|
Casey Iowa | Tile, population, and weather variables, usually make a bigger change to a farms yield potential over the last 14 years than the top hybrid now being a lot better than the top hybrid from 14 years ago. But the bag of top hybrid has changed drastically in price. That’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it. Our whole farm averaged 204 in 2004.....we basically have only tied that average or not even quite tied it 2 years outs of 14 years growing seasons since the harvest of 2004. Pioneer 33p67 was a yield monster back then and that was without fungicide!! I didn’t even mention fungicide up above....whoops forgot about that.
My point is same as your point I believe B&C......U.S. crop is behind to start with by quite a bit in way too high of a percentage of the U.S. to have a chance at trend line yields....which is 177-179 area I believe from looking at NASS trend line chart. A 158 to 164 national yield looks highly probable.....using 93 million acres of corn planted which is very optimistic in my opinion & then using 89% harvested for grain which is a little lower than USDA’s 91% that they usually use because I believe there will be some corn PP......gives a total acreage for corn harvested for grain of 82.77 million acres harvested for grain....then use a 166 national yield which not under trend line yield by a larger percentage than has happened multiple times in last 20 years.....and you get total corn production of 13.739 billion bushels.......this is not out of line....it’s not for certain, it’s very realistic. Not sure what that total corn production would do to the market price....but it would prolly raise it. If you use 90% harvested for grain off of 93 million acres and use a national yield of 176 one come’s up with a 14.731 billion bushel production. I would bet that production comes in between or lower than the lower # this year. Just my thoughts. | |
|
|
For comparisons sake, 2008 was a record flood event year
