jimg
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2003
- Messages
- 2,039
I know there are a bunch of smart folks here who can help me understand ag commodities trading and how prices are set. Im looking for the laymans version. The reason I ask is the TN Farm Bureau News featured an article titled 'Turbulent futures markets challenge farmers'. In that the author makes some really surprising stmts about who gets what from advertised prices and what forces govern ag commodities. In fact a simple overview would be helpful too.
Heres how I thought it worked. A farmer could 1) lock into a future price (before the crop was planted), 2) hold his produce and sell on the spot market or 3) grow for someone on contract and be paid a set price est. at the beginning of the contract. Each has its own pros/cons and I think I see most of the obvious ones. At any rate my hats off to anyone making money at it. Going back to 1 & 2 if the advertised price was $8.00/BU then thats what the farmer got paid (or so I thought). The article states: 'While sky-high future contract prices cause many Americans to believe farmers are bringing home the proverbial bacon, the reality is that few farmers benefit directly from from the contracts advertised by the commodity exchanges.' Really! So who does benefit directly and how does the farmer indirectly benefit? To me it implies a middle man taking some for himself. How much of the contract price does the farmer get?
Heres the 2nd stmt that left me confused: 'He also said the role of speculative and commodity-index-related trading in ag futures markets , while growing for some time, has reached historic levels and contributes to market uncertainty.' The 'he' is Bob Stallman AFBF president testifying before Congress. What is 'commodity-index-related trading'? Lately, from some of the ag shows I watch, analysts are saying there are no fundamental factors for current market prices. In other words, from their POV, prices aren't reflecting supply/demand. Do I have the right? Seems that speculation is/will causing some pretty significant problems.
Heres how I thought it worked. A farmer could 1) lock into a future price (before the crop was planted), 2) hold his produce and sell on the spot market or 3) grow for someone on contract and be paid a set price est. at the beginning of the contract. Each has its own pros/cons and I think I see most of the obvious ones. At any rate my hats off to anyone making money at it. Going back to 1 & 2 if the advertised price was $8.00/BU then thats what the farmer got paid (or so I thought). The article states: 'While sky-high future contract prices cause many Americans to believe farmers are bringing home the proverbial bacon, the reality is that few farmers benefit directly from from the contracts advertised by the commodity exchanges.' Really! So who does benefit directly and how does the farmer indirectly benefit? To me it implies a middle man taking some for himself. How much of the contract price does the farmer get?
Heres the 2nd stmt that left me confused: 'He also said the role of speculative and commodity-index-related trading in ag futures markets , while growing for some time, has reached historic levels and contributes to market uncertainty.' The 'he' is Bob Stallman AFBF president testifying before Congress. What is 'commodity-index-related trading'? Lately, from some of the ag shows I watch, analysts are saying there are no fundamental factors for current market prices. In other words, from their POV, prices aren't reflecting supply/demand. Do I have the right? Seems that speculation is/will causing some pretty significant problems.