Forage Seed Market Freedom

[parsley]

True.

But you have argued that directors on Corporations are more corrupt than farmer-elected directors.

That is ....er......accusatory....er....
even defamatory, in my kit of word-tools.

Do you think an apology to corporation directors might be in order, especially since we are in the process of registering falsetto indignation, as you have so ably prompted.

Parsley

[Fransisco]

Now who's the one getting personal with the name calling?

I just talked about your ideas and attitude.

[parsley]

an oversight....

if I possibly should have better used the term "castrato indignation"

Parsley

[Fransisco]

Gee now lets see about those posts of tower's where he talks about wheat board premiums... how's about any one of these?

posted Aug 3, 2007 12:45

"Despite having these problems I still think that it would be a serious loss to the independance and strength of western farmers if we were to lose it."

posted Aug 6, 2007 14:43 "Cash markets always have the tendency to get corrupted and you know we have enough problem with that."

and the main one...

Off to a Parlimentary vote -----Please respond, thread, posted Aug 3, 2007 8:22
"We've had to deal through the board through all these yers of low grain prices and I expect we've been better off than if we had not had them. Prices would have been lower yet."

[Fransisco]

So tower when you say <b>"and I expect we've been better off than if we had not had them"</b> do you really mean the opposite?

Or have you now after having reviewed some actual evidence changed your mind and come to realize the CWB is costing you money not making it for you?

[tower]

Fransisco, I did say that and I think it's true. I've also said that we haven't gotten them in recent years. I expect that part of the problem is the unnecessary compromises made in favour of those who do not want the board. By changing the mandate of the board cost of service would have to go up and in trying to minimize that impact I expect efficiency has gone down.

[tower]

Well done parsley, you have once again shown how you can work up to the level of your good judgement.

[parsley]

Such a conciliatory hand out, tower ...and the absence of feigned praise in your last post, must surely mean you want to kiss and make up and come out to play, again.

I note those unecessary changes you talk about actually caused you pause in the middle of the night. Put those night terrors aside! Change is here to stay.

Let's play, "No buyback export Licenses". Here's the game:

Each and every time a farmer or a grain company or a barley-munching porothonotory, applies for an export license, one is granted to them by the CWB.

You be the applicant,tower, (you can use high or low voices), Fransisco can be the Licensing Department official because he is a precise speller, and I'll send out the Wheat Board's PR. Maybe AdamSmith will be the CWB Minister, with his philosophical pillars solidly intact.

This will be fun. We can practice to our heart's content.

The best part is anticipating what we will do with more money that bypasssing the CWB will garner.

charliep can stand nearby, to make all of us feel a little more secure.(I've learned to anticipate "feelings", now, thanks to tower.) Rather like sensitivity training.

Anybody else want to play?

Parsley

[charliep]

tower

Your questtion - charliep do you assume that grain companies don't forward sell for their own benefit?

I have no doubt that grain companies sell for their own benefit if the definition is profit. Is this a problem?

They also forward sell for the benefit of domestic processors and export customers - this group needs to be assured supplies when needed and the ablity to manage their price risk. Most industries live in a world of just in time shipping/limited inventory so planning is necessary.

They also provide services to farmers to allow them to manage their cash flow and inventory/bin space requirements.

To the topic of CWB and forage. The services the CWB could provide would be as follows:

1) Ability to manage supply available to the market at an point in time through contracts and contract calls. You would have to argue that bureaucrats in Winnipeg are in a better position to do this than individual farmers.

2) The arguments around the ability to price differentiate between customers in a way that maximizes revenue. You can make the case here but will not work for forage seed above what the market is able to do now.

3) Ability to provide services to the entire supply chain (inventory financing, transaction integrity, etc.). Will note that most of the arguments around malt barley have been this aspect and not benefit to farmers (if anything, this would amount to downloading of cost to farmers).


4) Ability to provide risk management services/contracts to farmers. Will note that these programs are costly if ran the way the CWB does for wheat/barley (managing risk relative to an entire pooling year versus against individual sales).

[parsley]

Oh, tower,

One more teensy-weensy thing.

I took that sensitivity thing to heart. Some of the corporate directors might want to play, too.

Maybe you should apologize to them for calling them corrupt.

Nothing like putting a rosey hue on Agri-ville psyche once again.


Your pal,
Parsley