Suspected case of Foot and Mouth in UK with rapid diversion into Agribusiness policies and politics.

Who is insisting on the meat that they are eating being under 30 months ? Is the consumer paying less for the meat if it is over thirty months ? No .

At the time of the 2019 protests the German supermarket reps were quoted as saying that they had no issue with age of the beef.

It is a throwback to the BSE issue and particularly to the OTMS as it applied in the UK . It is a complete scam that two animals of otherwise identical parameters achieve two different prices because of a days difference in age while the consumer pays the same price for both end products .

There possibly WAS a reason .Time has moved on.

You don’t have to know anything about processing to know that paying a supplier two different prices for the same product while charging your customer the same is skimming .

Nobody is bullying them -and that is the problem . They have gotten used to dealing with pussies .

You don't know, do you? You've no idea if they have a reason? The supposition in the first instance should be that they have a reason - else why would they have the rule. My recollection is, for instance, that the Chinese absolutely insisted on the 30 months - when they were specifying. Also that the Brit supermarkets insisted on it. A lot of this could be buyers throwing their weight around - trying to impress their bosses/boards. I remember, on a number of occasions, once in America, being told that in tasting trials for beef flavour the Holstein scored highest!!

Some weeks ago there was some summit in Brussels, maybe a Nato occasion, and they described the 'leaders' as being served 'Holstein steaks'. Mirabile dictu!

Conspiracy theorist I see.

I don't understand from your piece how you figure a guy loses be selling under the 30 months. Stock can be let go over 30 and if one waits enough of an interval the price cut can be negated - I do that every Autumn with 4/5 stock. Also the price can increase after they've passed the 30 months or the grading cna get better. So it's not a certainty always. Best be alert and nimble.

I'm not sure I understand all of your post

You said

"I don't understand from your piece how you figure a guy loses be selling under the 30 months"

I'm not saying he loses by selling under 30 months....

I'm saying he potentially loses if he sells over 30 months and that's a bullshit arbitrary age limit which disadvantages all farmers selling beef.

I'm saying this means the pressure is on to sell under the 30 months and this means lads will aim to do that.....

I'm saying this is not advantageous to farmer for the following reasons

1) In general it encourages a more intensive style of production to get them fit under the 30 months which means a higher volume of beef is hitting the processors as lads try to chase profits by having more heads which lowers overall price for all.

2) This obviously (to me at least)means more inputs so more cost associated with production...on a product where the prices are reducing due to the volume being produced......the inputs (and thus the 30 month limit) are an even bigger issue on the poor quality dairy x calf selected for short gestation and ease of calving (so small and usually poor growth rates and bad conformation etc) .....more and more of these seem to be coming on stream year on year in my experience.....

I'm further saying I would have little problem with a 30 month limit if there was any real scientific underpinning or basis for it other than a handy lever to bring down price in 2 ways....a) anything over 30 months gets penalised b) it incentivises more stock turnover on amore regular basis therefore more throughput ...... I say there is no basis for it as I happen to know some of the finest tasting beef in the world (kobe aside) comes from animals that can be 6/7 years old (even more in some cases)...I also know from experience having had some of my own (over the 30 months) slaughtered and divided amongst family......and as for the main reason older can be better.....marbelling (fat in the muscle develops and more complexity of flavour can develop if animal given time and the diet is varied/natural etc......(so in addition we could be supplying a product at less than its true potential a lot of the time...which is kind of shooting ourselves in the foot)....I often wonder if we couldn't get dome sort of a PGI (protected status for our product) or work towards something like it with a mainly grass fed older animal with a varied diet etc

As an aside some other poster mentioned the Chinese factory wanting to keep 30 month limit it as if it was some sort of justification for keeping it......had to laugh at that...as if they wouldn't want to try keep a cheaper larger volume supply coming

I'm further saying the 30 month doesn't make much sense to me in terms of a green agenda either..........this efficiency and slaughtering at lower ages seems (at least to me) to mean even more heads/throughput, more inputs and more GHGs produced.....I can't get my head around how it's good for the farmer.....good for merchants and processors I can definitely see that

If anyone can show me the error of my ways I'll accept I'm wrong and move on but tbh I think it would get good for all farmers (in terms of beef prices) the less pressure lads are under to sell....if even a small percentage of farmers were more able/willing to hold stock if the spurious 30 month devaluation putting them under pressure to sell was removed I could see it being beneficial for all

I suppose I think its a total bullshit regulation with no scientific basis kept in place because of the reasons above....if you think that's Conspiracy fair enough......I await your reasoned explanation and I'll eat humble pie if you prove me wrong.....

When I'm killing a lamb for the freezer I picked a young lamb that thrived all his life, no setbacks, it seems to work for us, maybe they have something against older animals too........ they can sell a percentage of them but they don't want them all old cattle.

They're definitely penalising it, if it was a type of beef that they wanted encouraged ,they wouldn't be...... simples

The more kilos of beef they can sell the better for them so if the old beef was any good it'd yield more meat and a bigger margin per head

Fair enough. I've done that occasionally too, I've also had mutton that's been fed naturally and its a smashing product despite the stigma associated with it (mutton dressed as lamb etc)............................................think of the effect of people only wanting spring lamb : you get a glut of lamb coming on the market over approx 2/3 months where the product gets the price it should (most of the time) and then the rest of the product is devalued the rest of the time............

Maybe they do have something against animals over 30 months but I cant for the life of me think what it is beyond ensuring a larger volume of supply at lower prices and the next drive for "efficiency" is exactly the same.........................its ultimately to the primary producers loss and as an added kicker it doesn't benefit the environment either imo. I'd love someone to explain to me how it will reduce GHGs if you consider every part of the production cycle.

If that's the argument then its veered beyond simplistic into the positively moronic...........It cant be that can it?

Exactly as I suspected.

It appears you are unable to read/interpret what I wrote. Reread the post you quoted there and then reread your response.

At no point did I say there was a scientific basis for it........quite the opposite in fact......