CWB Vote! Where are all the CWB Supporters?

[mustardman]

Chaff

It looks by Charlies numbers that the numbers are tied at 45% each.


If there are only two questions.

Plebiscite Question #2 should not be there.

How can you have an effective monopoly if you have 10 thousand farmers ALSO selling and willing to undercut you?

Also how can you have a web site dedicated to Barley Plebiscite Vote and the first thing you see on the site is the Fed. Govt stating that they are committed to " marketing choice",
Where Is The democratic Neutrality in that?

Kinda of like going to Election Canada website and finding out they are determined to have Conservatives in power.


One question Chaff, I know you have said you don't farm , so what makes it so interesting to you to post thread on an issue that does not affect you?

[charliep]

Just highlight the survey was of permit book holders. I also note the Alberta numbers. 50 % of western Canadian barley is grown here.

Mustard - If I remember right, you don't grow barley. Why your interest in the plebescite?

[parsley]

mustardman, there are 10,000 farmers selling feed wht/bly to the feed mills. Are they undercutting each other? If they are, why doesn't the CWB market the grain to the mills FOR THE FARMER?

If this is making the monopoly ineffective, why does the CWB permit it? The CWB sells feed wht/bly.

Busy. Later
Parsley

[mustardman]

Charlie, You ask why I am interested in the Bly plebiscite.

Because the next questions coming will be on wheat marketing and judging by the questions posed in this plebiscite.....
And the number of threads on this site that are voting #2, I am sure that Question #2 will win the most votes.
So of course Chuck will give us a wheat plebicite and again Question #2
will raise its ugly head.

[charliep]

Fair enough. Everyone has to realize that the wheat and barley markets are fundamentally different in many ways. A system that is best for wheat may not work for barley and vice versa.

Wheat is also facing many other issues including new ethanol demand (with impact on variety selection), changes to CGC grading (KVD, HVK, falling number testers, etc). I think these issues will have far more impact on the wheat markets long term than medium term decision on the CWB.

Political realities over the next year will also change - federal election possibility.

Barley may be the first step to trying something different and an example of how wheat might be handling (realizing again they are different crops). It is up to the CWB to have the barley model go forward that best reflects how they want to position themselves with wheat. A CWB decision which removes them from the barley market altogether is a very risky one if the open market without a CWB is successfull. Just my two bits.

[chaffmeister]

Mustardman:
The CWB asked the question 2 different ways – the 2-option response and the 3-option response. Why do you think they asked it both ways? I believe it’s simply a matter of “position mining” – they now know which way to ask the question in order to get the response they would want.

<b>That’s the right thing to do if the objective is to manipulate the message.</b>

You give 46% of the guys out there the 3-option question and they vote for the “dual market”. Almost half the guys out there believe it can work. It appears that some support the CWB and figure it can survive in a competitive market. Others support the CWB and fear that it could not survive in a dual market.

So if you ask these same farmers the 2-option question, they go back to their respective corners. The open-minded CWB supporters say, “Well, if my choices are limited to CWB or no CWB, I’ll still go with the CWB”. And the open-minded choice supporters do the same thing – they revert to their preferred choice, an open market.

It all boils down to whether you believe a dual market will work. And since that is a market structure that the government and many producers believe in, it makes sense to include it as an option.


You ask:
“How can you have an effective monopoly if you have 10 thousand farmers ALSO selling and willing to undercut you?”
I think you just answered your own question. But first you are assuming you have an effective monopoly. Where does the CWB have a monopoly in barley? In the Japanese market, we compete head-to-head with the US. (By the way, the US is currently making inroads into the Japanese barley market because the CWB is pretty much out of the market. Still like your “monopoly”?)

You <b>can’t</b> have an effective monopoly if you have choice. The “monopoly” on barley provides little if any benefits (it’s certainly unproven and there’s mounting evidence to the contrary) and it comes with a substantial cost (real numbers the CWB doesn’t seem to want to talk about). Throw in dysfunctional pricing and an inability to stay in the market to take advantage of marketing opportunities (like right now) and I really don’t get the “business case” for supporting the CWB in the barley market.

If you still support the CWB on barley after hearing and reading all the information out there that is screaming against the CWB in barley, then you are making a business decision based on emotion, not logic. Not a good idea.


As for your question concerning my motives in posting here: With all due respect, not sure why this is important. (In fact, it’s not.)
I’ve spent my whole career in this business and have a certain “emotional investment” in it. With what I know and understand, I honestly and sincerely believe the CWB is serving up a serious injustice to the farming community. The CWB is costing the rural community in a very big way – I don’t believe for a minute that it gets premiums on barley, it comes with a substantial cost, it stifles opportunity and growth, it’s pricing policies weaken prices on non-CWB grains – need I go on.

And besides, I’m holding out till the end of this debate in hopes I get the last word in.