Angus, a superior product or superior marketing?

Help Support CattleToday:

Do you think Angu has had outside genetics infused into the gene pool?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.
phillse":33jjnr4i said:
The intent of My original post was to cause people to think. I am not sure that much thinking is going on on this thread now. It seems as iff everyone is resorted to name calling. I know that I do not like pompas breeders of any breed. In fact all breeds have thier problems. Angus has its share as does the rest. I think ANgus cattle fit into a composite program very nicely and have certain traits that make them dedirable. The truth is ANgus cattle will always be arround. They have done too good of a job at promoting the breed to not be.

My main question is this, how do other breeds reclaim their position? Thier are several breeds that can offer just as good of cattle as ANgus. Why are these breeds not being more aggressive in claiming their market share?

I do not see any one breed ever being able to take over what angus has marketed. They simply say CAB. which somehow signifies best in the buyers head.
Contrairy to what people think this is a good thing. It is forceing the other breeds to become as good, if not better.
I view angus as being somewhat complacient in what there market share is. This does not stimulate the angus breeders to be any better, they mentaly assume they have the unmatchable. As beef improves, and processing techniques improve people will find they do not have to spend extra on CAB which will not be any better than the competition.

My coon meat is 3 star tested tenderness, do you even have a clue what your CAB is? Or are you just proof of what I am saying.
 
Angus/Brangus

I've been wondering about the purity of those Pinzgauer.

Can you tell me about them and when they became "unpure".


Badlands
 
I raise some Angus cattle. I think that most people get angry about CAB because it is a dishonest program. The only cattle that should be CAB should be certifiable purebreds... That 27% or so accepted now. Since the association is now pushing Animal ID, this should be easy to do. Only Identified purebreds CAB. No false advertising. Otherwise they are swindling the consumers and should probably go to jail.
 
That 27% or so accepted now.

KMacGinley, the "accepted" cattle now aren't neccesarily Angus. Several producers I know qualify 2X as much beef for CAB from their ContinentalxAngus cattle than they do for their more straightbred Angus cattle.

That is a fact that few realize, the Angus guys have worked for going on 15 years to make Angus better able to qualify for CAB. Now some sires are making 60, 70, 80% CAB on their purebred progeny. But, several guys have been hitting 50%+ for 10 years on ContinentalxAngus calves.

Sad deal, really, the advertising basically bought Angus enough time to get their genetics inline that they can actually now do what people have supposed or assumed they could do for 15 years. So, while the Angus guys run down the Continentals for the slippage in CAB, they forget that they also advertise how Angus is capturing MORE of the bull market! How can they be selling more bulls, infusing a larger percentage of the cowhed with Angus, then blame it one the Continentals? They can't, but people actually believe this bunk!

So, while a few Angus bulls can make 60% plus CAB on Angus progeny, the average CAB acceptance has gone down as more and more Angus bulls are bought and used, and Continental Angus cross cattle can routinely hit 50%+ CAB.

A guy who uses Red Angus cattle and crosses them with Continentals that I deal with has consistently hit 85% Upper 2/3 Choice and 85% YG1 and 2 for a number of years. If these cattle were black, he would be at 90% CAB for the last 10 years. He doesn't buy Angus bulls because they cannot delilver the same results. Too much poor structure and not enough doability/longevity in the popular carcass cattle.

Badlands
 
Sorry, KMacGinley, that whole post might seem like I was attacking you.

I sure wasn't.

I just grabbed the point from your post to give my opinion in the 1st line, after that I was speaking generally to illustrate my point, not to you directly.

Badlands
 
Badlands":31o00m8m said:
Sorry, KMacGinley, that whole post might seem like I was attacking you.

I sure wasn't.

I just grabbed the point from your post to give my opinion in the 1st line, after that I was speaking generally to illustrate my point, not to you directly.

Badlands

No, I didn't think that at all. You made some great points, I was just referring to that CAB poll that said that 27% were pure angus.
It's crazy to call something Angus Beef if it is half something else. They should be at least 3/4 angus and not allowed to be sold otherwise.
I agree with the terrible looks of most bulls being marketed today in the angus breed. Especially what is at the bull studs.
 
I'm curious where anyone said anything about fullbloods till you brought it up

dun
 
Like most threads bashing Angus, this one has gotten ridiculous. The common threads to ponder from all these posts are this. You don't see Angus breeders cutting down other breeds. People defending the Angus always say that all breeds have their good points. The anti-Angus crowd asks for facts, then says the studies are tainted and are lies when you present them. A taste test is just a lot of rhetoric. You take the best cuts from any breed, cook them properly, who could tell the difference more than 50% of the time. Basically it all sounds like a bunch of 6 year olds whining because his piece of cake is bigger than mine. To me it always exposes a person's ignorance when they have to tear someone else down to make theirs look better. Post some facts, instead of I know two people who ......... They pulled funding because CAB threatened them. Show me some proof. Otherwise it's just wah wah wah!!!!!
 
KMacGinley":2c870dkw said:
Badlands":2c870dkw said:
Sorry, KMacGinley, that whole post might seem like I was attacking you.

I sure wasn't.

I just grabbed the point from your post to give my opinion in the 1st line, after that I was speaking generally to illustrate my point, not to you directly.

Badlands

No, I didn't think that at all. You made some great points, I was just referring to that CAB poll that said that 27% were pure angus.
It's crazy to call something Angus Beef if it is half something else. They should be at least 3/4 angus and not allowed to be sold otherwise.
I agree with the terrible looks of most bulls being marketed today in the angus breed. Especially what is at the bull studs.

I thought the big reason for starting CAB was so that Angus could sell bulls to commercial cattlemen. It didn't matter whether those commercial cattlemen were running Herefords, Chars, Simms, Lim-Brahman crosses, or stockyard rainbows, if they bought an Angus bull and their calves met certain standards those half blood Angus calves could be sold as CAB. CAB was never intended to be so Angus purebreeders could sell THEIR calves for beef. It was always intended that Angus breeders' customers benefit from CAB. There is (hopefully) more money in selling seedstock than there is in selling calves on the rail. It would be suicidal for Angus to suddenly cut off commercial black cattle from CAB. I think they would like too be able too verify source so that only calves sired by or out of a registered Angus can be CAB to lose the Angus look alikes; BUT the huge problem that Angus would face then is inability too come up with enough product too supply all their existing contracts. IF many of the restaurants and grocers who market Angus products were cut off they would seek other sources of branded beef and this could possibly jump start Certified Hereford Beef and/or other competitors. Angus has already made promises to their bull buyers and to their corporate partners. IF Angus suddenly betrayed the commercial cattle breeders who buy their bulls AND failed to deliver the promised product to their beef buyers by changing the rules midgame; there would be repercussions in the marketplace.
 
guest25":16nnasj8 said:
If you want the lead as a dictator since you have had thoughts of moving since the ice storm hit.

I didn;t give the reason for thinking of moving. You're assumption is most likely wrong.

dun
 
dun":7wu6oxtk said:
guest25":7wu6oxtk said:
If you want the lead as a dictator since you have had thoughts of moving since the ice storm hit.

I didn;t give the reason for thinking of moving. You're assumption is most likely wrong.

dun
looks like your a dictator and a spy. all this time i thought you were just a cattleman. your more versatile than one could imagine :p
 
Dang, this has turned into a long thread and it seems to be going nowhere fast! Haven't read all of it ( feeling a little intellectually lazy ) so "guest25" how about doing me a small favor -- lighten up just a bit and then post another picture of one of your little tykes grooming his calf. :) The photo from about a year and a half ago has always been a favorite of mine. Do you have 11 now or is it an even dozen?
 
Here is a little something to stimulate some legitimate common horse sense discussion talking points!
CAB Uniformity Rules Take Effect

Packing plants across North America that are licensed to produce the Certified Angus Beef® (CAB®) brand began using new, 10-part carcass specifications today.

The CAB Board voted last fall to replace the brand's original Yield Grade (YG) 3.9 limit with more specific consistency requirements. That was in response to a trend toward heavier cattle, closely trimmed fabrication of cuts and other technical advances since the brand was founded in 1978, said CAB President John Stika. It also recognized the top concerns of end users surveyed in the 2005 National Beef Quality Audit (NBQA).

"The future belongs to those who see it first," Stika said of the brand's proactive move. "We have taken a leadership position to solve some industry problems that weren't going to go away. Our changes are by design, a natural evolution in exceeding expectations of our customers, cattle producers and consumers."

The three new uniformity specifications approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are a ribeye area (REA) of 10 to 16 square inches (sq. in.), hot carcass weight (HCW) of less than 1,000 pounds (lb.) and external fat thickness less than 1 in. Those are the three main variables loosely governed by yield grade, Stika explained.

"Our original limit of YG 3.9 allowed too many outliers," he said. The brand's 2005 consist study of 26,700 carcasses at plants in four states found calculated YG 3 carcasses with 1.2 in. of external fat, a ribeye range of 6.9 to 19.0 sq. in. and carcass weights of up to 1,169 lb.

"A better way to fill the box for our customers is to use a narrower ribeye range with a limit on external fat and carcass weight," Stika said. The new specifications will turn aside an estimated 6.9% of cattle that would have been accepted for the brand in the past.

On the other hand, more cattle better suited to consumer demand should become eligible, for a net increase, Stika said. He acknowledged those will include some YG 4 cattle, but that is virtually irrelevant to end-users. "Packers will pay less to producers of YG 4 cattle, so that cost and market signal will be transferred to where it belongs," he added.

"Our new limits are set up for zero tolerance, and will work well in the transition to more precise beef grading that includes the use of video camera data," Stika said.

Licensees and Angus producers welcomed the changes and noted the implications.

"The new specifications will help remove some extreme sizing variables," said Mike Drury, senior vice-president at Newport Meat Co., Irvine, Calif. "It is a step CAB had to take to continue delivering the most consistently superior product."

Frank Winters, manager of the CAB-licensed Flint Rock Feeders Ltd., Gruver, Texas, said, "People need to understand, this does not mean we can aim for Yield Grade 4s now. Only a few with the right size ribeyes will get in, and even those will still suffer a grid discount.

"The changes are a good thing," Winters said, but they need to be understood. "We were less specific when we only had the YG 3.9 limit," he said. "That held back demand, cost Angus producers money, and allowed other brands to take advantage of some of our work."

North Platte, Neb., Angus seedstock producer Bill Rishel agrees that successful integration of CAB's 10 carcass specifications on farms and ranches depends partly on perceptions.

"CAB is eliminating the third standard deviation of outliers, working on both ends of the ribeye range, and that's just what the foodservice and restaurant operators have been asking for," said Rishel, a former CAB Board president and current National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) Product Enhancement Committee chairman.

He compared the CAB changes to strategic trimming. "It's like taking away those outer rings on the target, and allowing a few more to score closer to the bull's eye," Rishel said. "This is a narrower target for us, especially on the ribeye. On the external fat, it's actually a higher standard than Yield Grade 3.9, and keeping the carcass under 1,000 pounds is basic to most grid targets today," he added.

The market will help keep producers on target, Stika said. "Discounts for Yield Grade 4s and overweight carcasses, the inefficiency of putting excess fat on cattle and the higher cost of feed should put a lid on overfinishing."

CAB Packing Director Clint Walenciak said the company has worked with USDA and licensed packers "to make sure everyone is on the same page, aware of the changes and prepared" for today's adoption of the 10 carcass specifications.

Available tools include a one-page, two-sided fact sheet for all licensees, and a ribeye overlay for packers and USDA graders showing the fat limit and the minimum and maximum ribeye area at a glance.

"The new specifications are familiar to graders, who evaluate these same elements to calculate their yield grade calls, but like any change, it will take some getting used to," Walenciak said.

Only 8% of beef can achieve the brand's benchmark standards that ensure mouthwatering flavor, juiciness and tenderness. Offered at more than 13,500 restaurants and retailers throughout the U.S. and internationally, annual brand sales top $2.5 billion. For more information, visit http://www.certifiedangusbeef.com.

CAB Program Specifications
Carcasses shall be derived from cattle that meet the phenotypic or genotypic (AngusSource®) requirements of the USDA Specification for Characteristics of Cattle Eligible for Approved Beef Programs Claiming Angus Influence (GLA), and meet the following set of requirements:

Marbling score of minimum Modest or higher
Lean color, texture, firmness and overall skeletal characteristics of A maturity
Medium or fine marbling texture
Ribeye area (REA) of 10.0 to 16.0 square in.
Hot carcass weight (HCW) less than 1,000 lb.
Fat thickness (FT) less than 1.0 in.
Moderately thick or thicker muscling overall and in relation to their length
Practically free (not detracting from visual quality) of capillary rupture in the ribeye
Free of "dark cutting" characteristics
No hump exceeding 2 in. in height
SOURCE: USDA

Let the 'cow chips' fly!

DOC HARRIS
 
Hi Doc
To clarify my statement about using high percentage angus, it is plain that someone somewhere is not playing by the rules. They are allowing obviously non-Angus cattle to be placed in CAB. This should be stopped. Or the program should be stopped.
Just the fact that if I have a Hereford cow and breed it to an angus bull and the result is CAB, is insulting to herefords and why so many people react so strongly to it. I am here to tell you that from my own experience Shorthorn beef is much tenderer and tastier than Angus beef.

The program was designed to sell bulls, great. It has grown so much it is being abused. I was just trying to point that that is the reason why people get so intense.
 
Badlands":1544wd7f said:
Yes, I saw the results of one such test that compared Angus and Tarentaise on taste and tenderness several years ago at a midwestern university. Needless to say that since Angus paid for the test, it was not published.

Heck, Angus didn't pay for it. The Tarentaise guys paid for it. It just wasn't published because the folks were afraid they wouldn't get more "research" funds from Angus.

Great example of how much power CAB/AAA has. Somebody else pays for the research, but the University won't publish it out of fear they might not get funded in the future.

Schurrnbart, these guys don't have a clue how nasty this CAB/AAA collusion is.

Heck, I know guys that were fired from Wooster for being unwilling to play the CAB games.

Badlands

You are wrong on who paid for the test. I know the fellow that supplied the Tarentaise. Angus paid him for the cattle and for the test to be conducted. He was given a copy of the results by the school on the condition that he never publish it but he showed it the ATA members in Denver that year. Besides, if we had paid for it, the results would be ours to do with how we pleased and I guarantee that it would have been published loud and bold!
 
dun":1a78ufbe said:
phillse":1a78ufbe said:
The intent of My original post was to cause people to think. I am not sure that much thinking is going on on this thread now. It seems as iff everyone is resorted to name calling.

This thread has actaully goneon much longer without it deteriorating like any CAB thread usually does.
Here's a way to determine from an unbiased standpoint which breed has the best taste. Send me a 1 inch thick top sirloin from the breed of your choice and send Macon a pm with what breed it is. I'll cook it and eat it then evaluate it. I don;t really have an axe to grind as to breed, I just like to eat steak.

dun

My biggest concern/complaint is the introduction of Angus into all the other breeds to get a 15/16 pure black whatever. I fell prey to that practice one time and now have a few black Tarentaise but I won't buy any more. I will keep black heifers if they are born on my place. I figure that if you claim you can't sell cattle unless they are black or you just like black, go ahead and get some Angus and be done with it. Don't pollute/dilute the purebred strains of the other breeds to make them black. It is already almost impossible to find full blood animals of any breed. Leave them the way they were meant to be. I rather like the way the breed color Tarentaise look. When they are black, they look like any number of other cattle.
 
Brandonm2":1xribcmo said:
KMacGinley":1xribcmo said:
Badlands":1xribcmo said:
Sorry, KMacGinley, that whole post might seem like I was attacking you.

I sure wasn't.

I just grabbed the point from your post to give my opinion in the 1st line, after that I was speaking generally to illustrate my point, not to you directly.

Badlands

No, I didn't think that at all. You made some great points, I was just referring to that CAB poll that said that 27% were pure angus.
It's crazy to call something Angus Beef if it is half something else. They should be at least 3/4 angus and not allowed to be sold otherwise.
I agree with the terrible looks of most bulls being marketed today in the angus breed. Especially what is at the bull studs.

I thought the big reason for starting CAB was so that Angus could sell bulls to commercial cattlemen. It didn't matter whether those commercial cattlemen were running Herefords, Chars, Simms, Lim-Brahman crosses, or stockyard rainbows, if they bought an Angus bull and their calves met certain standards those half blood Angus calves could be sold as CAB. CAB was never intended to be so Angus purebreeders could sell THEIR calves for beef. It was always intended that Angus breeders' customers benefit from CAB. There is (hopefully) more money in selling seedstock than there is in selling calves on the rail. It would be suicidal for Angus to suddenly cut off commercial black cattle from CAB. I think they would like too be able too verify source so that only calves sired by or out of a registered Angus can be CAB to lose the Angus look alikes; BUT the huge problem that Angus would face then is inability too come up with enough product too supply all their existing contracts. IF many of the restaurants and grocers who market Angus products were cut off they would seek other sources of branded beef and this could possibly jump start Certified Hereford Beef and/or other competitors. Angus has already made promises to their bull buyers and to their corporate partners. IF Angus suddenly betrayed the commercial cattle breeders who buy their bulls AND failed to deliver the promised product to their beef buyers by changing the rules midgame; there would be repercussions in the marketplace.

I was under the impression that when it started, the cattle had to be 51% and above Angus. Don't know that but just have that impression in my mind. I think it won't be long before all registrations of all breeds will be DNA verified. Lowlines already do that. That will be a good thing for all the cattle industry in my opinion.
 
You can certainly dna test to see if a steer has Hereford or Angus DNA. You will never convince me that you can DNA test a Baldie to see if he is 66% Hereford or 66% Angus though. I am in favor of testing every registration to verify parentage IF it can be done at a reasonable cost.
 
Premium Gold Angus, ViaGen, to Provide Consumers with Industry's Only "DNA Verified" Angus Beef
Agreement gives Premium Gold access to ViaGen's AnguSure™ breed identification process for detecting genetics unique to Angus beef

Austin, Texas — ViaGen Inc., a global provider of high quality livestock genetics, and Premium Gold Angus Beef (PGAB), one of the country's largest and oldest ************* beef companies, signed an international agreement today to begin DNA testing its beef to verify its genetic relationship with registered Angus cattle.

While Angus beef is widely regarded as the gold standard for taste, the Angus content of much of the beef sold as Angus cannot be guaranteed, given that breed composition is usually estimated by coat color and confirmation.

ViaGen and PGAB, which last year had $150 million in sales, are setting a new standard for consumers by subjecting PGAB beef to ViaGen's AnguSure™ DNA verification process. PGAB is providing ViaGen with hair samples taken from live animals and with meat samples from carcasses before sale. AnguSure™ utilizes ViaGen's patented genetic breed identification technology and can quantify the amount of Angus genetics in any cattle DNA sample. The test measures the amount of genetic similarity between the animal sampled and the top 152 registered Angus bulls by number of calves sired in the last decade.

ViaGen will also test the samples with its Inducator™ test to identify Brahman genetics. Brahman influence is often associated with an increase in toughness and decrease in consumer acceptance.

"ViaGen has brought beef genomics to the point where both producers and consumers can now easily enjoy the benefits of DNA breed verification," said Sara Davis, President of ViaGen. "PGAB already consistently provides beef of the highest quality. We're excited our technology will confirm PGAB's commitment to excellence in a way the consumer can see on every label. Genetic monitoring and assurance programs give PGAB a way to increase its market by taking quality assurance to a level previously unknown in the meat industry."

"We want to give consumers confidence that when they buy Angus, they get Angus," said long-time Angus breeder and PGAB founder Dwight Hartley. "Our partnership with ViaGen, coupled with our highly selective breeding and buying programs will leave no doubt that when you purchase PGAB, you're getting the only beef available genetically verified to be delicious."

The AnguSure™ and Inducator™ tests were released earlier this year, following an initial study of branded beef. Since that time, ViaGen sampled additional retail branded and unbranded beef in Central Texas. Variation in the amount of Angus and Brahman genetics varied across sampling time and across brands. While no single brand had 100% pass rate across time, the pass rate within each individual time period ranged from 50-100 percent. Overall, the pass rate of the five Angus brands ranged from 63-83 percent.

About ViaGen

Based in Austin Texas, ViaGen is a global provider of advanced livestock genetic technologies whose unmatched expertise in animal genomics is setting new standards for high quality animals and high quality consumer products. ViaGen's industry-leading compilation of livestock genomic data and patented breeding and product identification processes are extensively used in the cattle, pork and seafood industries to obtain verifiably superior genetics. ViaGen makes livestock genetic technology affordable and accessible to producers throughout the livestock production chain, from farm to fork, offering new opportunities for business to build revenue and for consumers to enjoy unprecedented quality and safety.

About Premium Gold Angus Beef:

Premium Gold Angus Beef (PGAB) is simply the most delicious offered in the marketplace today. The company was founded by a concerned Angus breeder who felt discriminating consumers should be provided an opportunity to obtain consistently excellent beef. PGAB has made a conscious decision to provide the highest quality beef by ensuring that it originates from the best Angus genetics. This same desire for quality carries over to the Premium Gold Berkshire pork and lamb products. The primary goal of Premium Gold is to offer consumers branded beef, pork and lamb which can be trusted to provide superior taste and tenderness every time.

Retail Beef Testing

Steaks purchased from retail outlets in Central Texas were tested with AnguSure™ and Inducator™ beef breed identification tests. To pass AnguSure™, meat had to have at least 50% of its genetics in common with top registered Angus animals. To pass Inducator™, the meat could contain a maximum of 25% Brahman genetics. Results are displayed in the chart below.
 
Angus/Brangus":1w3qhmq5 said:
Thanks Mike.

I would certainly be for any program could test and insure the breed of beef. I have no problems with crosses but if a breed is going to tout it's beef then that breed should have a program that eliminates any dominate outside influence, if that's possible! A maximum amount of acceptable outside influence should be set and anything above it should not be allowed into the program. If consumers want Angus (or any other breed) then the industry needs to make sure they get it.

The USDA approved Viagens test and wanted to add DNA testing for all the "USDA Verified/Certified Beef Labels".

CAB fought it and fought it hard.

Most other breeds had no problems with it.

What does that tell you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top