The problem with marketing choice

[les]

bmj182
Even if we dont all understand everything thier will be lots of brokers out there that do understand and we can take the highest offer.

[Braveheart]

bmj182, there are lots of academics and professors who happen to think that the CWB adds more costs to the system than is returned as any benefit from single desk selling. It sounds like you weren't lucky enough to have studied under Carter, Loyns, Bercusson, Cooper, Smith, etc.

Usually, studies done by economists are completed with data and research that can be tested by peers. To date not one CWB testing study that has found the CWB beneficial has been done in an open manner to stand for critique. The opposite is true for studies that find the CWB to be a net cost to the system.

But ecomomists aside, the system the university you quote is promoting is not the dynamic type of agriculture Canada needs. We need self reliant growers capable of making pricing decisions. In fact, why would any university or learning center promote anything but teaching people to be better at the things their profession requires. Were you short changed bjm182?

Another point on this issue is that the CWB only handles human consumption and export wheat and barley. Growers everywhere are increasingly growing a wider variety of crops most of which aren't under the CWB's thumb. There is no clamor for a single desk to market those crops. So growers must be satisfied with their marketing abilities.

You must be a graduate of the U of S. It's professors and post graduates have been well oiled by the wheat board. I would argue that SK's ag grads and the entire grain industry (especially the pool accounts) are the worse for it.

Braveheart

[Dyno]

Now why would you go and start taking pot shots at the U of S Braveheart? I have followed with interest the entertaining discussions to this point. When you start to lash out at everyone whom you "perceive" as having views counter to your own you lose all credibility. I am proud to say I am a U. of S. grad who was trained to engage in debate without resorting to juvenile name calling.
With respect
Dyno

[parsley]

bmj182,

Who takes the most interest in the amount of money you earn? Who follows your finances the most closely? Who stands to lose the most if a stupid decision is made about marketing your crop? Who stands to gain the most if your grain hits the top of the market?


dyno,

The majority of the funding for the University of Saskatchewan Agricultural Programs are funded by these three: The Federal Government, the Provincial Government and the CWB. It is no surprise to anyone, then, if what is taught reflects who does the paying. All three funders promotethe CWB. Follow the money, dyno. The U of S has mouthed the CWB, to the point of looking absolutely ridiculous.

Parsley

[Dyno]

Parsley, each of us, is of course entitled to our opinions, but surely you don't honestly believe your own words, for if you do, then all academics, researchers and journalists on all sides of the grain marketing debate are in someone's pocket, including those who hold the same view as your own. A truly sad and paranoid view of the world indeed!

[Braveheart]

Dyno, has the CWB commissioned performance or other studies by anyone outside the U of S (with the exception of Darryl Kraft, U of M)? Andy Schmitz doesn't count, he's late of the U of S.

But again the point is that universities should impart grads with the skills to exist in modern globalized agriculture, not confuse them with rhetoric and studies carried out with data so "secret" it is hidden from peer scrutiny.

I know a lot of ag grads from the U of S. They are fine people. Perceptions aside, not one of those alumni are pleased with their former profs taking sides with the CWB.

Braveheart

[Dyno]

Now that's more like it Braveheart, carry on with your debate folks.

[parsley]

Dyno,
I do believe what I say. I have listened intently to what the majority of the academics at the U of S Ag Departments have promoted for many years. There has traditionally been a bastion of thought when it comes to the Wheat Board at the U of S, dyno. I've observed it as a farmer, and I have observed it as someone who has gone in to lecture at the U of S.

Ask yourself why historically, the U of S has never done an indepth study on the farmgate receipts of Board grains in comparison to farmgate receipts in the USA. Or what prevents value add in Board grains. Or the effects of the lack of value-added of Board grains in our communities. The University knows full well that the CWB is running on their policy cylinder instead of a legislative one, but they show no interest in helping put more money in farmers' pockets whilst they watch the CWB dipping out of the pooling accounts. All because they are committed to preserving the single desk above all else.

Mostly, there has not been funding for projects such as these, but neither has there been the push for them by the academics. Are they too dumb or too political?

In the last few years, there are a few breaths of fresh air in the U of S, and that is promising.

Dyno, there has been a debate on the lack of integrity in our elites, and the inability of them to be able to maintain academic freedom. It is the subject of so many books, from the right as well as the left, and you will have read the typical ones like The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy by Christophr Lasch. There is a problem, and not only the paranoid recognize it.

Parsley

[parsley]

Bmj182: May I remind you that 2/10 of the farmers produce 80% of the grains. Should 8/10 judge the 2/10's and force marketing upon them.

[bmj182]

I wasn't suggesting that farmers are
stupid! I am one myself! I was
simply pointing out that from what
I've seen alot of farmers make very
poor marketing choices (selling into
a falling market, always trying to get
the highest price, etc.) I've seen a lot
of .40 cent canary seed sold for .10!
Personally I don't support the Wheat
Board but they do take a good
portion of the marketing work load off
of a farmer's shoulders, whether you
agree with them or not. Has this
been good for Western Canada? No.
Yes brokers would step in to provide
advice, but from what I've
experienced they suggest changes
to your hedges to increase their fees,
which turns into speculation!
Farmers will be able to survive in the
new environment, just be ready for
more footwork regarding marketing.

As far as my education is concerned
the UofS is one of the finest schools
one could attend, I believe I received
the information quoted in my
previous post from Red Williams.
Whether or not you agree with him
he is a very smart man, and has
done a lot for the livestock industry in
Saskatchewan. He never did say if
he was for or against the Board he
just quoted the study.

[parsley]

bmj182,

The livestock industry in Saskatchewan. benefits immensely from the single desk. They have unlimited access to captive Board grains, because export licenses are denied. The pressure cooker for Board grain $$$returns only simmers even if CWB returns are miserably low,because there is no outlet to get higher returns for the wheat/barley grower. Low Board returns can never explode into the alternative....exporting.

Cattlemen enjoy domestic priced wheat/barley for their feeders. They benefit from the fact that if the grain farmer doesn't like what the Canadian feed market offers to them, the grain farmer can eat it, because he sure can't sell into an alternative market. And Red Williams knows it well.

Parsley

[bmj182]

Parsley,
Please forgive me, but do you need
an export permit to export feed
barley?(I've never looked into this), is
the grain really captive as you
suggest? The feedlot I sell to always
pays .10cents/bushell more than the
local elevator plus no elevation,
dockage etc. I don't think that selling
into an export market for feed barley
would net that much more, most of
the U.S. uses corn etc. However if
I'm wrong so be it! Please share your
ideas!

[parsley]

Every bushel of feed barley/wheat that crosses the border needs to be accompanied by a CWB export license. Even a bag...or jail.

Parsley

[charliep]

Perhaps age but I might want to look at Saskatchewan differently.

1) Impact of the method of payment/crow. The government paid farmers to export verus develop domestic markets up to the mid 1990's. Alberta government changed this matrix starting in the late 1980's/early 1990's.

2) Saskatchewan has chosen to diversify in different ways than Alberta. I look at what Saskatchewan has tried in terms of not only pulse crops but other alternatives (corriander, caraway, borage, etc.) with respect from the Alberta side.

3) Saskatchewan is not sitting still on livestock industry iniatives. Late out of the gate in terms of timing but not to be ignored. How many of those cows Alberta sent east are not going to come home? I am also seeing a lot of Alberta ranchers following the cows and selling expensive Alberta/buying Saskatchewan land with price based on productive value.

[les]

If the CWB is so sure they are the only ones that can market our grain then they shouldnt be scared to give us marketing choice.If they are so right and we are so wrong wont we as farmers go running back to them if we cant do better on our own? Why are they so scared??