beef price tracker

Jjameson wrote: »

https://share.icloud.com/photos/0b2aJjjz5t80UJ_gT3z8aGjHA

I screen shot this last year from face book. The ifa payed Jim power for page upon page of nothing when the truth can be established so easily with a bit of effort.

This is where it should start. A 3 mont Uk and European pricewatch of retail/wholesale catering value of Irish beef.

What is the advantage of that information, I questioned the same when Jim Power was doing it too. Unless you're going to build a factory it's a pointless exercise.
Processors will still buy as cheap as they can and sell as dear as they can, same as everyone else

Jjameson wrote: »

It would at least disarm the industry claim of high volume low margin. Back of fag box figures indicate a 100% gross margin.

Taking a plants net taxable profit and dividing it by animal throughput is ridiculous when every family baron member is a paid director or executive, every wage has been paid, every whimsical expense used. Jim power had absolutely nothing to go on. No information.
Eg. A beef baron family had a horse with a local trainer a couple of years back. After a grade2 win a restaurant in Dublin benefitted to the tune of 5 to 6 k in a splurge for all involved. Corporate expenses. This is not uncommon.


So it’s a consumer issue as much as as a producer issue. Particularly when the consumers tax is “subsidising” the producer in time’s of particular industry profiteering.

To be honest, the badgering of meat plants that's going on would make me less likely to increase price if I owned one.
Look at the lamb factories, no protests yet no worse than beef factories. Would beef factories kill all our cattle if it wasn't so attractive, it could be another case of farmers shooting themselves in the foot, They nearly ****ed up the beef trade last years.
I spend foolishly now,, does that mean I profiteer on taxpayers money,

Paunch
No I do not think 4.5 is realistic, but present prices are not sustainable either. We need a minimum base if 3.9/kg. And the price to vary from there up. That is where it was 4-5 years ago and there was less messing with weights and bulls than now. However suckling is not viable much below 4.5/kg. But lads BSing about 3/kg next year is not helpful either and negotiation has to start somewhere.

Straight
I do not think that dairy farmers should have to subsidize beef but a situation has been created where we have 1.5 million dairy cattle to be put through the system every year. Exports are only go to take so many. Panch has a dairy farm as well as beef. He has never answered what amount of calves he rests for his beef enterprise. There is only a minimal margin in beef at present prices it is not sustainable in present format.


Runwithme
If we have learned anything it's that more subsidizing is not the answer. Autumn born calving adds too much cost into the system and is not viable. As well it will only happen on the Suckler side and numbers would be limited. With carbon footprint it downsizing the Suckler herd we need.

Wrangler
The badgering of factories as you call it only started after the processor's started to drive price down last year and talked about 3.2-3.3/kg. Farmers drew a line in the sand. at 3.5. If processor's hat there way it would have been a lot worse. For all the BSing about market forces we are 150-200/head behind the UK all summer long this year. Processor and retailing interests will once again use Irish beef to pull price down

Jam
You are right Brexit is the great gift to retailers and processor's. 4-5 years ago beef was above 4/kg for half the year and was only at 3.7/kg for a few months in the autumn. Now it never hits 4/kg. The retailer/processor cartel has extracted 40-50c/kg out of the price for themselves.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Paunch
No I do not think 4.5 is realistic, but present prices are not sustainable either. We need a minimum base if 3.9/kg. And the price to vary from there up. That is where it was 4-5 years ago and there was less messing with weights and bulls than now. However suckling is not viable much below 4.5/kg. But lads BSing about 3/kg next year is not helpful either and negotiation has to start somewhere.

Straight
I do not think that dairy farmers should have to subsidize beef but a situation has been created where we have 1.5 million dairy cattle to be put through the system every year. Exports are only go to take so many. Panch has a dairy farm as well as beef. He has never answered what amount of calves he rests for his beef enterprise. There is only a minimal margin in beef at present prices it is not sustainable in present format.


Runwithme
If we have learned anything it's that more subsidizing is not the answer. Autumn born calving adds too much cost into the system and is not viable. As well it will only happen on the Suckler side and numbers would be limited. With carbon footprint it downsizing the Suckler herd we need.

Wrangler
The badgering of factories as you call it only started after the processor's started to drive price down last year and talked about 3.2-3.3/kg. Farmers drew a line in the sand. at 3.5. If processor's hat there way it would have been a lot worse. For all the BSing about market forces we are 150-200/head behind the UK all summer long this year. Processor and retailing interests will once again use Irish beef to pull price down

Jam
You are right Brexit is the great gift to retailers and processor's. 4-5 years ago beef was above 4/kg for half the year and was only at 3.7/kg for a few months in the autumn. Now it never hits 4/kg. The retailer/processor cartel has extracted 40-50c/kg out of the price for themselves.

Subsidies isn't the right answer to the problem but unfortunately it's the only answer at the moment.
Talk of anything else is up there with the 4.50/kg. criticising IFA is alright but no organisation has done anything else worthwhile in all the kerfuffle

Panch18 wrote: »

Do you not think its better to go into the meeting with realistic exceptions rather than telling/persuading people your going to get 4.50 and then even if you got 4 it would be seen as a defeat and probably rejected?

Look i agree that beef prices are too low and we should be getting 4 a kg, but what i want to get and the price that the market is willing to pay are 2 totally different things. Lets say factories paid a minimum of 4.50 kg - would we still be able to compete with Argentina or Uruguay on the world market? do we have reliable evidence that the global markets we are selling our beef into will pay 80 cent bonus for Irish meat?

There is no point in bringing up the Irish market - because it's irrelevant in the scheme of irish beef production

The biggest issue is in 2014 as a example brazilain beef price to the farmer was 8.0 Brazil real kgs (2.40 euro a kilo) today Brazil beef price is 20.49 real kgs (3.20 euro a kilo), they have experienced huge currency losses to the dollar and euro over 50% of a devaluation but farmers are receiving over double the price they where getting in 2014 while we are getting 20% less, been part of a 1st world economy as a primary food producer is a bad place to be at the moment as our governments actively encourage zero inflation while they hammer third world countries and make their currencies worthless

leoch wrote: »

Yea wrangler but all other organisations dont have the factory government backing

Why do you think that, is it because they don't abuse government departments or tell lies about them or even tell lies to them like Beef Plan do.
Do IFA look soft because they're not thugs

leoch wrote: »

Well if them thugs u keeptalking about had the gardi the ag dept and all the ministers, rte ,mii the revenue etc behind them backing them to the hilt then it would be very different indeed and they wouldnt need to be betrayed like thugs as u call them it would be the factories then getting frustrated do u not think???

Factories won't give in. They'd never stay in business if farmers thought they could block the gates if some farmer dreamt he got a wrong grade or price.
Beef plan better get cute or they'll **** it up for everyone. They're so abusive now they're winding each other up.
The level of subsidies won't continue if farmers keep abusing the government, plenty of hospitals, nursing homes, schools,etc need money worse than farmers at the moment

Jjameson wrote: »

The waters are fairly murky and far from black and white regarding the IFA. Wrangler is a antagonist and definitely not representative of local ifa here anyway.
We were glad of the ifa last year during the high court injunction cases. They were probably the best, and most coherent speakers at the table as well.
I concur with paunch on his commentary of the breakaway groups, some right head the balls with soapboxes and I think most of us that were at the gates don’t subscribe to any of them at this stage.
The ifa would have the lions share of the protest I was involved in.
It was a massive mistake that they hadn’t the leadership to step up officially when the momentum was there.
They haven’t been able to muster such support in over 20 years and they’ll never manage it again I fear.

Antagonist..... because I tell you the way it is, a bit of reality.
I foretold the way it was all going to go last year because we've all been there done that and know the outcome.
The fact that you supported them last year, they still think they have that support, they'll get nowhere with their abusive carry on.
Thinking they have that support they have done their best to undermine Irish beef across the Internet even directly writing to English supermarkets.
If it's antagonistic not to agree with all that's going on and if it's antagonistic not to accept the criticism of hard working farmers in IFA (that are elected by farmers) , then I hold my hands up.
With the off farm income and subs coming into beef farmers now I'd venture to say the farmers that are worried about the price of beef are in the minority, most have moved on to other enterprises that would be concerned

Jjameson wrote: »

No lies. You write so much ****e there’s just too many pages to scroll back to bring the real nonsense really it to the Fore. But I will dig it up tonight because of that that slur. I am that “SAD”!
The only ifa presidential candidate in favour of the protest won the election. The guys that look stupid are those that backed the wrong horse. Adam Woods!!!

The stats on Irish beef farming and sfp payments are widely known and your belligerent arrogance to acknowledge them doesn’t surprise me. You are with the “haves” and that’s your narrative.

I had 68 cattle fit or close to fit last October 1st. I didn’t buy into industry propoganda or that of a contingent of disgruntled ifa/ifj and sold from 1st week of January to 3rd week of feb at flat rates in excess of 40cent a kg had I given them away.
Thanks taxpayer for the top up as well...
But still f all made from them.

My sfp is around the national average and I can’t make any more of it but there’s a huge contingent of have nots with a an awful lot less.

I won't quote you my subs on eleven acres but my neighbour, a builder, with fifteen acres that used to rear a few calves to beef in the reference years gets 2400 euros and would've got another €800 on his beef cattle had he went for a bord Bia inspection, so excuse me if I don't see it difficult to get good subs.

wrangler wrote: »

With the off farm income and subs coming into beef farmers now I'd venture to say the farmers that are worried about the price of beef are in the minority, most have moved on to other enterprises that would be concerned

wrangler wrote: »

I don't think I said that, but the effort to take our income from us isn't going to do anything to improve our opinion of yous.
20 years is nothing, milk quota lasted over 30 years and we just had to suck it up, it's certainly not looking after the big fellow, mine is down about 30% + in the last 8 year. That money must be going somewhere, is it not new entrants.
At the time I was setting my land young farmers were getting up to 300/ha entitlements just by renting land and they could sell the entitlements after one year. All those concessions to young farmers are being abused all over.

Concessions to young farmers has very little to do with reduction in payments. National reserves are limited. Most reductions are due to reduction in CAP budget. This has been the main influence in reduction in payments. I say payments have reduced by nearer 40% than 30% since 2002.

This is where many fail to see the issue. there is no point in looking to the EU for payments to solve farm incomes. Any upturn has to come from the market. But as long as the imbalance in power stays there we will struggle to improve farm profitability.

Off farm income is a red herring used to blame profitability in the beef sector. Nobody will run an enterprise at a loss if it can be avoided. Neither are the large SFP around that were there that were there previously. Your builder neighbour with 2400 on 15 acres is getting 400/HA, that will be whittled away. Part of that payment may or may not have been stacked from rented or if a builder build on land. Over the next period all payments will be reduced to the national average.

I presume the 800 extra was from the slaughter schemes. These are useless they are one off payments to winter finishers keeping some of them in the game.

As for your attitude that Beef plans actions were a failure, they did steady the beef price last year and stop the slide. You belief that the processors won is deluded. They have been on the back foot since and political opinion now sees that there is an issue there. And as Gerry Adams once said ''they have not gone away''. There is a struggle with some infighting but they may emerge stronger or be moved into a radical younger organisation.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Concessions to young farmers has very little to do with reduction in payments. National reserves are limited. Most reductions are due to reduction in CAP budget. This has been the main influence in reduction in payments. I say payments have reduced by nearer 40% than 30% since 2002.

This is where many fail to see the issue. there is no point in looking to the EU for payments to solve farm incomes. Any upturn has to come from the market. But as long as the imbalance in power stays there we will struggle to improve farm profitability.

Off farm income is a red herring used to blame profitability in the beef sector. Nobody will run an enterprise at a loss if it can be avoided. Neither are the large SFP around that were there that were there previously. Your builder neighbour with 2400 on 15 acres is getting 400/HA, that will be whittled away. Part of that payment may or may not have been stacked from rented or if a builder build on land. Over the next period all payments will be reduced to the national average.

I presume the 800 extra was from the slaughter schemes. These are useless they are one off payments to winter finishers keeping some of them in the game.

As for your attitude that Beef plans actions were a failure, they did steady the beef price last year and stop the slide. You belief that the processors won is deluded. They have been on the back foot since and political opinion now sees that there is an issue there. And as Gerry Adams once said ''they have not gone away''. There is a struggle with some infighting but they may emerge stronger or be moved into a radical younger organisation.

That builder didn't stack anything and I'd say that disadvantage payment would account for €600 of it.,
I wonder at what price demand and abuse from farmers will processors say feck this and close down, I think you've said that they are making too much to walk away.

wrangler wrote: »

I wonder at what price demand and abuse from farmers will processors say feck this and close down, I think you've said that they are making too much to walk away.

ðŸ˜ðŸ˜ðŸ€£

They cry themselves to sleep at night.

All the scandals, tribunals, regulations ignored, laws flouted and all they wanted was farmers to be friends with them.

Panch18 wrote: »

Unfortunately off farm income isn't a red herring - but an actual reality

you only have to look at the buildings section of the journal - a fella with 25 sucklers dropping 150k on a shed for them, whilst having a nice 3 year old JD 100hp tractor to feed them, and your telling me they're losing money and the off farm income is a red herring. if logic and money came into it fellas would never see sheds like that - and its not just the odd shed either.

Lads spending that money on a shed for suckler's is an outlier. Most Suckler sheds I see for that amount of cows are 40-50k max before vat and grant maybe 21-27k net of vat and grant and 14-18k net of tax.

Ya I see lads at that crack with tractors but second hand is not easy to come by any longer in a smaller stick tractor. However again I see few enough around me at that unless tractor is used for contracting on the side

€3.65 for steers around this country next week.

jfh wrote: »

Usually sell stores but I sold a bullock for €1610, he was 760kg, I'm quality assured & he was under 30 months, can't help but think I'd have been better off going to the factory. Anyone do the maths for me please

Not by a whole pile unless he was sitting in te mart 10-12 hours or was a u grade bullock. As an R+ he should kill from 410-420 kgs as an R+ his price would be 3.86/kg as you have no bargining power. At 420 he gross about 1620 euro. At present looking at some mart prices they are at or virtually at factory price. I seldom see a 100 euro margin on them at preset. Most now are bought by online bidders from the processors.

Cavanjack wrote: »

A u+ bullock if fat would kill out at 58% fresh weight. Could have left him at 450kg dead. Would leave him at €4.09 A kg. So €1840.
All depends on weather he was fat and graded a u+ which I’d imagine he would if a prize winner.

You beat me to it, I was just about to post the same thing, the only difference I would have had is in the right factory a U grade bullock that size will kill 60%+. €1,850 is the minimum i’d be expecting for him if he’s a U grade.