IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jloagb/59586.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beef Producer Choice in Cattle Marketing

Author

Listed:
  • Gillespie, Jeffrey M.
  • Basarir, Aydin
  • Schupp, Alvin R.

Abstract

In addition to the conventional auction method of cattle marketing, some alternative marketing arrangements include sale by private treaty, video auction, retained ownership, and use of strategic alliances. This study finds that 91% of Louisiana producers use conventional auctions, while 39% use other types of marketing arrangements. The most heavily used alternative marketing arrangement is private treaty, at 26%. Those producers using alternative marketing arrangements tend to be larger, have heavier weaning weights, have more diverse farming operations, be younger, have greater contact with their county extension agents, and depend less on income from off-farm sources.

Suggested Citation

  • Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Basarir, Aydin & Schupp, Alvin R., 2004. "Beef Producer Choice in Cattle Marketing," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 22(2).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:jloagb:59586
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/59586
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Williams, Brian R. & Raper, Kellie Curry & DeVuyst, Eric A. & Peel, Derrell S. & Lalman, David L. & Richards, Chris & Doye, Damona G., 2012. "Demographic Factors Affecting the Adoption of Multiple Value-Added Practices by Oklahoma Cow-Calf Producers," 2012 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2012, Birmingham, Alabama 119743, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    2. Bensemann, Jessica & Shadbolt, Nicola, 2015. "Farmers’ Choice of Marketing Strategy: A Study of New Zealand Lamb Producers," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA), vol. 18(3).
    3. Gillespie, Jeffrey & Sitienei, Isaac & Bhandari, Basu & Scaglia, Guillermo, 2016. "Grass-Fed Beef: How is it Marketed by US Producers?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA), vol. 19(2).
    4. Lewis, Karen & Griffith, Andrew & Boyer, Christopher & Rhinehart, Justin, 2015. "Returns to Retained Ownership through Finishing for Beef Cattle Originating from Tennessee," 2015 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2015, Atlanta, Georgia 196620, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Franken, Jason R.V. & Parcell, Joseph L. & Patterson, David J. & Smith, Michael F. & Poock, Scott, . "Cow-Calf Producer Interest in Retained Ownership," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia.
    6. McLeod, Elizabeth & Jensen, Kimberly & Griffith, Andrew & Lewis, Karen, 2017. "Tennessee Beef Producers' Willingness to Participate in a Tennessee Branded Beef Program," 2017 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2017, Mobile, Alabama 252649, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Martin, Beutler & Fausti, Scott & Qasmi, Bashir, 2006. "Perspectives of Cow/Calf Producers in the Dakotas - Marketing Channel Selection," Issue Briefs 2006479, South Dakota State University, Department of Economics.
    8. repec:ags:jrapmc:122317 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Pope, Kelsey Frasier & Schroeder, Ted C. & Langemeier, Michael R. & Herbel, Kevin L., 2011. "Cow-Calf Producer Risk Preference Impacts on Retained Ownership Strategies," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(04), pages 497-513, November.
    10. Zimmerman, Lance C. & Schroeder, Ted C. & Dhuyvetter, Kevin C. & Olson, K.C. & Stokka, Gerald L. & Seeger, Jon T. & Grotelueschen, Dale M., 2012. "The Effect of Value-Added Management on Calf Prices at Superior Livestock Auction Video Markets," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(1), April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:jloagb:59586. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaggea.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.