Breaking free from the chains of the past Where
truth moves faster than a Holstein calf No law
waiting on some printed page We're charting new
ground in the digital age From genomic codes
to robot facts We cut through the noise, no hold
them back not your daddy's dairy news tonight
we're sparking where we deliver the contrarian
insights and uncomfortable truths the dairy industry
needs to hear. I'm your host, and today we're
diving into a story that's costing you $12 ,000
every single month you wait to act on it. We're
talking about the seven -fold price difference
between Holstein bulls and beef crosses. $200
versus $1 ,400 for the same calf from the same
cow. Just different semen. In this episode...
we expose why consultants charge $7 ,000 for
what costs $150 to implement, why extension workshops
are designed for attendance metrics instead of
your profitability, and why major processors
will lock up 70 % of the beef dairy market by
2026. This is investigative dairy journalism
at its finest. Let's get into it. Welcome back
to the Deep Dive, where we cut through dairy
industry noise to get you the insights that actually
matter for your operation. Today, we're tackling
something, well, something that seems like it
should be incredibly simple. A revenue opportunity
that's right there. But it's gotten tangled up
in, frankly, a lot of unnecessary complexity.
Absolutely. We're diving deep into a future piece
that's definitely been making waves, generating
some serious buzz. And this one, it really does
have layers. Layers of opportunity, yes, but
also layers of, let's call it frustrating red
tape. It's going to make farmers, I think, really
rethink how they're looking at one of the easiest
wins out there. Beef on dairy. OK, let's set
the stage here because the context is crucial,
isn't it? We're in this environment have been
for a while of tight margins. Milk prices are
all over the place and farmers are understandably
scrambling, looking for ways to bring in cash
that don't involve massive capital outlay. Yeah,
exactly. They need cash flow, not the kind that
comes with signing, you know, another half million
dollar note for a new barn or fancy robots. They
need simple, reliable revenue streams, stuff
they can implement now. And the market data shows
they want this. The interest is definitely there.
We're looking at the NAB report, the National
Association of Animal Breeders 2024 annual figures.
Right. And those numbers are pretty staggering.
84 % of all beef semen sold is now going to dairy
farms. 84%. That's not just a little trend. That's
a fundamental shift in the industry. It really
is. It shows the desire, the need to make this
change is widespread. It's clearly driven by
economics, by... Let's be honest, a bit of desperation
for some. But it's not just about who wants to
do it. The real stakes, the urgency, it comes
down to the dollars and cents at the auction
barn. And this disparity is, well, it's why we
need to talk about this now. We've got USDA Agricultural
Marketing Service reports, fresh data from October
15th right across Midwest auctions. And what
are they saying? Straight Holstein bulls? Yeah.
What are they fetching? Barely making weight,
really. $190 maybe. $210 if you're lucky, if
the buyer's feeling generous that day. Okay,
so $200, give or take, that's your ceiling for
a dairy bull calf. Pretty much. Now contrast
that, the beef crosses come into the ring. And
the whole atmosphere changes, doesn't it? You
can hear it in the auctioneer's voice. Totally.
They're consistently pulling $1 ,200 to $1 ,400.
Consistently. $1 ,200 to $1 ,400, okay. And we
even saw reports one really nice Angus cross
heifer cap hit $1 ,575. Wow. Okay, so let's just
take that baseline difference. Yeah. $200 versus,
let's say, $1 ,300 on average. That's the number.
$1 ,200 to $1 ,400 is the reliable range. That's
seven times the money. Just pause on that. Seven.
Times. Money. It's the same cow. Exactly. Same
cow carrying the calf, same feed going into her,
same water, same barn space. Same buyers, often
standing ringside. Often the very same buyers.
The only physical difference is swapping out,
what, a $20 dairy straw for a $25 beef straw?
Right. A $5 difference in input cost for $1 ,100
difference in output price. It should be the
easiest decision a farmer makes all year, like
you said earlier. But it's not, is it? And that's
the core of this deep dive, the real controversy
here. The problem isn't the technology. The deck
is simple. It's cheap. It's a $25 straw. So what
is the problem? It's the delay. The mandated
complexity, the advice that's being pushed. We're
seeing this push for like a $6 ,000, $7 ,000
planning phase. Testing, consulting, strategy
sessions. All before the farmer is supposedly
allowed to try the actual fix. Exactly. Before
they spent $150 on five straws just to see if
it works on their worst cows. The planning costs
thousands. The fixed costs, pocket change. It's
completely backwards. Astronomically higher.
And we can't ignore the clock ticking here either.
There's this looming 2026 deadline with processor
consolidation. We'll get into that more later.
But yeah, the urgency is real. It means if you
spend the next six months. developing a comprehensive
plan like the consultants tell you to. You might
miss the boat entirely. The market isn't waiting
for your feasibility study. Not at all. Okay,
let's really nail down these numbers. That $1
,200 price gap isn't just an anecdote. No, the
USDA AMS reports confirm it week after week.
It's the minimum average difference you're seeing.
Consistently, $1 ,200 to $1 ,400 for the beef
crosses. Holstein's struggling to break $200.
Let's translate that. Think about a typical dairy,
maybe 200 cows milking. They're breeding maybe
120 calves a year total, some for replacement,
some destined for beef anyway. Right. So let's
say out of those 120, they decide to use dairy
semen on just 50 calves that aren't absolutely
critical for replacement. Maybe lower end cows
are not sure about keeping long term. Okay. 50
calves bred to Holstein bulls at $200 a pup.
That's $10 ,000. Simple math. Now, what if they'd
use beef semen on those same 50 cows at, say,
$1 ,300 average? 50 times $1 ,300. That's $65
,000. So $10 ,000 versus $65 ,000. The difference,
the opportunity cost, the cash they just voluntarily
left on the table is $55 ,000. $55 ,000 in additional
revenue. And this is the kicker. What did it
cost to get that extra $55 ,000? Well, the semen
cost difference is maybe five bucks a straw times
50 cows. Maybe, let's say they used 1 .5 straws
per conception, so 75 straws. That's under $400
in extra semen cost. So less than $400 cost for
$55 ,000 gain, and crucially, no extra capital
investment needed. None. No new buildings, no
asking the bank for another loan, no hiring extra
people. It's pure margin, pure profit improvement,
driven by a tiny change in input. And you see
farmers, understandably, agonizing over milk
prices, fighting for every penny per hundredweight.
They're debating cutting protein supplement by
a tiny bit to save 50 cents, maybe save $5 ,000
over the whole year. Which is important, don't
get me wrong. Absolutely. But at the same time,
they're potentially walking away from $1 ,100
per calf on dozens of animals. It's this huge
inefficiency that when you add it all up, it
can become a question of solvency. Let's think
about the cumulative impact, too. It's not just
one year. Say a farm needs to restructure debt
or just needs cash to cover rising fuel costs,
labor or whatever. If they miss out on that $50
,000 or $60 ,000 this year and then again next
year, just because they stuck with dairy semen
18 months ago. That's over $100 ,000 cash shortfall
across two years. And what does that mean practically?
That's the difference between making your loan
payments comfortably and getting put on the bank's
watch list. It's the difference between paying
down debt and racking up interest on the operating
line just to buy feed. That small decision today
ripples through the balance sheet for years.
My gut reaction, just looking at the farm finance
side, if I'm culling, let's say, just 10 cows
a month that aren't making the replacement cut,
and I get those $200 checks, okay, that's $2
,000, but what could I have gotten? 10 cows times,
say, $13. That's $13 ,000. So by taking the $2
,000, I'm actively choosing to forego $11 ,000
every single month. It's a hemorrhage, like you
said. $11 ,000 a month. What does that cover
on, say, a 150 -cow operation? That's easily
a month's worth of diesel and repairs. Or paying
a good full -time employee for two months during
planting or harvest season. It's real money that's
just evaporating. Yeah. Because the system has
somehow convinced people they need a PhD and
a $7 ,000 plan before making a simple $25 purchase
decision. And it hits farms of all sizes. If
you're smaller, say 80 cows. That difference
between maybe $8 ,000 from bull calves versus
$50 ,000 or $60 ,000 from beef crosses. That
is your cash flow. That's the difference between
making it and needing the operating line constantly.
And for a larger farm, scaling that $50 ,000
or $60 ,000 difference across hundreds of calves.
It adds serious dollars to the bottom line. millions
potentially, without the headache and risk of
building a whole new barn or parlor. It's just
profit optimization using the assets you already
have more effectively. It seems like the lowest
hanging fruit, the easiest lever to pull for
profitability right now. And yet the whole advisory
system seems designed to make it feel like rocket
science. Which brings us right to this implementation
intention gap. We have to challenge the standard
advice here. What's the script? You know, the
one farmers hear from extension, from consultants,
when they ask about breeding to beef. Oh, it's
practically memorized. Standard issue. Well,
first, you need comprehensive genomic testing.
Step one, always testing. Always. Then you need
to build your breeding hierarchy, optimize your
genetic selection matrix, blah, blah, blah. Plan,
plan, plan, focus on perfection, maybe seven
generations down the road. Instead of putting
cash in your pocket today, it's all about future
optimization over current reality. They insist
you need this perfect, scientifically validated
plan before you order the first beef straw. But
the actual data, the behavioral research, tells
a very different story. Yeah, this research from
the Agricultural Systems Journal, March. 2024.
It's fascinating because it's just basic human
psychology applied to farming. What did it find?
It found that farmers who use what they call
satisficing strategies, good enough practical
decisions, like just jumping in, starting immediately
with the cows they know are culls, the obvious
ones. Those farmers actually had better sustained
adoption rates. They stuck with beef on dairy
longer than the farmers who spent six months
or a year planning the perfect strategy. That's
brilliant because it nails the problem with overplanning.
It's that gap. The implementation intention gap.
Right. The longer you wait between deciding you
want to do something and actually doing it, the
less likely you are to ever follow through. We
all do it, right? Decide to start exercising,
spend weeks researching gyms and plans. And never
actually go. Yeah. So this current structure,
the mandate to wait for the $7 ,000 comprehensive
plan. It actively makes the problem worse. It
widens that gap. It takes a simple $25 action
ordering different semen and turns it into this
massive, intimidating, expensive project. Makes
it feel overwhelming. Exactly. The farmer's already
stressed about everything else. You hand them
a 50 -page binder full of charts and genetic
codes. It goes into the deal with this later,
maybe, pile. Precisely. And the proof that people
are jumping in anyway is right there in the NEAB.
The semen sales numbers we mentioned. 7 .9 million
units of beef semen sold to dairies, 84 % of
all beef semen. You can bet the vast majority
of those farmers didn't sit through six months
of consulting meetings first. They saw the $1
,200 price difference at the sale barn, they
needed the cash flow, and they just started.
They likely skipped the optimization matrix entirely.
They grabbed the life preserver instead of waiting
for swimming lessons. Well put. And the market
rewards that action, doesn't it? It doesn't reward
perfect planning. That never happens. If 84 %
of the industry is doing it, it clearly works
well enough at a basic level. The ones making
the money are the ones who act it. Okay, let's
really follow the money trail here, because this
is where that six -month planning delay isn't
just inefficient, it starts to look, well...
Punitive. Almost predatory. Let's break down
how they get to that $6 ,000 or $7 ,000 figure.
Right. The consultant cost structure, it starts
with the initial visit, right? Usually. Just
to come out, walk the farm, assess the situation.
That's easily $500 to $800 right there. The discovery
phase, where they discover you need their expensive
plan. Bingo. Then comes the inevitable push.
Comprehensive genomic testing. Which we just
talked about. Yeah. It's around $40 per cow,
maybe more depending on the test. Plus, often,
There are coordination fees tacked on for the
consultant to handle the samples and data. So
for a pretty modest 100 -cow herd... You're instantly
looking at $4 ,000 just for testing. Testing
that... for the cull cows just confirms what
your own eyes and records already told you okay
so four thousand dollars for testing plus the
500 800 initial visit we're already close to
five grand then add in maybe a couple of monthly
check -in calls or visits while they analyze
the data another few hundred bucks each time
plus the time build for actually writing up the
comprehensive strategy document so yes six thousand
dollars seven thousand dollars maybe even more
and you haven't even bred a single cow to beef
yet based on this grand plan seven thousand dollars
just stop and think about that figure you're
on a farm budget. What else does $7 ,000 buy
you? Tangible things you need. At today's prices,
that's maybe 600 good round bales of hay. Which
is winter feed for 40 cows, easily. Or half a
year's worth of sawdust bedding for a typical
100 cow freestall. Or think equipment. You could
probably find a decent used TMR mixer for that,
something that could cut your feed waste by 10%.
So the choice becomes, invest $7 ,000 in actual
feed, bedding, or efficiency boosting equipment.
Or invest it in a consultant's binder. A binder
that tells you things you mostly already knew,
delaying the actual $1 ,100 per calf revenue
stream. It's sacrificing survival essentials
for strategy documents. And what's in that binder
usually? What's the deliverable for $7 ,000?
Lots of complicated looking charts, genetic trend
graphs, optimization matrices. Often advice based
on national averages or data from giant farms
in total different climates, which might have
zero relevance to your local conditions, your
feed costs, your buyers. It's designed to look
impressive, sophisticated, not necessarily immediately
actionable or relevant. Exactly. And the whole
structure cleverly hides the ridiculously simple
cost benefit here. The actual change is using
a $20 beef straw instead of a $20 dairy straw.
That's it. The solution costs $5 more per attempt.
The planning costs $7 ,000. The industry has
literally built a multi -thousand -dollar process
around a $5 decision. It generates complexity
where none needs to exist. Which leads to the
crucial hidden cost, the planning trap opportunity
cost. Right. We established earlier waiting just
one month, breeding just 10 cows to dairy instead
of beef, costs you about $11 ,000. in lost potential
revenue. And these consulting plans, they often
take three, four, sometimes six months to develop
and roll out. So let's be conservative. Say you
wait five months for the perfect plan. Five months
times $11 ,000. That's $55 ,000. You forfeited
$55 ,000 in cash flow while waiting for the plan
to be delivered. And does the consultant ever
mention that $55 ,000 opportunity cost in their
proposal? Never. Not once. They talk about potential
future genetic gains years down the line. They
never calculate the actual cash you're bleeding
right now by delaying. The farm needs cash flow
today. To pay the feed bill, make the loan payment,
keep the lights on. And this system demands they
hemorrhage cash for half a year, chasing theoretical
perfection. Which the research shows they're
less likely to stick with anyway than if they
just started messy and adapted. It makes no sense.
Okay, enough theory. Let's look at real world
examples. Does this just start approach actually
work? We have that Fond du Lac farmer anecdote.
Yeah, the Fond du Lac story is a perfect illustration.
Puts the plan first dogma in its place. Guy runs,
what, about 280 head? Old school Ticenol barn,
typical Midwestern setup. Exactly the kind of
farm feeling the squeeze. So what did he do?
18 months ago, he just started. Pretty much.
Started breeding his obvious cull cows to beef
semen. What was his comprehensive strategy? Did
he get the genomics? Hire a consultant? Nope,
none of that. He just used his eyes and his records,
picked out the classic problem cows, you know,
the three teeter that's a hassle to milk, the
cow that's been open for months and just won't
settle, the chronic mastitis case that's eating
up vet bills and dumped milk. The ones every
farmer knows are on their way out anyway. Exactly.
The obvious ones. He started breeding them to
beef instead of dairy. Simple as that. And the
result? The source says he banked an extra $68
,000 in revenue last year. Just from those beef
cross calves. 68 grand. Wow. Meanwhile, his neighbor.
His neighbor, apparently similar size farm, similar
setup, is still developing a comprehensive strategy
with some consultant based out of Madison. So
neighbor A has an extra $68 ,000 cash. Neighbor
B has a binder and is still waiting to start.
Neighbor B is stuck firmly in that implementation
intention gap, losing tens of thousands in the
process. And this is why the perspective from
agricultural lenders is so telling, isn't it?
Absolutely. Bankers look at one thing above all
else, cash flow. Can the farm pay its bills and
service its debt? When they see a farm struggling,
maybe trying to refinance, they see this beef
on dairy thing as the simplest fix imaginable.
See, wait, you can add $60 ,000 in revenue from
50 calves with zero capital investment. Exactly.
That's a huge immediate boost to solvency. It
makes their loan look a whole lot safer instantly.
And that behavioral economics research backs
this up too. The source had that off -the -record
quote from a lender. Yeah, basically saying they
see more farmers actually start using beef on
dairy when they're desperate, when they're really
struggling and need the cash now, more than they
see adoption from farmers who are comfortable
in just attending educational workshops about
it. Crisis clarifies priorities. It forces action.
When you're grounding, you grab the life preserver
that's thrown to you. You don't ask about swimming
lesson schedules. The science confirms it. Interventions
driven by immediate need have much higher follow
through rates than those based on purely educational,
nice to have optimization when things are OK.
And this connects right into the whole farmer
stress issue and frankly, the failure of how
a lot of this advice is delivered. We know from
research like those Canadian parliamentary hearings
in 2023, when farmers are in deep financial trouble,
they tend to withdraw. Right. They stop going
to the auctions, stop attending co -op meetings
or extension workshops. They're home, stressed,
trying to keep things running, maybe milking
in the dark to save a few bucks on electricity.
But where are these comprehensive strategy workshops
usually held? Tuesday morning, 10 a .m. at the
Holiday Inn Conference Center downtown. Right
smack in the middle of morning, milking and chores
for most farms. The whole delivery system often
feels designed for the farmers who are comfortable
enough to take half a day off, not for the ones
who are struggling the most and need practical
help now. And this goes back to how success is
measured internally for some of these advisory
services. Yeah, the Journal of Extension piece
from April 2024 hit this hard. Extension folks
are often evaluated based on workshop attendance
numbers and how much participants like the coffee
and donuts the satisfaction scores. They're not
evaluated on whether the farmers who attended
actually implemented anything useful. Or, crucially,
whether they actually made any more money because
of it. So the incentive is to run a popular,
well -attended workshop, not necessarily to deliver
advice that saves a farm $60 ,000. It's a structural
misalignment. Internal metrics over real -world
farmer outcomes. OK, we need to pivot now because
it's not just about the farm's internal economics.
There's this huge external pressure building.
The market itself is changing fast. We're seeing
reports from major analysts, Rabobank, CoBank,
just in the last month or so, all talking about
accelerating processor consolidation in the beef
dairy supply chain. Yeah, this isn't just talk
anymore. It's happening. The big packers, Tyson,
JBS, Cargill. They're making strategic moves.
They need predictable supply. They need consistent
quality. And they need massive volume. And dealing
with hundreds of small farms bringing in a handful
of calves sporadically just doesn't work for
their model, does it? Not at all. It's inefficient.
It's logistically messy. They can't build a reliable
supply chain on, as one source put it, guys bringing
five cows one week, none the next. What are they
doing instead? They're moving towards locking
up supply through exclusive multi -year contracts.
They're going to larger operations or groups
of operations that can guarantee consistent volume,
often with specific beef genetics. And they're
offering premium prices for that reliability.
They're basically cornering the market for high
-quality, consistent beef on dairy calves. That's
exactly what it looks like. And this leads to
the critical deadline prediction the source mentioned.
This should be a wake -up call. What was the
prediction? By the end of 2026, so... Just over
two years from now, the prediction is that 70
% of the desirable beef dairy supply will be
locked up under these exclusive contracts. 70%.
Wow. Okay, so what does that mean for the average
farmer, especially the small or mid -sized ones
who are still developing their comprehensive
strategy? It means they could be in real trouble.
by the time their perfect plan is finally ready
to implement in late 2026 or 2027. The door to
those premium contracts might already be shut,
bolted even. Exactly. They'll be left selling
their calves on the open, volatile spot market.
Competing with everyone else who missed the boat,
likely fighting for lower prices. Back to potentially
getting not much more than those $200 Holstein
bull prices if the spot market gets saturated.
It's a real risk. The processors are already
signaling this. They're turning away smaller,
inconsistent suppliers now. They need that reliable
weekly volume, maybe 20 calves a week minimum
from a source to make the logistics work. So
contrast the farmer who starts now, even small,
builds volume. proves consistency over the next
18, 24 months. That farmer is positioning themselves
to potentially grab one of those contracts, secure
that premium for the next few years. Versus the
farmer still sitting in planning meetings in
mid -2025. By the time they have calves ready
in volume, the game might have fundamentally
changed. The premium market could be fully allocated.
So the urgency isn't just about capturing the
$1 ,200 price today. It's about securing market
access for the future. It's about ensuring you're
not left on the outside looking in when 70 %
of the market consolidates. It's about long -term
viability. Acting now is essentially buying insurance
against being relegated to the spot market scrap
heap in 2027. That's a good way to put it. The
market waits for no one, especially not for a
six -month planning cycle. All right, let's circle
back to the advice itself. We need to be really
critical of some of the things consultants push,
especially when they're charging that $7 ,000
fee. What are the big red flags farmers should
watch out for? Red flag number one, definitely.
Insisting on comprehensive genomic testing before
you breed a single cull cow to beef. We touched
on this, but it bears repeating. For identifying
cows that clearly shouldn't be making replacements.
It's overkill. It's financially wasteful. Yeah.
Yes, genomics are great for selecting your elite
replacement heifers. but for the obvious calls.
That three -teeter, the chronic mastitis cow
that cost you $2 ,000 in vet bills last lactation,
the one that's been open 200 days. Do you really
need a $40 DNA test plus fees to tell you she's
not prime replacement material? Come on. It's
using an expensive tool for a job your own records
and eyes can do for free. If you can't spot your
worst cows... You've got bigger management issues
than genetics, absolutely. So that insistence
on universal testing up front, big red flag.
Okay, red flag number two. Pushing expensive
equipment before you even have the calves on
the ground to justify it. The source mentioned
a consultant heavily pushing a $12 ,000 remote
calf monitoring system before the farmer had
even bred the first cow for a beef calf. $12
,000. Based on what? Theoretical mortality risk.
Exactly. But what does the actual research say
about preventing... calf mortality. Multiple
universities agree. It's colostrum. Good colostrum
management. Four quarts within the first couple
of hours. Bingo. And that's an observation. Manual
checks. What does that cost? A $30 Bricks refractometer
to check colostrum quality and paying attention,
maybe some extra labor time. Right. Not a $12
,000 capital investment that costs the equivalent
of a year's worth of betting. That smells like
pushing high margin tech sales, not solving a
real problem efficiently. So unnecessary testing,
premature equipment pushing. What's red flag
number three? Relying heavily on national averages
or data from completely different types of farms.
If the consultant's presentation is full of ROI
projections from a massive 10 ,000 cow confinement
operation in Texas. And you're milking 150 cows
in a tie stall in Wisconsin dealing with snow
and $280 drought hay. That Texas data is virtually
meaningless to you. Your costs are different.
Your climate is different. Your local buyers
and market dynamics are different. You need to
know what your neighbor, Tom, down the road,
is getting for his calves. Who's buying them?
What are local feed costs? Exactly. Generic national
averages are easy for consultants to pull up.
They look official. But they're often useless
for making decisions on your specific farm. It's
lazy analysis disguised as expertise. And this
all ties back to the bigger structural problem,
doesn't it? The university funding angle. Oh,
yeah. This is where the whole system really incentivizes
complexity over simple solutions. You see land
-grant universities asking for huge sums. The
example was $16 million for new research barns
in Wisconsin, partly to study the implementation
challenges of beef on dairy. Studying the challenges
of implementing a solution that costs $25 per
straw. $16 million. Think about that. If you
just gave that $16 million directly to Wisconsin
dairy farmers as a $5 per straw rebate for beef
semen? You could probably pay for the conversion
of almost every single Holstein bull calf born
in the state to a beef cross for the next decade.
Exactly. Every single one. But that doesn't build
fancy research facilities. It doesn't fund large
graduate student programs. It doesn't get professors
tenure. So instead, we fund multi -million dollar
research projects to study the complexities of
a $25 fix. It becomes a self -serving cycle.
Okay, wow. We've covered a ton of ground from
that $11 ,000 monthly hemorrhage on just 10 cows
to the consultant traps to that looming 2026
contract cliff. Let's distill it down. Farmer
just finished milking, grabbing coffee, maybe
driving to the feed store. What are the absolute
must -know takeaways, the actionable stuff from
this deep dive? Right, we need to cut through
the noise. It boils down to prioritizing immediate
practical action over waiting for some mythical
perfect plan. The plan needs to start today,
even if it's small and messy. So, insight number
one. What's the first step this week, maybe even
today? Insight one, immediate action. This week,
today, the action. Call your AI tech right now.
Tell them on their next visit, bring some decent
general purpose beef semen, hangus cross, semangus,
whatever's readily available and reasonably priced.
The goal. Breed your five or six worst cows.
The most obvious coals you already know you don't
want replacements from. The three teeter, the
chronic high SCC, the one that won't breed back.
Cost, maybe $150 total for the semen. That's
it. No genomics. No consultant fee. This $150
investment starts the validation process on your
farm. Start small. Prove the concept yourself,
but start now. Don't wait for a $7 ,000 permission
slip. Okay, what's next? Insight two. Medium
-term strategy. Next three to six months. Scale
based on what actually works, not a projection.
After that first preg check, usually three weeks
later, see how those first few cows did. If four
or five out of six settled, great. Concept proven.
Action. Scale up immediately. Breed the next
15 likely culls. If conception rates stay decent,
keep going. Aim to get 30, 40, maybe 50 head
bred to beef over the next few months. Goal.
Start generating consistent supply. Get that
first cycle of potential $1 ,400 calves coming
through. And if you invest anywhere, invest in
simple management tools that pay off like that
$30 Bricks refractometer for colostrum, not $12
,000 sensor systems yet. Let the early success
pay for the small improvements. Don't go into
debt for fancy tech before you know it works
for you. Makes sense. And long -term. Insight
three. Long -term positioning. Next one, two
years. The key action here is speed of implementation
over perfection. Keep the momentum going. Consistently
breed your lower -end cows to beef. Build that
volume. Goal. Position your farm to be a potential
supplier for those premium contracts. Demonstrate
you can deliver consistent numbers of quality
beef cross calves month after month before that
70 % consolidation deadline hits hard at the
end of 2026. This is your insurance policy. It's
about making sure you have a reliable premium
market when the spot market potentially gets
ugly. Avoid that scrap heap. Hashtag, hashtag,
enhanced show outro. So that's our deep dive
for today. If this kind of... practical, no -nonsense
analysis helps your operation make better decisions,
definitely head over to www .thebullvine .com.
We've got more articles digging into what's really
happening in the dairy world. And seriously,
hit subscribe wherever you get your podcasts
or deep dives. We're putting these out twice
a week now, bringing you analysis on the topics
that matter. And trust me, you do not want to
miss next week. We're digging into the true,
often -hitting costs of conventional feed programs
and talking about one company that's trying to
completely flip the script on how we think about
feeding cows. It's going to be eye -opening.
But for today, the final thought is this. You
can potentially get $1 ,400 per calf instead
of $200 just by changing the semen you use on
your culled cows. $5 difference per straw. Tell
us again why this needs a $7 ,000 plan. All right,
here's your bottom line. Every Holstein bull
calf you're selling for $200 could be a $1 ,400
beef cross. The only difference? $25 worth of
semen. Stop planning. Start breeding. Your action
plan is simple. Call your AI tech today. Pick
your six worst cows. Invest $150 in beef semen.
In seven months, you'll bank $8 ,400 instead
of $1 ,200. No consultants. No genomic testing.
No $7 ,000 planning process. While you're sitting
through another workshop on optimization matrices,
your neighbor's already banking $1 ,400 per calf.
Every month. For the full article with the complete
action plan, visit thebullvine .com. That's T
-H -E -B -U -L -L -V -I -N -E dot com. And remember,
in dairy, like in life, those who act while others
plan are the ones who profit. This has been the
Bullvine Podcast. We'll see you next time with
more contrarian insights and actionable intelligence
the mainstream ag media won't deliver. Until
then, stop planning, start profiting. Thank you.