continue to discount its price low enough to finally get rid of that grain, which means the world price gets effectively lower. THE PROVINCIAL PROVISO The big benefit is that Ontario growers were not at large risk with our trade; we won’t have the same trade disruptions. In the end, I’m not worried about getting rid of the physical product. We’re talking to individual farmers and learning what they care about, and what they really care about most is getting rid of the physical grain. And from where I stand, the demand for our physical product through these trade disruptions still looks strong, and I’m comfortable that we’ll at least have demand for all of our grain. It’s not to say that political conditions haven’t had any impact; they have caused some uncertainty in the market, and that makes people market a little of their crops that much sooner. No one likes market uncertainty because it’s a higher risk, and for some, it has them leaning towards taking that risk off the table, and they’re not wrong if they do that. But risk halfway around the world is a little harder to understand and react to, which can lead to growers making fewer decisions. That creates risk that we may not be familiar with, which means we might find marketing for those reasons to be a difficult choice. REPEAT THE SAME MESSAGE Focusing back on demand for the physical grain, it’s best to watch what’s happening in the cash market to more accurately forecast what might happen in the futures market. If we’ve seen demand for the physical product all the way through harvest towards the end of 2025, it’s going to provide more optimism for 2026 because it means the world is buying and moving the grain. That means we’re disrupting trade, which means other customers are buying cheaper grain from the U.S. instead of us because they’re being offered it. ONTARIO GRAIN FARMER COVER STORY 8 continued from page 7 As for finding newer ways to drive demand and cushion any negative effects of U.S. political pressures, there are suggestions that Canadian commodity markets might benefit by detaching from the Chicago Board of Trade (CBoT) and distancing ourselves from any turmoil caused by our proximity to the U.S. Or that a trade agreement on soybeans between Canada and Indonesia in late September might generate higher demand and production, particularly for Ontario growers. But neither scenario is likely to unfold. For starters, CBoT, despite its occasional frustrating qualities, provides liquidity in the market, which translates to stability. As a trader in Ontario, there will be times during the year when we’ll struggle to get bids for physical grain, and we need CBoT to provide a way for us to do that. Late in 2025, Americans had a surplus, particularly with soybeans, so it’s easy for us (in Ontario) to look at that situation and say we don’t need them or a marketing authority like CBoT. But there are benefits of having the ability to trade with them or at least use their liquidity in the market to help us during times when our local demand is potentially not as strong. We know that the fewer options we give ourselves to market something, the greater the risk because we’re likely to be stuck with fewer options at different times. The more options we have to sell everything, the more likely it’ll be positive in the long run.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQzODE4