bass ackwards heterosis...

[PureCountry]

Exactly, raymondb, great point. That is the key, and it's what makes our beef program work. Consistency in a product that demands a premium.

[farmers_son]

I doubt if anyone knows "what the customer wants". The customer doesn't know what they want much less communicate it to the producer. And the customer will tell you one thing but do another. For instance, say they want taste and quality but buy low price. If you are selling direct to a consumer, maybe the consumer says they want an aged product but what they really want is to feel special or superior because they can afford to demand something extra of you.

I would hope what you are really doing is producing for the most profitable market for your operation, taking into consideration returns and costs of production, economies of scale and so forth.

And size of cow has little to do with that.

[smcgrath76]

Glad to see a conversation about this.
I think what triggered my original post is some work I have been doing looking at genetic variation within breeds (or the range of variation). Using a bit of trickery with some information from USDA-MARC it is pretty interesting to see the "genetic overlap" in the major breeds. In other words, it appears somewhat that many breeders in every breed are selecting for the same things, even though their breeds "should?" more than likely be used for specific purposes. For example, there is a lot of overlap in milk genetics between terminal type breeds and maternal type breeds. I don't think this is a great surprise, but for us at home, our terminal bulls better not have a high milk number, as I would rather have muscle growth than milk production. It is also interesting to see breeds that are passing other breeds for traits that we consider the strengths of the breeds that are being passed. Has anyone looked at Milk numbers in Angus cattle lately?
Pretty much I agree with most of the comments posted above, but it is interesting to see how things are done, versus how we think they should be done.
Perhaps the biggest problem we face as an industry (RKaiser aside) is that even if we select on the information we know about our cattle (measured efficiency, growth, net return, etc.) most of us still sell our calves visually in large groups, or even in presort sales.
Basically, we put effort into selecting cattle that work and then just turn into a ring and say "These ones are pretty/shiny/taller/thicker so please bid an extra 5 cents."
A bit oversimplified, but certainly a goofy way to sell a product. I think that perhaps this is why we are seeing auction market volumes decline over the last several years. Certainly shows the difference between value added and commodity production.

[raymondb]

farmers-son--Do you know who your real customer is? My first line customer is not the consumer as I do not sell directly to the consumer. I am not smart enough or have the time or inclination to raise beef, finish beef,process and wrap beef and then sell the finished product after I put it on a shelf with enough lighting and color to make the consumer happy. I do the cow/calf thing and my main customer is the feedlot or the cattle broker. I talk to my customer and raise what he wants.My buyer gives me a price that I am satisfied with because I meet his needs. Yes I know what my customer wants.

[farmers_son]

And I would say that what your customer wants is to make money. Part of that is buying your cattle cheap.

There is a saying that when a customer buys a drill bit that is what he does, but what he wants is a hole.

smcgrath76: When you say it is a goofy way to sell a product, you need to keep in mind who is the seller. In the auction, the seller is the auctioneer, the fellow with the cattle in the ring is the prospect. The product is not cattle but rather image and "feel good" for the producer who wants to go home with a good feeling about his worth as a cattleman. Bearing in mind what the "product" is, i.e. "feel good" the auction ring is an effective way to sell a product.

Getting back to weight of cow, the weight of a cow is an excellent indicator of the weight of the cow and nothing else.

[raymondb]

Farmers-son--my customer better be making money because if he was not making money , I would run out of customers. I am making money with my cattle so both me and my customer are happy. If I am able to make money and still sell my cattle cheap, I must be doing something right. I thank you for the compliment.

My old and slow mind missed the analogy with the drill and hole thing-I appologize.

[kpb]

raymondb, you have hit the nail on the head. Your customer, and the customer of every producer who sells his calves rather than backgrounding (the majority) is the buyer, backgrounder or feedlot man. I see a lot of talk on here about producing a calf that the consumer wants and that's fine but if you don't have a big enough cow to give me a calf that I can feed well over the winter you're not going to get a good price in the fall no matter how your product eventually looks to the consumer. The bottom line is that the calf has to gain quickly and I think that your cow better churn out calves that the buyers in the fall want (ones that grow fast) or you're always going to be a dime behind. And that, no matter how efficient your cows are, means less money for you.

[redcountry]

with all the talk of breeds the point missed is that in the end the only thing a calf producer wants is a fast growing calf.
that said, does anyone know what breed or breed crosses will consistantly produce a calf that will finish within 20 months
Is it all in rations fed? or is it breed combinations and the way one crosses these breeds.
one cannot change his cow herd at every (flavor of the month) but by changing his bull he can change his calf crop in one season.
I learned a lesson on crossbreeding the hard way
I bought a herd of simm cows half were crossbred semm/tarentaise a real good producer and pretty to look at.
we met a tarentaise breeder and ordered some heifers, their calves look nothing like the crosses we bought (we should have bought a bull)
"lesson learned"
Today with having to meet the age (tooth) requirements of UTM what breeds or cross is best meeting the needs,anyone breeding for slow tooth eruption

[whiteface]

I fully expect to get yelled at for this but take it with a grain of salt eh...
I was told once that the only thing a Charolais cow was good for was raising a Charolais bull ( for terminal, good feeding, fast gaining, muscle calves for any of you who might not get it! ) so I will go out on a limb and say not only will I largely agree with that (meaning a straight Charolais cowherd would not be the most efficient way to go regardless of how much that particular "breed" might contribute to quality calves)and also that the only thing some "maternal" breeds would be good for (breeds made and promoted as being "milky", good moms, grass efficient, likely don't have the jam to produce pounds PAST WEANING (everyone get that statement!!! A lot of these fat good looking calves in the fall are done, especially if the're from maternal breeds and won't grow and perform in the feedlot on grain.
So I would go so far as to say that if a Charolais cow is good only for producing a Charolais bull, in my mind it stands to reason that a Tarentaise (or Hereford or Pinzguar or any thing promoted as the "mother of all cattle" is only good for that, being a mom, don't expect much for feedlot performance, or a premium for your calves, unless you take the best of both worlds and cross maternal with terminal, 'stead of trying to "do it all" with one breed, can't be done, they all have soething to contribute as much as all of us have something to contribute to the quality of each breed we dabble in. Just my opinion, don't blast me too much. Have a good night all!

[kpb]

whiteface, you are right on the mark. I agree with everything you said in your last post, nothing more to add.

kpb