MII

ganmo

QPS – The QPS was introduced in 2010 by agreement with IFA, following a number of Government led expert reports that highlighted the need for a quality based payment system that rewarded efficient producers and in particular underpinned the production from the suckler cow herd. The QPS remains at the heart of the payment system for beef animals. MII analysis indicates that the QPS system has delivered additional price returns in excess of €100 million euro per annum since 2010 to the progeny from the suckler herd compared to the flat price based system in place up to then.



Transparency – MII members are committed to improving their remittance documents to provide further information and clarity, including factors which contributed to the determination of the final price paid. Clearly this will help to identify the benefits of achieving target specifications and the cost of not doing so. The structure and format of the current remittance documents vary across members with some documents providing more information than others. MII members have already commenced a process of amending their administrative systems to add further clarification and information to these documents and these improvements will be rolled out as soon as possible



Carcase Weights – The carcase weight criteria, in particular, have come in for much unjustified adverse comment. MII again highlights that: • Carcases up to 380kg are the desired product for premium markets;
• Carcases above 380kg have, and will continue to have, a market outlet, though not necessarily a premium market outlet;
• Carcases up to 400kg are not being penalised;
• It is now proposed that for the period up to 31st March 2015, industry will, in line with its commitment following its meeting with Minister Coveney, exercise further flexibility on weight ,given the concerns expressed about heavy carcases, which account for only a small proportion of overall cattle output.
• Weight flexibilities will be dealt with on a plant by plant basis and producers of heavy animals should engage early and directly with processors to establish the opportunity and best timing for marketing such animals.




Winter Finishing – The Dowling report suggested that consideration be given to modulating the In-spec bonus to take account of seasonal factors such the additional costs associated with winter finishing. Industry will continue to analyse this proposal and other measures that might support and maintain the current supply pattern recognising that any return to more seasonal, solely grass-based production would undermine our capability to service high value European fresh beef customers. MII proposes that a cross-stakeholder group comprising producers, processors, feed mills and banks be established to look at possible ways to reduce risks involved in winter finishing.



Increase use of Contracts- In the shorter term it is felt that the wider use of contracts represents the most appropriate method of providing some guarantee to winter finishers. Companies are committed to working closely with their supply base to outline the various types of contracts that may be available”.

Taken from the agriland website
My take on their response is - QPS 'aren't we're great guys'
Transparency - why aren't they doing this already?
Carcass Weight - premium products deserve premium price, non premium product should not get the premium price but also shouldn't be penalised
Winter finishing - Why are they pawning off the responsibility to the mills and banks?
Contracts - only winter finishers?

Farmer Pudsey

ganmo wrote: »

Taken from the agriland website
My take on their response is - QPS 'aren't we're great guys'
Transparency - why aren't they doing this already?
Carcass Weight - premium products deserve premium price, non premium product should not get the premium price but also shouldn't be penalised
Winter finishing - Why are they pawning off the responsibility to the mills and banks?
Contracts - only winter finishers?

A lot of it is too little too late. Exit from winter finishing by smaller producers is continuing. They may well have killed the goose that layed the golden egg.

Good article in todays rag regarding the way that irish beef is sold in British retailers. A lot of the beef sold from the butchers counters in major supermarkets is Irish as opposed to prepacked beef. This avoids issue with labeling and the same price is achieved by retailers V prepacked British labeled beef.

There is at present a 300 euro difference between the price paid fora British and Irish steer. It has also been highlighted lately that processors are paid virtually the same for cattle dispite huge drop in price over last ten months.

I think we have to push the boat out and go to the line with them. Exiting QA if it is not reformed. A completely restructuring of the grid and pricing to reflect production costs. This idea that farmers costs are too high might be right however it is very hard for farmers to achiever cost reductions. The reality is that winter finishers would be fairly good to keep costs low and as has been highlighted factory feedlots produce more expensive beef than these finishers. Yet it is from this area that farmers are walking away from fast.

MII has been talking out the side of its mouth for years. It continues to do so. Processors and there procurement managers then spin a different line. Remember last year as Procurement managers in September/October saw no issue with bulls as long as they were under 24 months and then a few months later change tack. The end result was that finishers lost serious money. The reality is that we are selling the cheapest prime beef in Europe. So cheap that the diofference between prime beef and cow beef of same grade is only 30-40c/kg.

Robson99

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I think we have to push the boat out and go to the line with them. Exiting QA if it is not reformed. A completely restructuring of the grid and pricing to reflect production costs.

What way do you think they should restructure it?.

Connemara Farmer

Getting properly paid for Irish beef in the UK and getting as much of it from here to there is the most important issue. Easier said than done but I'd put that top of the list.

Don't have cattle here but I have been watching ICSA on Twitter urging farmers to exit the QA scheme. I think that's a good idea.

Don't know about the grid and all that, if the factories change it at will, well that's just bull**** and needs tackling. Given the nature of animals it takes a farmer time to respond to changes in the market.

Farmer Pudsey

Robson99 wrote: »

What way do you think they should restructure it?.

Increase the base age by at least 3 months for steers this would help to equalise kill spread and allow Fresians to finish to an adequate fat score. Include O- and maybe P+ to gain bonus. Reduce the drop for O+ from R- back to 6c/kg.If they want to impose weight limits then have set deductions not case at present where if you present cattle out of spec you can be taken for a spin.

Bulls grid to be put in place with price structure put in place with a realistic pricing structure. Set pricing from 2= fat score to reflect issue with getting fat cover on bulls. Similar to steers make penalty's visible for age or weight issues.

If processors are willing to accept different cattle at different times that these bonus's/penalty's should be more visible. For instance if during May/June they are willing to accept heavier cattle or lower fat covers then idealy a contract/tendering process should be put in place.

Robson99

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Increase the base age by at least 3 months for steers this would help to equalise kill spread and allow Fresians to finish to an adequate fat score. Include O- and maybe P+ to gain bonus. Reduce the drop for O+ from R- back to 6c/kg.If they want to impose weight limits then have set deductions not case at present where if you present cattle out of spec you can be taken for a spin.

Bulls grid to be put in place with price structure put in place with a realistic pricing structure. Set pricing from 2= fat score to reflect issue with getting fat cover on bulls. Similar to steers make penalty's visible for age or weight issues.

If processors are willing to accept different cattle at different times that these bonus's/penalty's should be more visible. For instance if during May/June they are willing to accept heavier cattle or lower fat covers then idealy a contract/tendering process should be put in place.

And what about R+ and U grade cattle??

Farmer Pudsey

Robson99 wrote: »

And what about R+ and U grade cattle??

The Processors have stated that O grade cattle are quite suitable for the premium markets they have. The majority of cattle fall into this area.

The reality is that the issue with R+ and U grade cattle is harder to fix. These cattle come from suckler herds. The processors have no issue with heifers in general it is heavy steers and bulls are the an issue. However at certain time of year processors are more willing to take same. The real issue is putting structures in place that if you produce these slightly out of spec cattle that you are not crufied and that these is structures in place to market same.

For instance I think that longterm U16 month bulls will be the main outlet for suckler quality cattle. However it is important that a grid is in place to reflect there value, it is also important that in the case of these cattle they should be linked to the steer grid and acceptance of them from FS2=.

The reality is that the UK market dose not desire heavy carcases that is not to say there is no market for them just it is not the high priced UK market. However it is ridiculous that cattle under 30 months in the case of O- and P+ steers that they are making little more than cow price and when over 30 months maybe less than cow price with P= bullocks with a FS3 often making less than cows of a similar quality.

Robson99

To be honest Farmer P, I think the main problem is the base price at the moment. It needs to be up at 4Euro /kg

In relation to the grid structure, O and P grade cattle should not be rewarded the same as U grade cattle on the grid. If anything the 6 cent difference in grades should be more like 8 or 9 cent to reward producers of these cattle. Most O and P grade cattle are a by product of the dairy men. Producing quality cattle is what most suckler farmers west of the shannon aim for to make their living from. Any old cow can throw an O or P grade calf. Same as any old cow can produce a litre of milk. Dairy men at rewarded for producing higher quality milk. The beef man should be rewarded for producing better quality cattle. IMO

Farmer Pudsey

Robson99 wrote: »

To be honest Farmer P, I think the main problem is the base price at the moment. It needs to be up at 4Euro /kg

In relation to the grid structure, O and P grade cattle should not be rewarded the same as U grade cattle on the grid. If anything the 6 cent difference in grades should be more like 8 or 9 cent to reward producers of these cattle. Most O and P grade cattle are a by product of the dairy men. Producing quality cattle is what most suckler farmers west of the shannon aim for to make their living from. Any old cow can throw an O or P grade calf. Same as any old cow can produce a litre of milk. Dairy men at rewarded for producing higher quality milk. The beef man should be rewarded for producing better quality cattle. IMO

On the base price the use of the it by processors allowed them to access cheap beef. It allowed them to drop the price of cattle outside the grid and then use this beef to force down the base price. It also allowed them to back up certain types of cattle and then use this as a reserve bulls in particular in march/april.

The fallacy that higher quality cattle are not valued on the grid is just that fallacy. From the base a U+ 4= is +24c on the grid it is 4 places up from the median, an O=4= is -24c/kg even though it is only 2 places down. A processor would much prefer the latter than the former as the U grade would be well above 400kgs in general and the the O grade animal would more than likly be arounf 370kgsDW. When you go down another grade on the grid you lose another 18c/kg as you lose QA bonus as well. You also have to factor in that more cattle fall below the median than at or above the median

Robson99

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

You also have to factor in that more cattle fall below the median than at or above the median

Because they are coming from dairy farms. Sucker farmers are being advised and encouraged to produce high quality cattle. Dont you think they should be rewarded for doing so. If the grid structure wasnt in place there would be some amount if sh*te cattle in the country

Farmer Pudsey

Robson99 wrote: »

Because they are coming from dairy farms. Sucker farmers are being advised and encouraged to produce high quality cattle. Dont you think they should be rewarded for doing so. If the grid structure wasnt in place there would be some amount if sh*te cattle in the country

I am not sure if that is true. Suckler farmers produce cattle that they think are what the market wants. The animal they produce often has to be taken to high weights to make a viable return on the suckler cow. Yes there is an export market for high quality weanlings for the Italian market. If these type of cattle are viable for the Irish system is questionable. The UK which is the premium market wants O/R grade cattle sub 380 DW and ideally lower for which suckler cattle are unviable unless killed as sub 16 month bulls.

IMO the real reason the retailers want to drop age of bulls is to reduce down caracase size in these cattle.

Nettleman

Robson99 wrote: »

Because they are coming from dairy farms. Sucker farmers are being advised and encouraged to produce high quality cattle. Dont you think they should be rewarded for doing so. If the grid structure wasnt in place there would be some amount if sh*te cattle in the country

All valid points Farmer P, I think factories want to abandon the QPS system because they want to develop their next business strategy (linked to dairy expansion) away from continentals, and sucklers towards boney dairy male cattle, they are crapping themselves that the dairy man will start to cull male calves at birth like NZ,(imo) and they will have no choice but to pay top dollar for what ever other cattle the suckler man has, i.e. big continentals would be very expensive for them. Better, from their perspective to make the suckler man "see sence now", force him to switch to finishing dairy males, put continantial herd extinct now, make sure government doesn't support suckler man, force him into dairy cattle fattening, which never put on weight, and penalise farmers under a new QPS system where if you cant put condition on a jersey or friesan bullock, you will get nailed. If you can put weight on the,, well the meal man will have cleaned ya out before ya get to the factory. We have been lead by the nose down the big contential route previously, and if we continue to follow the same "knowalls" this time, don't be surprised if we get nailed again if we allow other dictate the agenda, government included

Farmer Pudsey

Nettleman wrote: »

All valid points Farmer P, I think factories want to abandon the QPS system because they want to develop their next business strategy (linked to dairy expansion) away from continentals, and sucklers towards boney dairy male cattle, they are crapping themselves that the dairy man will start to cull male calves at birth like NZ,(imo) and they will have no choice but to pay top dollar for what ever other cattle the suckler man has, i.e. big continentals would be very expensive for them. Better, from their perspective to make the suckler man "see sence now", force him to switch to finishing dairy males, put continantial herd extinct now, make sure government doesn't support suckler man, force him into dairy cattle fattening, which never put on weight, and penalise farmers under a new QPS system where if you cant put condition on a jersey or friesan bullock, you will get nailed. If you can put weight on the,, well the meal man will have cleaned ya out before ya get to the factory. We have been lead by the nose down the big contential route previously, and if we continue to follow the same "knowalls" this time, don't be surprised if we get nailed again if we allow other dictate the agenda, government included

A lot will depend on sexed semen. when it will be fully developed commercially it will change beef production. Dairy farmers will only need to AI anout 15% of there cows to dairy Breeds. There will be few if any Jersey or Friesian bullocks. You will be left mainly with HE and AA cross bred calves. It will be hard for sucklers compete with these especially as they will be ideal for beef market with carcase's of 280-330kgs. Yes there may still be a market for export type suckler cattle. but 1.2-1.5 million dairy cross calves will be just about market demand

Robson99

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

I am not sure if that is true. Suckler farmers produce cattle that they think are what the market wants. The animal they produce often has to be taken to high weights to make a viable return on the suckler cow. Yes there is an export market for high quality weanlings for the Italian market. If these type of cattle are viable for the Irish system is questionable. The UK which is the premium market wants O/R grade cattle sub 380 DW and ideally lower for which suckler cattle are unviable unless killed as sub 16 month bulls.

IMO the real reason the retailers want to drop age of bulls is to reduce down caracase size in these cattle.

Teagasc are continuously advising sucker farmers to produce better quality cattle.
Were at suckers here for a good few years. Always tried to produce good quality U grade cattle. Off farm work commitment meant we had to move away from them. Now purchase u grade yearling heifers and finish them. Not afraid to pay for the quality I'm buying as the producer of these yearlings deserves his slice of the cake for producing same. There is more than the Italian market as an outlet for quality young cattle. We should have a bit of pride in the quality we produce. Maybe I'm old fashioned in my ways and I will accept that I'm not depending on the farm to put bread on the table but I hate to think of the day if I had to be fattening O and P grade cattle. I'm not saying those who are doing this are wrong, everyone to there own but top quality deserves the top premium

ganmo

reliance on dairy bred calves will result in greater seasonality IMO

epfff

Robson99 wrote: »

Teagasc are continuously advising sucker farmers to produce better quality cattle

but top quality deserves the top premium

What do teagasc know about beef bar what they read in a book back in intervention times.
When did they last sell beef on any market?
Sorry forgot their own suckler herd was a great financial success

What is quality?
The customer not the producer calls quality.

Compairing export and home finishing cannot be done at the moment so breaders must commit to one not use the home market as a safety net for stock that dont make grade

Farmer Pudsey

This is the issue with sucklers. Only the calf produced for export is viable off a suckler cow. Producing calves that can be slaughtered sub 360 kgs average is not profitable off suckler cows. U16 months with weights of 360 average may be a possibility with producer finishing himself.

Farrell

On reading al this, everyone has viable points.
The concern I have is everyone killing off grass, & especially in October / November.
Will this not bring a glut to 1 time of year, which will mean price drop for end of year?

Nettleman

Farrell wrote: »

On reading al this, everyone has viable points.
The concern I have is everyone killing off grass, & especially in October / November.
Will this not bring a glut to 1 time of year, which will mean price drop for end of year?

If Department published data it holds about cattle on the ground monthly, and their age profile, we could see whats actually in the country, their systems already separate beef and dairy herds and male and female and age. They publish once a year, but that's not much use the other 11 months of the year

rangler1

Nettleman wrote: »

If Department published data it holds about cattle on the ground monthly, and their age profile, we could see whats actually in the country, their systems already separate beef and dairy herds and male and female and age. They publish once a year, but that's not much use the other 11 months of the year

Plenty of farmers out there telling us that factories have access to it 12 mths of the year....pity they don't have proof

Farmer Pudsey

Farrell wrote: »

On reading al this, everyone has viable points.
The concern I have is everyone killing off grass, & especially in October / November.
Will this not bring a glut to 1 time of year, which will mean price drop for end of year?

Cattle off grass in October/November would be over 30 months. If you look in general we have equalised the kill over he year to generally withing a 5K range. 33 month limit would allow Friesians to develop to good far score however lads would have to read the market and kill when price and condition was right,

Robson99

epfff wrote: »

Compairing export and home finishing cannot be done at the moment so breaders must commit to one not use the home market as a safety net for stock that dont make grade

Wait till there is a glut of friesan cross cattle in the next few years. Thats when they will screw people fattening those type. There will always be a market though for quality sucker bred ones

Robson99

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Cattle off grass in October/November would be over 30 months. If you look in general we have equalised the kill over he year to generally withing a 5K range. 33 month limit would allow Friesians to develop to good far score however lads would have to read the market and kill when price and condition was right,

450 kg carcass weight would help the contenintal cattle. Too many people get worried about the Fresian beef

Farmer Pudsey

Robson99 wrote: »

450 kg carcass weight would help the contenintal cattle. Too many people get worried about the Fresian beef

Yes there is no issue with 459kg carcasses it is just that they have to go to Italy or France not suitblr to the UK trade so they will sell50c less