• 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.

Manitoba CWB Plebiscite results

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

    #31
    Chaffmeister. "Bottom line - your “highly respected ag. economists” may know how to craft detailed theoretical supply/demand charts and sophisticated models, but they have no idea of how grain is traded. If they did, they wouldn’t have been drawn to the conclusions they did. You can be certain that my analysis will not “be equivalent to the work, training and experience of three highly respected ag. economists” because, based on their analysis, I understand the subject matter much better than they do. And I don’t have blinders on".

    Chaff. I am glad you have such confidence in your ability. So since you're so knowlegeble and brilliant what are you doing arguing with the masses on Agriville?

    Since you are raising questions that only Gray and the CWB can answer then I suggest you write them directly and then paste their responses for all to see. It is easy for you to make all kinds of unsubstantiated arguments against the CWB, but unless you are going to offer the arguments to public scrutiny and responses from knowlegeble sources your arguments will hold little weight. Grays paper will be riviewed by his peers.

    Futher the primary resaon why many farmers are critical of the CWB is they only believe in an open market where the CWB does not restrict the rights of farmers and or other grain companies from marketing their wheat and barley. To many it doesn't matter whether the CWB does a good job or not. Their right to choose is paramount. Since this is largely an idelogical and political position it doesn't really matter whether the CWB performs better or not.

    Further, a large percentage of these farmers don't seem to understand the basics of pooling. They are always bringing up the higher prices in North Dakota or here at home to malsters etc.
    assuming that they are missing out on the high spot market prices that are sometimes higher and sometimes lower than the pool return. Many farmers seem to forget or don't know that pooling is a price risk management tool that averages prices out from all our markets for the entire crop year. So why then do they always complain like hell when they see higher prices and then argue that the CWB is not performing. Almost everybody knows that the majority of non board grains are sold at various prices in rising and falling markets and the majority of farmers cannot sell at the peak of the market. Then why would they expect pool returns to reflect the highs of any market? I would encourage readers to look at as many DPC and FPC contract charts as possible on the CWB website to see how pooled prices compare to the DPC and FPC. The most important thing is that farmers can now use these options to lock in higher prices than the pooled price without affecting those who prefer the pooled price and want the benefits of a single desk marketing board.

    Comment


      #32
      CP. Most of what you are asking is answered in Gray's study. The rest can be answered by the CWB. Please raise these questions with the CWB and Gray and paste your questions and responses for all to see.

      Comment


        #33
        chuckChuck:
        You asked: "So since you're so knowlegeble and brilliant what are you doing arguing with the masses on Agriville?"

        It’s a hobby.
        (By the way, knowing more about grain trading than your three wise men doesn’t make me “brilliant” but I’ll take the compliment anyway!)

        Also, you said:
        "Since this is largely an idelogical and political position it doesn't really matter whether the CWB performs better or not."

        You’re kidding, right?! Why would the CWB pay about $100k (I’m guessing) for the U of S study if it wasn’t about doing a good job? The CWB seems to think it matters. Why else would it be trying to prove itself?

        Comment


          #34
          Tom4CWB:

          (reference: see tom's first post on this thread)

          Tom4CWB said;

          The low cost port in Canada... closest to premium markets like Japan, China, and the Asia Pacific growing & profitable markets. Since August 1st 2006, it costs less rail freight to get to Rupert than to Vancouver".

          So if the Asia/Pacific market is so valuable, why do you continue to only PREACH about the US spot values?

          Anyways Tom, can you tell me how many Japanese vessels have loaded out of prince rupert in the last 10 years? Check the monthly load data off the cgc site (oops, this is a government site, so i guess you libertarians will dismiss there numbers as propaganda... right PARSLEY??)

          It appears from the the CGC numbers that the Japanese prefer to take grain out of Vancouver. Also they only buy 1CWRS 13 protein from want I hear. How consistently do you find this quality north of Edmonton? surely not in the Peace region

          Tom, Remember "the customer is never wrong attitude". Perhaps you can convince them to load at Prince Rupert instead of Vancouver. But I hope you are well versed in Japanese culture, so that you don't offend them when you try shipping a 20 tonne container to one of their mills, and the falling number or protein is slightly under spec.

          Comment


            #35
            Charlie:

            Please tell us why you ever accepted a job at the CWB?

            Comment


              #36
              Can you reference me to the part of the study that indicates current domestic feed barley pricing is inefficient? Would your ideal world be one where all barley (including domestic feed both for sale and on farm feeding by the person that grows it) is delivered to the CWB/they participate in the pooling process?

              Comment


                #37
                BennyHin (and Tom):

                China is not considered a premium market – quite the contrary.
                Japan loads in Vancouver because that’s where the trade (exporters) tells them to load; it’s not their choice. Exporters want to use their own terminals (Vancouver) for their own grain.
                Prince Rupert is owned/operated by the Vancouver terminal operators; it's considered “surge” capacity for CWB grains.

                Comment


                  #38
                  An interesting challenge at a point in my life when I needed one. A great learning experience. I have an understanding of the pooling process and was one of the first involved in setting up the model/price forecasting process for the PRO. I was involved in setting out the sales program including all the processes around return to pool tables, priority markets, etc. I have an understanding of how spreads are established.

                  Even more interesting, I was at the CWB (sales area) during the fusarium fiasco and the continental barley market.

                  Interesting enough, I am visible and would not have it any other way. I can be held accountable for what I say/back it up with my name. Would be interesting if others did the same.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    BennyHin,

                    Even if I comment that you were right out of line with your slimey personal question to charliep, somehow, I expect little improvement from you.

                    Parsley

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Chuck Chuck
                      You are under an illusion if you think the DPC and FPC,s are reflective of open market values. When basis is tied to the PRO's it is obvious that the 2 prices (Pool and PPO's)will track closely together. If the CWB truly wanted to they could offer producer payment options that gave most open market supporters what they wanted at no risk to the pool accounts. They wouldn't want to do that because surprise surprise they have found that the PPO's are huge money generators which they can now use to backstop the pool accounts. The question you need to ask is why is the CWB reluctant to offer viable producer options. Maybe it's because they fear the price spread will become too great and pool supporters will start questioning the CWB's performance. The CWB could defuse this debate if they wanted to come to the table. Instead it's my way or no way.

                      Comment


                        #41
                        Craig. If the DPC and FPC aren't working for farmers why are they getting used more and more?

                        Comment


                          #42
                          CP. I didn't say the the domestic open market for barley was inneficient. What I said or should have said was the CWB cannot effectively manage feed barley domestically or internationally because it doesn't control all the supply. Most of the premiums are in malt as a consequence, according to Gray.

                          Comment


                            #43
                            http://www.awb.com.au/NR/rdonlyres/F41B17F4-B8D3-4467-9E02-AADEC063FDD9/0/ITS_Global_AWB_Report.pdf

                            Fig 1.1 of the ITS Global Study on the AWB has an interesting graph on page 12.

                            It compares the AWB pooling price to the CBOT futures.

                            The AWB pooling price is most always higher that the CBOT futures price.

                            In similiar comparative graphs the CWB price pool is rarely above the CBOT futures price. Hence the assumption of CWB supporters that the pooling price is generally lower by average than the CBOT is disproven by the AWB graph.

                            I am sure Chuck can find reasons for this phenomena, but it is interesting to note graph the performance of the AWB when compared to the performance of the CWB pooling prices.

                            Is it possible Chuckeroo that the 20$ a tonne increased handling fees is somewhere in the lower average performance results in CWB returns to the grower?

                            Comment


                              #44
                              Ok Chuckeroo then why not let us export feed barley, if the premiums are in malt?

                              Comment


                                #45
                                CP. I Didn't know that you worked at the CWB. Interesting. So in your opinion is the CWB a benefit or a liabilty to the average farmer?

                                Comment

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