CWB has to go

[Fransisco]

Funny, the last time I heard of somebody selling a crop and winding up owing money to a "company" it was the CWB. Under their fixed price contract.

[per]

I sure hope your old and near retirement Burbert.

[furrowtickler]

most old farmers own all the land they farm and have no machinery payments, not hard to make a living. Back yourself up thirty years and run todays numbers, and then tell me if you could survive with CWB grains?
Still not one logiacl response to the huge differences in prices!

[parsley]

You are spot-on, furrowtickler. The money for Board grains doesn't materialize.

Non-established farmers cannot make normal farm Mammas content living on the returns of Wheat Board grains. Nor make the farm payments. Or pay the phone bill, or pay for tuition for the kids.

And Mammas depending on having their expectations and dreams fullfilled via Wheat Board initial and final payments, are usually one of a kind...deaf, dumb, or blind. Not much of a choice for farm boys going-a-courting in 2008.

(Discounting, of course, the odd exception,.... the occassional silly one, gone head over heels, that would live in a grainery. lol)

Parsley

[jensend]

if the cwb disappears agri-ville will roll over on its back and die!

[BreadWinner]

Do you know what the best thing is about being a young farmer today?

Year by year the board supporters are dissapearing and eventually all those ballots being sent to the old folks home wont matter. Time is againt you Burbert, I will eventually see a free market system and if I loose the farm it will at least by my doing not the incompetance of the GREAT C.W.B.

[bucket]

jensend

Actually,imho, agriville will be where people come to locate and discuss prices and strategies to get even better margins out of their grain. The cwb is going to its own demise because they have not responded to the needs of the people they are to represent. They could be setting up a better more transparent pooling system that would, in fact, gain farmers support but they choose not to.

Farmers have made incredible changes to their farms in 20 years and the cwb continues to muddle along in its archaic system.

The question this year for the cwb is:

How do we get grain from farmers with such poor prices when every other commodity can or will pay their bills. The bins are locked. They can get the first 500,000 to 1MMT without asking but the rest might be a little more difficult!

[parsley]

jensend,

Isn't Commodity Marketing about learning, ...about sharing,... about how to get the most for your grain? About talking with peers? Learning about how markets are fluctuating in the world? Tuning in to a debate or argument, too.

Open marketers view the CWB simply as an impediment to marketing. Once it's gone, probably AVers will discuss wheat as they now discuss canola.

Do Monopolists view the Commodity Marketing site simply as a vehicle to argue to preserve the monopoly? Will you click off AV when the Wheat Board is no longer a monopoly?

I would hazard a guess that most farmers will want to continue to e-coffee every day to trade news. To touch base with other farmers. And argue a bit. And have some sport. And laugh.

I would sorely miss not reading the postings every day. Even from the Care Home, breadwinner. lol

Parsley

[jensend]

could be but at least half the posts are bitching about or defending the wheat board. if joe dales loses that traffic this board is toast. that's marketing.

[parsley]

That's a little like taking the notion that if the CWB lost its' sales to Iraq, it's toast, because there are no potential sales.

Is that how you view the world jensend?

Audieces, and viewers and consumers and buyers are not fixed. They are fluid.

Lot more contributors now, on AV, than when Tom4CWB and I first began posting, many moons ago. charliep will notice the difference. Free-marketer thinking wants to talk, and exchange, and interplay.

Farmers can now disperse information on AV, in seconds, compared in the past, to, say, the CWB dispersing a quartery info bulletin to farmers.

We've finally moved from top down information dispersal to instant farmers sharing directly.

I like it. Do you?

Parsley

[agstar77]

The bitching will continue even if the CWB is gone, since there will be a need for several new groups to take over the function it carries out now.

[parsley]

Will it be the same as those overwhelming oats growers that now do the 24/7 bitching agianst the two plus groups that took over the Wheat Board's oats-marketing functions, now that oats is out of the Board?


Do you hear the tirades, and demonstrations and dissension of the oats growers in your ears? Oh, oh.

Hopefully...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20021211/ai_n12661848

Good Luck.

Parsley

[cottonpicken]

Its going to be a glorious shark feeding frenzy.

I may have to park the tractor,pull up a seat at the computer and start buying all this cheap wheat the marketing guru's are willing to offer at such ridicuoluos prices.

Yes,most of the posters on this thread.

Agriville will become much more entertaining once we get the cwb gone because everybody will be talking about what their marketing plans are.

Whoops!

Seems most stopped talking about that,for some reason?

My chops are dripping.

[parsley]

Keep it up and they'll soon be bleeding.
LOL

Parsley

[charliep]

Cottonpicken

Just curious why in all other markets you are
willing to go for the gold so to speak and in wheat
you are willing to accept average? The CWB claim
to fame is being able to average sales over a 15 to
18 month period. Their premium is being able to
sell for consistently higher prices on a daily basis
via their market power and ability to use single
desk to price discriminate (page 43 annual report).
In an open market, you will choose when to
market and have your cash sales related to actual
business up the line to a exporter/domestic buyer
- not the relationship to the most recent PRO.
Cost of managing risk will come down.

So to look at the question in the title, you seem to
indicate for this debate the CWB should stay. Why?
To protect poor marketers from making bad
decisions?