Rumour about big meat factory - is it true?

morebabies

I heard a rumour last week that a big meat producer is buying up a lot of suck calves in the south and getting them contract reared. The figure of 10,000 calves was mentioned. This could all be rubbish, does anyone know is there any truth in this?

paddysdream

Neighbour is supposedly rearing a few hundred for a well known meat processor.

Heard talk of a euro per head per week.Presume this is just supply of sheds,water,straw and labour.

willfarmerman

900 in a yard in north wexford..I heard a 5r a week.

newholland mad

already posted about this in chit chat 3 farmers around here with 3-500 each all aa. All for the 1 factory!!:mad:

morebabies

So how does it work? Does the meat factory buy the milk replacer / meal do you know and how long does the farmer have to rear them for? Also what type of calves are they? (age/breed etc.) Thanks

paddysdream

Anytime I heard about calf rearing on contract around here it was;

Farmer supplied sheds,straw water and heating for milk replacer etc.Calf owner supplied calves,milk powder,meal and all vet expenses.
Think the calves had to be a certain weight/size/age when they arrived in the yard.

Usually you were on a schedule of having the stock to hit a certain weight by a specified time and think if they ran over this then it was not as profitable(if at all!)

500 plus sucks at the one time would be a nice little bit of work,no matter how good a setup you had and the amount of straw used by them(whilst on milk) is eye watering.

All the above relates to rearing them for rose veal finishing etc but would assume that rearing them for a normal beef unit would entail something similar.

Think they are in the host farmers herd number/register etc for the duration but not certain.
This could complicate things if you were running your own stock as well unless there was seperate air space in sheds etc.

bbam

The obvious problem is the plan to manipulate the market further..

Coveney has signalled no intent at all in getting involved in ensuring fairness in the market... Indeed I was told today that his brother is tied up with Larry himself, don't know if this is true but if it were it wouldn't bode well for him stepping in..

Does anyone know of the IFA or similar bodies have or plan to make a complaint to the Competition Authority as Coveney suggested here

tomwaterford

paddysdream wrote: »

Anytime I heard about calf rearing on contract around here it was;

Farmer supplied sheds,straw water and heating for milk replacer etc.Calf owner supplied calves,milk powder,meal and all vet expenses.
Think the calves had to be a certain weight/size/age when they arrived in the yard.

Usually you were on a schedule of having the stock to hit a certain weight by a specified time and think if they ran over this then it was not as profitable(if at all!)

500 plus sucks at the one time would be a nice little bit of work,no matter how good a setup you had and the amount of straw used by them(whilst on milk) is eye watering.

All the above relates to rearing them for rose veal finishing etc but would assume that rearing them for a normal beef unit would entail something similar.

Think they are in the host farmers herd number/register etc for the duration but not certain.
This could complicate things if you were running your own stock as well unless there was seperate air space in sheds etc.

so is this not more or less the route taken by cappaquin chickens??

they used supply chicks and feed and you supplied housing and heat and certain targets to hit along the way with bonus for over target performance (it was easily attainable from what I heard)

this ended in a bit of disaster for feed mills left on hook for large sums of money and rearers left on the hook as they were by and large paid when chicks gone!!!

I would be wary of depending meat factories to behave honourably here if I was the new rearers - a good idea on paper...but in practice it will lead to sqeeze on margins as factories will look to cut costs and could be sticklers on the target weights
*this should be said....forward buying animals at start of year would be best for all involved surly

newholland mad

Where the heck is the comp ath with all this going on, i know they always had their own stock but this seems to be upping the tempo. the store seller wont even have them at the ringside now that they have their own stores never mind when all these calves come fit and the job that will be done on the finisher

Farmer

This picture of calves in cages doesn't tie in too well with the images of seemingly happy cows and calves shown in green fields by the supermarket chains when advertising their latest beef promotion!

paddysdream

Farmer wrote: »

This picture of calves in cages doesn't tie in too well with the images of seemingly happy cows and calves shown in green fields by the supermarket chains when advertising their latest beef promotion!

?

Farmer

paddysdream wrote: »

?

OK perhaps an exaggeration but getting a little bit more like factory than field. Add in our age profile, lack of young people wanting to farm - is this the thin end of the wedge towards more U.S like factory farming where it just becomes not feasible for the rest of us to compete? I certainly hope not

bbam

Farmer wrote: »

OK perhaps an exaggeration but getting a little bit more like factory than field. Add in our age profile, lack of young people wanting to farm - is this the thin end of the wedge towards more U.S like factory farming where it just becomes not feasible for the rest of us to compete? I certainly hope not

I agree.
Were heading down the factory farm route where sheer numbers makes them a profit rather than high levels of animal welfare.

I saw €5 a week mentioned.
Anyone who thinks this will rear stock in top quality facilities is fooling themselves.

st1979

bbam wrote: »

I agree.
Were heading down the factory farm route where sheer numbers makes them a profit rather than high levels of animal welfare.

I saw €5 a week mentioned.
Anyone who thinks this will rear stock in top quality facilities is fooling themselves.

I have seen one of these places and it is a very good set up. They are not in cages but are batch fed. And would put most of us to shame.

oldsmokey

bbam wrote: »

The obvious problem is the plan to manipulate the market further..

Coveney has signalled no intent at all in getting involved in ensuring fairness in the market... Indeed I was told today that his brother is tied up with Larry himself, don't know if this is true but if it were it wouldn't bode well for him stepping in..

Does anyone know of the IFA or similar bodies have or plan to make a complaint to the Competition Authority as Coveney suggested here

The IFA?? don't get me started...worse than useless doesn't do them justice...anyway, who's going to collect their factory levies if they make too much of a ruckus?...Larry will tell em sling their hook..

rancher

oldsmokey wrote: »

The IFA?? don't get me started...worse than useless doesn't do them justice...anyway, who's going to collect their factory levies if they make too much of a ruckus?...Larry will tell em sling their hook..

Do you really think that I give a sh...e where the funding for the organisation comes from. The day we have to consider that in our discussions..I'll be gone.
Lots of members have the facilities, but don't have the finance to feed cattle, you expect us to put the boot into them.....don't think so.
There's other organisations out there, if it was such a great idea to stop feedlots being rented to factories, why aren't they at it

Farmer Pudsey

rancher wrote: »

Do you really think that I give a sh...e where the funding for the organisation comes from. The day we have to consider that in our discussions..I'll be gone.
Lots of members have the facilities, but don't have the finance to feed cattle, you expect us to put the boot into them.....don't think so.
There's other organisations out there, if it was such a great idea to stop feedlots being rented to factories, why aren't they at it

TBH rancher you are getting a bit excited about this. The reality is that all the farm organisations are behind the curve on it. They are refusing to tackle the issue. They have this idea that it might effect the mart price of cattle. However as we see finishers losing money will be slower to buy cattle for finishing at the end of this year. If they do they will be much more cautious in they bidding.

The fist thing any factory tells a finisher that is losing money is that they are ''paying too much for store''. Up until lately factory's gave out contracts to finisJers in Sept/Oct to finish cattle. They had less control of the market as the contract was to have cattle ready at X date. If the contract price was stronger than the actual price the finisher wanted to get his cattle slaughtered to reby more cattle whose price were adjusted to that. If the slaughter price was stronger that the contract the finisher still had his margin. This is totally different now where the factory are filling there own feedlots and renting more and using these to dampen prices at the normal high points Dec/jan and May/June.

The story now is that at the end of the year fewer finisher will be around the ringside, who will force the factory's and exporter to pay for weanlings and stores. The farm organisations are failing to react to this. They seem more concerned by weight and age restrictions.

The other thing Rancher while you may not be worried about the issue of where the money comes from to run the oprganisation the permenant staff and top table will always have an eye on this. The reality is that the only way non contracted finishers may be able to get the ball rolling is to stop the slaughter fees. A half a mill drop in income and 10K less members would focus the minds in the Farm Center

Greengrass1

Another thing I came across the other day. Why isn't IFA and ICMSA telling each farmer what they contribute every year? Its appalling tbh that these organisations are getting this money from the farmers and not letting us know what there doing with it to make our lives better.

I for one am looking at getting the IFA levie taken off my milk cheque. I have no faith in them as an organisation after they have done so little about the vegtsbles at Christmas and the beef the last few months

case 956

ye we pying a membership fee and levies on our milk to the ifa... for What??? all they do is sit on there arses and do nothing for the farmer, organise a protest outside leinster house once a year to just get a trip to the smoke, ifa is a disaster of a orginisation that do nothing for farmers and there families

paddysdream

case 956 wrote: »

ye we pying a membership fee and levies on our milk to the ifa... for What??? all they do is sit on there arses and do nothing for the farmer, organise a protest outside leinster house once a year to just get a trip to the smoke, ifa is a disaster of a orginisation that do nothing for farmers and there families

Not an apologist for the IFA(as a certain poster on here will vouch for!) but;

No one forces you or anyone else to pay those fees or levies,they are entirely voluntary and its child's play to stop them.All it takes is a phone call to the relevant office,mart,creamery,factory etc.
Have a problem with the method of collecting them unless told otherwise buts thats an arguement for another day.

For all those who complain;what are YOU doing about it and what do you propose(bearing in mind that this is real life so lets be realistic) to do about it.All well and fine complaining but whats the answer(assuming you go to meetings,are involved some ways in things etc)

Ifa or any other organisation can only do what ACTIVE members propose or suggest ie the leaders must do what the majority of its members(not the majority of farmers) want.If its not what you want ,then join and lobby to change their policy.

rancher

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

TBH rancher you are getting a bit excited about this. The reality is that all the farm organisations are behind the curve on it. They are refusing to tackle the issue. They have this idea that it might effect the mart price of cattle. However as we see finishers losing money will be slower to buy cattle for finishing at the end of this year. If they do they will be much more cautious in they bidding.

The fist thing any factory tells a finisher that is losing money is that they are ''paying too much for store''. Up until lately factory's gave out contracts to finisJers in Sept/Oct to finish cattle. They had less control of the market as the contract was to have cattle ready at X date. If the contract price was stronger than the actual price the finisher wanted to get his cattle slaughtered to reby more cattle whose price were adjusted to that. If the slaughter price was stronger that the contract the finisher still had his margin. This is totally different now where the factory are filling there own feedlots and renting more and using these to dampen prices at the normal high points Dec/jan and May/June.

The story now is that at the end of the year fewer finisher will be around the ringside, who will force the factory's and exporter to pay for weanlings and stores. The farm organisations are failing to react to this. They seem more concerned by weight and age restrictions.

The other thing Rancher while you may not be worried about the issue of where the money comes from to run the oprganisation the permenant staff and top table will always have an eye on this. The reality is that the only way non contracted finishers may be able to get the ball rolling is to stop the slaughter fees. A half a mill drop in income and 10K less members would focus the minds in the Farm Center

It was discussed yesterday, and we couldn't see that we could interfere,
also how many cattle are being fed and how many would it take to manipulate the trade.
Also approx. over 300 voluntary officers are not going to be swayed by a few permanent staff

Farmer Pudsey

paddysdream wrote: »

Not an apologist for the IFA(as a certain poster on here will vouch for!) but;

No one forces you or anyone else to pay those fees or levies,they are entirely voluntary and its child's play to stop them.All it takes is a phone call to the relevant office,mart,creamery,factory etc.
Have a problem with the method of collecting them unless told otherwise buts thats an arguement for another day.

For all those who complain;what are YOU doing about it and what do you propose(bearing in mind that this is real life so lets be realistic) to do about it.All well and fine complaining but whats the answer(assuming you go to meetings,are involved some ways in things etc)

Ifa or any other organisation can only do what ACTIVE members propose or suggest ie the leaders must do what the majority of its members(not the majority of farmers) want.If its not what you want ,then join and lobby to change their policy.

Not true you have to keep asking and they always seem to forget, I have started to ask for them to stop taking them. The cheque has always arrived without same, I have to get them paid seperate. This costs another 40c to cash. On top of that if you deal with 2-3 factory's you have to do the same each time. Whay cannot you opt in or out.

paddysdream

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Not true you have to keep asking and they always seem to forget, I have started to ask for them to stop taking them. The cheque has always arrived without same, I have to get them paid seperate. This costs another 40c to cash. On top of that if you deal with 2-3 factory's you have to do the same each time. Whay cannot you opt in or out.

Never had to ask a second time and sell lambs and ewes to 4 different factories at different times of the year as well as 2 or 3 marts.Some of those I would only maybe send one lot of cast ewes a year to or a few cattle so its not like I am a regular customer.

First thing I ask when dealing with a mart or factory is to only withold the compulsary levies and none of the voluntary ones.Simple really.

rancher

case 956 wrote: »

ye we pying a membership fee and levies on our milk to the ifa... for What??? all they do is sit on there arses and do nothing for the farmer, organise a protest outside leinster house once a year to just get a trip to the smoke, ifa is a disaster of a orginisation that do nothing for farmers and there families

Another very brave anonymous poster I see
If you think you can do better....carry on...democratic organisation etc.etc but you're too lazy ....
Very hard to read this rubbish when the membership is increasing.
20,000 farmers went to a protest that some genius's on boards claimed that no one was going to.
I answer questions for you here, but your negativity does not worry me

Farmer Pudsey

rancher wrote: »

It was discussed yesterday, and we couldn't see that we could interfere,
also how many cattle are being fed and how many would it take to manipulate the trade.
Also approx. over 300 voluntary officers are not going to be swayed by a few permanent staff

Not as many as people think if cattle flow is adequate. Look at what happen last December the factory's killed there own cattle during December/January. This allowd them to back up other farmers cattle. There is no fear that they will let there own cattle go over fat. This then allowed them to control the kill from Dec on. They then could get fussy about cattle, they did not want bulls or heavy cattle. Now when bulls are cheap they are killing them at full tilt and backing up prime cattle. Finishing is a tight game, bullocks and heifers struggle after 100 days feeding if on adlib. Lads feeding same for 3 weeks longer than normal then have to kill when cattle are booked in as the cannot afford any more delay.

I will agree that the number of finished cattle was higher than normal. They also distorted the price to buyers last September by driving the price of store. While this may seem to be to the advantage of the store producer this year in a year or two time it will be they that ditcate the price around the ring. I had one IFA man ( a store man) that they need the factory man around the ring , as I explained to him what happens if a few hundred finishers are not around the ring in 2-3 years time.

The factory man around the ring will not pay a high price forever, for instance are there any factory men buying cattle to go straight to the factory at present and are they paying above the finished price.

If the different factorys put 20K cattle into feedlots and it is usually only prime cattle they put in. Even though the kill is 30K/week 2-3k.week make a big difference. For all the talk that the fridges are full they are killing 33-34K cattle/week for the last 12 week so they must have no issue selling same. I suppose if you buy cheap it is easy to sell at a discount.

Farmer Pudsey

rancher wrote: »

Another very brave anonymous poster I see
If you think you can do better....carry on...democratic organisation etc.etc but you're too lazy ....
Very hard to read this rubbish when the membership is increasing.
20,000 farmers went to a protest that some genius's on boards claimed that no one was going to.
I answer questions for you here, but your negativity does not worry me

Rancher Boards is an anonymous forum you continual using of this expression is dispicable but then again you are only acting the bully and trying to silence other contributors. We all have user names that is the rules if yoou are not happy with it take it up with the moderators.

I see that you continually use this to silence criticism. It is unfair to call any contributor lazy and few trade unions are democratic any longer. Most are finding that the only way to voice there opinion is to withdraw support from the organisation. I do not think that 20K farmers were at any protest in a while and it will be a long time again befire they get as many. It will be interesting to see membership figure over the next year or two because I get the feeling that a lot of members are unhappy.

whelan2

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Rancher Boards is an anonymous forum you continual using of this expression is dispicable but then again you are only acting the bully and trying to silence other contributors. We all have user names that is the rules if yoou are not happy with it take it up with the moderators.

I see that you continually use this to silence criticism. It is unfair to call any contributor lazy and few trade unions are democratic any longer. Most are finding that the only way to voice there opinion is to withdraw support from the organisation. I do not think that 20K farmers were at any protest in a while and it will be a long time again befire they get as many. It will be interesting to see membership figure over the next year or two because I get the feeling that a lot of members are unhappy.

i for one have given up saying anything about the ifa on here as i do feel "bullied " by the comments of a poster on here. Sad way to be really. In reality people do not have time to go to the streets to protest or to go to meetings.

paddysdream

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Not as many as people think if cattle flow is adequate. Look at what happen last December the factory's killed there own cattle during December/January. This allowd them to back up other farmers cattle. There is no fear that they will let there own cattle go over fat. This then allowed them to control the kill from Dec on. They then could get fussy about cattle, they did not want bulls or heavy cattle. Now when bulls are cheap they are killing them at full tilt and backing up prime cattle. Finishing is a tight game, bullocks and heifers struggle after 100 days feeding if on adlib. Lads feeding same for 3 weeks longer than normal then have to kill when cattle are booked in as the cannot afford any more delay.

I will agree that the number of finished cattle was higher than normal. They also distorted the price to buyers last September by driving the price of store. While this may seem to be to the advantage of the store producer this year in a year or two time it will be they that ditcate the price around the ring. I had one IFA man ( a store man) that they need the factory man around the ring , as I explained to him what happens if a few hundred finishers are not around the ring in 2-3 years time.

The factory man around the ring will not pay a high price forever, for instance are there any factory men buying cattle to go straight to the factory at present and are they paying above the finished price.

If the different factorys put 20K cattle into feedlots and it is usually only prime cattle they put in. Even though the kill is 30K/week 2-3k.week make a big difference. For all the talk that the fridges are full they are killing 33-34K cattle/week for the last 12 week so they must have no issue selling same. I suppose if you buy cheap it is easy to sell at a discount.

Lots of time here to talk sh**e today as minding the young lad who is sick, so;

What do people propose?

A regulator? more quango with no effect and do we really want more not less government interference in agriculture?

Ban Larry et co. keeping cattle? him first then maybe a few big finishers then maybe that auld neighbour we don't like,then why not move on to anyone with dairy cows etc etc.unworkable and not really free enterprise etc.

Complete cattle blockade? won't work as farmers will do this for a week at max then collapse when any pressure comes on or government says boo.

Any other ideas?

Mad4simmental

paddysdream wrote: »

Lots of time here to talk sh**e today as minding the young lad who is sick, so;

What do people propose?

A regulator? more quango with no effect and do we really want more not less government interference in agriculture?

Ban Larry et co. keeping cattle? him first then maybe a few big finishers then maybe that auld neighbour we don't like,then why not move on to anyone with dairy cows etc etc.unworkable and not really free enterprise etc.

Complete cattle blockade? won't work as farmers will do this for a week at max then collapse when any pressure comes on or government says boo.

Any other ideas?

Only one spud in the fields idea, but
It would be grate if we could start a farmers factory, owned by the farmers that supply it. Not easy to do by any means but a nice dream!
Try get contracts to all the irish supermarkets to try ensure a constant flow of beef. Cut the middle man out so to speak.

tomwaterford

Mad4simmental wrote: »

Only one spud in the fields idea, but
It would be grate if we could start a farmers factory, owned by the farmers that supply it. Not easy to do by any means but a nice dream!
Try get contracts to all the irish supermarkets to try ensure a constant flow of beef. Cut the middle man out so to speak.

to do this you will have to set up facility to process waste as AFAIK the present factory that deos that is owned by main beef processer in Ireland at the min!!

will the farmers take a cut in there profits from new factory to run this second factory....they will have to

rancher

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Rancher Boards is an anonymous forum you continual using of this expression is dispicable but then again you are only acting the bully and trying to silence other contributors. We all have user names that is the rules if yoou are not happy with it take it up with the moderators.

I see that you continually use this to silence criticism. It is unfair to call any contributor lazy and few trade unions are democratic any longer. Most are finding that the only way to voice there opinion is to withdraw support from the organisation. I do not think that 20K farmers were at any protest in a while and it will be a long time again befire they get as many. It will be interesting to see membership figure over the next year or two because I get the feeling that a lot of members are unhappy.

I consider cases post an abusive post and will be refuted similarily
As for calling them lazy, isn't that just a polite way saying what they said......sitting on their arses

paddysdream

Mad4simmental wrote: »

Only one spud in the fields idea, but
It would be grate if we could start a farmers factory, owned by the farmers that supply it. Not easy to do by any means but a nice dream!
Try get contracts to all the irish supermarkets to try ensure a constant flow of beef. Cut the middle man out so to speak.

That sounds good in theory but can you see it working?
Low margin ,high volume industry and how many farmers would be willing to put up say 5k each to start it?

Then when tesco etc come along and ask will you be cheaper and can you supply what we want,not what you have,what would the shareholders say?

Reason it isn't being tried now is that its a non runner to start from scratch.How about farmers buyout an existing plant and try to run it.Garauntee you that within 6 months it would be either broke or unable to get cattle

Mad4simmental

tomwaterford wrote: »

to do this you will have to set up facility to process waste as AFAIK the present factory that deos that is owned by main beef processer in Ireland at the min!!

will the farmers take a cut in there profits from new factory to run this second factory....they will have to

I'm only throwing it out there naby it wouldn't work at all. We currently don't get payed for the fifth quarter so naby that could fund a fair % of it?

tomwaterford

Mad4simmental wrote: »

I'm only throwing it out there naby it wouldn't work at all. We currently don't get payed for the fifth quarter so naby that could fund a fair % of it?

it is surly getting to stage now where the very least is a feasibility study should be done???

though you would want to be well up with regulations as I could guess the dept would get a heap of annomysus tipp-off

rancher

tomwaterford wrote: »

it is surly getting to stage now where the very least is a feasibility study should be done???

though you would want to be well up with regulations as I could guess the dept would get a heap of annomysus tipp-off

Who'd do the rendering, one person seems to have that sewn up In Ireland too

leg wax

seeing a little into the shipping down here lately, and from what numbers are going out and the old company that shipped cattle in the 80s doing up their yards to also start shipping ,i can see why larry has no choice but buy calves and fill feed lots for himself.

rancher

leg wax wrote: »

seeing a little into the shipping down here lately, and from what numbers are going out and the old company that shipped cattle in the 80s doing up their yards to also start shipping ,i can see why larry has no choice but buy calves and fill feed lots for himself.

There's a lot of bulls being exported at the moment, even heavy bulls, some at poor money,
At least they're getting rid

Mad4simmental

paddysdream wrote: »

That sounds good in theory but can you see it working?
Low margin ,high volume industry and how many farmers would be willing to put up say 5k each to start it?

Then when tesco etc come along and ask will you be cheaper and can you supply what we want,not what you have,what would the shareholders say?

Reason it isn't being tried now is that its a non runner to start from scratch.How about farmers buyout an existing plant and try to run it.Garauntee you that within 6 months it would be either broke or unable to get cattle

It certainly wouldn't be easy and probably would never happen.
That type of factory run right should be able to sell to supermarkets at a lower cost and a higher profit to farmers all day every day.
Try run it as a not for profit business to try keep the greedy out of the pot.
The factory stands to make a profit for farmers (share holders) supply at a better rate and that's it.
It's out there but naby worth a look into.
IMO it makes more sence than the new Beet Ireland proposal!

tomwaterford

rancher wrote: »

Who'd do the rendering, one person seems to have that sewn up In Ireland too

I have raised this point as regards processing waste:)

the opening of second factory deos make it expensive...though a feasibility study would be interesting reading to say the least (so long as they released there figures not just a conclusion!!)

case 956

Rancher that was a very ignorant reply on your behalf to me, calling someone lazy cause they wont hit the streets of Dublin to protest with ye... some of us active young farmers are too busy running our business and trying making it viable as we can with all the levies and price cuts we are faced with..it was a long time ago since ye had 20,000 protesting... What am I doing about what? one single voice of mine is no good, but I tell you I haven't paid any ifa membersip fees or levies since November last, when I had a ifa man out canvassing for election last autumn I showed him the gate because in my opinion yer worse than the shower in the dail, ALL PROMISES NO ACTION. IFA is a organisation set up to help as no 2 on ifa cosituation and rules: to secure adequate living in line with the prevailing standards, economic and social for the maximum number of families living on the land, to fight for our rights and negoate on behave of farming familie, yer doing none of that letting the fattories walk over the beef farmer who is struggling and in adverse if it continues struggle to feed his family, ifa doing nothing as if they were this beef situation be fought against, ifa are happy to collect levies and m fees.

paddysdream

Mad4simmental wrote: »

It certainly wouldn't be easy and probably would never happen.
That type of factory run right should be able to sell to supermarkets at a lower cost and a higher profit to farmers all day every day.
Try run it as a not for profit business to try keep the greedy out of the pot.
The factory stands to make a profit for farmers (share holders) supply at a better rate and that's it.
It's out there but naby worth a look into.
IMO it makes more sence than the new Beet Ireland proposal!

How could they sell at a lower cost if they had to pay more for stock?
To run it as a not for profit business then where would funds to expand/upgrade come from?
Greedy?don't we all want to make a few bob or should we supply cattle and invest in processing facilities for goodwill only?
Beet Ireland will never take off as who will supply beet(after having to invest 25k per 400 ton contract) for 35 a ton for clean beet less haulage when farmers will pay that and more for dirty tonnage most years.

Mad4simmental

paddysdream wrote: »

How could they sell at a lower cost if they had to pay more for stock?

If you remove the profit of the factory, it works both ways, can afford to pay a little bit more. Contract beef so mr x and mr y knows what they are getting.
As for expansion ect I believe many small factory's would be better than one big one. It's only an idea what elce do you see being any good?
The way things are now the factory's hold the power and that's it. As one previous poster put it
we can protest, won't work
We can block factory gates, won't work,
What elce is there??

eeeee

Hmm it is a depressing situation. I don't know all the ins and outs but from what I understand it have only 1 option when it comes to rendering. Rendering person holds quite a few strings in things . If you want to open a new factory you have to sort out the rendering. You cant open a new rendering plant pretty much from protest point of view etc. So that's sewn up. Rendering person and factories have a Very Close WOrking Relationship. Symbiotic I suppose you could call it. So now factories decide to rear their own beef. Thus removing another level of competition. Cartel much? So there is really no competition, the one small group of people buys, I would say if it's let go along eventually breeds, rears, stores and kills their own stock, leaving farmers as managers or contract rearers only. That is my understanding of it, although I may be very wrong, as I said I have only a very basic understanding of the situation. The IFA has done sweet FA down home anyway about this situation. Why would you bite the hand that feeds you? Far too many pockets too close to one another.
I suppose export is the only bit of the beef industry really outside of this?

BTW I am willing to stand corrected on all the above points. I have a rudimentary understanding (if at all ) of the situation.

bbam

I think it's hard to hide that the IFA have a confiloct if interest wen it comes to protesting at the gate of the processing plants.
Also it was enlightening to see the large lads who are renting facilities to Larry being defended, how could we deny them a living made from this cozy setup. Well the IFA seem quite happy to seethe smaller farmers being squashed so this cozy arrament is being maintained to support larger facilities - this shows where the IFA loyalties lie, with the larger men. The small man can be squeezed from existence as long as you get to protect the cronies.
It definitely seems that Larry has the IFA in a compromising position which they are happy to support as it meets their own ends - money !

rancher

case 956 wrote: »

Rancher that was a very ignorant reply on your behalf to me, calling someone lazy cause they wont hit the streets of Dublin to protest with ye... some of us active young farmers are too busy running our business and trying making it viable as we can with all the levies and price cuts we are faced with..it was a long time ago since ye had 20,000 protesting... What am I doing about what? one single voice of mine is no good, but I tell you I haven't paid any ifa membersip fees or levies since November last, when I had a ifa man out canvassing for election last autumn I showed him the gate because in my opinion yer worse than the shower in the dail, ALL PROMISES NO ACTION. IFA is a organisation set up to help as no 2 on ifa cosituation and rules: to secure adequate living in line with the prevailing standards, economic and social for the maximum number of families living on the land, to fight for our rights and negoate on behave of farming familie, yer doing none of that letting the fattories walk over the beef farmer who is struggling and in adverse if it continues struggle to feed his family, ifa doing nothing as if they were this beef situation be fought against, ifa are happy to collect levies and m fees.

Firstly I consider your post abusive and secondly to me saying that we're sitting on our arses is the same as calling someone lazy, probably even worse.
As for doing nothing...we organised and paid for the transport of fodder to a lot of hard pressed farmers last spring, a lot more help was given than got in the papers. If ordinary farmers arranged a depot, we got the fodder to them
We resisted Ciolos proposals to cut our SFP budget to give to other poorer countries and got it nearly back to the original amount. If Ciolos got his way., SFP wouldn't be worth fighting over in Ireland.
We lobbied for a system to ensure that farmers SFP income wouldn't be reduced by up to 50% in one year.
We opposed regionalisation and no one has to claim 2or3 ha to claim one entitlement just because they have bad land.
We got huge cofunding on Pillar2, when every politician told us we hadn't a hope....and who do you think the govt, is looking to for direction in the new Glas scheme....
We're trying to reduce the tax paid by farmers on the forced sale of their entitlements, we're also involved in the new tax review.
We're working on a land use policy, to encourage land transfer and younger farmers.
We're negotiating a charter of rights for farmer in inspections and working for loads of farmers trying to reduce the impact of eligible land overclaims.
And that is only a small part of what's going on and I think we've delivered a huge amount in the last year

Face facts, if you were the factories and cattle being thrown at you, would you be bothered talking to anyone only customers

paddysdream

Mad4simmental wrote: »

paddysdream wrote: »

How could they sell at a lower cost if they had to pay more for stock?

If you remove the profit of the factory, it works both ways, can afford to pay a little bit more. Contract beef so mr x and mr y knows what they are getting.
As for expansion ect I believe many small factory's would be better than one big one. It's only an idea what elce do you see being any good?
The way things are now the factory's hold the power and that's it. As one previous poster put it
we can protest, won't work
We can block factory gates, won't work,
What elce is there??

Sounds good but;(am pretty good at the glass half empty type of thing!)

Selling out the finished product is reliant on the purchaser paying what you think you need,not what they believe they can get it for.

This may come as a shock to some farmers but(that word again) this is how it works in agriculture and some but not a lot of other sectors;

End retailer decides what he can pay for meat and sell with a good margin(forget loss leaders,offers etc for the minute)
Factory then can work out what to pay for cattle to leave a margin after costs(big as possible but hey thats life!)
Finisher/weanling producer then; OOPS this is the bit where we get a sharp dose of economics.

In the real world factories KNOW that many farmers will continue to produce raw materials for them regardless.
How many posters on here are part time or trot out the old "keeping down tax" "weekend r and r" "building up the farm" "investing in the future" "shur what else could I be at " stories?

rancher

bbam wrote: »

I think it's hard to hide that the IFA have a confiloct if interest wen it comes to protesting at the gate of the processing plants.
Also it was enlightening to see the large lads who are renting facilities to Larry being defended, how could we deny them a living made from this cozy setup. Well the IFA seem quite happy to seethe smaller farmers being squashed so this cozy arrament is being maintained to support larger facilities - this shows where the IFA loyalties lie, with the larger men. The small man can be squeezed from existence as long as you get to protect the cronies.
It definitely seems that Larry has the IFA in a compromising position which they are happy to support as it meets their own ends - money !

Hard to hide that the farmers you mean have a conflict of interest when it comes to protesting at the gate of the processing plants.....pathetic turnout at the last one.
I was often very glad to rent my sheds, we didn't have big SFPs in the 80s when interest rates were up to 18%. I wouldn't have thought a lot of any one messing with my customers,

bbam

rancher wrote: »

Hard to hide that the farmers you mean have a conflict of interest when it comes to protesting at the gate of the processing plants.....pathetic turnout at the last one

Perhaps..
But that's probably as much a message of unhappiness with the IFA than any other message.

I deal with small farmers every day in my job. And the overriding message is exactly what I see demonstrated here.
The IFA is an organisation constructed and executed to protect the positions of the top 10%-20% of farmers.. Small farmers in marginal areas are completely disillusioned with it as a representing body and are turning away from it.

The biggest shout in the propaganda list above is about protecting payments. Its widely known that these same top tier of farms are creaming off a disproportionate amount and so the IFA will fight their case, just as it is they rather than the smaller beef producer who were defended in earlier posts.

The IFA movement has recently been described to me like the NAZI party in 1940's Germany, there to serve the few at the expense of all. Many are members simply because there is no alternative rather than they think its a great organisation. Membership numbers is not the same as outright support, as can be seen by numbers turning out.

Greengrass1

Father was talking to a friend of his today. Went to the protest that was on in Dublin and had 60 fat cattle at the time.
He still has them. Didn't do him any good

Farmer Pudsey

First I like to state I do think the IFA can do little about the low prices there at present. My biggest issue is they seem to have a huge blockage about preventing from controlling the kill by keeping huge amount of cattle in feedlots.

The UK competition Authority has ordered Ryanair to dispose of its share in Aer Lingus as it is anti-competitive. It is the same with the factory's owning cattle in feedlots and owning feedlots themselves. I have no issues with factory;s giving contracts to feeders I have a huge issue with them owning the amount of cattle they have over the last 12 months.

The IFA are the lead farm organisation or so they always tell us. But they are standing well back from this one. It all very well throwing remarks about interfering in people business but when they are involved in distorting the market then something needs to be done. If the CA rules against it and the IFA follow it to Europe and they rule against it well and good, but I get the feeling they want nothing to do with this, why?

Is it because the powers that be do not want any interference with the present set up. The factory's are very deliberate when they buy cattle and have them finished they target the time to control the market like this year. The so called beef regulator was a pie in the sky idea. The reality is that it would be impossible to set up a new factory in competition with the present factory's especially if we look at the history of farmer owed factory's.

This issue with Factory's now buying calves is a deliberate attempt to squeeze producer margins. They the factory cannot make a profit for the money invested due to labour costs etc. However this will reduce store prices next Sept 12 months. Finishers can now expect that the factory's will target having about 30-50K cattle for finish from December every year and they can back up supply and you will have to send in you cattle when they tell you at there price and it will not matter whether the kill is 25K,27K or 33K/week.

case 956

rancher wrote: »

.
We lobbied for a system to ensure that farmers SFP income wouldn't be reduced by up to 50% in one year.

ye wouldn't have done that only the larger farmers would suffer, the small man is thrown in the corner and forgot about.

rancher wrote: »

Hard to hide that the farmers you mean have a conflict of interest when it comes to protesting at the gate of the processing plants.....pathetic turnout at the last one.


Not everyone can go on your day trips to protest, majority of beef and sheep farmers are part time because there business isn't viable to support a mortage and feed a family because of factories and others walking all over them when they like and a dairy farmer to go on a trip has to get someone in too milk for them costing money and for what a waste of a day away with no results shown afterwards

As for my post been abusive it not to be I expressing my view point about the ifa and I very well entitled to, whether you agree with it or not is up to yourself, I could call your reply back to my post as abusive if that was the case.