Canadian Beef consumption

[Murgen]

For example, according to Canfax statistics, Canadians ate 49.5 pounds of beef in 2001, which increased by two lb. per capita in 2003.

Are these consumers not noticing what OT has been saying?

[Guest]

[Kato]

Other than the odd 'cheap hamburger' sale that was put on, prices in the stores did not respond to lower prices paid to cattle producers, as a general rule.

Nevertheless, it was the first time consumption has gone up after the discovery of BSE, and we are very grateful for it.

[Guest]

Good stuff Murgen. Don't you jsut love how our BIC has bragged about their promotion causing this increase in consumption by the Canadian consumer. Then they will tell you that if not for this and the fact that they promoted the product, producers of this country would be in worse shape.

As agman says, cunsumption has nothing to do with supply/demand. Just as our dysfunctional marketplace has had nothing to do with supply and demand. -------- Therefore, every cent offered up by producers of this country for almost 2 years for promotion of beef has helped consumption, but not one of those red cents has found it's way back into producers pockets. Packers and retailers have benefitted with our checkoff dollars.

[rkaiser]

Just me Murgey, I forgot to log in.

[Murgen]

How's it going Randy? what's the weather doing your way? 20 cm of snow here last night, melting today, wet and heavy!

[Tam]

[rkaiser]

All that promotion does is affect price Tam. Price, in Canada, was found by means beyond comprehension, but it certainly was not found from demand for cattle. This leads to my assumption that nothing trickled down past the door of the packing house. They took our cattle because they had a market for beef, but the price for those cattle had nothing to do with supply and demand. You tell me how we saw benefit from increase in consumption?

Weather is great out here Murgen. A bit below zero today but nice and sunny and NO WIND.

Made a quick tour through the trade floor at Red Deer but didn't see the booth you directed me at. Must have been under another name.

[Jason]

Price, in Canada, was found by means beyond comprehension, but it certainly was not found from demand for cattle. This leads to my assumption that nothing trickled down past the door of the packing house. They took our cattle because they had a market for beef, but the price for those cattle had nothing to do with supply and demand. You tell me how we saw benefit from increase in consumption?

Sorry randy, I agree with Tam on this one. If the packers never found homes for that beef, they wouldn't have given anything for our cattle.

If you remember back our surplus was/is end meats not middle meats. There has been good demand (consumption x price) for high end cuts. If we had not been in BSE mode prices for said middle meats would have climbed beyond the reach of consumers who were still buying it, and they would have switched to lower priced cuts or lower priced meats.

If the packers have been making so much money, why hasn't the price advanced now instead of them shortening the kill week? Because the cattle have been held back due to low margins. If the packers had been making the kind of money everyone kept saying they were making, they could have advanced the prices and kept drawing cattle through the system.

[rkaiser]

When the border cracked open to America for boxed beef, the packers in Canada not only had the producers of this country by the balls, they also held the consumers in Canada in their hands. The price of BEEF was now based on the American consumer and the Canadian consumer paid the same price even though packers were getting cattle for next to nothing.

Consumer demand, okay I'll give you that. But American consumer not Canadian.

[Guest]

[rkaiser]

That's right agman, supply and demand is a very complex market phenomenon that only minds like yours can handle.

Canada had an over supply of cattle in the months following the border closure. We have moved closer to closing that gap with expanded slaughter capacity and a hot American boxed beef market. Is this wrong so far.

Your comments "What I said is that consumption does not equal DEMAND. Demand is a supply and price function. Those TWO components are necessary to determnine demand. Consumption by itself only measures the available supply. Demand is determined when the price required to clear that level supply is known. " I can agree with. And excuse me for assuming that consumption has NOTHING to do with supply/demand.

It obviously does not equal demand unless you include exports and need; and then demand would always be short of supply.

As far as a functioning marketplace based on supply and demand in Canada for the past two years, you sir are wrong. We are getting closer as I've said, but dysfunctional is the word to describe the Canadian market during this debacle.

Why so arrogant agman.

My point on this thread is that due to a complete disconnect between consumption of beef in Canada and price, no checkoff money paid by producers in Canada has found it's way back to those producers, but has benefitted retailers and packers alone.