Cattle Producers Push Back on Meat Institute’s Market Claims
Virginia Cattlemen’s Association says report “cherry-picks” data on prices, retail shares, and demand drivers
The Virginia Cattlemen’s Association (VCA) is disputing the North American Meat Institute’s (NAMI) recent report The Reality of Beef and Cattle Markets, arguing it omits crucial economic context that paints an incomplete picture of conditions facing producers. In a sharply worded critique titled “Inconvenient Truths Ignored in Meat Institute’s Cattle Market Report,” VCA Executive Director Brandon Reeves compares the report’s claims to a livestock sale pitch that highlights selective traits while ignoring structural flaws. Link to VCA report.
Inflation-Adjusted Prices Tell a Different Story
The NAMI report states that cattle prices were “at record levels for most of 2023,” surpassing the 2014–2015 highs. Reeves counters that this comparison ignores inflation. Adjusting for inflation, he notes, the 2014 average of about $240 per hundredweight (cwt) equates to roughly $330/cwt in 2025 dollars. The CME Feeder Cattle Index did not touch that level until mid-2025 and has since traded lower. He adds that producers face mounting costs, meaning real income gains have lagged despite nominal price increases.
Reeves also cites industry data showing that packers have experienced profitable spot margins near $150 per head at different times during this summer and fall despite higher cattle costs — a sign, he argues, that profitability across the supply chain remains uneven.
Producers’ Share Still Below Historical Norms
Another “inconvenient truth,” Reeves writes, involves producers’ share of the retail beef dollar. The NAMI report highlighted a 55% share in August 2025, but Reeves points out that this still falls below the 58% share recorded in November 2014 and far below the levels seen through the 1970s to early 1990s, when producers often captured more than two-thirds of retail value.
He argues that while packers and retailers can adjust margins weekly or even daily, cattle producers must bear the cost of raising animals over years — a dynamic that continues to erode producer leverage.
Consumer Demand: More Than Formula Pricing
Reeves also challenges NAMI’s attribution of stronger consumer demand and beef quality to the “broad adoption of value-based marketing” and formula pricing models. While he acknowledges quality improvements, he credits multiple factors — including genetic gains, more days on feed, and checkoff-funded marketing — as more significant drivers. “Good cattle are good cattle regardless of how they are sold,” he writes, adding that the industry should preserve price discovery and negotiation power rather than relying too heavily on packer-controlled pricing formulas.
Despite his criticism, Reeves emphasizes that producers “need everyone in the supply chain to be successful.” His conclusion quotes radio legend Paul Harvey: “And now you know the rest of the story.”
