|
Alton, Ia | Maybe this should be on Market talk, but that's primarily grain, and ...well, if the grains were limit down two days straight heads there would explode, especially with a product that HAS to go to market at a certain time, so it's here.
Anyway, we've got major, major "societal distancing" going on. Thur and Fri hogs were limit down, cattle Fri, maybe Thurs also. Supposedly because people won't be going out to eat, demand destruction, etc. I know part of the hog drop was China cancelled 45,000 tons of pork. Does anyone else think that was a strategic move? They watch closely, they could tell the US was in panic mode, "let's throw some gas on that fire", and cancel orders. I would not put it past them to do that, tank the market, then come back in next week and buy 2X that amount, at fire sale prices. They are shrewd, to put it nicely.
Back to my first point, do people not eat at home? How does staying home == demand destruction? I realize when you go out, your meal size is probably bigger, but OTOH, eating at home is 1/3 the cost, so people should be able to eat more. Eventually you can only consume so many calories per day/week etc., so overall the consumption should stay uniform.
Help me out here. Why should staying home = demand destruction? Why should the current panic = limit down moves? Or is it all fund trading, risk off as they say. In pork the cutout value was up nicely this week so obviously the consumer wants the product. | |
|