Is the wheat board on its way out?

[mulecrazy]

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Politics/2...-board-110504/

interesting read. should make a lot of farmers pretty happy!

[powerman]

In the artical the wheat board wants to let the farmers decide, but from where I sit it looks like the farmers did vote. They help the CPC get a majority gov't and now want to see some results. That is what the farmers that I know want.

[Ryry4]

One can only hope there will be changes to the way it is done now. There needs to some change. I personally, would like to see the wheat board optional. If the CWB can get you a better grain price than elsewhere, sell it to them and wait a year or two for them to move your grain. If someone else can market your grain better, sell it to them.

[densa44]

I believe that the gov't will eliminate the wheat pool. Just the issue that the NDP needs. Once the monopoly is gone, it is gone for good.

I just don't want to hear any winning if the bottom falls out of the market.

[berjerkin]

Originally Posted by densa44

I believe that the gov't will eliminate the wheat pool. Just the issue that the NDP needs. Once the monopoly is gone, it is gone for good.

I just don't want to hear any winning if the bottom falls out of the market.

I would like you to find any right minded farmer that would whine if the wheat board is gone. It takes them 1.5 years to pay out what they owe you for your grain, and pay you less than than i can get across the border an hour away.

No thanks.

Scrap the wheat board and the gun registry.

[bisonhunter]

I wouldn't mind seeing the twin brother of the wheat board go the way of the dodo also, the freshwater fish marketing corporation.

[Ryry4]

Originally Posted by berjerkin

I would like you to find any right minded farmer that would whine if the wheat board is gone. It takes them 1.5 years to pay out what they owe you for your grain, and pay you less than than i can get across the border an hour away.

No thanks.

Scrap the wheat board and the gun registry.

Don't forget that it usually takes them 2 years to move your grain also. I know more than one guy that has 2009 grain still in his bins.

[FCLightning]

Isn't this how it goes now. 3 guys with 1000 bushels in the bin from the same acreage. Wheat board negotiates a sale for 1000 bushels and calls quota for 333 bushels from each farmer. No further sales are coming and 3 fellows have a little cash flow with profit tied up in inventory in the bins. We have 3 fellows keeping on with faint hope and asking for help to keep going.

New system:
3 guys have 1000 bushels in the bin. One guy negotiates the contract for 1000 bushels by price cutting. He generates significant cash flow but no profit. Other two fellows have grain in bin with zero cash flow. Bank calls operating loan on other two fellows and ends up with land and grain inventory rather than money. Fellow with cash flow goes to bank and gets discounted land. Next year he puts 3000 bushels in the bin, negotiates a contract for 1000 bushels and generates a little cash flow but not enough to finance the extra capital burden. Now we have two fellows on welfare and one in desperate need of help to keep going.

Which scenario is in the best interest of the farmers? Which scenario is the best for the general taxpayer?

[silver]

If they do keep it, it should be expanded to Ontario and BC and the rest of Canada so they too can know the joys of socialism.

[Forrest]

Originally Posted by FCLightning

Isn't this how it goes now. 3 guys with 1000 bushels in the bin from the same acreage. Wheat board negotiates a sale for 1000 bushels and calls quota for 333 bushels from each farmer. No further sales are coming and 3 fellows have a little cash flow with profit tied up in inventory in the bins. We have 3 fellows keeping on with faint hope and asking for help to keep going.

New system:
3 guys have 1000 bushels in the bin. One guy negotiates the contract for 1000 bushels by price cutting. He generates significant cash flow but no profit. Other two fellows have grain in bin with zero cash flow. Bank calls operating loan on other two fellows and ends up with land and grain inventory rather than money. Fellow with cash flow goes to bank and gets discounted land. Next year he puts 3000 bushels in the bin, negotiates a contract for 1000 bushels and generates a little cash flow but not enough to finance the extra capital burden. Now we have two fellows on welfare and one in desperate need of help to keep going.

Which scenario is in the best interest of the farmers? Which scenario is the best for the general taxpayer?

Farmers having the right to market their grain to a number of companies instead of the wheatboard. Thats the best.

[berjerkin]

Originally Posted by FCLightning

Isn't this how it goes now. 3 guys with 1000 bushels in the bin from the same acreage. Wheat board negotiates a sale for 1000 bushels and calls quota for 333 bushels from each farmer. No further sales are coming and 3 fellows have a little cash flow with profit tied up in inventory in the bins. We have 3 fellows keeping on with faint hope and asking for help to keep going.

New system:
3 guys have 1000 bushels in the bin. One guy negotiates the contract for 1000 bushels by price cutting. He generates significant cash flow but no profit. Other two fellows have grain in bin with zero cash flow. Bank calls operating loan on other two fellows and ends up with land and grain inventory rather than money. Fellow with cash flow goes to bank and gets discounted land. Next year he puts 3000 bushels in the bin, negotiates a contract for 1000 bushels and generates a little cash flow but not enough to finance the extra capital burden. Now we have two fellows on welfare and one in desperate need of help to keep going.

Which scenario is in the best interest of the farmers? Which scenario is the best for the general taxpayer?

Oh, your one of those. Sorry for your loss in the election, by the way.

[greylynx]

Originally Posted by FCLightning

Isn't this how it goes now. 3 guys with 1000 bushels in the bin from the same acreage. Wheat board negotiates a sale for 1000 bushels and calls quota for 333 bushels from each farmer. No further sales are coming and 3 fellows have a little cash flow with profit tied up in inventory in the bins. We have 3 fellows keeping on with faint hope and asking for help to keep going.

New system:
3 guys have 1000 bushels in the bin. One guy negotiates the contract for 1000 bushels by price cutting. He generates significant cash flow but no profit. Other two fellows have grain in bin with zero cash flow. Bank calls operating loan on other two fellows and ends up with land and grain inventory rather than money. Fellow with cash flow goes to bank and gets discounted land. Next year he puts 3000 bushels in the bin, negotiates a contract for 1000 bushels and generates a little cash flow but not enough to finance the extra capital burden. Now we have two fellows on welfare and one in desperate need of help to keep going.

Which scenario is in the best interest of the farmers? Which scenario is the best for the general taxpayer?

A Choice. The wheat board is not the end all of all grain sales. Unless one is tied to the federal government in one form or another.

[FCLightning]

I'm not one of anybody. How about you tell me if the scenarios are right or wrong. They operate on the premise that there simply is no sale for the amount of wheat we produce at the price required to make a profit. Some farmers seem to think that there really is and that the Wheat Board simply cannot get the job done. Perhaps they are right - or maybe not.

[FCLightning]

The second part of the premise is that the only way Canada can maintain all the acres that are currently in production is to continue to subsidize them in one form or another.

So... scenario 3. Pay all 3 farmers to take 1/2 their land out of production. Eliminate the wheat board and allow them to fight for the 1000 bushel sale with their 500 bushels each. They all have cash flow from the gov't and profit comes from competitive production and marketing of product.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by FCLightning

I'm not one of anybody. How about you tell me if the scenarios are right or wrong. They operate on the premise that there simply is no sale for the amount of wheat we produce at the price required to make a profit. Some farmers seem to think that there really is and that the Wheat Board simply cannot get the job done. Perhaps they are right - or maybe not.

Maybe the board should open up the books and prove to farmers what a good job they are doing. Until then they prove what a good job they are doing, I'll continue to be against them.

[Rockymtnx]

FCLighning, are you actually a grain producer?
Just curious, because you are one of VERY few that I know that supports the CWB.

[4thredneck]

Keep the wheat board, just make it optional. If it is so wonderful it will be around forever, me thinks it will go the way of the Dodo.

[FCLightning]

Originally Posted by Rockymtnx

FCLighning, are you actually a grain producer?
Just curious, because you are one of VERY few that I know that supports the CWB.

Support?
As a taxpayer I question where my tax dollars are best spent.

[dgl1948]

Funny thing about single desk marketing. A couple of months ago when BHP wanted to buy Potash Corp and the feds stepped in to stop it was because BHP was not going to use Canpotex. (Single desk marketing for all the potash companies). They all put up a huge cry over this. Funny how it works for large corps. but not farmers???

[Ryry4]

When I was a kid, 90% of what was grown in my neighborhood was board grains. You go for a drive out there now and I would say that 50% or what is grown is non-board crops. If the CWB was doing such a good job of marketing grain to the world why would farmers switch to growing crops that they can market on their own?

There are plenty of other companies out there that have the ability to market grain to world markets, but our hands are tied because of the CWB. The grain company I work for ships non-board grain to the U.S. all the time, we even have customers in Japan that we ship to.

[Private Ear]

Originally Posted by 4thredneck

Keep the wheat board, just make it optional. If it is so wonderful it will be around forever, me thinks it will go the way of the Dodo.

X2

[Redfrog]

"One guy negotiates the contract for 1000 bushels by price cutting. He generates significant cash flow but no profit."

Why would he sell at a discount? Too stupid to market his product I guess.

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by bisonhunter

I wouldn't mind seeing the twin brother of the wheat board go the way of the dodo also, the freshwater fish marketing corporation.

What is the FFMC?

[Beerfish]

Originally Posted by densa44

I believe that the gov't will eliminate the wheat pool. Just the issue that the NDP needs. Once the monopoly is gone, it is gone for good.

I just don't want to hear any winning if the bottom falls out of the market.

This person is correct. By all means dump the wheat board and go it alone but don't come asking for help if the price goes into the dumpster.

[Ryry4]

Originally Posted by Beerfish

This person is correct. By all means dump the wheat board and go it alone but don't come asking for help if the price goes into the dumpster.

CWB doesn't control the price. Just because they have a monopoly doesn't necessarily mean they'll get you the best price. Last year the company I work for was buying board wheat for feed because we could move it and get the farmer a better price than what the board could do at that time.

[hillbillyreefer]

On the world stage the CWB portion of Canada is small potatoes in terms of production. The board blows smoke up our butts making us think that we aren't price takers, but price setters. That couldn't be further from the truth. We are price takers and commodity markets set the prices not the commie wheat board.

Canpotex is a bit different. Sask potash is a world scale commodity controlled by a few, they actually are price setters, not price takers.

Now back to seeding peas comrade!

[dgl1948]

Canpotex is a bit different. Sask potash is a world scale commodity controlled by a few, they actually are price setters, not price takers

Not true. The Chinese usually set the price by purchasing from European producers. The Potash companys try to control markets by single desk marketing and production. They do not mind shutting down and laying off workers to control production. Canpotex markets much the same as the wheat board. Companys are giving quota's by nameplate production estimates.

As for the wheat board being a price setter it is hard to do so when you produce a surplus of product. Control production and you can be a price setter.

[ManHunter]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

What is the FFMC?

FFMC ( Freshwater Fish Marketing Corp. ) is similar to the Wheat board, only it is suppose to manage the selling of fish caught in Alberta,Manitoba, Sask. NWT and NW Ont. Same as the WB,, lots of Fisherman want out, some want to stay. I am A Manitoba Commercial fisherman that makes his living off fishing as my main income. The sooner they are gone the better as far as I can see. They talk in Canada about free trade, well as a Manitoba Fisherman I can not sell my fish into Alberta it against the law. I can not sell my fish into the US as it agaist the law, I can not sell to a store in Manitoba without a permit from FFMC bercause it is against the law. My fish prices have dropped over 50% in the 5 years, but all the Government Corp. and all it's unions, brokers and agents have had raises every year, retail prices in the same 5 years are up 40%. I am hoping Harper will put an end to the government slavery called FFMC. Can't happen fast enough for me.