Cattle 'limit up'

[errolanderson]

Tyson Foods announced they will no longer
accept cattle that receive feed additives
such as Zilmax effectively reducing beef
output per animal.

October live cattle up $3/cwt in overnight
trade.

[grassfarmer]

Not so sure its the act of "reducing beef output" that
puts the futures limit up. What about the potential of
raising overall beef prices by allowing more exports,
at higher prices, into countries only willing to accept
beef free of these products?
Well done Tyson Foods.

[smcgrath76]

A variety of factors. Corn price
dropping quickly (probably should result
in bigger carcasses), downward pressure
on barley, short of cattle, and the
Zilmax issue. I tend to agree with GF
long term, but the short term of those
markets I think is limited as very few
commodity players are thinking about
them at all, and there are still all the
issues with other implants, protocols,
etc.
I just hope (but have very little faith)
the US doesn't screw up the debt ceiling
discussion slated for next month. If
you have them locked in great, if not I
would consider August marketing of
yearlings.

[rkaiser]

Just like any experiment, some pass the test of time, some don't. Ractopamine was proven in the lab and in field tests, however the changes that all feedlots observed in the cattle behaviour obviously took some numbers and observation to verify.

Is it a move by Tyson to move on new markets? Maybe. Don't forget that Tyson is suspected to be the company that "bought" the EU quotas at inflated prices that drove companies like Canada Gold out of the market. I personally doubt that they are going after these markets and maybe, just maybe, like JBS and their "natural beef" program, they are listening to public whisperings.

In spite of efforts by people like me to help them keep frankensteer developments out of the public media realm.... LMAO, there are people lashing out against the continual onslaught of experiments on their food in the name of profit and nothing else.

Had some conversations about branding this week that led to a question for ya'all.

Isn't "natural beef" conventional and could we consider that each time the other stuff gets a new drug injected or fed,"IT" should be labeled. Instead, anyone who sells traditional beef must pay the extra cost of labelling and developing brands. Seems pretty damn ass backwards to me.

I will also congratulate Tyson. Not sure what their financial plan for this is yet, but they are removing a drug that I do not believe is good for humanity at large. so Here here.

Up the limit? Another case of gamblers who sit on their asses trying to make money in this false economy we call futures. Period. Demand for beef is rising and will for the rest of the careers of those on this site. Even better times are on the way and our choice is to play and speculate with the gamblers sitting on their ass or physically do something ourselves to take advantage of this growing world demand.