Conman: "Imports take the place of domestic supply. Importers win. Sometimes consumers win (if imports are being mixed with old 50/50 trim, may be they are just being rookered), and domestic producers lose in the deal. The complimentary value of imports with 50/50 trim do not overcome the substitute costs to the domestic producers. If the packers are so wanting to use 50/50 trim and they don't want to use trim, let them make dogfood out of it. I know my dog would probably like that solution."
You never have explained how the packers decide how much of their profits to tithe to producers yet. Exactly what is the % of their profits that they have allocated back to producers? What is the formula? Do they keep it secret? I can't seem to recall the market report mentioning anything about any "carcass value bonus" raising fats prices.
Sandbag: "Here's a concept you don't understand, SH, you don't make any money off something that you don't sell."
Sandbag: "Now some facts for you - that trim is not "worthless" as you keep trying to snow us on."
Sandbag: "Another fact, that trim and any value associated does not belong to producers - it belongs to the packers. Every producer I know could sell me a cow right now, how much of your trim can you sell me, SH?"
Are you suggesting that the value of the carcass does not determine what packers are willing to pay for cattle? If not, what does?
agman said:Econ101 said:TimH said:Econ101- "You bring a good point. If you do have to bring in $1.99 shoulder roast then there would be less shoulder roast to sell. If you have less shoulder roast, it costs more for the shoulder roast you do have. Then you get more money for it. That brings the producer more money. If packers bring in imported lean trim then you pay the Aussies or someone else for that lean trim and you don't make a dime on it. The packer does. "
Are you saying, that if the packers can sell a shoulder roast for more than $1.99, that some of that extra value would be passed on to the producer???
I guarentee you one thing, Tim: If there are no imports, you will get more money than if there were imports. This even includes the trim argument. Packers would have to pay you more money for your cattle to satisfy the market for beef. I think the packers are as opportunist businessmen and if they did not have to pass on a dollar to the packer they wouldn't. They would just as soon keep it themselves. Do you know any different?
Do you make more money when there are fewer cattle to satisfy consumption or more? Agman's quick quote on that is that for every 1% increase in supply, the price goes down 1.5%. The reverse is true without market manipulation.
The actual relationship is 1.0 to 1:68. A 1.0% change in supply will change prices inversely by 1.68%, all other factors being equal. Ironically, Econ101, that basic relationship is valid today just as it was prior to marketing agreements. That shoots one more big hole through your endless stream of unsupported price manipulation theories.
Conman: "Supply and demand. You get factors of demand mixed up with the the equilibrium of market forces, SH."
~SH~ said:Conman: "Supply and demand. You get factors of demand mixed up with the the equilibrium of market forces, SH."
Hahaha!
Ah....ok? LOL!
If the value of the carcass does not contribute to demand, WHAT DOES?
~SH~
Conman: "SH, a lesson in economics would obviously be wasted on you. Go back and read my post. You will find the answer there if you have the intellectual capacity to grasp the answer you seek."
~SH~ said:Conman: "SH, a lesson in economics would obviously be wasted on you. Go back and read my post. You will find the answer there if you have the intellectual capacity to grasp the answer you seek."
DISCREDIT AND DIVERT, IMAGINE THAT?
NEXT!
~SH~
Econ101 said:~SH~ said:Conman: "SH, a lesson in economics would obviously be wasted on you. Go back and read my post. You will find the answer there if you have the intellectual capacity to grasp the answer you seek."
DISCREDIT AND DIVERT, IMAGINE THAT?
NEXT!
~SH~
Would you like me to recomend a book for you?
Conman: "Would you like me to recomend a book for you?"
~SH~ said:Conman: "Would you like me to recomend a book for you?"
No! I can only imagine the type of conspiracy driven books you would recommend.
Sandbag go play on the railroad tracks.
~SH~
Sandhusker said:You never have explained how the packers decide how much of their profits to tithe to producers yet. Exactly what is the % of their profits that they have allocated back to producers? What is the formula? Do they keep it secret? I can't seem to recall the market report mentioning anything about any "carcass value bonus" raising fats prices.
Here's a concept you don't understand, SH, you don't make any money off something that you don't sell. US producers don't sell foreign lean. Put the two together.
Now some facts for you - that trim is not "worthless" as you keep trying to snow us on. Read my opener on this thread and tell me where I'm wrong. Another fact, that trim and any value associated does not belong to producers - it belongs to the packers. Every producer I know could sell me a cow right now, how much of your trim can you sell me, SH?