• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CWB PROs

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    ChuckChuck;

    THis is a laugh.

    "The key difference between the
    CWB system and a multiple-seller
    system is the ability to price
    discriminate. In the absence of
    constraints on the quantity of feed
    barley, 6-row malting barley, and 2-
    row malting barley available for sale
    iii
    by Canada’s producers,

    the law of
    one price must hold for all
    international and domestic barley
    sales in a multiple-seller
    environment.

    In the model used,
    multiple sellers were assumed to be
    fully competitive, and this
    competition resulted in one market
    price for feed barley and one market
    price for malting barley at any point
    in time, which is a characteristic of
    all competitive markets."

    Talk to Monsanto. They sell their product at $10/L and $4/L. Now if that isn't price discrimination...

    And guess what... I paid both of these prices myself this year... and applied them to kill our weeds.

    Price Discrimination is normal in almost every business today, and the "law of
    one price" is the exception far more than the rule.

    I don't know if you saw this CHuckChuck...

    I think it might add a little perspective to the U of S view of the world!

    What determines a business success?

    Suppose that in 1972, someone had asked you to pick the five companies that would provide the greatest return to stockholders over the next 20 years. Conventional economic theory would be a guide, so how would you approach the assignment?

    In order to create prosperity, the companies we pick should have some sustainable competitive advantage, and something that:
    a) distinguishes this organization from others in the business;
    b) creates value for the industry it is involved in;
    c) provides a service that is not easily copied.

    Conservative economic strategy would have us pick the “right” industries as step one.
    The 5 strategies for fundamental success would be:
    i) difficult entry for new competitors;
    ii) a product or service that isn’t easily substituted;
    iii) low market power of the buyers;
    iv) low market power of the sellers; and
    v) cooperation between the competitors.
    Economies of scale, patent protection, (a monopoly) and the largest market share would help a good selection process.

    What would have been the best business strategy between 1972 and 1992? If we had taken conventional wisdom… and turned it on it’s head… we would have done the BEST!

    Here are the results, the top 5 stocks, in reverse order:

    Plenum Publishing, (15,689%)
    Circuit City, (16,410%)
    Tyson Foods, (18,118%)
    Walmart, (19,807%)
    Southwest Airlines, (21,775%)

    Yet; Airlines, Retailing, Food processing, and publishing industries were awash is bankruptcies and massive competition during this time period.

    Therefore… what made these five good businesses and what sustained their advantage?

    It was not market power, technology, patents, or strategic position…

    It was how they handled their work force.


    CHuckChuck... I think even you would have to admit the CWB has done a VERY poor job in handling it's work force... the grain growers of western Canada!

    Comment


      #17
      I will note the study makes very little reference between the domestic market and the CWB export market. In farmer terms today when they are given choice, they are able to review multiple price offers on any given day and select the highest price. The best example is feed barley - how much is sold to the export market? Under what condition are farmers are farmers willing to deliver? On the last point, the only major deliveries of feed barley to the export market have occurred when the CWB and one or more grain companies have cut deals to come up with effectively a daily cash price for export feed barley (or at least a price guarantee.

      On the malt side, there are really very limited markets the CWB sells too. Domestic maltsters, US and China. Why couldn't an open market sell equally as effectively to these markets as the CWB? What services does the CWB provide the malt market other than some market development and a gate keeper on price? The CWB is not involved in selection. They are not involved in sourcing. In most cases they are not involved in sales. What value (from a farmer perspective) do they bring to the table?

      Comment


        #18
        Who got the the plaque?


        ---------------------------------------
        ! 2006 CWB GOLD AWARD
        ! singlicala-deskoretta
        ! CUSTOM SPUN
        ! REPORT SPECIALIST
        ! CHAMPIONS
        ---------------------------------------

        Comment


          #19
          Someone do the math. Take the final payments from the last number of years and deduct the premiums the study says are accrued to the CWB. End result under this senario is no one would grow barley. If there is anything we can learn from all the studies done on the benefit or cost of the CWB is that there is biases on both sides of the issue to get the end result that is desired. In the end people will only believe the study they want to believe.

          Comment

          • Reply to this Thread
          • Return to Topic List
          Working...