Export beef markets
- Thread starter sben222
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
sben222":xpiu06ke said:
Limousin are known for their yield grade, less so for their quality grade. It's one of the larger breed associations, so I'd expect there are lots of them being slaughtered here in the US every day.
Frankie":b0d62v7h said:
Quality grade is a misnomer though. Since marbling is used in determining quality grade, and there is only a 10% correlation between marbling and "TENDERNESS", those limo's could possibly be better meat than the USDA's higher "quality" grades, since the public has assured us many times that "TENDERNESS" is the number one factor in a good beef eating experience.
All data to date has recommended them in a crossbred program along with other Continental breeds on British cattle for optimum results from pasture to plate.
MikeC":1863cyr0 said:
It's not a "misnomer." It's a USDA system for identifying cattle that meet certain criteria. Our grading system is admired around the world.
I'm not going to argue about the 10% correlation, though I have heard meat scientiest from OSU say the correlation is higher, but we know that Choice beef is less likely to be tough than Select beef. I don't know if anyone ever found a tough Prime cut. It's expensive to do a WB shear force test on every animal that goes through the grading line, less expensive to identify the marbled beef.
Tenderness is important; the quickest way to get a cow herd that produces tender beef is use a bull with a high IMF (marbling) EPD.
Natrional research (BQA?) shows that consistency is the most important quality on the consumer's mind.
Consumers Willing to Pay for Beef Tenderness
MANHATTAN, Kan. – It's no secret. Consumers want tender, high-quality beef on a consistent basis. And many are willing to pay for it, according to a Kansas State University Research and Extension study called "Valuing Beef Tenderness."
"Based on other studies, we know tenderness is an important meat quality attribute to consumers," Ted Schroeder, K-State agricultural economist, said. "It was our focus to determine if consumers who desire this value would pay a premium for the improved attributes."
"This study was just one piece of the bigger research picture," Schroeder said. "It has been picked up by a lot of folks and used to increase incentives for quality labeling. The research provided motivation for further studies and was a catalyst to get the ball rolling on other kinds of tenderness projects."
According to results released to the industry last year, 69 percent of the participants preferred the tender selection when relying only on their own taste. But 84 percent preferred the tender steak when the choices were labeled. Providing consumer information affected shoppers' choices, Schroeder said.
"Labeling helps, as indicated by the study," he said. "Bottom line: Telling consumers about the product's quality on the package helps get the message across."
Even though a majority of consumers preferred the tender steaks, not all were willing to pay extra for them. Researchers said this most likely reflects those with high expectations for tenderness.
"This is a sign that a significant proportion of the population expects steak to be tender and palatable," Mintert said. "They do not anticipate paying extra for what should already be good."
MANHATTAN, Kan. – It's no secret. Consumers want tender, high-quality beef on a consistent basis. And many are willing to pay for it, according to a Kansas State University Research and Extension study called "Valuing Beef Tenderness."
"Based on other studies, we know tenderness is an important meat quality attribute to consumers," Ted Schroeder, K-State agricultural economist, said. "It was our focus to determine if consumers who desire this value would pay a premium for the improved attributes."
"This study was just one piece of the bigger research picture," Schroeder said. "It has been picked up by a lot of folks and used to increase incentives for quality labeling. The research provided motivation for further studies and was a catalyst to get the ball rolling on other kinds of tenderness projects."
According to results released to the industry last year, 69 percent of the participants preferred the tender selection when relying only on their own taste. But 84 percent preferred the tender steak when the choices were labeled. Providing consumer information affected shoppers' choices, Schroeder said.
"Labeling helps, as indicated by the study," he said. "Bottom line: Telling consumers about the product's quality on the package helps get the message across."
Even though a majority of consumers preferred the tender steaks, not all were willing to pay extra for them. Researchers said this most likely reflects those with high expectations for tenderness.
"This is a sign that a significant proportion of the population expects steak to be tender and palatable," Mintert said. "They do not anticipate paying extra for what should already be good."
houstoncutter
Well-known member
I believe that Colorado State developed a camera that can, and has been used to identify tender beef. It is being used by the Nolan Ryan Tender Beef program. You dont have to have all that fat to have tender beef. Of course the packers love things the way they are. It would really upset their little kingdom if they had process beef correctly. Such as:
1. Identify beef thats tender
2. Age beef
3. Not be able to mix beef from other countries, namely comply with COOL regs.
These companies are the ones that have driven the CAB program, but know they are hollering about yeild grades 3's and 4's. Something they say has been increasing over the last 5 or 6 years. Well duh, ranchers start using lots of Angus bulls and the yeild grades go up. Cross a Angus with a Limi, Simi, or Charolais and you solve the problem. Straight Angus or Hereford you have yeild grade problems.
1. Identify beef thats tender
2. Age beef
3. Not be able to mix beef from other countries, namely comply with COOL regs.
These companies are the ones that have driven the CAB program, but know they are hollering about yeild grades 3's and 4's. Something they say has been increasing over the last 5 or 6 years. Well duh, ranchers start using lots of Angus bulls and the yeild grades go up. Cross a Angus with a Limi, Simi, or Charolais and you solve the problem. Straight Angus or Hereford you have yeild grade problems.
Texan
Well-known member
Do you actually believe that packers are the ones driving the CAB program? Not consumers? The packers are forcing consumers to buy CAB? Huh?houstoncutter":18101ccw said:
Frankie:
i dont think of QG so much for tenderness; it is a matter of taste to me. marbling/imf give the meat its characteristic flavor; tenderness is just a bonus. dont get me wrong, i like a tender steak and normally comment on it when consuming, but the flavor is what i am looking for. btw, i have had a tough "Prime" steak; it's very easy when there is no pink left. one thing that has bothered me for years is the variability of steaks. i can see some variation from preparation, but it seems like if i am going to pay $40-50 for a 16 oz ribeye, they could have ultrasounded cuts that they give me. i think the variability is the big reason isnt more popular. if we could predictably get what we order, most people would have a more highly refined taste, expectation and craving for it.
i dont think of QG so much for tenderness; it is a matter of taste to me. marbling/imf give the meat its characteristic flavor; tenderness is just a bonus. dont get me wrong, i like a tender steak and normally comment on it when consuming, but the flavor is what i am looking for. btw, i have had a tough "Prime" steak; it's very easy when there is no pink left. one thing that has bothered me for years is the variability of steaks. i can see some variation from preparation, but it seems like if i am going to pay $40-50 for a 16 oz ribeye, they could have ultrasounded cuts that they give me. i think the variability is the big reason isnt more popular. if we could predictably get what we order, most people would have a more highly refined taste, expectation and craving for it.
Aero":94y5dszr said:
As I said, the #1 complaint of consumers is inconsistence in beef. They know what to expect when they buy a package of chicken; they don't know what to expect when they buy a package of generic ribeyes at their supermarket. That's why branded beef has taken off; they have something they can depend on (they hope).
The taste of meat is carried in the fat. There is research where they injected pork fat into chicken and the chicken tasted like pork. They did the same with other meats and fats. Thus, we'd expect marbled beef (fat) to have more taste than lean beef.
I don't doubt that tenderness is important, but, according to Mike's article, consumers expect beef to be tender and palatable. I think palatability is associated with higher marbling.
houstoncutter
Well-known member
Texan the vast majority of beef being bought is select, not CAB. Thats a fact. The ability to do something about the tenderness issue could be met by the packer, but as long as they can do business as usual their will be no change. They will continue to have producers chasing their tails, trying to make them happy. That was the reason for bringing up the subject of yeild grades being poor, just another reason to discount the beef of hard working ranchers. I would love to see all producers not take one calf to market for 3 months, that would really throw a monkey wrench in their futures markets. Unfortunetly it will never happen, as farmers and ranchers we are our own worst enemies.
houstoncutter":gyf57nbj said:
If the vast majority of beef being sold is Select it's because that's what most ranchers are producing. Choice beef is the standard. Select beef is discounted; higher quality beef gets a premium. That's not a "trick" of the packers. That's what the marketplace will bear. Consumers will pay more for higher quality beef than lower quality beef. They don't care a thing about yield grades because they never see that backfat. The packer is left with all that backfat to dispose of.
Why should the packer change his way of doing business? He's profitable most years. On the other hand, ranchers are going to buy new bulls every few years. They'll keep or buy replacement heifers every year or two. If they use EPDs, they can make changes in the quality of the beef, feed efficiency, milk production, etc., when they make those changes.
Caustic Burno'
Well-known member
Frankie":26e8ee4r said:
Hats off Frankie a truely great post I love reading your post on epd's and management when you can take off your AAA hood and robe.
Texan
Well-known member
Well, it might be a "fact" that the vast majority isn't CAB. But it sure isn't a current fact that the vast majority is Select. Here's the current boxed load count for the week beginning Friday of last week through Thursday of this week. Based on 40,000 pound loads. Link follows.houstoncutter":m2y2f09s said:
Date---Choice---Select
11/17---112------80
11/16---180-----120
11/15----74------92
11/14---101------73
11/11---139------98
http://www.ams.usda.gov/mnreports/LM_XB403.txt
houstoncutter
Well-known member
Texan you may be right on that report, But does it also include meat from other countries. If it doesnt, then its a different story
houstoncutter
Well-known member
Frankie, never said it was a trick by packers. I did mean that packers love to have us chasing our tails. It hasnt been that many years ago that they wanted high yeild animals. So ranchers go out and buy bulls to produce that market. Now they want marbeling, so ranchers went out and bought bulls to help produce that market. Now their complaining about yeild grade 3's and 4's..... So hopefully you might understand my post
Most imported beef is lean trimmings used in the cheap burger biz. It is usually the stuff unfit for the Japanese Market. They just chop up everything and then it is mixed with our fat trimmings shaved off of all those yield grade 3s, 4s, and 5s to produce burger meat (why the packers are fighting country of origin labeling(COOL)) to achieve the desired fat percentage. Most of those cattle aren't either finished or aged. OBVIOUSLY this is not a market with a high margin of profit and only our worst calves wind up with the cull cows.
houstoncutter":2xctpcdr said:
We've not been in the cattle business as long as others on this board, but for as long as I've been paying attention, the packers have asked for a Choice, 700-900 lb carcass, YG 3 (or better). That's been the standard for years and years and years.
Ranchers can chase their tails hoping to capture premiums for CAB or yield grade, but there are more discounts in the beef business than there are premiums. Most of us would benefit by trying to hit that Choice, 700-900, YG3 grid.
