cwb Advertising ?

[wedino]

Vader, Please explain why the cwb sees fit be a gold sponser for SARM conventions. Every year, year after year.

Why does cwb see a need to advertise in the Sask Rural Councillor magazine? Six issues a year, full page add, every issue. What does this sponsership & advertising cost the wheat & barley pools?

How much wheat & barley has the cwb ever sold to SARM or Sask municipal reeves, councillors or administrators? As I see it these are the only people who attend the conventions or read the magazines.

[Vader]

lets put it to a vote. Those who want to retain the cwb vote yes, those who are angry and want to get rid of the cwb vote to tie its hands and prevent it from involving itself in anything outside of the pure and simple maketing function and vote no.

[wedino]

Vader, Make the cwb voluntary & I could give a rats a$$ were you spend advertising money. Advertise on the Playboy channel for all I care (you will likely sell as much wheat & barley there as you do to Sask rural local government people).

Are you hung over or did you get hit by a truck or something. You're sure talking funny, like what does voting have to do with spending final payment dollars on advertising?

[TOM4CWB]

Wedino;

You, I and Vader will have a vote! The three of us alone.

Guess what the outcome will be Vader!

Now... this is how many of us felt in the last CWB election... along with Ralphie G... the CWB picked the voters list.

If the single desk monopoly directors DIDN't win... the majority... then we would know something was wrong!

[silverback]

Angry? How about you just explain what purpose it would serve to advertise with SARM? And why would the CWB have to hire a lobbyist to lobby the very people who hired the lobbyist in the first place?

[wd9]

Vader, why not have a vote, and don't give me the 'It's the wording of the question that can't be figured out' line.

Here is your question:

Open market? yes or no

If you truly represented farmers, you would freely accept the accountability associated with representation. Even the government who sort of represents Canadians lets us vote. Grains, Pulse and Oilseed commissions allow refunds if they don't do a good job. Accountability. Membership organizations allow membership numbers to provide accountability.

Allow farmers to actually decide. Voting for a board to destroy a corporation is not accountability - it is litigation for failure of fudiciary responsibility. Otherwise the WCWB (yup the Western Canadian Wheat Board) is merely a government controlled institution.

So, when can I expect the ballot in the mail?

[silverback]

The Soviet Union used to have votes before they split up. That must have been a democracy too, no?

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

Do you remember this?

"wd9, I agree with you about the whole monopoly thing. I do not use that term in regard to the CWB. I know that people find it offensive and that the definition does not fit.

Western Canadian farmers (and the entire grain handling system) must strive to maintain a reputation for a highly differentiated quality product. When it comes to #1 milling wheat and durum we have that to a limited extent. Certainly other countries compete in that market but the supply can be somewhat limited. Hence there is an opportunity to extract a premium. The CWB acting as a single desk seller of this premium product does have the ability to maintain this premium pricing structure.

The CWB does not have a monopoly but they can influence prices in an upward direction. You could argue that they could also influence prices downward and this is true. The question to ask is what motivates the CWB sales department. Certainly they do not answer to shareholders, nor do they work on a quantifiable margin. The problem is the federal government involvement and producers distrust of the feds. If the CWB was completely delinked from the federal government, and there was no minster-in-charge, no spending approvals, no govenment appointees on the board, and the CWB was completely controlled by farmers, then there would be no other conclusion but that the CWB worked only in the producers interest to drive prices upward. The best intentions of the CWB can be to work in the farmers interest and this attitude can be drilled down throughout the organization but the proof is not there as long as the government is involved."



And you VADER said it after WD9 said this:



"Vader, the thing that drives many of us up the wall is the way terms are used by the CWB but are not defined in the real world that way. I hate to get into this one, but there is too much frost to combine till lunch time anyways.

Monopoly: exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action. A commodity controlled by one party.

If wheat was only sold in Canada, and Canada could not import from any other country, only selling Canadian farmers wheat, the CWB has the legal right to charge in pure monopolistic fashion whatever they want because they have a monopoly.

The reality is the CWB is just one of many sellers worldwide and carries no monopolistic power to sell. What producers receive is simply a dollar cost average of all the wheat produced in Western Canada, sold on the open market worldwide as is legislated.

Vader, you shouldn't confuse monopolistic pooling, or the legal right to sell all the Western Canada's wheat and malt barley production with that of a true and real world monopoly. I must say, the CWB spin doctors have always done a good job of this. The CWB doesn't even have a Canadian pooling monopoly as eastern Canada is not included.

If Canada was the only country in the world that produced wheat, and the CWB was the only "seller" of this wheat worldwide, then it would be a monopoly. The only monopolistic action in Western Canada is the pooling, not the pricing. That is a big difference.

True legalistic monopolies scarcely receive less money than an open market system. Sony and Phillips and the compact disk is more than proof enough. A portion of every CD produced and sold in the world S & P get a cut. The problem is the Western CWB is not a true monopoly and therefore is forced to simply be another seller, albeit a big one, its only perceived advantage."



Now the question is, why didn't the CWB stop this waste when the DIrectors KNEW it is pointless to spend money talking about a monopoly that does not exist!

What exactly gives here Vader?

[Vader]

I don't monitor every piece that is published. I don't use the term monopoly.

Single desk selling is the correct term.

What and where the CWB advertises is a staff decision. The board of directors generally decides on the strategic direction only.

[Vader]

wedino, my best guess is that someone has made a judgement call about the readership of the SARM magazine and has decided that the advertising value is worthwhile. I guess the fact that you saw it is a case in point. You are a farmer are you not?

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

I note WD9 said; "Open market? yes or no"

I also note WD9 clearly identified that we are already in an open market, whether the CWB chooses to believe it or not!

Only now the CWB manages a small % of world trade in a couple of products... at the expense and against the wishes of the majority of those who actually produce these products on their farms.

Remember the 20/80 relationship where 20% of grain producers control 80% of the productive assets CWB products grow on...

C(onfiscating)
W(heat)
B(arley)... mother corp. markets.

"Single Desk" and "Monopoly" are directly interchangeable and one is no less or more offensive than the other!

CWB...

Please stop rubbing my face in this garbage, it offends many people who MUST do business with the "single desk monopoly"!

[wd9]

All I want to know is when my ballot is coming?

[Vader]

wd9

There is no ballot in the mail just now and as far as I am concerned you get to vote every four years. Up till now the voters have been very emphatic in their support of single desk candidates.

[TOM4CWB]

Vader;

Good Job... refuse to answer our questions... and insult us on top!

I seem to remember in District 5 that a local Choice Candidate won every round until "star" drop in won it on the last ballot!

True to Goodale plans... of election manipulation of results!

[wd9]

Vader come on, elect a board of directors to achieve an open market?

Corporate governance means the process and structure used to direct and manage the business and affairs of the corporation with the objective of enhancing shareholder value, which includes ensuring the financial viability of the business.

Why not just come clean and say that even if 100% of the farmers voted for open market that the board still due to governance, that the Federal Government is the primary stakeholder, and Corporate Law would not allow an open market? Litigation would ensue against the members attempting such an action.

Just like the Supreme Court said, The WCWB is only responsible to the Federal Government, the primary and only stakeholder.

I guess advertising would be important to protect the primary shareholder in this instance convincing the captive market (farmers) that the WCWB is in their best interest.

Guess my ballot isn't coming in the mail for sure is it?