- Agriculture.com Community
- Announcements & Forum Help
- Farm Business
- Young & Beginning Farmers
- Cattle Talk
- Crop Talk
- Hog Talk
- Machinery Talk
- Machinery Marketplace
- Shops, buildings and bins
- Ask the SF Engineman!
- Computers & more
- Precision Agriculture
- People & Rural Life
- Ag Forum
- Women In Ag
- Agriculture.com Blogs
- Your Farm in the Future
- Women in Ag: Lisa Foust Prater
- Women in Ag: Brenda Frketich
- Women in Ag: Anne Miller
- Women in Ag: Jennifer Dewey
- Women in Ag: Talkin' Turkey with Lara Durben
- Women in Ag: Heather Lifsey Barnes
11-23-2016 07:12 PM - edited 11-23-2016 07:15 PM
Just a reminder folks. Most all of the news networks and political pundits projected Hillary Clinton would win the election.
11-23-2016 09:20 PM
It is the difference between those who like to define and redefine words VS those who deal with the ever changing numbers.... How can you be so exact on meanings of a process that is so abstract.
But, Jim, I just wish usda was as particular about the meaning of their words as you are....... there is no need to continually defend a projection or a prediction. it is nothing more........ Yet usda declairs it fact within two years. It starts with the long range projections...which begins the basis for annual projection..... adjusted monthly by observations of the factors that affect yield and acres... and 6 months after harvest, without any actual accounting it becomes fact to be looked back on and compared too.
Fact is there is not a bit better data gathering in the process than the exit poles of an election...... but in both cases we over analize the guesses....
11-23-2016 09:34 PM
overly simplistic and I wish their fervor for defending the accuracy of nothing more than a "projection" -- --- just apply that same energy to the data creation process process. Base it on something more than this sounds good.
Like right now in 4 states in the southern plains cotton seed selling at a record pace...... that fact won't be considered in March --- It might become a reason for what happened after the fact...12 months later.
11-24-2016 09:37 AM
SW, I think you get the point that a projection is simply pushing a trend out into the future and as new data in analysed the trend or projection is very likely - in fact almost has to change. My own take is that USDA provides information which we have to keep current on and incorporate into our other data to come up with our own assessment.
Some point out - I think accurately - that there often seems to be valid and available information that contradicts USDA's projections. An example is that USDA is at least 30 days behind the times in the summer. Many of us see crop conditions that are quite different than USDA's projection. That does not mean the projection is wrong. And that does not mean that USDA "predicted" something that we can see with our own eyes is not the case. We also complain that USDA doesn't incorporate data we think is relevant to developing a marketing plan. We ;have to understand that USDA gathered the data according to a certain procedure and it took the 30 days to process and publish it. Of course things changed in the meantime.
It's our job to take what USDA gave us to work with, understand it, use it as one component in our own yield forecasts and make marketing decisions that suit our situation.
Taking USDA numbers as a prediction means the farmer first has someone to blame when things don't go the way he wishes and means that the farmer opts out of accepting responsiblity for making his own decisions. There is no way I would ever accept that the USDA number is a prediction. I use it as one of many data sets and make my own marketing decisions. I accept responsiblity when I am wrong.
11-28-2016 09:34 PM - edited 11-28-2016 09:48 PM
These projections were created for enhancement of the budgeting process at the federal level, not to praise farmers or stabilize markets. Never intended to enhance our marketing experience.
It is not the producer who makes the mistake in judgement..... The producer is not very active in the futures trade compared to the buyers and merchants of grain. Those are the people who cling to the usda "projections" and will as long as those projections favor the flow of cheaper grain.
Cheaper grain makes for greater markup in the resale....There is far more money in transportation and resale than in production now, and preaching the trend like usda does helps maintain that reality.
It is disinformation if anything. At best a diversion from what may be reality.... and as long as the trade considers it actual information, it will continue to be used to stabilize price.
So we will continue to see a market that dies off and spikes in shock like a patient with a bad heart.
I consider usda to have lost perspective in their purpose for being. I do not think headline creation is the goal of the projection process. The bureaucrat gets job enhancing glamour and the commodity press gets lazy headlines.. And the markets become destracted from the creation and movement of commodities.....
For example, open interest and unfilled position data just aren't important anymore. Now that we have all day to speculate on the usda yield number or acre number in the projections....
I really think that if all farm activity stopped ---- no fuel no seed... ---- The commodity markets as they now function would trade for two years without believing the inconvenient reality of the farmers "election".
They are not commodity markets. They are a public casino that gambles on what the usda will say next....