Burbert Emerges From His Cave

[chaffmeister]

Disagreeing is not attacking.

Predictions? I can't predict what a voluntary CWB would look like. But I can share what it could look like.

To me, a voluntary CWB would compete for your wheat. It would sell what it buys. It would offer pooled prices for grain contracted with farmers. It would also offer daily prices to buy grain on a spot or deferred basis.

There would be no final payment on daily priced sales - the price you get on delivery is the price you get. The pooled price would not be a flat price as it is now, rather it would be a basis. Each farmer in the pool would price at his discretion. For those that don’t want the responsibility to price, the CWB would also offer a fixed pool price as they do now – but participation would be voluntary (even if you’re in the pool, it’d be your choice whether you do your own pricing or allow the CWB to do it).

[chaffmeister]

"Ocean Spray was formed in 1930 by three cranberry growers who really loved their cranberries and wanted to expand the market for their favorite crop."

I can find no indication anywhere that Ocean Spray was formed to control production or limiting competition. Same with SunKist.


The idea of market power or even market dominance is the same regardless of whether you're buying or selling.

But aren't we getting a bit if topic? The argument is really about whether voluntary marketing through a pool or coop would work and how.

[dmlfarmer]

Chaff, you are the one who brought up Sunkist and Ocean Spray and talked of the success of this business model. But both of these only market the production of their members. Yes they have market power because of size, but also because of quality and brand recognition. Neither these nor most other selling coops sell for non members simply because they cannot control quality or quantity of production. The sunkist name alone is extimated to be worth of 1 billion dollars to Sunkist grower members.

While a marketing coop operates within the free market, it is by no means free for everyone to take advantage of. Either you are a member and abide by the rules of the coop and benefit from it or you are outside looking in.

[dmlfarmer]

And no I do not think we are off topic. I was very intrigued by your reference to Sunkist and Ocean Spray and that got me wondering if the CWB could operate under this business model, restricting its grain sales to the production of CWB farmer members. Either you are in the CWB or out. As hog and cattle guys have found out big is not always better. Maybe a CWB more focused on quality and less on trying to be everything to everybody might be an option to consider. I really don't know and that is why I am asking these questions.

One thing is for sure, we would sure find out what side in the CWB debate is right if producers had a one time choice of remaining in a CWB coop or opting out and never selling grain through the CWB again!

[Burbert]

Okay, so a cartel, won't work, cause they are all voluntary organizations, that no longer control anything, look for instance at the price of oil, its cheap, cheap, cheap, or is ittttttt! Bought any gas at the pumps lately. Oh by the by, guess I'll go buy some cheap diamonds to give to the family at Xmas now that they are so cheap, cheap too. Oh the free market is wonderful, everything is sooooo cheap nowadays. No wonder I always have sooo much cash in my pocket and my bank account is bulging. Maybe what we need is an OLIGARCHY like in Russia, the mob controlling our grain sales, not a cartel an OLIGARCHY, same people who cut of the gas to Poland last winter. Yeah thats it an OLIGARCHY....... What about an OLIGARCHY chaffmeister?

[Fransisco]

How's about a monarchy, and you get to be the King Burbert? I know Burger King has an extra crown kicking around somewhere.

[Choice2U]

I'll be happy to leave without the ability to go back in.

Question...Are some people just plain stupid or do they just not understand that farmers freed from CWB shackles will not necessariy be hauling their x-board grain to the northern US. My canola goes all over the world and I often haul it to my local elevator.

[chaffmeister]

Burbert –

Just to be clear – I didn’t say a cartel wouldn’t work – I said the ones you emulate are voluntary, yet your design would be mandatory. You’re using voluntary organizations to support the argument for a mandatory organization. Your argument is incongruous.

It may seem like a small thing to you, but when it comes to whether the CWB is good or not, the mandatory single desk is the only thing worth discussing.


I’m trying to figure out your logic. Here, through your sarcasm and derision, you chide those that support free markets sarcastically saying “the free market is wonderful, everything is sooooo cheap”. Which I guess really means you don’t believe the free market makes things cheap.

On many earlier posts, you use your same rapier wit and, oh yeah, sarcasm, by saying something like, “the free market is wonderful, we’re all gonna get rich with the big prices we sell at sellin’ in the free market”. Which I guess really means you don’t believe the free market contributes to generating wealth at the producer level.

So, to decipher your sarcasm, it appears you think:

1……the free market will keep farmers from getting good prices on the stuff they sell, and

2……the free market will keep consumers from getting good prices on the stuff they buy.

Can you really have it both ways?

[shaney]

Here is the interview that I did today with Maureen
Fitzhenry from the CWB. We chatted about the issue
to try and clear up some misconceptions.

http://realagriculture.com/2009/11/23/cwb-
responds-to-privacy-allegations/

[parsley]

The CWB chooses an auditor and pays them enough salary to make your head spin.

This lucky auditor does not want to injure next years contract renewal prospects.

Would a keen junior accountant with a sharp eye fully appreciate his/her unstated "duty" to not dampen contract renewal?

Keen young accountants are often quite accomplished at ferreting out technical issues, but very naive about poking political hotspots. Pars
Pars

[parsley]

The question not asked:

"Related to this audit, or veering from protocol, has the CWB supplied personal producer information to ANYONE other than the CWB's accredited agents?"

[shaney]

I didn't ask that question in the interview because she
answered that question through the other questions.
She stated that they have not released any information
to other parties other than the ones listed in the audit.

I am not a big fan of the single desk but I just think
this is going to blow over and be a none event.

[parsley]

For example, let's do an easy one, the Canadian Wheat Board has a reciprocal agreement with Saskatchewan Crop Insurnace Corporation where they freely trade and share producer information.

I missed it being mentioned.

Granted, perhaps they ended the agreement last month.

Does the CWB ever come clean?

When organic producers tried to pin the Wheat Board down with the question:

"Can you provide export liceses to producers?' at all kinds of open forums, and meetings and by written queries, I will say those CWB bastards fudged every time. Every time, including Chairman Ritter. They didnt want to answer the question because then Western farmers would finally realize the CWB was handing out licenses to everyone EXCEPT Western farmers. Willingly.

And so the only way they admitted they could issue licenese was at a Standing Committee of Agriculture in Ottawa grilled by an MP who actually called producers to see what the ruckus was about.

It took the CWB TWO years to admit they could actually issue licenses to whoever, whenever.

The big issue is not Wheat Board sharing information. Surely you have a handle on that one.

The issue is few trust what the CWB tell us. And particularly producers.

Pars