read CWB story in today's National Post

[Vader]

TOM4CWB,

Perhaps you missed my post on the other thread so here goes again,

posted Oct 26, 2002 6:50
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOM4CWB,

Help me understand what you are saying about Columbia grain.

How many tonnes/bushels of grain did you sell? What location did you deliver to? What grade did they assign? Was you grain graded in Canada and if so what grade was assigned? How much was your check for?

[Everest]

Vader,

Here is a question YOU did not answer. I know you didn't miss it, but here it is again.



posted Oct 25, 2002 19:09
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Vader,

You say, "Anyone can market into the US and beat the CWB average. ANYBODY!!"

You seem quite emphatic about it. And I agree with you 100%.

Canadian farmers can beat it. US farmers too.

That is why on this side of the border a majority of farmers support a voluntary CWB. As you say, an open market delivers more money than the CWB single desk.

Your observation is absolutely bang on.

So why, as it seems, do you support and insist on a policy of strict adherance to the monopoly mantra?

Sincerely,
Everest

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

AS I stated earlier,

I have exported 1, 3CWRS, 1CWES, and 1CPS, and since I did the buy-back on all but the Certified seed, the buy-back requires the grain to be sold to the CWB, which requires it be graded in Canada.

When I sold these wheat products, to Columbia Grain at Meriwether MT., they were always graded my the MT. state official grader, load by load.

I sold about 20,000bu, worth a good sum, enough that FIDP complained that I could not get the prices I did, that these sales inflated my margins for FIDP/AIDA coverage... even though all the income was reported correctly for income tax, as required by the Cdn. CCRA.

As I indicated to you earlier, I was paid the posted price at the Columbia grain elevator, in US$, and recieved nothing more than US growers recieved during this time period.

And during 1997,98,99... the CWB was complaining about the glut of wheat on the world markets... including high US stock levels, which the CWB complained were dragging down Canadian wheat prices.

Yet I was simply paid US Seattle export price, and it did not matter that my wheat was consumed domestically in the US PNW, I recieved world export price.

During these three years the CWB WAS undercutting the US of A in the US domestic market. I recieved buyback profits which meant that the CWB was selling for less than the pooled price, at some points at the initial price.
Therefore the pecuniary benefit enuring to the applicant explains why the buy-back cannot be CWB Part IV licensing.

NO Where in the CWB Act does it enable the CWB to PAY ME for issuing an export license to me.

What the CWB is doing is wrong, and your saled dept, knows full well what they are doing is wrong, with regard to PART IV.

Further as I stated before, the selling price for my grain, was never even disclosed to the CWB, and was not part of the information flow back to either CCRA or the CWB, the sales value reported was the Buy-back price, not what I recieved from Columbia Grain.

Again, the CWB sales Dept. knows this does not match Part IV requirements, yet the CWB does not care what I get in the US, they have the Producer Direct Sales Price, and that is it; again not consistant with Part IV of the CWB Act.

By Law the CWB is required to maintain a North American price, which means the price inside and outside Canada MUST remain the same, again proving the CWB Part IV is not the buy-back.

If I do not offer my grain to the CWB, by Sections 32 or 39, then the CWB has no duty or obligation to market it. It is that simple. Before I offer my grain to the CWB, it is no different than Creston or Ontario grain that the CWB issued free export licenses for.

You already knew all of this Vader.

[Vader]

We all seem to be holding our cards very close to our chest.

What I am trying to get at is who sells their grain to US customers at a higher price, TOM4CWB or the CWB.

It is very hard to say since neither one seems willing to divulge this information directly, instead implying that these prices are posted and anyone can find them for themselves.

At some point in time both parties must lay their cards on the table and the answer will become self evident.

I simply believe as a basic economic principal that the more sellers of a commodity that there are the more cheaply the buyer will be able to acquire that commodity.

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

THE CWB has forgotten one very important thing... Marketing.

Who exactly is responsible for the CWB's Marketing decisions? Especially sales timing?

If I sell at the wrong time, and if I sell something I do not even control, then I could be in a very bad position.

SOME years will work out OK... BUT this year is an example of exactly why the CWB MUST respect the individual's right to determine when exactly the CWB should sell that individual's wheat or barley.

Cost of production, security of this production's supply, and the need for survival of the supplier... are big factors in what determines what a customer is willing to will pay for a product.

[TOM4CWB]

I have to leave my comments on this thread on two points -

one - parsely is effecting a selective illusion regarding the assumption that the CWB does not have the requirement to have the buyback program. On the contrary, as I have explained on previous threads, the CWB has the legislative and regulatory requirement to capture any pecuniary benefit that exists as a result of having a single desk. It's that simple. I have asked parsely to come up with a different idea to meet this requirement, and there has been silence on that question.

two - tom4cwb mentioned on another thread that for every tonne he ships into the US, it pushes one more US tonne out to the export market. This is the essence of the having the buyback program and part of the reason a dual market wouldn't work. There is a direct result of his actions.

IN fact, when we did face a cap on exports to the US not that long ago, his cargos would tally up against that total. He captured that nearby market, leaving more distant (read more costly) markets for other pool participants. Because the CWB had in their marketing plan to sell to the cap in the US, the equivalent amount of his cargo then would have to be sold to other markets by the CWB, in competition with the US grain he displaced. This is not a recipe for higher prices overall.

One tonne or one hundred tonnes may not make a difference. But they all add up.

Tom

[Vader]

tom4cwb,

It is totally ridiculous to say that the cwb ignores marketing. That would make as much sense as for me to say that you ignore farming. You might want to invest a few dollars in a University course called Logic 100.

Did you see the response in the wheat complex around the time the cwb withdrew from the market. The market went up - a lot. I'm not saying that the cwb was entirely responsible but when you market all of Canada's wheat the world watches what you do. Do you think that the world watches how you market your grain tom4cwb?

[parsley]

thalpenny,

The pecuniary benefit is defined very clearly in 14(b). It is a tariff and every Exporter is subject to the 14(b) Tariff and it is determined as follows:.

The Tariff = World Price minus Price
Inside Canada= $0.00

$0.00 because the price inside and outside Canada is the same because of NAFTA.

This $0.00 tariff is what the legislation requires everyone to pay, but the CWB Backroom boys and the Single Deathskers couldn't accept what the law says for Westerners as well as everyone else, so every applicant inside the Designated area is denied an export license while those outside pay zippo and truck south.

Every exporter inside the Designated Area is TOLD to do a buyback by the backroom boys(not the legislation) and they calculate the buyback as follows:

Marketprice - InitialPrice =$Variablecost

NOTHING in the legislation requires producers to do the buyback. The reason you keep dancing around the issue, is because you know that Parliament doesn't require a buyback, only Board policy
does. Not being upfront with farmers will destroy the Board

Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

Personal responsibility will always create more efficiency and wealth than any other system... you can take that to the bank...

Sticks and stones...

Just take a look at the difference between SK. and AB.

Which province has created more wealth over the last 30 years?

Vader, we all make the beds we lie in, and we all must live with ourselves after we pronounce our "wisdom".

I for one will always respect my neighbours right to property, even if I could get more for my own possesions if we combined both together!

We have co-operation... and the benefits of co-operation far outweigh any prosperity created by confiscation greed and deceit.

This is why AB. farmers got all emotional and went to prison today, they co-operated to build a stronger and better future for our next generation!