Is the CWB trustworthy?

[TOM4CWB]

Charlie, Lee, and Brenda;

Since March 2001 the Dec. 01 Minneapolis Spring Wheat Contract that the CWB prices our CWRS Wheat has dropped from $3.61/bu to $3.11/bu or down $.50US!!!

The CWB keeps saying that Wheat prices are rising, and that the PRO is legit.

Does the PRO mean anything?

Has the CWB actually even sold one tonne of the 2001-02 crop year CWRS yet?

And yet the market has fallen $.80/bu CAN!!!

Where is the CWB getting its PRO numbers from, guesses?

I believe the CWB is the biggest speculator on the face of this planet, am I not right?

I thought farmers needed risk controlers not risk creators as their marketing partners, or have I missed something?

DO GRAIN PRODUCERS NOT HAVE ENOUGH RISK ON THEIR OWN FARMS, WITHOUT THE CWB CREATING MORE FOR US?

IS NOT SOME OF THE REASON GROWERS DON'T OR AREN'T PRICING NON-CWB GRAINS:

THE CWB, THE MASTERS, ARE SAYING the "PRICE IS GOING UP"

THIS BULLISH MENTALITY, THAT IS NEVER QUENCHED,

THE POOLING ACCOUNTS,

THE MONOPOLY SINGLE DESK:

Are they not designed to feed farmers greed that we can somehow get more by being powerful brokers who can force our consumer to pay more, we can force them to get more,

Isn't this a big reason that growers in Western Canada are poor marketing planners, their mentor (the CWB)being the worst culprit?

I can go around every day saying the price is going to rise for wheat, and techically on the main, I will be right, just like the CWB.

Every day the futures do go up and down, and even though the price didn't settle higher, during the day sometime the futures did trade higher than it was sometime before that day most likely!!!

So the CWB can use this excuse if they want, however, isn't this destructive and hurting Growers?

Really are the CWB PR people not continually feeding on fear and greed, the two worst emotions to market by?

FEAR: that I will miss out on higher prices;

Greed: that I myself can get more by forcing others through my CWB Monopoly without having to work for this higher return.

Now, are the CWB Marketing Masters really our freinds; can we really get something for nothing?

[bbrindle]

Take a look at a wheat price chart to see the drop in prices that tom4cwb is talking about.

Some would argue that farmers who were willing to accept the spring prices could have done a fixed price contract with the CWB. True. The fixed price contract is based on the PRO at the time. That's how they arrive at the basis. This still isn't a true cash price opportunity independent of CWB influence.

I would say the federal government has given the CWB the mandate to speculate with farmers' grain. Some farmers think that is a good thing but more and more are coming to the conclusion that they want to be in control of marketing their own grain.

Watch for the PROs this Thursday, Sept 27th.

[agstar77]

The CWB is more trustworthy than ADM or Louis Dreyfus. At least we have real farmers on the board of directors who care whether wheat prices rise. Large multinationals don't care but they do rely on stooges to try to destroy farmer marketing groups so they can get a larger share of the pie.

[cropduster]

Agstar77 is right when he/she uses the word stooge on the board .It`s true tho` that the CWB has some on it`s board too!Those that want to live in the `cold war era` are welcome to just keep their/your methods/politics to themselves don`t force it on me.It sure is interesting they don`t like free enterprizers forcing their views on them!!!!

[TOM4CWB]

Agstar,

The Multi-nationals have profit centers to be concerned about to star in business!

I would suggest that you and I do as well, or we will not survive.

The CWB however has taken the position that spending my money to brainwash me is a better solution that truly changing and becoming customer driven.

I object!

Long term, if the CWB wants a share of higher priced what markets, Like the US private trade can provide their farmers, then the CWB must change the way they do business.

I understand the CWB will not match PPO sales directly taking a basis charge, instead they return everything to the pool, then sell it.

The CWB must become a facilitator, rather than the bull in the China shop.

Then maybe they could disipline the Multinationals!

The way things are now it appears to me that the Multi-nationals can easily manipulate the CWB and actually use it against "designated area" grain producers!!!

Is this what we are all looking for?

[rain]

The CWB supporters have it in their minds the board is there friend. Maybe it is but they have not really proved it. We all have friends and people we do business with.

We need to look at things differently. I have been using CWB numbers and information for the last two years for my clients. Last year we sold our Canola for $6.75 and our average price for feed barley last year was @2.85 and we carried 20% of last years crop into the current year.

Untill the CWB goes away they are a tool to be used. They have excelllent raw numbers that should be used to make your marketing decisions. We await the PRO this week and decide if we will will continue the fight for malt barley.

Even if the PRO for malt is raised substantialy I would not recomend the malt pool unless the initial is raised as well.

If you have a #2 HRSW it may not be to your advantage to go to the CWB. Tom I don't think it is a case of wether the CWB is Trustworthy, but the fact that Western Canada is short feed grains. Wheat and barley prices are high, maybe not high enough but $4.12 feed wheat and $3.70 feed barley has not been seen for some time.

[rain]

The CWB supporters have it in their minds the board is there friend. Maybe it is but they have not really proved it. We all have friends and people we do business with.

We need to look at things differently. I have been using CWB numbers and information for the last two years for my clients. Last year we sold our Canola for $6.75 and our average price for feed barley last year was @2.85 and we carried 20% of last years crop into the current year.

Untill the CWB goes away they are a tool to be used. They have excelllent raw numbers that should be used to make your marketing decisions. We await the PRO this week and decide if we will will continue the fight for malt barley.

Even if the PRO for malt is raised substantialy I would not recomend the malt pool unless the initial is raised as well.

If you have a #2 HRSW it may not be to your advantage to go to the CWB. Tom I don't think it is a case of wether the CWB is Trustworthy, but the fact that Western Canada is short feed grains. Wheat and barley prices are high, maybe not high enough but $4.12 feed wheat and $3.70 feed barley has not been seen for some time.

[TOM4CWB]

Rain,

The Feed grain numbers you quote are in spite of the CWB and certainly the CWB is not the one offering them.

If the Canadian government really wanted the Monopoly to work for grain producers in the "designated area" it certainly could extract higher prices domestically.

However, this hurts value added, and encourages jobs to be shipped out of Canada.

I am afraid there are so many smoke and mirrors that anyone can create stats to prove their point!

A little freindly competition would do wonders for this system, wouldn't you agree?

[cowman]

TOM:
We don't need a little "friendly competition"...we need to get the government out of the business of selling grain! The domestic feed market operates very well with supply and demand determining price. I suspect if they opened up the borders to a continental market little would change in the amount of grain crossing the border. The Americans have a way of protecting their domestic market from cheap feed grain. And if they can feed all that grain cheaper than here then so be it! Let the market decide!

[cowman]

There is a huge misconception that the federal government runs the CWB. It is just not true, despite the strained linkages others will attempt to present.

There is a legislative framework that enables this organization to exist - not unlike the fact that there is legislation regarding other types of organizations - cooperatives, credit unions and even the federal Bank Act. I don't think anyone automatically stretches it to say the federal government runs those organizations.

A difference in this comparison is the appointments to the Board by the federal government. The connection with the appointments of Directors and the CEO/President through the federal government should not be viewed as a govt control method. They are a minority on the Board.

Rather, look at the members who serve and have served - James Stanford former Pres/CEO of Petro-Canada for example. He was an invisible asset in helping develop the governance structure and activities of the Board. Betty-Anne Heggie from Potash Corp, Bonnie Dupont from Enbrdige Energy, Ross Keith, lawyer and farmer, David Hilton, former Sr VP with the Bank of Nova Scotia - these appointees are not bureacrats, they are business people. Their experience is a huge asset in running an accountable, efficient organization.

Regarding the PRO - Tom4CWB knows as well as anyone that the PRO can fluctuate. It is an estimate of the return from ALL sales to ALL markets over the entire pool period.

It is an estimate of sales that have not been made, and an estimate of when they will be made, and an estimate of what price. The currency value is also estimated as a factor. before the crop is harvested, the grade pattern available is estimated.

As you go through the year, there is diminishing variability with the PRO as firm sales replace these estimates.

The suggestion that the PRO should be totally predictable from March of the preceeding year is not realistic. However, it is an effective market indicator.

If farmers wish to hedge either currency or wheat, the US futures markets are there for them to use separately or in conjunction with the marketing choices options the CWB offers. The futures are another forecasting tool, one that is beyond prediction from one minute to the next.


Tom

[cowman]

Are you kidding me? The last time I didn't shop at the co-op they didn't seize my truck and throw me in jail! And who are all these upstanding appointees? Good little Liberals everyone I'll bet! The CWB is a dinosaur that would be right at home in any communist state. I will agree the GOVERNMENT has put in place a way to eventually get rid of the CWB but TOM is right when he says our rights and freedoms are being violated.

[cowman]

My point is that the monopoly is like a patent protection - the benefit gets shared amongst farmers; all farmers own it.

And I respect that some people have problems with this, just as some people have problems with the concept of a patent.

But it is not the case that the federal government has involvement in the operations of the CWB or that this is some clandestine organization to stomp on western farmers.

In referring to the legislation guiding all other types of commercial entities, my point was that as a democratic society, this organization (the CWB) was recreated in 1998 by the same legislative process as was the legislation guiding other commercial enterprises.

Farmers now elect the majority of Directors. Farmers ultimately control the direction of the organization.

Tom

[bbrindle]

I'm really curious now. If the CWB wanted to:
1. Could the CWB stop pooling feed barley completely and buy on a daily cash basis?
2. Could the CWB open the Canadian domestic market so farmers could sell directly to processors?
3. Could the CWB provide export licenses with no buy-back process to a farmer who wanted one?
4. Could the CWB accept deliveries at the spout only and give up Part II of the Act (Control of Elevators and Railways)?
5. Could the CWB create truly separate pools for various classes of wheat?
6. Could the CWB allow grain companies to export grain without going through the CWB?

Are all of these things in the powers of the CWB or would some require changes by the federal government?

[TOM4CWB]

Tom,

I appreciate your trying to deal with this issue, however, Interpretation of the CWB Act is where it is all at.

I note it was against the law for Air Canada to lay off workers, until the Transport Minister said the law, as interpreted by his lawyer, didn't apply!!!

I further note that "special" packages are likely for these layoffs, with government blessing.

The CWB has a very specific Act, with very specific instructions from the Government of Canada on how it MUST be interpreted.

CWB staff and Directors have no choice in this matter, grain producers are no different.

This lays the flex issues at Sir Goodales feet, he alone can approve, or turn them down. The CWB Act is quite specific, Ralphie G has the last say, therefore all must be done to insure CWB policies meet his approval!!!

[parsley]

Finally there is a bit of free time and Parsley is back! It is most difficult to watch from the sidelines, especially while Thalpenny emphatically makes the statement - "Farmers ultimately control the direction of the [CWB] organization." Let's all read what the CWB Act actually states :

Section 18.(1) The Governor in Council may, by order, direct the Corporation with respect to the manner in which any of its operations, powers and duties under this Act shall be exercised or performed."

And futher, the Act states:

18.(1.1) "The directors shall cause the directions to be implemented......"
3.12 (2) "The directors...of the Corporation shall comply with this Act, the regulations, ....and any directions given to the Corporation....."

Should we believe believe thalpenny, or the Parliamentary Act? Which would hold up in court? I'll choose the Act, even knowing it means being pigeonholed by thalpenny as one who is attempting to present "strained linkage" about this issue.

Parsley