WHAT IS A DUAL MARKET?

[parsley]

thalpenny, there are questions that really need answering.

We want to know about EMFA stats. We want to know about privacy of producer buyback information, about the CWB given orders about barley by the Federal Government. We want to know why the EMFA info wasn't made available to farmers. We want to know why the licensing costs for all of Canada is taken out of the pool accounts, when the legislation says that it cannot be. We want you to respond to Chaffmeister's comments on demmurage. Why did the CWB tell organic producers that they couldn't get no-cost export licenses unless there was a change in legislation? and on and on. Go through the threads.

If you do not wish to answer them as a Moderator,.... after all this is your personal volunteer time, (and you cannot be expected to respond to questions you judge valueless),... perhaps you could arrange for someone from the CWB who would be willing to respond to them. Would that be possible Thalpenny?

Producers feel "Producer Concerns" have been ignored by the CWB. This is not acceptable.

If the CWB wants to survive at all, there must be some accounting .....Explaining. The farmer-guy who gets to pay eventually gets the say. Or he quits paying.
Hope this suggestion will be considered.
Parsley

[parsley]

Tom4cwb - don't confuse price pooling with single desk selling. Price pooling can exist in an open market, however single desk selling cannot. This is the crux of the issue.

If farmers want to get rid of the advantage of single desk selling, which provides market power for farmers, that is the issue proposed by a dual market. The flaw in the dual market argument is as you've presented - many people talk about voluntary price pooling when the true issue at stake is the single desk authority.

Regarding the numerous requests for information on this site, the CWB Board of Directors have adopted a Disclosure policy. Perhaps the best avenue for seeking some of these requests would be for the interested parties to request them from the corporate secretary. This way, the appropriate costs for the research and compilation of this info would accrue to the user who requested it.

The producer direct sale information is treated as confidential on a transaction basis. In aggregate, as was the information we put out regarding organic, the information isn't compromising anyone's position. There is much more detailed information put out, such as the volume sold doemstically - one can extrapolate the volume of business done by a particular company and approximate their volume of business, for example.

The PDS information, or any information from the CWB relating to sales is never sold.

I'll check on Chaffmeister's comments on demurrage ...

Tom

[AdamSmith]

You are right about one thing Tom, there are only two choices single desk (monopoly) or open market (free market).
But that does not mean a voluntary pooling entity such as the CWB or whatever else you might want to call it can not exist within a free market system. Whether the CWB could survive and function within a free market system is really a red herring argument. Of course it could if the people who manage it are creative and energetic and the service that they provide is of value, there will be a demand for that service. But if the service you provide is inherently unatractive and your preformance is less than to be desired, probably the CWB would one day cease to exist.

What I believe is that you have already made up your minds that the service that you could provide would be so sub par that your demise is inevitable.

What does this say about the people who operate the CWB today? What does this say about you and your abilities Tom?

When you insist on the preservation of your monopoly to survive and be relevent, what I hear is you really are a bunch of low rent marketers and the only way people will deal with you is if their forced to (that jail thing ya know).

The only evidence of an advantage to single desk selling comes from studies commisioned by the CWB themselves. If you want any thinking person to take what the CWB say's seriously is to put your evidence and all the information to support that evidence up to peer review. If two or three other independent economists draw the same results from the information it might have credibility. Until then it's just very expensive propoganda.

One last question Tom, When are the Boards operatives going to figure out that the more money and time spent on propaganda the greater you disapproval numbers will grow?

And doesn't anyone at 423 Main question the wisdom of spendings millions in self promotion when farmers are struggling to the degee they are today? I know that was two last questions not one, but what the hey!

AdamSmith

[TOM4CWB]

To Tom Halpenny and the CWB,

I know that you believe this has been really tuff medicine to swallow.

I know that in a truly democratic and free country, we would not even be required to ask these questions.

Please tell me why Western Canada cannot be like Ontario, at least for a trial?

We are cynical for good reason.

1. No-cost export licenses for Seed barley and wheat.

2. No-cost export licenses to Manufactured feed.

3. Creston farmers being issued no-cost export licenses, for the best reason yet, they could get more money and better service from their US brothers who gave fair value for the grain they recieved!

Please allow us to be human beings, and allow us to use our gifts, or is this control issue so important that you cannot free us from our chains?

If this is the case, then shouldn't a cost of production formula be implemented, and have the Canadian government buy our wheat and barley outright instead of pretending that it is still farmers produce, when it is really not?

Can you understand why we are bitter, please try, we don't hate you personally, we just hate what is happening to our communities, and we feel the CWB is at least partially responsible.

Is what I am saying unreasonable?