The recent butchering of the Agristabilty program has prompted me to take a closer look at GARS (Global Ag Risk Solutions). In the past to me GARS did not make sence as Agristability for many was a superior program, and if you participated in Both Agristabilty clawed back the GARS benefit, so it just didn't make sense.
I have done a lot of homework on GARS, and am close to a conclusion but I wanted to put it out there for discussion.
I compared GARS $100 margin coverage to 80% crop insurance coverage, and on our farm it was very close. The advantages to crop insurance were more of a spot loss coverage. The advantage to GARS was the all perils and the certainty that the Margin coverage I chose would be there no matter the reason.
My conclusion with GARS so far is it is superior coverage if a commodity prices broadly fall by 25% or more, or if average input costs rise significantly. Also the more crops you grow on a farm the poorer the fit.
I know one thing it's changing the way I look at Insurance.
What is your take?
I have done a lot of homework on GARS, and am close to a conclusion but I wanted to put it out there for discussion.
I compared GARS $100 margin coverage to 80% crop insurance coverage, and on our farm it was very close. The advantages to crop insurance were more of a spot loss coverage. The advantage to GARS was the all perils and the certainty that the Margin coverage I chose would be there no matter the reason.
My conclusion with GARS so far is it is superior coverage if a commodity prices broadly fall by 25% or more, or if average input costs rise significantly. Also the more crops you grow on a farm the poorer the fit.
I know one thing it's changing the way I look at Insurance.
What is your take?
Comment