• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cranston grain, Trevor Schulz, screws farmers

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    So which is it , the buyer or seller has insurance?

    Comment


      #22
      Tom, any guesses as to why Shelley
      started doing that?

      We all get hurt, brokers didn't get paid.
      truckers didn't get paid. You bet brokers
      are changing now too. Don't be surprised
      if truckers change too, although that may
      be limited to greater numbers of loads.

      Comment


        #23
        who is the broker you sold it through?

        Comment


          #24
          part of the problem is brokers trying too get you the "best" price so they are pushing guys and when the good buyer cant get it they go to there second bests then thirds bests untill they have someone will to pay that magic price that we will sell at ... when in the long run its usally best to sell to guys you know and are comfortable with. take the ten cents less or whatever it is..

          Comment


            #25
            Wd9,

            I heard Shelly talking to another grower about the risk
            transaction when selling grain.

            Shelly said she thought the risk had increased
            significantly.

            1. Futures contracts in domestic transactions is not
            liquid; and risk management therefore tends to be a
            buy sell transaction... back to back... to contain the
            transaction risk. If not back to back... then a Spec
            position... and guess what if things go sideways!

            2.A margin business is harder than ever to maintain.
            Like in pulses... no futures... if enduser pulls the plug
            on the sale... When grain dealer has a grower backing
            the transaction... BIG PROBLEM. This almost NEVER
            happens when the prices are rising. ONLY when they
            fall.
            3. Volatility has increased... political unrest; ie. like in
            Mideast countries... Basis risk has also increased.
            Droughts and surpluses change values/demand
            quickly.

            Perhaps one can excuse this all as an excuse for
            problems; which is not my point at all. New markets
            and end users/consumers mean higher risk. Long
            Term Established relationships of trust bring a lower
            cost of doing business.

            For the vast majority of trade in grain done in the
            future... NOTHING will change with the major
            grainco's... they can NOT afford to mess growers up.
            Too much bricks and mortar/(Billions in value) to mess
            with reputation over a minuscule percent owed a
            grower. Small end users and dealers have been... and
            will continue to be... the high risk transactions. They
            do not have established brands worth billions to worry
            about being lost.

            Cheers

            Comment


              #26
              Under the changes to the Canada Grain Act, buyers
              who are licensed facilities under the act will carry the
              insurance. If you are not dealing with a CGC licensed
              company, then the seller could consider receivable
              insurance.

              Comment


                #27
                Charlie,

                The 'Producer Security Program' is the risk
                management tool close to being available.

                Surprises are not fun... when it comes to getting paid.
                ESPECIALLY for those of us who crop share and are at
                risk for others financially.

                It will be great comfort to have this security issue dealt
                with... after decades of Goodale's inaction.

                It took Minister Ritz three tries... great that he did
                eventually learn what growers expected of the CGC
                and security.

                Looks like a good forward move for growers!

                Comment


                  #28
                  Charlie: Can I pass the cost of the
                  insurance on the the buyer? Wait for
                  it...hahahahahahaha. Isn't that the way
                  business is done in just about any other
                  industry except primary Ag? Cost
                  recovery.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    I suspect that costs of insurance will get built into
                    basis. There were also costs of carrying a bond/letter
                    of credit under the CGC security system.

                    I would be curious how many farmers are aware of
                    the new Canada Grains Act/changes that are
                    occurring. Have been to at least 6 meetings in the
                    past year where general direction of changes were
                    being discussed in the past year including some
                    pretty specific ideas in the last 3 months.

                    Since the problem described is not with a CGC
                    bonded/licensed grain company/dealer, none of this
                    is relevant (isn't currently and not in the current
                    proposal). Again, there at least is some discussion of
                    expansion of buyers to include domestic feed market.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Not on the topic at hand but I will be curious how the
                      insurance based payment security system.

                      1) Acceptance by buyers from the largest grain
                      company to smaller players.

                      2) How buyer financial stability/relative risk of
                      default is measured and impact on premiums. It is an
                      insurance product.

                      3) Moving from a companies financial ability to pay
                      farmers to some process of measuring sales value
                      and from there, collecting premiums to cover this
                      risk.

                      4) I think will be a better program for farmers. No
                      more worrying about adequate bonding but rather
                      simply an insurance payout. Will have to see how the
                      program works however.

                      Comment

                      • Reply to this Thread
                      • Return to Topic List
                      Working...