BROOKINGS, S.D. - "Cattle feeders and packers have been trading more cattle on a formula based pricing system and fewer on a negotiated basis in recent years according to data reported by USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service," explained Darrell R. Mark, Adjunct Professor of Economics at South Dakota State University, in his regular Cattle & Corn Comments column on iGrow.
In 2004, negotiated pricing accounted for 50 to 60 percent of fed cattle sales. Such sales would include direct feedlot sales where the packer takes delivery of the cattle within fourteen days, terminal stockyard sales, public auctions, etc.
Negotiated grid pricing accounted for another 10 percent or so of total fed cattle sales in 2004. Forward contracting fed cattle, wherein the cattle feeder and packer would agree on a specific price prior to the cattle being ready for slaughter (i.e., more than two weeks), generally accounted for less than 10 percent of fed cattle sales.
Formula pricing was used for 25 to 30 percent of fed cattle sales in 2004. Formula pricing cattle involves using a reference price from an external source as the base price for the sales transaction.
"Often, this reference price is based on the preceding week or weeks' plant average price or the price in a specific market report (e.g., the 5-area fed cattle price)," Mark said.
Over the last decade, Mark said the data shows that the percentage of fed cattle sales made on a negotiated basis has declined while formula based sales have increased.
In the first half of 2013, formula sales accounted for 60 percent of fed cattle sales. Negotiated sales were only about 22 percent of sales, while negotiated grid pricing was less than 7 percent.
"The doubling of formula-based fed cattle sales at the expense of negotiated transactions brings about the "thin market" issue that is typically the focus of most concern associated with this trend," he said. "This occurs when a few negotiated sales are being used as a base price in the formula to price a large percentage of cattle."
In other words, Mark said the price for a few cattle is used to set the price for a majority of cattle and concerns about representativeness of the quality of the negotiated sale cattle arise, as does the potential for manipulation of negotiated sales pricing in an effort to adversely affect the formula's base price.
"Generally, this concern is greater for formula pricing that relies on plant average prices for the formula's base. Often, base prices that use a specific market reported price offer more transparency. However, they too can be a problem when the volume of cattle represented in the market report is low - or when the market report is unavailable," he said.