• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

maybe its been broken for ever but was itbnot desinged for farmers

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    I was thinking expenses should be tied to the price of grain on a % of return. What if check off was 1% instead of flat rate. Or marketing was say 5% instead of rate set by marketer? Elevation, rail, fert, chem all on % of grain price.

    That way everyone would be trying to achieve common goal. Highest return for industry based on the price of grain.

    Comment


      #12
      I have thought the same for 40 years, but every other part of the chain wants less risk and sets rates, except the producers, where all the risk is dumped on. Will never live long enough to see farmers treated fairly.

      Comment


        #13
        Sorry. My mistake. Iwas looking for the marketing forum. I guess I accessed an NFU/Sask Wheat Pool meeting in my hot tub time machine. I didn't want 1927. I wanted 2014.

        Comment


          #14
          And currently there is nothing different between 1927 and 2014. Grain companies are not using the futures market - just look at the volumes on the ICE in Winnipeg for wheat durum and barley.

          Comment


            #15
            They use it for canola. For sure. Wheat and durum, cos use Mpls.

            Comment


              #16
              Prairie dude just glad no one is spell checking. I am mad not cause I dont know how rolling and using futures works. The way I look at it is someone lost or made on a squeeze when the farmer with product or the buyer needing product is not part of the equation then it is not functioning properly. I spell good. I just think the farmer should still be involved at bin level.

              Comment


                #17
                I am not dwelling. Do you see me dwelling? I am in a dwelling. Not doing dwelling. If there is an explanation why farmers are exempt from the final trades then tell me.

                Comment


                  #18
                  I didn't know farmers couldn't trade the cash month. But, would you really want to risk standing for delivery or having a warehouse receipt handed to you?

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Braveheart, the problem is there is too much "buyers choice" on what futures contract is used for cash price. This is how they divorce a farmer friendly basis from a farmer friendly price. I realize that the futures are a derivative for the cash market but it seems like more often than not it's being manipulated to the advantage of the buyer. Has anyone ever delivered physical against a short paper position?

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Too much choice which month is cash price? I don't understand. Isn't it always the nearby till the 15th of the closest month?

                      Comment

                      • Reply to this Thread
                      • Return to Topic List
                      Working...