- 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
08-30-2017 11:59 AM
All I want is good information, if PFT and USDA are right, so be it let`s get it out and deal with it. When someone says "I have good news and bad news" I always want the bad news FIRST...figuring if it`s bad enough, I won`t even wait around for the "good news" I`ll grab my passport and bug out bag and head for Uruguay or a country without extradition
But what I`m afraid of with these reports, I`m hardup enough I can`t wait for things to get better "next spring". If a rally comes then and the final January report vindicates the bulls..."oh yeah we goofed up it was really 155bu corn and 43bu beans..sorry". When due to shenanigans, poor saps like me will have it stolen from us off the combine for $2.65 and $8.10...well I`ll get a RA insurance check and be happy as a dog having been thrown my own tailbone while my owner eats the meat.
08-30-2017 01:03 PM - edited 08-30-2017 01:05 PM
-- important to remind our customers that all production estimates at this stage of the game still have wide margins of error. Even USDA's September WASDE estimate of U.S. corn production has a 90% confidence interval of plus or minus 1 billion bushels (+/-7.7%). [Emphasis added]
-- corn prices are influenced by many factors, only some of which have to do with the size of this year's crop.
-- Versus corn, copper and crude oil both had correlation coefficients of +0.80 and gold came in at +0.85. For assets that have nothing to do with food, are produced year-round, and are not weather sensitive, those coefficients were remarkably high.
-- To put those results in perspective, I also tested the correlation of DTN's national index of cash corn prices to USDA's monthly estimates of U.S. ending corn stocks-to-use ratios -- the golden calf of traditional analysis for corn prices.
The result was a correlation coefficient of -.67. The negative value simply means that corn prices go down as ending stocks-to-use ratios go up, but the fact that corn prices showed a weaker correlation to their own stocks-to-use ratios than they did to three non-grain assets with which they seem to have little in common should come as a surprise to many.
08-30-2017 02:09 PM
JEC22-----we are going to see the most erratic distribution of yields across Iowa we have seen in a long time........district breakdown shows a crop larger by 1.5 bpa in the NE crop district and down 38.8 bpa in the SC crop district.......I suspect the loss in the SC district from the current 144 will grow a bit due to better August weather, but in driving around I see everything from corn turning rapidly to staying dark green.....only the combine knows!!
Roaring......I would like to be as optimistic about shrinking carryouts to 1 byn, but that is not in the cards when we are set to see corn exports go from this year's 2.225 byn to 1.850 byn next year as those SA bushels provide strong competition.....last year's short crop in Brazil allowed us to have strong exports.....not the case in the upcoming marketing year
I am expecting a 165 crop +/- a couple of bushels.....
let's hope Harvey does not disrupt our gulf loading capacity too greatly
08-30-2017 03:09 PM
Now for a thought... what happens when we find out this selective dry patch some of us are in is just the precursor to the real deal next year?
The drought for many of us is not over yet, has been actually expanded in Aug.
How's that for spin?
08-30-2017 03:19 PM
Vr you mention bidding for acres........
IMO the acre side of the usda equation is just as remarkable........... or unexplainable....
It all starts with congresses all out acceptance of monsanto's promise that yields would continue to climb because of biotechnology..... usda accepts that as well. So we start with the yield trend expectations and work backwards.
Yield can be questioned and obviously a created figure.....
But acres??? Well look at what is reported comparing same crops..
In million acres planted
Feed grains...... 121 ............. 101.7
totals 352.8..............295.6 ...............
A decrease of 57.2 million planted acres. 23 million of which can be explained in the CRP program and it's administrative desire to keep those acres in the program. Im sure
yard ornaments will soon qualify as CRP enhancement... Where did those acres go....... I think maybe we are planting 105 M acres of corn or 115m.... ........ probably not buy how would we know
Keep in mind that 7% of soybeans ( 6 million acres) are double crop acres there is an average clunker.
I live on the fringe .............usda says Iowa is the highest acre participant in the CRP program and in 1980 Iowa planted nearly the same crop acres going down only a million acres.... 24 insteadof 25m in 1980. 13 million of it in corn almost exactly the same acres as 1980. So as Hobby points out they keep building in iowa so they moved the hogs in the house to keep the acres the same, because they been planting wall to wall since the 70's
I am affected by what I see and we pushed a lot of production out onto the high plains..... you can inspect corn fields within 60 miles of Denver and Wheat closer than that. so I been thinking they under report planted acres to hold the average up..... We cannot be gaining average doing what we are doing. It takes 4 acres in Colorado to replace one in Iowa, or ohio, mo, or indiana.
It all seems like a push to prove something................ so that is where the cheap food esbionage starts......... or more possibly just trying to keep it cheap enough to sell in the poor parts of the world so we don't end up trying to build roads out of it or, heaven forbid, feeding it to ........ a poor critter and his red meat........We could be buying that from somewhere else where we can pretend they didn't feed it or kill it.
(side note most planted acres to crop in 1980 was Iowa-25.8 followed by texas- 24.8, illinois-23.9, Kansas-22.8, Minn-22.6, N. Dakota-22.1, Nebr-19.3, SDakota-16.6, Mo-15.1, Ind-13, ohio-11, Oklahoma-10...................
in 2017 -----Iowa-24.7, N Dakota 23.5, Kansas-23, Illinois-22.6, Texas- 21, Minn-20.2, Nebr-19.7, S Dakota-17, Mo-13.3, ind-12.2, ohio 10,........................................)
Ks, nebr, ND, SD go up all else down led by California who lost more than half its planted acres a reduction of 4 million acres. ---- I think it is a water issue...... and a big corn issue, and maybe a gluten issue, hell knows.
And by the way Biotech is in use on 92% of the corn raised in the US according to usda, 93% of cotton, and 94% of all beans raised in the US.
Ray I wish those merchandisers would stop calling and asking me to verify that my crop is not GMO..... They know better, tthey don't pay enough for me to carry their false claim responsibility to someone making cosmetics for fools.
Yields are all over the place..... as they have looked all year.....
08-30-2017 03:22 PM
I highly suggest you get the bin forms back from the neighbors and build a couple of more bins
there is no better investment on planet earth than owning sub $3 cash corn when basis is this wide
that is, if you are willing to accept a 50% return within two years