CWB supporters please help me out with something

[TOM4CWB]

Chaff;

Durum is not blended into CWRS in Canada... but CWRS/DNS is blended into Durum at pasta mills.

07-08 Durum/DNS spreads are so high... because DNS was not avaliable to blend... to arbitrage DOWN durum prices... when customers bought the durum/DNS for pasta production.

$25/bu DNS... plus basis running $3-5/bu over the MGE futures.... and then when DNS ran out... Durum maintained $30/bu... cause of Desert Durum and pockets of remaining stocks saved for sales...

Does the CWB actually claim to take credit... for the consistant high ($30-35/bu) durum prices... US growers got?

[Fransisco]

Those are some impressive numbers chaff!

[TOM4CWB]

Chaff;

The CWB can keep its 'single desk' by allowing 'slipage'... through the 49th... that in turn keeps the faith that mafia tactics/corruption... are the best long term strategy to keep power.

Same with seed growers and no-cost CWB export licenses... and CWB manufactured feed exemptions.

Folks who won't break the law... are no threat... and those who will... can cash in so there is no reason to change the CWB!

The ultimate frustration... tear your country apart... from the inside out... with corruption.

[mustardman]

walk maybe you'd better take a look around Sask. 80% of the peas 99% of the lentils and 99% of the chicpeas are produced Here. Why is that once you hit the border you guys can't grow these ? Maybe if you changed your government once every century you'd also change your farming practice.....

[Fransisco]

Of which you can deliver and get paid for 100% of them, 100% of the time.

[sawfly]

chaffmiester
yes pretty impressive numbers

my numbers were shooting from the hip ,looks like i didn't do too bad.

but you missed the point i was trying to make.
that being the relationship between HRS and durum prices considering their ending stocks to use ratios

how does any grain, in this case durum maintain a preium to Hrs with a 40% -50% carry out. what was the average CO for hrs 20% ? you probably have that # too

in other words what grain can maintain its price with supplies that burdensome.

Name one other grain that can do that

the only way is if you have the board saying we are not selling for less

market power exists in durums case anyway

admittedly the competition also benifits

with COs like that any other grain in an open market would be 2$bushell

[vvalk]

Sawfly. Just keep your head in the sand some more. Have you not noticed the canola numbers. The largest crop by 30% ever and look whats happening. Crush is up, exports are up and so is the price in the last 2 months. There is good carry in the market and YES you can sell all of your canola and pay your bills. Imagine getting paid for storage. What a concept! Even with all the increase movement there still will be a 25% carry over but the market is paying you for it and you have the choice whether or not to sell it all or gamble. Just think how big the carry over would have been if the CWB were in charge of canola. 40 to 50%. Think of the reprecussions of that. The price would be way lower in new crop and this would translate into all other COMPETING crops. They would drop as well. Board supporters do not understand the market. When there is that much carry over in certain commodities, its that much less pressure of others. Look at the battle for acres in the USA every spring. Wouldn't work if there was 40% carry over in corn or soybeans. Just remember too that the board is only calling 60% and 80% this year. That 20 to 40% carry over is added to last years.

[charliep]

Interesting that everyone wants to talk durum - the
CWB poster child. Just a comment that wheat
acreage in general is coming down - a good sign
that wheat returns per acre/fit with a farming
business is less than the non board crops which
someone seems to indicate should be less than
$2/bu. Close to zero growth in world durum
demand (how much more pasta can people eat/no
new uses) and only one inconsistent market with
volumes based on weather (North Africa with the
market couscous).

From a price risk management direction, the CWB
has shown zero creativity and innovation in durum.
The zero use of the durum over the past 3 years
reflects the $2/bu (a common number) discount for
the The CWB needs to follow the example they use
with malt barley and the cash plus (match farmer
contracts against sales).

I also find the comment on Saskatchewan pulses
dominance interesting. I suspect you would find
that several Albertans (including myself) that would
agree with you. I note Alberta dominance in
Canada in terms of cattle (where we have invested
our efforts) and that brings up barley - the CWB
crop that competes in a 80 % open market. For
facts, Saskatchewan grows about 40 % of western
Canada barley. About 1 mln tonnes is shipped to
Alberta to feed our cattle industry (not the cattle or
hog industry in Saskatchewan). About 50 % of malt
capacity resides in Alberta). Things may have
changed but Saskatchewan to grow about 75 % malt
varieties (most impacted by the CWB sales desk
decisions about how much malt barley to export).
But I guess selling more barley to the export
market market at higher prices than feed would
create problems Saskatchewan farmers hate -
paying taxes.

[Jagfarms]

If you were to defer a grain check what would you
defer? A CWB board grain or check from a special
crop?

I feel a lot safer deferring my CWB check.

We had sold some lentils one time and the place
went belly up and it was a pretty scary few months
waiting to see if the check would come and to
wonder what % pay out it would be when it got
there. We were lucky we got paid the whole
amount. Some other people I know were not so
lucky with their canary seed they did not receive any
thing and they were out a lot of $$$$.

On our farm out of the 11 crops we grow some
years Durum had the biggest acreage out of them
all. It was about 60% durum and the other crops
were divided into the other 40% so I would NOT say
that durum is the number 11 crop on our farm. We
grow durum over HRS on our farm because it yields
higher on our farm and is worth more most of the
time and has the same input cost.

When we sit down to figure out a return on the 11
crops after they are all sold into the market. Durum
is most likely in the top 3 out of 11. Even if were to
sell every thing else at the top of the markets.

We do not know what the top 2 crops will be it
changes from year to year. The last couple of years
lentils have been number one on our farm followed
by durum. We have a few different types of lentils
reds, large greens ect.

[Jagfarms]

Found this on the web

"– An Alberta government report has used false
assumptions and selective data to undermine the
value of the CWB, its president and CEO Ian White
said today. “This study is badly flawed,” White said.
“The authors have made sweeping assumptions to
create comparisons so simplistic that they are
meaningless.” The report, commissioned by the
Alberta government and prepared by Informa
Economics, was released last week. It calculates on
page 34 that the CWB earned significant premiums
(prices above market values) of up to $33 per tonne
in 10 of 11 markets studied, but then uses a
number of incorrect assumptions to discount them.
The report wrongly assumes that all wheat is the
same and that overall market share is what
determines the CWB’s ability to exercise market
power, White said. It ignores the crucial fact that
the wheat market is not homogeneous, but made
up of many segments that purchase specific kinds
of wheat. In certain segments, the CWB will hold a
very large market share for a particular kind of
wheat and thus earn substantial premiums. Because
of its flawed premise, the report selectively focuses
on only 11 of the 60 to 70 actual wheat markets the
CWB sells into each year – rejecting important,
high-value markets like Canada, the U.S. and
Europe. Based on false assumptions about what
grades or qualities of wheat these markets were
buying from Canada, the report then wrongly
adjusts and discounts the higher prices achieved by
the CWB in 10 of the markets. “This adjustment
does not reflect how grain marketing works in the
real world,” White said. “Wheat is different, markets
are different and our strategy as a single seller
takes advantage of exactly that fact.” The report
also blatantly misuses grain handling and
transportation data published by the respected
Quorum Corporation, which produces the quarterly
Grain Monitor report under contract to the federal
government. Quorum emphasizes in its reports that
efficiency comparisons cannot be made between
wheat and canola based on its calculations of
export basis and producer netback for each crop.
Yet that is precisely what Information has done.
Examples of other flaws include: • Lack of
acknowledgement that the CWB’s dominant
position in the durum market supports the overall
price structure.• Comparisons to U.S. elevator
prices, which are based on a different set of market
factors than Canadian wheat returns. American
wheat has an intrinsic price advantage due to
factors such as the dramatically lower proportion
exported from the U.S. (40 per cent compared to 80
per cent in Canada). This means less U.S. grain is
sold into diverse markets outside North America
where prices tend to be lower and transportation
logistics more expensive. • Handling system costs
are counted twice in the comparison between U.S.
and Canadian returns for wheat and durum. Farm
gate values that already account for system costs
are used, then a canola-versus-wheat comparison
is added that also accounts for those same costs. •
Failure to account for the CWB’s ability to assure
customers of long-term and consistent-quality
supply, which is a valuable competitive market
advantage, attributable to the single-desk
structure.• Failure to acknowledge the dramatic
differences in U.S. and Canadian rail capacity. The
study also fails to account for the important role
played by the CWB in keeping regulated rail freight
rates in Western Canada lower than American rates.
Based on all of the above, the CWB completely
refutes a key finding of the report that an open
market would generate significantly more revenue
for Prairie farmers than the single-desk system. “It
is ironic that this false conclusion is being
circulated in a year when the CWB marketing
approach has delivered extraordinary returns to
farmers,” White said. “We’ve conservatively pegged
that benefit at $560 million for 2007-08.” White
said the CWB will conduct further, more in-depth
analysis of the report’s methodology and
conclusions and intends to share those results
when completed. Controlled by western Canadian
farmers, the CWB is the largest wheat and barley
marketer in the world. One of Canada’s biggest
exporters, the Winnipeg-based organization sells
grain to over 70 countries and returns all sales
revenue, less marketing costs, to farmers. "