Arlan, you are on the right path in your thinking. The USDA, is of course wrong. Where we usually have grain piles after harvest we have none and I'm in one of those production areas where USDA said we raised bushels close to last year. Simple fact is, if we raised near production (which we didn't) it already got gobbled up by ethonal plants or railed out for use. Our basis has of course nearly tripled in the last few weeks as the end users are realizing the fact "uh... where is it at?" Farmers do finally have more working capital and can do business like the rest of the free market has for years but it is still not out there. I'm sure by this time next year USDA will finally tell the moronic traders "gee, I guess we miscalculated". Of course by that time even the strong fisted farmer had enough and sold it for 6.50 cash. After all if we don't some outside influence will hand us our head. Arlan this is your chance to stay the path and say it like it is. We farmers know what we have to do until the truth finally comes out. Play the game and watch our hindside.
Posted by Anonymous on January 31 at 9:12 PM
|
Arlan, good call on your recent projections of Argentina lowering their production. Now how can we get the Argentina guys to project and calculate the US production instead of USDA.
Posted by Anonymous on January 23 at 6:51 PM
|
After seeing the Argentina satellite images I correct myself from previous post. The crop tour guy better walk in more than a few rows to get rid of his morning coffee or he will still be seen.
Posted by Anonymous on January 20 at 1:53 PM
|
There's a great deal of truth to what you say.
Posted by Arlan on January 20 at 1:27 PM
|
I know a commodity trader that has said for years we should be looking at satellite images. We have the technology why wouldn't we use it as a guide. It is alot more accurate than a drive by or a John Deere crop tour guy walking in a few rows to relieve himself of his morning coffee.
Posted by Anonymous on January 19 at 1:45 PM
|
Be sure to follow the link I will use in this afternoon's commentary to satellite images of Argentina's grain belt compared to the same period in the devastating drought in the 2008-09 growing season. Those images suggest that this year's drought is worse, which a local from Argentina has told me as well. Argentina lost 30% of its soybeans and 43% of its corn that year. Those getting Farm Futures Daily, our e-newsletter, will also see a graphic of the region's vegetative health versus the previous year.
Posted by Arlan on January 19 at 11:55 AM
|
I came across some interesting data released by FSA. According to them there were only 87.25 million acres of corn planted in 2011 with 3.01 million acres in prevent plant. soybean acres came in at 73.65 acres with 1.45 million in prevent plant. With wheat there was approx 4.5 million in prevent plant. How come these acres are so different from USDA. Please don't tell me they are both right. How can you trust one source and chose to ignore the other. These figures were released just the other day. That's a huge difference.
Posted by Anonymous on January 18 at 5:43 PM
|
I often hear analyst saying the crop has time to recover. They just repeat what USDA always says because it must be bible. Analyst also continually readjust their numbers after another bogus USDA report. This is the point, analyst need to quite listening to USDA. They need to stay with their own numbers and listen to producers about the crop. Then when it finally comes out maybe the uninformed traders will stop listening to USDA also and pay more attention to analyst that stayed the path and were ultimately right. I don't know how bad parts of South America really are because I have not taken a tour. Nor do I even know what a bumper crop in South America would look like. I do know what one looks like here though and often when the analyst are telling me there is time for our crop to recover I have already personally made Anheuser Busch stock go up. Not just because I'm a lush but with 25 years hands on experience I know what the crop can and cannot come out of.
Posted by Anonymous on January 18 at 2:29 PM
|
yes soybean losses can recover to a point once stress has occured, but they will never recover to its original potential. The best analogy I can give you is this. We had a hail insurance claim and the adjuster claimed that they would recover after the leaves had been stripped off. I agreed to a point but said that if I was to take his hand and cut of a finger he could probably function without one finger but he would never function as before. The same occures with plants. Once stress has occured your yield potential declines even with normal weather. It only works if your the USDA or a analyst or an expert. You know what an expert is. 1 an X is a has been, and 2 a spert is a drip under pressure. Needless to say we came to an agreement
Posted by Anonymous on January 17 at 9:49 PM
|
I think the last comment hits the nail square on the head. We listen to trade analyst daily to help guide our marketing decisions and farming business in general. It gets to the point that we are not able to believe either the USDA or the analyst (this puts you in that category). I have always liked and enjoyed listening to you and reading your commentaries, however now it appears neither you or the USDA can be trusted. I say this only to encourage you and other analyst to challenge these completely manipulative USDA reports. I have no doubt there is some insider trading occurring which is the reason for the bear reports when prices start to climb. My advice....man up and challenge this agency.
Posted by Anonymous on January 17 at 9:46 PM
|
Arlan, I think the point most producers are trying to make here is the fact that USDA numbers are always contradictory to whatever analyst we prefer. We prefer certain analyst because their logic and rationale seem well thought out and alot of times has history to back it up. USDA has no rationale, logic or history. Any farmer that has farmed several years has been used to making lemonade out of lemons numerous times. Likely several times a year. It is in our nature. It is also in our nature to call bu!!shi! when we see it. Must be that thing of not having a boss or company telling us to knock it off or else. That's our trade off for not having benefits or security.
We need those same logical, well thought out, rational people that we listen to about markets to challange USDA numbers. If not this crap will never end.
Posted by Anonymous on January 17 at 8:14 PM
|
Really wondering why everyone(including Arlan)is so affraid of calling the usda out on thier lies not errors? For the last 3 quarters all the livestock in this country must be ording thier meals from weight watchers, because we have vitually feed no corn or wheat, yet cattle numbers are up? Go to cnbc.com and search video on corn,usda report. A couple of days before the report Rick santelli interviewed John Mcintosh from Rand Finacial Services. He explains in detail how wrong the USDA reports have been for quite some time. The usda is wrong and one day it will all come to light, who will be blamed? The obama administaion is directly behind these BS numbers( ie Still havent accounted for the 6.2 million acres of prevent plant in ND alone)? why any producer would ever vote for that fool again is beyond me???
Posted by Anonymous on January 16 at 2:00 PM
|
It's true that our data indicated that corn stocks are much tighter than what USDA reported on January 12, due to a smaller crop and stronger demand. USDA's math produced a different result. The same was true for wheat feeding data as well. Our methodology has proven effective over the long haul. However, many of our other estimates were actually pretty close to USDA's numbers, especially for soybeans. When it comes to South American weather there is a difference between rainfall over the past month as a percent of normal and the percent of a crop currently under stress after a rain system has passed through. That doesn't mean that damage is reversed, but a rain does temporarily relieve stress. I get information from Argentina and Brazil on nearly a daily basis, from both producers and grain brokers. But I also have to filter through that information. All of us have a tendency to see the rest of the world just as it is in our own back yard. Corn losses are likely substantial, but late and second crop corn can partially offset the losses if the weather pattern improves in time, especially in Brazil. Soybean losses have occurred as well, but soybeans are the most responsive to late season rains if they occur. That's why weather over the next few weeks is most critical. I've been much more aggressive with my comments about South America's production in my Twitter comments at https://twitter.com/#!/ArlanFF101.
Posted by Arlan on January 16 at 10:36 AM
|
I greatly appreciate the dialogue. We also appreciate the loyalty of our readers who filled out producer surveys, indicating that the 2011 corn yields were lower, confirming past historical tendencies as well. Yes, our data, as well as the data of many others, suggests that corn usage is higher and stocks are lower than what is currently reported by USDA. However, this is not a closed system where one can easily prove the case, until stocks either run up and prices explode higher, or we suddenly find where all the bushels are at and the market collapses. As such, we must respect the chance that USDA is right. Unfortunately, the typical farmer can only hold his grain for so long before he must sell, either for cash flow reasons or to make room for the next crop. Meanwhile, many young money managers take USDA's word as gospel. With all of this in mind, we must take the information handed to us and create a marketing plan that makes the best of what we have. We must channel the emotions created by USDA's reports in a way that allows us to make lemonade out of lemons rather than causing us to make emotional decisions that end up hurting us even more.
Posted by Arlan on January 16 at 10:19 AM
|
Good previous post. Why are acres still being adjusted when we are forced to certify in June exactly what we planted. I can understand weather distroying some of those acres afterwards but usually the acres somehow get increased in later reports. We have another year of high temp nights but somehow the yield increases from the previous report. Many of us report yields to government subsidied crop insurance. Wouldn't that be more accurate than what they are doing. I refuse to fill out the USDA surveys because they simply cannot be trusted to compile the info correctly and as I said they already have the information in a better format anyway. This crap has to change and all our farm groups and associations need to put this priority one.
Posted by Anonymous on January 14 at 5:08 PM
|
It just bothers me that everyone, even the traders, have access to some of the same information that USDA has (even more up to date) and USDA is continually surprising everyone? Something doesn't smell right here. Everyone but apparently the USDA knew we had low test weight corn a couple years ago and USDA did not confirm it until June report, right? Go figure. By then most farmers had sold most of their grain for cash flow or listened to too many negative reports to be sold on the market going the wrong way. I know, that is why there are options and futures that cost us more money to protect us from government reports. If they can not provide more accurate information, then of what value is it? I know adjustments have to be made, but lets start getting it right more often. Can everyone be wrong here but the USDA? Talk to crop adjusters, they have boots on the ground.
If we can assume that there is some underlying reason for what they do, then what about a theory that they are trying to keep prices low through February for the crop insurance subsidies?
Scott County Iowa
Posted by Anonymous on January 13 at 7:56 PM
|
I know I'm ready for November. I realize USDA is lousy no matter who resides at the White House but with all the other rank doings they seem even more suspect right now. Hopefully the President's supporters are busy election day doing other things and forget to get on the Accorn bus to vote. Like occupying somewhere defecating in zip-lock bags. Or marching for gay marriage dressed like the opposite sex. Or at a ribbon cutting ceremony for a new facility displaying the latest interpretive arts. Or,, well you get my point. See Arlan, thats how you say what is on your mind. You know you want to.
Posted by Anonymous on January 13 at 4:42 PM
|
Perhaps the USDA is showing us the correct numbers now, and they were wrong last year. Maybe ending stocks and carry-over were never as tight as they said, and they've slowly been correcting that over these last several reports. If that is the case, at least it's been done in small incriments, and not one large increase shown in one report. Lets also not forget the stocks-to-use ratio is still the tightest it's been in years as Arlan has stated in his report yesterday. Fundementally, and long term it's still a bull market. There just might be some hiccups along the way. Thanks to everyone at farmfutures for their hard work, and excellent reports for everything ag-related. Cheers!
Posted by Anonymous on January 13 at 3:25 PM
|
Really wondering why everyone(including Arlan)is so affraid of calling the usda out on thier lies not errors? For the last 3 quarters all the livestock in this country must be ording thier meals from weight watchers, because we have vitually feed no corn or wheat, yet cattle numbers are up? Go to cnbc.com and search video on corn,usda report. A couple of days before the report Rick santelli interviewed John Mcintosh from Rand Finacial Services. He explains in detail how wrong the USDA reports have been for quite some time. The usda is wrong and one day it will all come to light, who will be blamed? The obama administaion is directly behind these BS numbers( ie Still havent accounted for the 6.2 million acres of prevent plant in ND alone)? why any producer would ever vote for that fool again is beyond me???
Posted by Anonymous on January 13 at 3:11 PM
|
Arlin I have a question. You are saying that in Argentina you are concerned about stress in 25% of the corn and soybean belt in Argentina. The national weather service says that Argentina has recieved from 33% - 50% of normal rainfall with above normal temps. Who is right and why the difference? Ernie
Posted by Anonymous on January 13 at 8:36 AM
|
The USDA report badly damaged the market's emotions. The report only accounted for half the Argentine corn damage and none of the Brazil damage - USDA will mea culpa their "error" in future reports. Thanks alot, USDA. Once again, handing a big present to China and a big lump of coal to the tax-paying farmers of America. How much money did producers lose on this report? Where is the oversight for accuracy? Is it November yet? Remind me once again WHY we need the USDA Reports manipulating of our ag markets??? Oh, and let's not forget CME who can hardly wait to expand trading limits increasing risk for all, and yet cannot stand behind MF Global even after CME's own shoddy job of regulating segregated client accounts. Let's hear it for MF USDA and the CME.
Posted by Anonymous on January 13 at 5:18 AM
|
come on Arlin your comments about Argentinas lack of moisture are misleading. If you do research most of Argentina has recieved 33% of normal rainfall in the past 30 days combine that with above normal temps and you have a disaster. Argentine newspapers are reporting this drought as bad as 2008. That's the year they cut of exports
Posted by Anonymous on January 12 at 2:54 PM
|
write what you think, not what you are told to write, think you really would do a lot better job.
Posted by Anonymous on January 5 at 4:57 PM
|
Apologize for the error. I was referring to the gains from late last year. Good catch.
Posted by Arlan on January 5 at 2:54 PM
|
You wrote:
"March corn gained 27-cents this week and is 30 ½-cents higher than a year ago. "
12/31/10 H was $6.29
12/31/2011 H was $6.46 1/2.
Where is the 30 1/2 cents higher at?
Roger Wright
rwrighT@main-net.com
937 605 1061 cell
Posted by Anonymous on January 3 at 4:06 AM
|
You reference USDA's estimates a lot in your commentaries and understandably so, however how can you base your comments on anything that comes out of USDA's mouth as many times as they are wrong. I along with a lot of other farmers based a lot of our decisions on the information they put out early in 2011 only to have them come back this fall and make corrections. Corrections that cost us lots of dollars. Is it time for this defunct agency to have an overhaul or is it just this administrations way of insuring a cheap food policy?
Posted by Anonymous on December 15 at 10:36 PM
|
Who can discount the damage that USDQA does each report manipulating the markets and pulling down prices with clearly erroneous assumptions? Now the producers should wait until January 12th when liar's poker has to show their hand - that is unless they continue to create corn stocks that don't exist by discounting corn sweetner, etc. etc. We would be better off if the USDA was terminated instead of the Post Office.
Posted by Anonymous on December 12 at 7:34 AM
|
I've mentioned the tight available stocks at length in recent weeks. However, the trade perceives that the world is awash with corn. USDA hasn't helped, and there are a lot of new young traders in the business that have bought the perception. U.S. export demand has dropped dramatically, but that is already factored in. I believe domestic demand is stronger than currently perceived. If so, we should see a bullish stocks report January 12, along with a possible reduction in crop size one more time. Hopefully, that will be enough to move grain traders past the worries of European debt. That is their number one concern at this point.
Posted by Anonymous on December 5 at 3:54 PM
|
During the last few weeks very little mention has been made about the tight supplies. When will this become a factor in the price. What are we missing or has demand really slipped back that much?
Posted by Anonymous on December 1 at 10:43 PM
|
The reason for poor export sales I believe is that the commercials simply don't have the corn or beans to sell , hence the strong basis. But nobody wants to admit it. In Canada the elevators are running at 60 % capacity and were sold out of wheat anonymous
Posted by Anonymous on November 23 at 2:46 PM
|
Why isn't somebody in jail from MF global?
Posted by Anonymous on November 23 at 10:11 AM
|
A'm I the only one that get's tired of nations that can't balance their check book? The U.S. is right there with them but WTH. If we have learned anything, stimulous is not the answer. Default and be damned and maybe someday everything will be right.
Posted by Anonymous on November 8 at 4:58 PM
|
Any increased demand puts a squeeze on the corn balance sheet, as well as for soybeans. Occasionally a statistical abberation will arise when dealing with numbers this large, which may be the case here. It's difficult to defend USDA's demand estimates for each category, particularly after the sharp price break of September.
Posted by Arlan on October 25 at 2:48 PM
|
Arlan, what is your take on the USDA's Industrial Use projections for corn? A trendline of nonfeed use puts it at 184, with high confidence, but the USDA has it relatively unchanged from last year at 162. What is the reasoning behind the lack of growth for 2011/12? Couldn't even a slight increase in this use dramatically squeez the market?
Posted by Anonymous on October 24 at 6:57 PM
|
I get my weekly export sales data from my Dow Jones Newswires feed. The USDA site mentioned is the agency's official spot for export sales data, but the DJ feed tends to be quicker for me.
As for the comments on China's population happy, I agree. There is actually a great deal of land that is either not being utilized or its being under-utilized in Eastern Europe, the Former Soviet Union and in Brazil, but prices have to stay high enough for a long enough period of time to stimulate the needed resource investment to bring that land into production. That process has started, but we still have not seen enough additional production to bring global supply and demand into balance.
Posted by Arlan on October 19 at 4:30 PM
|
The gobal need for better food will grow. With the population at
7 billion and growing the taste for better food will grow with it.
The goverment will have to keep there population happy or there will be up rising and they can not have that. The land the world has for
production will not keep up at the rate we need for food.
Illinois famer
Posted by Anonymous on October 19 at 1:06 PM
|
Arlan, where are you finding the weekly export data. When I check the USDA website @ http://www.fas.usda.gov/export-sales/esrd1.html it only shows through October 6th. It says the next report won't be released until the 20th. Can you please share your data source?
Thanks!
Posted by Anonymous on October 18 at 3:25 PM
|
W Central IA - 3 fields - normally 210 bpa - this year 180-185 bpa. Due to tip-back pollination issues, Goss, rootworm, and stalk rot. Genetics did not hold up and corn lodged badly. Corn all over the ground. Believe that VT3 genetics can't keep up w resistance. See Andy Gass's report from ISU re rootworm and VT3. Believe it's true. Will take a second protein to keep corn-on-corn acres vertical and not horizontal. USDA lied about yield and now they lie about demand.
Posted by Anonymous on October 16 at 2:21 PM
|
I Like This Information... dear
http://www.onlineduniya.com/
Posted by Anonymous on October 13 at 2:23 AM
|
Is there any reason that every time the farmer starts to see a crop prices that are keeping up with expenses that the USDA comes up with some negative news to knock the prices out from under us?
Posted by Anonymous on October 3 at 6:27 PM
|
Why are we selling tons of wheat to China when the harvest has been so poor? I am not willing to pay $4 for a loaf of bread while Chinese Aristocrats eat free (because you know they aren't going to feed the people). Chinese people starve and we pay! Just so someone can make a buck. WTH?
Posted by Anonymous on September 27 at 4:32 PM
|
That's the job of the marketplace, to find a price that will sufficiently slow demand to balance it with a smaller supply. However, it's very possible that the market will do that job before Black Sea supplies dry up. Frequently supplies end up larger at the end of the year than expected because the market does too good of a job of slowing demand. At this point, I still see substantial evidence that we're on the front end of the curve.
Posted by Arlan on September 16 at 11:45 AM
|
Had a chance to listen to you speak today at Husker Harvest Days, very informative, thank you. I do have a question for you. Do you think once the black sea region runs out of feed wheat the resulting price jump that it will take to replace that need with corn will have detrimental effect on demand/price on corn?
Posted by Anonymous on September 14 at 9:22 PM
|
Twitter icon is back. Thanks for your follow and for bringing it to our attention. Keep the comments coming.
Posted by Arlan on September 13 at 12::45 PM
|
What has happened to your tweets? Aren't receiving them anymore.
Posted by Anonymous on September 9 at 9:17 AM
|
what happened to your tweet icon? now I have to log into twitter to follow you - bring it back ;)
Posted by Anonymous on September 8 at 12::33 PM
|
what happened to your tweet icon? now I have to log into twitter to follow you - bring it back ;)
Posted by Anonymous on September 8 at 10:24 AM
|
The corn crops here in SW KS are in poor shape as well. Most have chopped the corn for silage and a lot of it that is left pollinated during 110 degree temperatures. Reports of ears with 10 or 15 kernels per ear are the norm. Will be interesting to see if USDA will have a clue that the bpa will be way down this year.
Posted by Anonymous on September 6 at 9:17 PM
|
i just finished harvesting 1550 acres of corn here in eastern okla. it yielded less than 20000 bu, you do the math.
Posted by ffarms on August 27 at 5:46 PM
|
Have you guys heard? We've got some real bin busting corn yields in SE Kansas, SW Missouri; 4 to 54. Aflotoxin so high in some, guys are being told to bury it. This is not just a localized area either. It is wide-spread. Last years yields were 145 to 199.
Posted by REBELAG on August 18 at 9:56 PM
|
You raise an excellent point. There is some good corn this year, but many producers are finding that it's not as good when you walk into the field and pull back the husks as it looks from the road. Now is the time to find out if the corn in your field is as good as you think it is by walking some fields and pulling some samples. It may impact your marketing decisions over the next few weeks and months.
Posted by Arlan on August 5 at 5:11 PM
|
I pulled corn ears from 5 different fields. Three out of five ears showed up to 2 inches of tip back - aborted kernals. Farmers here say
that 15% of a fantastic yield is gone. All around us fields are either flooded or drought-stricken. Our fields in west central IA looked good until the excessive heat the last 2 weeks. We move back from typical 220 bpa to 180-185 bpa. Wonder if even the best fields will get 200 bpa this year? Kernal filling needs good weather - no excessive heat now or could get worse.
Posted by iowafarm on August 5 at 8:40 AM
|
Illinois only has 12% excellent - WOW and Indiana only 10%! Iowa is the best at 28% excellent. Hard to believe it is that bad but between the floods, the high overnight temps, and the two windstorms that knocked down so many acres, I guess that is right..............
Posted by iowafarm on July 25 at 3:20 PM
|
Iowa Corn is only 28% excellent! Shouldn't prices respond to this? NE is only 22% excellent and Texas 24%. I think we have some problems out there, debt ceiling debate or not!
Posted by iowafarm on July 25 at 3:17 PM
|
thanks arlan, read your comments every day. dave wiebke
Posted by bustinit on July 21 at 5:22 PM
|
USDA has shock agriculture once again with there report on crop production out look. We in the agriculture world knows that many things goes in production of a big crop. The big problem is the trader has taken a beating today and they drive the market. How long will they stay in there and take these losts, is this what the USDA wants.This should keep cheap food and that is there gold. Ilfarmer
Posted by W. Entwistle on June 30 at 9:35 PM
|
West Central Iowa had severe storms last evening and many fields are filled with corn that is lodged, snapped, and shredded. Wonder if that even will be considered by USDA? My guess is no.
Posted by iowafarm on June 27 at 11:34 PM
|
Snowing in Iowa on April 19. Tough to plant corn. Hopefully the belt will get a break by the end of next week.
Posted by Arlan on April 19 at 1:09 PM
|
Arlan,
Going to leave the planter in the shed today. Cold!!!! Potential hard rain here(Alexis, Illinois). 15% of corn planted. Hope it comes up.
Don Edwards
Posted by d. edwards on April 14 at 8:22 AM
|
Arlan,
Always enjoy reading your analysis of the markets. I also enjoy following you on twitter.
Thanks,
Matt
Posted by M. Karls on March 10 at 3:28 PM
|
Land prices have increase 30 percent in the last six months. partly because of the price increase in commodity, and maybe because the available land is disappearing at a alarming rate to urban sprawl, and highways,factories,and the big boxes we see along our highways. There will be a shortages of food and fiber because some where in the world there will be floods and other places there will be dry areas with poor production that will cause food to be in short supply. Ilfarmer
Posted by Bill on December 8 at 9:49 PM
|
I have to agree that the July 2012 contract certainly doesn't do a lot to ensure adequate acreage for 2011. That demonstrates how much the nearby contracts are currently being propped up by outside money flow into the market, which tends to focus on the lead contract and the December contracts. However, even the new-crop soybean/corn ratio is only trading at 2.23 to 1 at this point, hardly an endorsement for buying corn acres in the spring. I anticipate that we'll see more emphasis on 2011 acres once we get past harvest, but this is also one reason why I expect the greatest fundamental support for prices in February and March as the need to acquire acres becomes more apparent.
Posted by Arlan on October 5 at 3:04 PM
|
I'm glad our comments have been of assistance. We appreciate the feedback.
Delta for the purpose of our comments generally refers to the grain belt stretching either side of the Lower Mississippi River region. Others vary the extent of their definition somewhat to fit their purpose.
As for foreign commodity quotes, I really haven't found a source that I really like. Pick what you like from a Google list.
Posted by Arlan on October 5 at 3:00 PM
|
Does anyone else ever notice how the USDA always steps in to thwart crop prices when they start to get profitable for the producers. I wonder if China maybe had something to do with this.....since they own us.
Posted by S. Morgan on October 4 at 6:22 AM
|
Please explain with the low corn to stocks usage ratio why July 2012 corn is trading at discount to July 2011 corn? Hardly a raging endorsement to incentivize additional acres considering declining U.S. corn supplies. Doesn’t make sense!
Posted by D. Allem on September 30 at 2:55 AM
|
Hello Arlan,
I am a producer from SW Kansas, follow your writings and catch your commentaries on 550 am KFRM from our farm near Dodge City, KS. I'm 21 and have a passion for the markets, learning everything I can. I've been reading the afternoon recap for about a year now, I learn something every day, thanks for the relevant, up to date information. Our grain sorghum has 100 bushel potential, which is a great combination with the recent rally in corn futures! Looking pretty dry though, reluctantly pulled the drills out of the shop today, but not getting in a hurry about wheat seeding quite yet.
I have two questions,
Have never been able to find a clear definition some of the terms used to describe different areas of the nation, where is the 'Delta' exactly?
Is there a good source on the web for up to date quotes on foreign commodity futures?
Thanks!
Posted by Dsnbrckfrms on September 29 at 9:34 PM
|
You raise great points. The trade sees this week's condition rating increase for corn as a statistical anomally, with many now buying into expectations that yields will fall short of USDA's August 12 estimate. As for soybeans, they took a bit more of a hit due to sudden death syndrome showing up in the central Midwest as well as heat and dryness impacting the crop in some areas at a time when it's still a bit more susceptible to stress.
Posted by Arlan on August 25 at 4:36 PM
|
How is it possible the corn rating went up while the bean rating went down? Isn't the weather the same for the corn & the beans? A rep for Dekalb said at this point the corn is what it is. The rating should only decrease or stay the same not increase. Sounds like these people might be mentally challenged. I guess I should'nt be surprised, after all it's the USDA and we all know how acurate they are.
Posted by kurt on August 23 at 8:02 PM
|
Yes, I've taken a look. Thanks. The age of the Internet makes a plethora of sources available. We try to sort through the available information to provide our readers with the most relevant information from among them each day.
Posted by Arlan on July 27 at 2:25 PM
|
Arlan,
Have you ever looked an Shanghai JC Intelligence Co. Ltd. ?
You might think of subscribing.
Don Edwards
Posted by d. edwards on July 25 at 9:48 AM
|
Crop analysis under estimate gain in genetics improving draught and pollination resistance for corn... being from Nebraska we have experience with improving genetics, Our dry corn has performed very well compared to a decade ago. Analysis missed this factor three years ago when illinois had severe dry weather. they are non putting to much to do about present weather presently my theory is...when it comes to weather, you're second guessing God putting us out of his league.
Posted by herm on July 22 at 6:23 PM
|
Minnesota has certainly been the garden spot this year, along with neighboring areas of Wisconsin. Once again it will likely shape up as a debate about how the good crop areas offset the less fortunate areas further to the south.
Posted by Arlan on July 19 at 10:40 AM
|
Here in our little corner of the world, (southeast Minnesota) old-timers say that it has never looked better by this date. On a drive from here to Ames, Iowa, there is about a fifty mile stretch where excess moisture has rendered low spots into yellow, stunted areas that the combines will pass up.
Posted by kingofthehill on July 16 at 5:14 PM
|
Should be a weather market over the next several weeks based on trade perception of how the crops are responding to this La Nina-induced pattern. The trade currently thinks the crops look wonderful, and in some places they do. Many investors come to Farm Futures for perspective. Let them know how you're crops are handling this summer's weather.
Posted by Arlan on July 16 at 3:28 PM
|
Farmers
I believe this year the combines monitors will be very erratic as they cross the fields. I do a little flying accross Illinois from the North to the south and I never seen so much uneven corn as I do this year. There are some fields show as much as 30 percent yellowing and the areas are growing larger instead of smaller. The roots are shallow and cannot stand much dry weather, but all in all it is a fair crop.
Il Farmer
Posted by Bill on June 23 at 9:56 PM
|
Watching the deferred for pricing opportunities makes good business sense, but beware of your risks. Locking in your price two years out may make sense now, but we still cannot rule out a return of inflationary pressures that could make input costs soar over the next couple of years, considering our current mounting federal debt structure. Long-range pricing strategies should be made in light of your input cost exposure.
Posted by Arlan on June 16 at 4:46 PM
|
THINKING ABOUT 2011 CROP FUTURES; SHOULD WE TAKE ADVANTAGE ON RALLIES?
DEC 2010/2011 FUTURES SPREAD?
HERMAN GERDES STROMSBURG, NE.
Posted by herm on June 14 at 11:39 AM
|
i guess the new lows on poor volume were convincing to somebody!now where did i leave my trigger finger?
Posted by bustinit on June 4 at 4:29 PM
|
fresh lows in july corn on anemic volume. not very convincing imo. anybody else
Posted by bustinit on June 2 at 3:31 PM
|
You can follow my real-time comments on Twitter once again by clicking on the "t" next to my name to see a sample of each day's comments, or you can follow me to have them sent directly to you.
Posted by Arlan on June 1 at 5:38 PM
|
we need rain in nw ia. bustinit
Posted by bustinit on May 27 at 6:49 PM
|
I enjoyed your Twitter site. It was inactive today and there is no link in your column this afternoon. Have you discontinued it?
Posted by Annie on May 24 at 5:54 PM
|
I enjoyed your Twitter site. It was inactive today and there is no link in your column this afternoon. Have you discontinued it?
Posted by Annie on May 24 at 5:23 PM
|
The information I recieve from these articles help me understand a little what is going on in the grain industry.I use to think it was supply and demand, but it is monipulation and control by the money people of the world drives the prices. A few years ago when a oil rig had a problem the gas prieces would shy rocket. Today we are loosing thousands of barrels a hour and the gas prices goes down
Illinois Farmer
Posted by Bill on May 17 at 8:19 PM
|
arlan, being relatively new to this site,im surprised the arent more comments posted. bustinit in nw ia
Posted by bustinit on May 17 at 7:19 PM
|
Ethanol prices remain low because the industry is ramping up production while gasoline demand remains sluggish. As such, EPA's 10% blending cap continues to put a lid on demand.
Demand is ultimately the key to pushing prices higher. Soybean prices provide a good example of that, holding at current levels despite record South American production. Meanwhile, global corn stocks at a 62-day supply are the 4th tightest of the past 34 years, but end users aren't worried as long as the US has supplies. The key then to global corn prices is the rate at which we can use up US supplies.
Arlan
Posted by Arlan on March 29 at 2:12 PM
|