an educated decision on this proposal, producers will also require a complete business plan indicating all risks and benefits.

Now I have to ask how much funding does BIG-C have available for the Professionally executed feasibility study? Have they done the feasibility study? Have they started a business plan yet? or are they still in the idea stage and discussion stage?

 

[don]

so tam is your investor owned plant looking for a govt handout like natural valley got the other day (600,000+) in which case my money is competing against me? or are you into a 100% free enterprise no govt money venture???

 

[rkaiser]

Still at the idea stage Tam, and as long as there are people like you and the other insulated CCA directors talking about ours and yours, BIG C will fail. If you could once realise that a levy funded plant, or plants, would not only help every producer in Canada as much as it would help YOU, you'll never get it. I always like to say to folks that don't hate me yet, "why not protect your investment by investing in more than one concept". You keep talking about BIG C having some kind of unfair advantage over your plant. How is that? Your plant is only about you, and a few of your buddies. Tell me Tam, why the producers of Canada should hope for YOU to succeed over a plant that would benefit all producers?

Unlike you Tam, I hope your plant can make it. I hope you have a good plan for marketing etc. I hope you don't last two years and then loose the grant money that you got to do your feasability study and likely MORE. I hope that every plant proposal in Canada gets off the ground and succeeds. Make sure you cut and paste this paragraph hero.

You are almost as good as SH in talking clips out of context and trying to make the author look bad. Keep rolling Tam. Prove yourself with your simplistic games.

As far as the export numbers ----- MAYBE I AM WRONG. There TAM, have you ever said that in your life? I read on Canfax that Canada produced 1.35 million tonnes of beef and exported 446,000. Must have been MY MISTAKE.

 

[Bill]

A couple of things.

Randy, I am not sure what figures you are using but you have to go all the way back to 1990 to find over 70% of our production consumed in Canada and in 2002 only 40% of our Beef was eaten by Canadians.

Tam, although not perfect by any means BIG-C's proposal in 2003 was the only plan out there to build a plant large enough to compete with the big US corps. Will the plants under construction or still in on the drawing board survive? Not without support of CCA and some significant changes made within CFIA. Will this happen? I truly doubt it. The sink or swim attitude will not make for many success stories within the new plants.
While CCA kept it's thumb on the provincial producer groups such as SSGA and ABP and any ideas they may have had, BIG-C had already stepped outside the box and was actually trying to do something. As I said not perfect but at least there were some not willing to buy into the "all will be well.....the US will look after us......" line CCA was spouting.

 

[Jason]

Hmmm exporting 70% versus consuming 70% big difference. Thanks for finding the info Tam I thought it was 60/40 but didn't have time to find the references.

Randy, what you read on Canfax might well be right, it just proves that after BSE the exports were sorely lacking. That backs cattle up.

It's funny how so many of these producer owned ventures are still in the idea phase, while other plants are up and running or are almost there. The ones with little fanfare that have a solid plan will be fine and most producers won't even know about them.

As for XL being an old plant, it is, but they keep spending money to upgrade, over $1 million just before BSE to meet WHIMIS and ISO standards.

 

[rkaiser]

You little sneaky Tam. It was my hero Cam Ostercamp who wrote your clip.

I WAS WRONG. Darn good thing I didn't make a $100.00 dollar bet. Like some folks on here, I might have had to whine for a month about I trapped myself etc. etc. etc.

Good thing Nillsons had a few bucks to spend on upgrading hey Jason?

Or were they like Cargill and Tyson, needing governement support to survive the BSE crisis?

Where did all that beef go that wasn't exported Jason. Cargill must have rented some igloo space up in Alaska hey.

 

[Anonymous]

And Oldtimer why do you keep bring up the Anna and Blue tired old story you must know by now the the CCA in Canada has been working with the NCBA for over a decade to get those regulations change.

Then Tam, why were you whining and crying about it taking so long to open up the border after your BSE was found....Seems only fair and practical for USDA to study the Canadian BSE problem for a decade too....

 

[Tam]

so tam is your investor owned plant looking for a govt handout like natural valley got the other day (600,000+) in which case my money is competing against me? or are you into a 100% free enterprise no govt money venture???

First Don I'm not investing in any plant that it just another one of Randy's opinions. :wink: Second all I would like to see is a level playing field for all plants so one doesn't have a Huge Advantage over the next like Randy admits the Big C will have over any other investor funded plant. And Don if you have invested your money in a plant would you like to compete against a plant that has the huge advantage of paying back their debt and possibably Operating costs with side money so all the plant profits are to go back in to competeing for cattle and markets.

 

[rkaiser]

This huge advantage that you keep talking about Tam, may be simply a Darn Good Idea. Am I wrong? Is the BIG C proposal illegal? Is it socialist? Are we asking for Grant money?

The way you talked about your plant Tam, I thought for sure that you or Daddy had invested in it. I guess that I am WRONG twice today.

 

[Tam]

A couple of things.

Randy, I am not sure what figures you are using but you have to go all the way back to 1990 to find over 70% of our production consumed in Canada and in 2002 only 40% of our Beef was eaten by Canadians.

Tam, although not perfect by any means BIG-C's proposal in 2003 was the only plan out there to build a plant large enough to compete with the big US corps. Will the plants under construction or still in on the drawing board survive? Not without support of CCA and some significant changes made within CFIA. Will this happen? I truly doubt it. The sink or swim attitude will not make for many success stories within the new plants.
While CCA kept it's thumb on the provincial producer groups such as SSGA and ABP and any ideas they may have had, BIG-C had already stepped outside the box and was actually trying to do something. As I said not perfect but at least there were some not willing to buy into the "all will be well.....the US will look after us......" line CCA was spouting.

I see you were confused about who BIG -C was planning on competeing with TOO. As BIG-C's plan that was so sarcasticly pointed out by Randy was all about OTM. BIG-C would process OTM cattle for export markets of which we have few, and the Big US corps are producing UTM for export of which they are shipping just about all into the US. Can you maybe explain how BIG-C was planning on competeing with the Big US corps?

 

[don]

tam: And Don if you have invested your money in a plant would you like to compete against a plant that has the huge advantage of paying back their debt and possibably Operating costs with side money so all the plant profits are to go back in to competeing for cattle and markets.

the reason i haven't invested in a plant is that i think they will just be a target for the big guys once a bunch of money has been invested. most of these plants will be very vulnerable to predatory competition and cargill and tyson will just be taking over ranchers' equity at a discount. a proposal like big-c would have the ability to weather the storm if it had the backing of all cattle producers and that levy could be paid back in increased revenues if true competition did exist. what's $3.00/head - about a quarter of a cent per pound? as your buddy sh was telling us for a long time - a rising tide lifts all boats.

 

[Tam]

This huge advantage that you keep talking about Tam, may be simply a Darn Good Idea. Am I wrong? Is the BIG C proposal illegal? Is it socialist? Are we asking for Grant money?

The way you talked about your plant Tam, I thought for sure that you or Daddy had invested in it. I guess that I am WRONG twice today.

Randy that is a matter of opinion and it depends on which end of the huge advantage you are at if its a darn good IDEA. :wink:

Randy my beloved Daddy died of Cancer in 2002. And his Death still bothers me so Please refain for speaking about him in your sarcastic way.

And I have some more questions about the BIG-C plan. If the plan is to lease the plant out to an operator wouldn't that make the Producers the landlords of the plant? and as landlords are we entitled to any of the profits of said plant? It also says that the lease operator would recieve a percentage of the profits to cover his risk. Now if he is paying a fixed lease wouldn't that entitle him to all the profits and the Producers to only the percentage their shares represent in the plants lease payment? and if he is not paying a fixed lease just what is his risk that his percentage of the profits are to cover? He is getting the use of a brand new state of the art plant that is being paid for but someone else.
Now it does also state the possible use of hiring a Management team so if the team is being paid a wage to run the plant are they also entitled to profits to cover their risk, to which I have to ask what is they risk if they are being paid a WAGE?
Now it also says that the Producers that helped fund the Plant(which could mean every producer in Canada) would recieve the balance of the profit as dividends proportional to their investment. Alternately, dividends could be forgiven as better pricing and new export markets reward the producer with positive returns on their cattle. So Randy couldn't I realize these positive returns from any plant if they weren't competeing with your huge advantage for cattle and markets without actually owning the plant? Who invests their hard earned money just so they can forgive the payment of dividends during the salmon run as you call it? And again if the plant is leased out who would be entitled to the profits?

 

[Tam]

tam: And Don if you have invested your money in a plant would you like to compete against a plant that has the huge advantage of paying back their debt and possibably Operating costs with side money so all the plant profits are to go back in to competeing for cattle and markets.

the reason i haven't invested in a plant is that i think they will just be a target for the big guys once a bunch of money has been invested. most of these plants will be very vulnerable to predatory competition and cargill and tyson will just be taking over ranchers' equity at a discount. a proposal like big-c would have the ability to weather the storm if it had the backing of all cattle producers and that levy could be paid back in increased revenues if true competition did exist. what's $3.00/head - about a quarter of a cent per pound? as your buddy sh was telling us for a long time - a rising tide lifts all boats.

Geez Randy you confused DON too.
Don, Did you not read the part where BIG-C said they would not be competeing with the exsisting plants as in Tyson and Cargill as the Big US corps will be processing UTM cattle and BIG-C with their HUGE advantage will be compteteing for OTM cattle. So just who will the BIG preditor in the OTM cattle market that will be running these investor funded plants out of the business BE? Will true competition exsist if one plant has a huge advantage over their competitor as in the BIG-C plan? I would like to see true competition which means a level playing field so anyone that does invest their hard earned money isn't stream rolled by BIG-C Huge advantage while competeing for OTM cattle (of which Tyson and Cargill are not in competition for according to BIG-C.)

 

[don]

nice diversion tam. a real good sh tactic. whether it's otm or utm real competition is needed. your fabled level playing field disappeared when cargill opened up it's plant in high river and was only a myth when ibp bought lakeside. if we don't set up an alternative to cargill and tyson we are in an even worse position than we were may 20, 2003 when we were completely vulnerable to american political and business interests. i don't see why you keep on arguing for the status quo; pretending it is what works is delusional. if r-calf disappears somebody else will raise hell with us on an ongoing basis. look for a solution that will enable us to expand our markets (maybe testing!) and yes we need the american market but let them come and buy our animals and our beef instead of being held hostage by them. if r-calf would tend to business at home and fight the battles that might get them ahead they would have strong allies up here. r-calf will only succeed when it straightens out the domestic situation re: cool, packer concentration and captive supplies. the canadian influence on their market has been shown to be miniscule (look at prices since the border opened) and is merely a diversion by unscrupulous r-calf leaders.

 

[Tam]

nice diversion tam. a real good sh tactic. whether it's otm or utm real competition is needed. your fabled level playing field disappeared when cargill opened up it's plant in high river and was only a myth when ibp bought lakeside. if we don't set up an alternative to cargill and tyson we are in an even worse position than we were may 20, 2003 when we were completely vulnerable to american political and business interests. i don't see why you keep on arguing for the status quo; pretending it is what works is delusional. if r-calf disappears somebody else will raise hell with us on an ongoing basis. look for a solution that will enable us to expand our markets (maybe testing!) and yes we need the american market but let them come and buy our animals and our beef instead of being held hostage by them. if r-calf would tend to business at home and fight the battles that might get them ahead they would have strong allies up here. r-calf will only succeed when it straightens out the domestic situation re: cool, packer concentration and captive supplies. the canadian influence on their market has been shown to be miniscule (look at prices since the border opened) and is merely a diversion by unscrupulous r-calf leaders.

I think you has missed the point here Don, Big -C will not be an alternative to Cargill and Tyson as to be the alternative they would have to be in competition for the same cattle and they are not according to their high priority plan going to be in competition with Exsisting plants IE Tyson and Cargill. Their plan is to become the Tyson and Cargil of the OTM sector of the slaughter industry. And I'm not arguing for that stats quo I'm saying I want the other plants that have taken the time to write good business plan and find investors that believe in that plan to have a fair change in the OTM cattle sector so we don't have just one or two big plants running the whole show like we do in the UTM cattle sector. You say you want true competition but if we have one plant running the OTM sector do we have TRUE COMPETITION in that sector and it will be any different than what we have in the UTM sector?