Mbratrud, good questions and thoughts although the cash advance administration already handed off I believe.
My thoughts are this: First the CWB old commissioners always stressed the board had 3 pillars, single desk, pooling, and government guarantees.
So the single desk goes, focus on the other two.
CWB could position itself in the industry as the "Pooling Provider". They have experience in this. The CWB could run multiple pools, shorter pools, longer pools (god forbid), but what I'm really saying is adapt pooling into a more flexible and valuable tool for farmers. After farmers have booked enough forward contracted grain to cover obvious cashflow needs, pooling could be an attractive way to manage price risk on some remaining inventories.
The government guarantee will remain for awhile so that's moot.
Contracts with the CWB to change. Current contracts are more of a loose arrangement of offer by farmer, accept some or all or none by CWB. Contracts would have to be binding on both parties.
After the North Africa discussion I really wonder if the third pillar, the single desk, was really a pillar to support buyers and not add value to the farmers.
My thoughts are this: First the CWB old commissioners always stressed the board had 3 pillars, single desk, pooling, and government guarantees.
So the single desk goes, focus on the other two.
CWB could position itself in the industry as the "Pooling Provider". They have experience in this. The CWB could run multiple pools, shorter pools, longer pools (god forbid), but what I'm really saying is adapt pooling into a more flexible and valuable tool for farmers. After farmers have booked enough forward contracted grain to cover obvious cashflow needs, pooling could be an attractive way to manage price risk on some remaining inventories.
The government guarantee will remain for awhile so that's moot.
Contracts with the CWB to change. Current contracts are more of a loose arrangement of offer by farmer, accept some or all or none by CWB. Contracts would have to be binding on both parties.
After the North Africa discussion I really wonder if the third pillar, the single desk, was really a pillar to support buyers and not add value to the farmers.
Comment