Argument used to be wild fur producers need ranch fur, so we can ride on their coat tails essentially. At this point in time it seems to me, a collapse of the ranch fur business would increase demand for wild fur due to lack of supply. How many millions of ranch mink run thru the auctions? All that manufacturing and processing and marketing involved with those pelts going to come to a screeching halt, or instead switch to what else might be available. Collapse of nafa and ranch fur might be exactly what trappers need.

Not enough wild fur imho to supply the market so ranching is needed but at the same time less ranch mink and fox should help push demand for quality wild fur. Fur is fur but it's easier to mass produce fur of all the same color and size on an assembly line than pick individual pieces if wild fur that match to make a single garment. That's why the bigger the clearing/auction house is, the better wild fur can do because more fur recieved, the better they can match lots for sale and the easier it is for the buyer to get what the need. Again that's how I see it.

If the ranch fur market dies so does the wild fur market. There isn't enough wild fur to support the ancillary industries that the fur market needs in order to operate. Things such as fur dressers, garment manufacturers, retailers, etc..

Wild fur doesn't "match" ranched fur. In the garment making process, wild fur is paired with other wild fur, (other than perhaps trim).
The argument goes that trappers can't produce enough quantity world-wide to keep garment factories running full-tilt. I call bull. Fur garments used to be exclusively a luxury item. With tens of millions of $20.00 ranch mink produced annually, nearly anyone can afford a fur this or that, now.

When both Auctions and many furbuyers are telling you the price of ranch mink is killing the price of most wild fur. I'm gonna believe them. I guess that is why I need them so bad.

I don't understand why when I go to the supermarket the free-range, organic anything brings a premium price. Yet, when it comes to the fur industry the opposite happens, many people within the fur industry look down upon trappers and wild fur. Something is definitely wrong with our marketing campaign.

For how I was explain to it is that ranch fur is set for size and color. there is no match or size to do. With wild fur you need to size and color match up and grade.More work into it then there is ranch. That is how it was explain to me many years ago to a fur buyer I use to deal wit and was a good friend of my.

Ease of matching size, color, and nap, is the processers problem, not ours. That's just one more thing in the koolaid they want us to drink, for the last thirty years.

I don't know how any marketing campaign that can penetrate the fog regarding fur. It's almost a law that the people that don't view things the way we do are immune to the guilt of hypocrisy of wearing synthetic, oil based products while protesting oil.

I'm just a simple person with finance. It seems to me that if ranch fur took a hit then wild fur would do better. Supply and demand. Less wild available should mean price increase of wild because there would be more demand.

In a vacuum that is correct. What you learn in economics if one could stay awake that long, is that there's a thing called supply/demand curves. As supply diminishes there is a point at which a majority of the market refuses to buy. Then they turn to the next cheapest alternative.

Sniper are you saying folks were not wowed by the awe and excitement that is economics entry level to post grad?

I was surprised I made it to the end of the semester in those econ classes.

Less supply does not mean more demand It means less supply. If demand stays constant price should increase with less supply. I got a 100 on my final, for whatever that is worth.

Ranch fur is the cheaper alternative at this point.

P.S. When a product is subsidized , you are no longer talking free market.

The cost to manufacture fur garments with just wild fur will not generate enough economies of scale to keep production costs low enough and then add to it the skilled labor to make the garments compared to today which will add costs and time which is money as well, will make garments for the current buyers more expensive and in some cases the fur may be of equal or better quality but the garment will not look as uniform unless they are all tinted and dyed, which is a knock against being wild. When the market shifted from the elite and wealthy to middle class and utilitarian there was a major shift in where the fur comes from and how it is processed. I don't see a huge desire to return to that fur market any time soon and especially by those doing most of the processing now. If I could get $2000 for 200 rats I would not need to try and catch 550 of them to get my $2,000, but our industry at this time is not rewarding us for that market today.

Bryce

Before latest down turn, what was the price per on ranch mink?

I think they got up in the $120 range. If they could keep them in the $60-$70 range a lot more people could make some money, including themselves.

P.S. There are a lot of exceptions to the law of supply and demand. Luxury items is the one we want to get back to. Many times price is what people are buying. Fashion is also problematic when it comes to price. Fashion buying is an irrational purchase and demand doesn't necessarily track price.

Marketing boards set prices.
Take diamonds for example.The world is polluted with diamonds but they are kept off the market and dribbled out a little at a time,keeping the price artificially high.Like dirt said a marketing board could set the price of a ranch mink where it would be profitable for the producer,and attractive for customers.Problem is producers would be told by the board how many they could put on the market.This is against the free enterprise system,and socialist.The idea was floated here but mostly voted down by trapping organizations.It leads to the small guy getting phased out.
Marketing of diamonds is also ingenious,brainwashing women into thinking they have to have a diamond ring in order to get married.

Colluding to fix prices is not socialist. Socialism is government control of the means of production.