Multinationals

[grassfarmer]

Here is an interesting comment I read by an American producer on a Holistic management messageboard.

"In the recent **** of Canadian cattle producers, thanks to BSE, by Tyson and Cargill (I think it was), those two giant cattle processors made more money in this year past than all the Canadian farmers and ranchers put together."

Don't know if that is true or not.

[ALICIA]

Of course its true. Just were are you from any way. You must hate us ranchers and farmers to even rewrite a quout like late, Talking about throwing durt in our faces, or rubbing us in it.

[cowman]

Without a doubt IBP(Tyson) and Cargill have done all right. Lets not forget the likes of Safeway, Superstore and Sobeys.
BSE has got to be the best thing that has ever happened to them. Buy meat for peanuts. The Canadian public wades in to save their ranchers even though the prices stayed relatively high. Result...pure profit! And with every little patriot filling up the cart with hamburger and steak, demand for pork crashes and the meat industry is able to beat the price paid to the hogman down! Result...more profits! Ah, life is good for the packer/retailer Mafia!

[grassfarmer]

Alicia, I fail to understand why you take offense to my postings on this site. The quote I posted here was by an American rancher and I thought it might interest some of the readers as it highlights the scale of thr problems we have due to multinational companies in Agriculture.
I am an eighth generation farmer who chose to emigrate from the UK to Alberta in 2000. I make my sole living from beef cattle, both pedigree and commercial.

[cakadu]

The multinationals haven't been hurting too much throughout this BSE crisis as far as I can tell. The quote likely has some merit.

It is tough to take in view of the fact that so many are struggling out there right now and it doesn't look to be getting any better - at least not in the short term.

They could be killing the goose that laid the golden egg, though, if they are not careful. Sure they can pick up cheaper livestock at the moment, lining their own pockets. However, there will come a point in time when they have driven enough out of business that they will have to source product from elsewhere.

Sometimes you have to be really careful about what you wish for.

The other thing that concerns me with them is the fact that the top 5 retailers in the world are not in North America. In fact, it seems to me that Walmart makes it into the top 20, but they are basically the only ones.

I'm not so sure I want my food controlled by such a few conglomerates.

Take heart all, we need to stick together in this!

[cakadu]

The multinationals haven't been hurting too much throughout this BSE crisis as far as I can tell. The quote likely has some merit.

It is tough to take in view of the fact that so many are struggling out there right now and it doesn't look to be getting any better - at least not in the short term.

They could be killing the goose that laid the golden egg, though, if they are not careful. Sure they can pick up cheaper livestock at the moment, lining their own pockets. However, there will come a point in time when they have driven enough out of business that they will have to source product from elsewhere.

Sometimes you have to be really careful about what you wish for.

The other thing that concerns me with them is the fact that the top 5 retailers in the world are not in North America. In fact, it seems to me that Walmart makes it into the top 20, but they are basically the only ones.

I'm not so sure I want my food controlled by such a few conglomerates.

Take heart all, we need to stick together in this!

[cowman]

Linda: I suspect most modern corporations look at quarterly earnings and seldom look down the road. If supply gets weak they use their influence to get more foreign product and be damned to the locals! Afterall they are multi nationals and not citizens of any country? They have no loyalty to any country or group of individuals. They are the emerging Global Economy that every little tinpot politician spouts about. Welcome to the future.

[kato]

Actually, welcome to the past. It's colonialism minus the country.

At one time countries like France, Spain, and Britain had colonies all over the world which were taken over based on their merits as "sources of wealth". This is the same thing, only the divisions are not on a national level, or even a physical level, but on an economic level. Companies, industries, and natural resources are acquired for the sole means of providing wealth to the parent company. When no longer profitable, they are disposed of.

These huge multinationals care only about their share values, and have the welfare of no one in mind. They also have ways of making governments dance to their tunes, and have no qualms about doing it.

It's starting to look like we tough old cowboys may be just about the last independants left standing. I wonder if we're up for the battle? I like to think we are.

[ALICIA]

Grassfarmer I really wasn't taking a shot at you. And we shouldn't be taking shots at the guys that are buying because even your own nabour down the road will try to take you. We all whant something for as cheep as we can get it and it doesn't matter if its a cow or car or shoes. Even you and me love to get a deal. Thats just life.

[ValueChainFX]

For the past 10 to 15 years the multi-nationals along with our government and the blessing of some of the industry have been centralizing the infrastructure of the rural communities into larger centers'. This move was seen as a good business move and as we see in hind site, has striped the rural communities of almost everything that supports them or identifies them. Rural communities have suffered noticeable for the past few years and have desperately struggled to keep their heads above water. The farmer input costs have gone up due to the lack of this infrastructure. BSE has only magnified the challenges in the agriculture industry and highlighted the policies challenges and politics of export trades. (Hurting the producer to the core for sure)

The only bright side (even though the light is dim) is that the agriculture community can now see the need to empower a unified voice with some real leadership behind it! The Canadian consumer has tried to show support (and the multi-nationals and big retails capitalized on that, as usual the trickle down didn't go to the producers) and I believe they would support a real grass roots movement done in a coordinated manner. Finger pointing is over as if we really care what the so called experts say to shift blame, we have businesses to run and a future to build (at least decisions to make about our own futures) The multi-nationals don't have the ability to mass produce a product that the consumers are crying for, there is an opportunity to begin reconstructing and reengineering the infrastructures so clearly stripped from us in the past. But it can only be done in a unified way, and you can bet the politicians and bureaucrats will be on board when a critical mass of unified agriculture industry participants are on board. I can almost hear some of you saying how big the challenge is to do this! But if not now? When? If not you? Who?

I guess the question is what are the risks? If you don't do something like this ... What are the risks? If you do something like this ... are the risks lower or higher?

[cowman]

Well Valuechain I was wondering where the hell you were! Taking your leasure in the Bahamas or something?
Anyway I suspect you are maybe right(now is that a ringing endorsement or what?). The day is coming when we either take back our country from the "multinationals" or we fold. I hope we are up to the challenge!

[cakadu]

Agriculture development is not a positive correlation with rural development, as sad as that is to say. As land has been divided into acreages or bought by existing farmers, there have been significant changes happening in rural areas.

I'm not so sure we can blame the multinationals for all of our woes. Some rural areas have not done as well as they have historically or could have in the present because there has been a reluctance to change, past differences have made it difficult to move forward, acreage owners don't support the local shops and stores but conduct their business in larger centres because they work there or the selection is better (or whatever else you can think of), as land is bought up and held by one landowner, there isn't enough trade etc. to keep businesses in smaller areas going and the list goes on.

People who direct market are generally those who have access to markets in larger centers because they have enough people to purchase their products. There are those success stories who do great business in smaller areas, but that generally is not the norm.

The push for business and ag development in Alberta has been along the highway #2 corridor between Edmonton and Calgary, which has created difficulties for those without easy access to highway #2.

What we need is more development off the highway #2 corridor and the supporting policies and infrastructure to go along with that. Entrepreneurial ventures need to be supported as much as possible.

Canada as a whole does not have much of an infrastructure to support entreprenuers - information is fragmented and in many areas, tax incentives don't exist as readily as they do in other sectors, etc.

It seems to me that it comes back to doing what we need to do for Canada and not be so concerned with trading with other countries. Last time I checked, Canada was still it's own country!

I have always been a fervent supporter of the small entrepreneur because that is where the innovation and consumer driven products are going to come from. The big companies are not able to give consumers what they want.

[cowman]

I sure have to agree with you on the idea of getting some developement out in the boondocks. I went to a info meeting Red Deer County put on where the consultant put on an excellent presentation about the possibilities of expanding the eastern half of the county which is pretty well doing its best to depopulate. It made a lot of sense to me but just how do you get people to locate out there? Somehow or other you need some sort of support to make that happen and reverse the trend? I doubt our municipalities have the resources to do that and our Provincial and Federal governments don't seem to keen on putting up any money. They'd rather give lip service to the whole thing...you know more studies and say what a capital idea it is but when it is time to get out the check book they suddenly remember they have other things to do, but give us a call next year sort of thing?
The opportunities are there but it needs a kick to get it going and I don't see Klein doing that. Maybe Martin?

[ValueChainFX]

Cowman, I have not being out in the sun much these days! I have been moving forward with our plans, presently the land is being rezoned and meetings planned for the New Year. January the 3rd is our next meeting where some plans will be made for meeting dates and locations. The beef sector is now coming on board with increasing numbers so I see this as a positive step.
cakadu

Your statement "Agriculture development is not a positive correlation with rural development" has been true in the past! However, my view on this is due to many seemingly unrelated changes have made the rural communities lathargic in maintaining that infrastructure. Many have since noted that they are slowly dying and have been very aggressive in looking for ways to create a sustainable community.

Your statement "As land has been divided into acreages or bought by existing farmers, there have been significant changes happening in rural areas." Is true in many parts of Alberta, especially closer to the urban centers. Alberta has many areas where these smaller parcels have little or no effect on the agriculture base. Agriculture is still the majority of the land base in these areas. The changes that have happened in the past as they challenge agriculture are the loss of supporting infrastructure to the ag sector which in turn increases the costs of input.

Your statement "Some rural areas have not done as well as they have historically or could have in the present because there has been a reluctance to change" is so very true. Even in the face of disaster some communities cannot look beyond the status quo! But there are some that are and we are working with one such community and have been in contact with several others (at least 6) in Alberta that agree in principal but don't have the knowledge, drive or government support to move forward, we are presently developing a model (as we see it) to assist these communities in follow our template. Our hope is that they will not run into as much Red tape (beauracrats) as we have and when they do they have examples to share.

Your statement "People who direct market are generally those who have access to markets in larger centers because they have enough people to purchase their products. There are those success stories who do great business in smaller areas, but that generally is not the norm." You are right "Direct Marketing" is something that is a double edge sword and does not help the overall agriculture industry, A coordinated marketing effort with key focus points is what is needed, the consistency of product, supply, trace ability and a system of checks and balances is needed NOW especially given the challenges we have all found ourselves in. Although this has been recognized the challenge remains a coordinated system is required to accomplish this! The planning, time and an open minded attitude will make this happen, so far the supply chain seems to believe they can accomplish this without including the producer, I personally don't believe it and chose to continue to build the opportunity with the producer involvement.

Your statement "What we need is more development off the highway #2 corridor and the supporting policies and infrastructure to go along with that. Entrepreneurial ventures need to be supported as much as possible." Is right on the money and is seen by government, the ag sectors, entrepreneurs and investors, but the plan to take us there must also provide stability, risk management, growth strategies, sustainability and mostly a foundation for producers to the consumers balance.

Your statement "Canada as a whole does not have much of an infrastructure to support entrepreneurs - information is fragmented and in many areas, tax incentives don't exist as readily as they do in other sectors, etc." You are right again, but there are incentives including tax, operational cost reductions, collaborative opportunities, partnering programs, education exchange programs, etc. that can be used if put in the right combinations.

Your statement "It seems to me that it comes back to doing what we need to do for Canada and not be so concerned with trading with other countries. Last time I checked, Canada was still it's own country!

I have always been a fervent supporter of the small entrepreneur because that is where the innovation and consumer driven products are going to come from. The big companies are not able to give consumers what they want." Is again right on. We have not looked after our markets at home and have allowed those to be taken by importing countries, most marketing programs are export programs, it has been a challenge to convenience those in power that our Canadian market must be the solid base and exports are something that we can pursue as ADDITIONAL market share in the global market.

Thank you for your comments and the opportunity to respond to them, as cowman stated we still have challenges, but that comes back to the point that if we in the agriculture sector are going to survive it will be up to us to make the right moves to make it happen. If you let the government or anyone else look after your business you can bet you will end up working for someone else. A plan with choices for the producer that is in alignment with government policy and balances out the ag sector is what we are all looking for!