Poll

[mbratrud]

CP if you owned shares in Nortel before they went broke. Would you want creditors to come to you personally to collect unpaid accounts simply because you owned shares in the company? The Sask gov't simply owned shares in Big Sky.

Just like any investment there are risks, not sure what the govt exposure is today they may have sold alot of their shares over the years who knows.

I feel for anyone that has been affected but its no different than producers stung by Neigbors, Cancom, Borch Farms, and many other companies that have gone broke in the past. Just because the governement is an investor shouldn't make this one any different.

Do your homework folks before you sell, make sure you get unload information in a timely manor and then makesure you are monitoring your payments. Give questionable companies a credit limit ie. $20000 would be roughly 3 loads of Barley. Never have more than that outstanding at a time. If a company cannot live with terms like that they are to risky to deal with. Depending on what your selling you may have to allow more credit to cover a few more loads but thats when its even more important to do your homework.

[cottonpicken]

If your a government who owns seventy percent of something and then turn around and abandon the people who you where trying to support in the first place-is very goofy to me.Think of how underhanded this was to keep taking farmer shipments while behind the scenes some people new the ship was going down.

This is same lack of morality that has infected global corprate structure.

And now everyone wants to be apart that EVIL?Because they didnt do their homework-so screw em i'll take their money?

We are talking 70% GOVERNMENT ownership.Not private.

No they shouldnt have been involved in the first place but they/we are.

[skhadenuf]

I understand your point and will sound wishy washy because I really hope that those farmers would get their money it's a hell of a screw job in underhanded fashion as far as I am concerned BUT this is a business transaction just like any other business that goes broke and doesn't pay their bills they know their going broke long before it happens and yet still go on putting others in jeapardy. It doesn't matter that it is government or not the same rules should apply. What I think should happen is that some of those rules should be changed for example the guys sitting with the government grants that started the company and have their grant money as the first secured creditors that should not be the case. The idea of these barns was to help the farming community therefore the farmers delivering the grain should be the first line of secured creditors, those barns are full of hogs surely those hogs would cover the cost of the grain, those sitting behind a desk owning this thing should run the risk of loosing their government grant not the farmer. Interesting that those running the barns first comments were if we declare bankruptcy that will put us on firmer ground well yah hoo of course don't pay the farmer what you owe then you're on firmer ground? No matter how this turns out I wouldn't deal with those bastards if there was no where else to sell my grain, far as I am concerned shut them all down.
How is this going to go down in re gards to cais, guys grew the grain but are only going to get pennies for the dollar if that, so how does cais value this grain? maybe if you have had no crop losses higher margin, you can now qualify for a cais payment because if you sold alot for pennies? Yet the guys who had multiple crop loss no marging would get nothing from cais even if you got only pennies from your grain? Sound fair???? Maybe we'll all pay for this anyway through cais to some at least.

[parsley]

Farmers need to have read government's "large view"..their goal.. in order to understand what is the result from it.

Federal Liberals wanted to cut back smal pissy farmers, partnership with the large farmers to guarantee their success, and support large operations, hence go the federal payments.

Little farmers, like small business create a lot of wealth and ask little in return.

Central planning in agriculture, results in Big Sky manager types, full of themselves, not caring about rural communities, and skimming director profits before they declare bankruptcy, with governments too embarrassed to regulate.

I don't mind "big".

But I despise "big" established because of and sustained by government tax-welfare.

[fjlip]

"Everyone needs to do their homework before they deal with someone." But your home work could have been the day before the lawyers started the proceedings. It's all risk. We have prepaid and always asked for a bank reference. That is still as of the day you call, some risk.
So are there any other buyers or suppliers we should be wary of? How safe are COOPs? Let's help each other. There could be a website to share rumors or experiences with businesses. Is the BBB an option? How current or detailed is their rating?

[fjlip]

If any government makes any special rules or tax laws to benefit "big", are they not screwing with business and the market? There would be a natural size limit if not for favoring all corporations such as Big Sky Pork. It never should have been allowed to change name to "farm".

[skhadenuf]

One of the neighbors brought up a point about Cais and this situation. There ought to be a follow up on this because if Big Sky declares all this debt owed to the farmers and then collects a big payout from Cais is the bankruptcy going to protect them from using that payout to pay the debt to the farmers? There are rumors floating around that happenned last time with these characters. I don't think they should be allowed in cais to begin with.

[farmerboy]

I am a farmer, not an accountant, but I do have some experience with this type of non-payment! If you delivered grain to a company who has not paid you or will never pay you, and if you have a paper trail such as your scale receipt, do not delay in contacting a representative of the CAIS program for help, as this may be treated as a receivable that you never received. If you are enrolled in CAIS and you are able to prove that you delivered this grain to Big Sky and that you never recieved payment, you may be paid through CAIS.

[skhadenuf]

That's likely some good advice for those that have a decent margin in cais for those that don't likely still SOL. Maybe someone should give a heads up to cais in terms of Big Sky claiming the expense owing of the grain, if they never intend on paying it then I would think it should not counted as an expense if left as is and they get paid then actually cais would be paying twice for the same debt which would be another scam in itself.

If people would just sit back and try to imagine how many scenerios and scams there must be going on with this cais program, I am starting to see why some maybe like it if your big time into scams, off topic but I always wonder why certain suppliers like this cais and it always seems to be the guys who owe the supplier the most money that gets money out of cais, yet no one else in the same area gets a payout. HMM let's see farmer x has a big bill, as a supplier all the farmer needs is a bill from me for more product and wala the old bill is paid by Cais. HMM!

[Hopperbin]

Farmboy I believe if you feel you are not getting paid from sale of grain to big sky I think I would lean to not claim the productions in the first place. Could be much less headache. If there is no paper trail really to start with then why make one. Since the non payments did happen in this crop year and it is not the end of the year yet. If you get paid surprisingly later after the caise application is made it is then easy to make a production adjustment.

[Hopperbin]

Oops not thinking too much here, decision would be different if your in a non claim year then best to claim the production.

[Choice2U]

The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act has a 30 day supplier protection component if memory serves me correct. If you're up on it, keep on top of your deliveries, and take the appropriate measures during this time there is a possibility that one could get some of one's money back based on priority even over first charges such as banks. Check into this....or maybe I will and report back if I get a chance. It'll not help those with Big Sky (been close to 30 days already) but farmers should be aware of this.