06-07 CWB Prices

[lesm]

SF3, not sure if you took exchange rates into your calculations but the average was 1.13 for that time period. Could have bought a new 350 Ford diesel and blown it up and not been any worse off.

[bsigg]

wmoebis,

I would like to thank you for costing me $75,000 per year in extra freight costs, for supporting the removal of the crow rate and crow benefit.

It would appear that your not concerned about a farmers bottom line at all. Your plans to eliminate the CWB are no different and the impact will be no different. You want lower prices for farmers.

[nw9flynn]

wmoebis,

i can't beleive you still support the cwb....

they have been a joke these last two years. Even I converted a long, long, time ago...

let those who want to cwb join it in a voluntary pool...let those of us who want to particpate in the open market do so...

[bsigg]

nw9flynn,

How do you suppose a voluntary pool will work?
Harpers own task force report says that a dual-market is not possible.
Harper has not shown a business plan to the CWB nor has he promised financial support to purchase an export terminal or grain elevators—things that are essential to operate in a dual-market, even with them, there is no guarantee that it will survive.

Without elevators or export terminals the CWB would be forced to use their competitions infrastructure to handle and transport the grain, how would that work exactly?

Apparently Harper doesn't think a dual-market will work, he just hopes farmers will fall for it so he can rob them of their marketing agency. It is just the people who don’t want the CWB at all that promote such nonsense, because they know that options 2 and 3 on the ballot are the same thing—an open-market with NO CWB.

[Incognito]

bsigg: You grow 2400 MT that moves by rail? I'm curious how that 2400 MT breaks down by grain. Care to disclose the 75K or is it commercially sensitive?

I see you bot into the lie that the CROW was going to be paid in perpetuity that was fed to you via the pools, the weekly farm rags and the left.

[wmoebis]

It is not that I am pro or anti wheat board or, if I want choice. I don't want, to see big mistakes made that the farmers of today and future farmers of tommorrow will have to deal with, because the best interest of producers wasn't the priority.

If the CWB isn't extracting the top dollar and passing it back to the producer then the Minister, and there have been two(2) pro choice ministers, Mr Strall and Mr Ritz who should be after the board and rolling heads.

The CEO is pro choice as is a lot of the board, if they are sitting there not extracting maximum returns and passing them on to farmers they should be dismissed. As this is not happening I have to believe that our elected and appointed Ministers and board members are working within their mandate and doing their job. I can't believe that Mr Harper and Mr Ritz would be allowing the Board to sell below the world market or keeping those returns from producers. Unless, they have a different agenda in mind.

First off we should be reassured by the Minister, that the Board is extracting max returns or not, then he should make changes if need be this would have to include dismissing all even his appointed members.

This would get rid of any question as to whether we are getting as much, averaged over the year as foreign producers, whether that is USA, Aussie or EU farmers. The responsability to make the assesment lies in Ottawa not with fellow farmers who have family and friends in the USA. or numbers we read in the market posts that say they are getting a higher return for equal product.

The first action Mr.Ritz has taken is try to rid the grain merchants of any liability through bonds and lisencing. I don't feel this is very responsable or in the farmers best interest. Any one who has been ripped of by unliscened buyers or processors will know what I am talking about.

The people at the Wheat Board have a job to do, they are human beings, make mistakes and have to live with those mistakes and seldom here bravo for a job well done. What would it look like if Monday morning, none of them showed up to work, ALL QUIT. Would the grain giants of the world come in and take over. You bet they would, but would it be with our best interest at heart or would it be their shareholders interests in their minds. Anyone that says this would be a dream come true, rethink. That, could be tommorrow AM.

I too made up my mind a long time ago as to the grain marketing situation.

My mind set is this: Yes, there has to be changes made in the whole grain handling and marketing system to maximize the producers returns and to make todays and future farming viable and stay outside corporate farms. If that is changes within the CWB itself then, let it happen. If that is disbanding the CWB, let it happen, but either way it has to be done "in the interest of producers" and with proof and and all avenues carefully reviewed and as a risk management tool, we need a back door if changes fail.

I truely believed (past tense) that Mr. Harper and his appointed Minister would work in the best interest of producers. Either this is not the case, because we are still hearing the USA farmers are getting more for equal comodities or, they have seen that the CWB is doing it's job and have to look at other ways of dibanding farmers so their corporate pals can get their way. Which way is it? They have had lots of time to do their jobs and the CWB according to some is still getting below world/market price.

With the prices that the USA farmers are supposably getting why are the people of the USA still allowing huge farm subsities, while being trillions in debt. Farmers down there should all be sustainable enough that they don't need subsidized and I don't believe the common voters would put up with it or that farmers want govn't hand outs for no reason while their country is running an unrealistic debt. Ther fuel is cheaper their fertilizer is cheaper they sell every bushell for way more money. They live in a dream world and the tax payers give subsities too? Who do I believe Mr Harper and Mr. Ritz or the american farmers.

I was once told by upper management of a government agency,that the very people that were to be looking after the "interest of producers" beliefs were "that producers were only suppliers to the agriculture industry". I remember that because in my mind without producers there is NO industry.

This old cat smells a RAT.

[chaffmeister]

bsigg:

Why can’t a voluntary pool work? Seems that everyone that says it won’t work thinks myopically that this voluntary pool must have a fixed price as an initial payment. Truth is, the CWB has nothing to do with setting futures prices, just its own price relative to futures – therefore, it sets its own basis. So the voluntary pool could be set up so that the Initial Price is an Initial Basis. You join this voluntary pool because you believe that there is good value in the basis – and you price on the futures at your own discretion – or you get the CWB to do it for you.

I find it ironic that CWB supporters (open market detractors) find fault in just about everything the open marketers have to say ----- EXCEPT when they say something that they can use - like that a dual market I not possible. I disagree with the task force – I believe - no, I know - a dual market is indeed possible.

Harper hasn’t shown a business plan because he & Strahl asked the CWB to come up with one (after all, that's their job). Rather than comply, the CWB chose to sic Mr. Measner on the media and anyone esle who would listen, trying to sway public sentiment. The end result was abject embarrassment for the CWB and its supporters.

Harper did not promise financial support to purchase a grain terminal because its not necessary. Tell me; if you think the CWB needs elevators to “compete” with what you call its “competitors”, how is it that A.C Toepfer has succeeded without any facilities? (FYI – A.C. Toepfer is one of the largest commodity trading firms in the world – and it got there without one brick and with no mortar.)

The only reason a voluntary pool or voluntary CWB wouldn’t work is because of a combination of high cost, inefficiency, and/or ineptitude - or all of the above. If this is what you are afraid of exposing, so be it. But at least let’s call a spade a shovel.

[nw9flynn]

a voluntary pool will work just fine. Producers can continue to pool their grain for a below mkt price...be paid in small increments with no regard for the time value of money...not know what the final price will be...and on certain years not be able to deliver all of their production unless they are willing to deliver to the feed mkt..

the current cwb system is a joke...if it is going to stay it needs a complete overhaul...

[Kodiak]

bsigg,

Maybe you can fool yourself, but you can’t fool the readers of Agriville.

Your comments about the Task Force Report are false. You are either deliberately being dishonest, or deliberately misinterpreting the report to support your politically based views.

Or, what I really suspect, you haven’t read it. So, instead of parroting the false information put out by people with a vested interest in false information, try getting a copy and reading it yourself.

http://www.agr.gc.ca/cb/index_e.php?s1=ip&page=ip61030a

Fact: The Task Force did not say a dual market is not possible. Quite the opposite. The report goes into great length as to how CWB II, which would operate alongside the rest of the trade, could function competitively. What the Task Force said, was that a monopoly cannot exist within an open market. Quite a straightforward and logical statement.

Fact: The Task Force Report explains how the CWB could operate without grain handling assets. In fact it suggests that with the over capacity in our system, the CWB may have an advantage over those companies with huge investments in their own handling system.

The CWB has 70 years of customer relations behind it, and a proportion of loyal farmers who would seem to support it no matter what its success in the marketplace. Why do you have so little faith?

[TOM4CWB]

wmoebis,

The Aussie Barley system for 2007 is a very good example of working pools and cash prices that maximise grower returns.

The ABB barley pool closed at the end of September 07, and returns over $430/t for malt and $410 for feed barley.

Many barley growers in Australia say they did even better than this on the cash market!

AND what did CWB customers get?

The "single minded" bunker mentality of 8 elected Farmer owned Directors has killed the CWB. NOTHING to do with PM Harper... Minster Strahl or Ritz. They have 0 control over what the CWB does. Goodale set it up that way in 1998.

This is Goodales Revenge... get Harper et el blamed for everything he failed to do... yet had the obligation to rectify. Remember the Western Grain Marketing Panel? 1996?

We are not even close to implementing this 1996 industry consensus report... because Goodale screwed up the CWB Act in 1998.

In Edible beans we have pool that operate on a contact only base. They are functional and operate with integrety.

The CWB CAN/COULD do exactly the same... IF they were not so Cotton Picken Lazy!

[Kodiak]

bsigg and Chaffmeister,

I realize it might be just semantics, but for clarity I think the Task Force did the right thing by being explicit and descriptive about the terms it used. But as you can see, no matter how clear, there are some people who will only believe what they want to believe.

From the Task Force Report, Chapter 2, titled:

"What marketing choice means"

"....."Marketing Choice" is a better term to describe the new environment than "dual marketing". The latter term implies to some that the existing marketing approach (a CWB with monopoly powers) could co-exist with an open market approach. This is not possible. Marketing choice implies an open market in which CWB II, as an entity operating in that open market, will be a vigorous participant through which producers could voluntarily choose to market their grain."

[chaffmeister]

Kodiak:

You're absolutely right. And I know better - I've actually read the Task Force Report cover-to-cover, albeit a long time ago now.

Seems like I've heard for so long now (over and over) that the Task force said a dual market wouldn't work that I didn't even think of correcting the statement - it seems easier to just counter it.

I'll try to get more sleep and be more alert next time.