Maybe the trade "just knows" that September is going to be nice and warm, and that the last couple weeks of cold weather is an aberration to "global warming" and those immature beans and corn plants here in Minnesota are going to transform into 210 bushel corn and 60 bushel soybeans.
Or, maybe, the farmers not selling know something too. Those pivotal 1990 years,( can't remember exactly which one was which anymore), but the time after the Mt. Pinatubo volcanic eruption really showed how inexact the US government is at predicting supplies, usage, ending stocks and the really important one...PRICE.
The $5 per bushel corn back then paid off my farm debt, got me forward from 20 some year old combines to five year old machines, and was probably a bigger deal than the $8 corn was a few years ago. Those were the days when I didn't have any crop insurance except that CAT policy that I don't think ever paid me a dime but only cost $100 per year, and I paid the price with ulcers and sleepless nights wondering if the 99 corn was even going to make it.
Now, this year I have soybeans with a long way to go to maturity, corn with ears not even in the ballpark size wise with last year, and some replanted corn that has stood there, ready to tassle for the last two weeks. I read somewhere that the corn plant shuts down at 60 degrees and takes heat above that to start up again, so I can see why the plants are not advancing.
I thought that corn and soybeans were poised for a breakout, limit type move before the 8-10-17 report, but never dreamed that the experts at USDA would come out with a national average of 170 corn, 50 beans and say "bumper crops". Who do these clowns think they are......the 538 prediction crew that had Mrs. Whatsherface up by double digits? LOL
That report is a classic example of why whatever the private sector can do, they SHOULD do. Earmark this post, come back in January when corn and beans are trading based on fall yields and let me know how wrong I am. OK?
