Text 17477, 140 rader
Skriven 2008-06-08 00:51:32 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 17427 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: Humo(u)r
================
Hello Bob,

On Saturday June 07 2008 10:08, you wrote to me:

 RB>>> Here and further on you're assuming a tight market for chicken
 RB>>> feed, where relatively minor changes in demand can cause major
 RB>>> swings in the price.

 MV>> I merely stated that the price in Dollars goes up.

 RB> You can _claim_ anything, Michiel. It doesn't even have to be logical.

 MV>> The rest are your words.

The "tight market", "minor changes" and "major swings" are you words.

 RB> No, the logical conclusion from what you write. It's not enough to
 RB> claim something, logical or not.

"Tight market" is not a logical conclusion from what I write.

I merely say that there is a coupling, not a *tight* coupling.

 RB>>> But don't kid yourself: the USA middle west can still produce
 RB>>> more grain and other agricultural products than the US can
 RB>>> consume. Don't you remember how the American farmers were always
 RB>>> so interested in exporting their surpluses to the USSR?

 MV>> Exactly! They are exporting! So they would be foolish not to raise
 MV>> their price if the prices on the world market go up.

 RB> And why should the world market prices go up? I can see that in the
 RB> case of petroleum, but _chicken feed_???

Because world food price are going up and chicken feed competes on the basic
ingredients of farm land, sunshine and fertiliser.

 MV>>>> No, but the US producers of chicken feed will _export_ to the
 MV>>>> Euro area, thereby reducing supply on the US market and driving
 MV>>>> the price up (in Dollars).

 RB>>> This is what I mean, and I'm nearly 100% convinced your
 RB>>> assumption is incorrect.

 MV>> It is not an assumption, I am merely applying the laws of supply
 MV>> and demand. Your logic is faulty.

 RB> And your basis for the assumption (it definitely IS one) is faulty.

By your own words: you can claim anything.

This is leading nowhere...

 RB>>> Run out of Dollars?

 MV>> The individual trader, not the economy as a whole.

 RB> Which is precisely what I wrote, and does not apply as long as
 RB> currencies are convertible.

When currencies are 100% freely convertible without restrictions, it should not
matter in what currency you deal. In reality the matter is a bit more
complicated.

 MV>> Then the same restrictions will apply to the US chicken farmers.
 MV>> If they are lifted the others will profit too.

 RB> Getting pretty desperate in your arguments, aren't you ;-)

Not at all, I am simply observing that no one from outside the EU has
successfully penetrated the chicken market and my only assumption is that the
US will have much of the same problems in trying to do so as anyone ales.

 RB>>> so it's a good deal cheaper to ship the meat than the feed.

 MV>> That depends. Meat shipment needs a lot more care than chicken
 MV>> feed. For fresh meat, it has to be flown. Otherwise it must be
 MV>> frozen. Which adds to the expense and makes it less attractive for
 MV>> the consumer. People here seem to prefer fresh chicken over
 MV>> frozen.

 RB> Both are offered here.

Here too but the vast majority is fresh chicken. Only Lidl and Aldi offer
frozen chicken here and what they offer comes form Germany...

 RB> The frozen variety is generally cheaper, since it can be shipped from
 RB> the cheapest supplier. Fresh chicken is a local product.

And as people *here* seem to prefer fresh over frozen, that may be a reason why
penetrating the market from outside the EU is so hard....

 RB>>> And, as above, the EU laws and conditions may be too restrictive.

 MV>> Again: if that is so, all competitors from outside the US suffer
 MV>> equally.

 RB> Then why are you concentrating on the USA?

I am not, you are. I just keep saying that the US will have much of the same
problems as anyone else.

 MV>> My observation that so far no one from outside the EU has
 MV>> succeeded in penetrating the market is not a speculation.

 RB> Of course not... you as a recognized economic expert in the poultry
 RB> area must have a great deal of insider information that we peons never
 RB> hear of <beg>...

I can see what is on the shelves of the supermarket. Sarcasm won't change that.

 MV>> Now you say price isn't everything. Now what is it?

 RB> Both, of course. You have been assuming not only a higher price for US
 RB> chicken in the EU, but some kind of emotional "quality concern".

You are again putting words into my mouth.

 RB> I dispute both - unless EU chicken farmers manage to lobby
 RB> governments to impose "labelling" laws to stigmatize foreign-produced
 RB> chicken.

It is required by law to label the country of origin. Whether that is seen as a
stigmata is up to the buyer. It may indeed have that effect on some.

But the people reject things for many reasons that have nothing to do with
economics. Some people will not eat pork. Often for religeous reasons, but not
always. Roy Witt does not eat chicken, Or so he claimed on several occasions.
Some people will not eat horse meat. Or any meat. And some people will reject
products form certain sources for political reasons. I am one of those. I have
a list of countries who's products I try to avoid. I am not a fanatical
extremist, I will not reject a medicine that will save my life. Call me a
hypocrite for that, it will not change my position. I avoid products from
countries on the list. The US is on that list since 2002.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)