• 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.

Newco Front...Just because it's quiet doesn't mean that producers means other parties are deciding f

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

    Newco Front...Just because it's quiet doesn't mean that producers means other parties are deciding f

    Some will see this as not commodity related; but what do they know.

    Even though there has been no public announcement (that I am aware of); the Federal Government has cut cheques for slightly over 95% of the amounts due to eligible producers for unpaid Newco Grain deliveries. This results in nearly a 5% shortfall.

    Some accountants are reported to have advised that cashing these government cheques is a release of any further claim against the contracts entered into between the producer and Newco.

    I have checked with the CGC, who of course says to consult with your own lawyer; but I am advised by the CGC that information provided before the issuance of the goverment cheques was to inform producers of the bond claim paid by Atradius and the security held by the CGC. I understand from the CGC that the information provided has no bearing on the bond insurers and other unsecured creditors(farmers) other options. Producers are not "signing off" or accepting as `full payment by cashing the Federal Government cheques.
    That's an important point that everyone; including those with their heads deeply in the sand, should fully realize.

    Further; the 120 some odd unsecured farmers; are not being involved in first round negotiations which are apparently in progress with Atradius (presumably for some sort of bond repayment settlement in the order of perhaps $2M.`) Those figures come from CGC information provided to each eligible producer; which works out to an approx. two-thirds portion as being noted by the CGC to be a possible future claim Atradius may make against the insured company. Past information has been that there was a 3 million total bond claim "collapse" and all available estimates and information keep coming out to $2M out of the pockets of the bonding company, and $1M from CGC security held.

    Consider that while Atradius may be the largest unsecured creditor; farmers still are uncontestably owed 5% or about $150,000. One very accepable solution for farmers would be for Atradius to pay out those 120 producers; and negotiate for whatever $2.15M settlement they can arrive at. That would tremendously simplify the great bulk of outstanding claims; but I realize there are truckers; brokers and others out of pocket. I also know that at least some token payments have been made to some of those businesses; and it only makes sense that agreements have been made with whom a a still active company need to conduct ongoing business.

    I would strongly hope that the 120 some farmers could come together behind such a suggestion.

    On the other hand; one must be pragmatic enough to know that only 1% will note the suggestion; two thirds are philosophically opposed to everything and 0.1% would get off theirs asses in time.

    What I do know is that each and every one of those 120 (including myself) is having the important first round being done in our absences; despite asking for the same financial and business information that the few big boys are discussing.

    At the end of the day, or end of next week in this case; the done deal is planned to be put to the rest of those affected. Considering the average age of farmers; I predict there will be a lot of estates involved; or more likely a totally different outcome that invoves a much more common outcome.

    The above events have obvious parallels with the CGC being in total control of the licencing and bonding process currently in place. The CGC and the Government of Canada should be held fully responsibile for ensuring an adequate bond in the first place. That didn`t happen; and continues to be overlooked. All we need do is demand the Federal Government treat us as they demand from us in terms of penalties, interest incarceration and full payment.
    And we all know now that this CGC Federal agency, with all their compliance officers and auditor teams didn't have adequate security in place. What makes anyone think Atradius and the insured will pay out any substantial portion of the rest of amount owed to farmers when farmers aren't anywhere close to the table.

    I am suprised/not suprised that neither Agriville; the press; newsletters; and public talk has attracted any substancial debate. The real big picture is that this story, or one identical to it, will involve a different set of producers; who are equally uninformed about the stabilty of any grain purchaser; anywhere in the world. Thus Newco should not be singled out ; and may indeed be an example of the "best" of a very very bad lot in the agricultural marketing industry.

    And I am not impressed by the next solution which is liable to be a producer fee of 1% of the insured sale; in order to get a guaratee of a 90% return. Hell I got 95% back frmo the bonding process and am not nearly satisfied. The new insurance program suggestion guarntees at least double that loss.

    And for the respondents who willclaim that 95% is a way better than nothing; just keep being satisfied with 5% losses of pure profit and you will confirm beyond doubt why such farmers are such poor business men.

    #2
    I think you should quit bitching and look at the 95
    percent as a gift. Many would love to that kind of
    deal when your buyer goes broke.

    Comment


      #3
      . How did this happen? I thought the CGC was to
      oversee monthly audits from all licenced grain
      buyers. This would legitimize the bond. If grain
      buyer was doing more business, the CGC would
      inform/enforce them to buy a larger bond to cover
      the larger volume of business.
      If this did not happen , the govt should reimburse
      the farmer sellers, replace the useless
      incompetent employees who failed to do their job.
      Then the govt can settle with Atradius.

      I will continue to pay for my own due diligence
      and buy my own accounts receivable insurance.
      This makes me feel like I am doing the best I can
      for my farm.

      Comment


        #4
        Poorboy.

        When a buyer goes broke, I expect that they go into receivership. That it continues on, and wipes the outstanding balances it owes under contracts with the industry players (farmers) as "too bad" strikes me as being pretty low.

        You should apply to go to work for them. Your comments would fit in nicely with their philosophy.

        Comment


          #5
          This is why the current syatem is flawed. There is
          this time lag before the CGC knows there is a
          problem. Feedmills dont even need a bond at
          present.

          Comment


            #6
            checking...what makes you think that a receiver can run a business and pay off all debts when the owners couldn't. Usually when receivers run it, the gov't gets it's money first, then lenders with priority, then subordinate debt. The 30 day supplier rule is enforced so any new business from farmers that is needed to run the business will get paid by the receiver but any farmer that was over 30 days when the business went into receivership is SOL.

            Comment


              #7
              Hobby, you are a 1% er. This is the opportunity of
              a new system. This one doesn't work.

              Comment


                #8
                AND POORBOY IS A 66%ER

                What the purchasing side fears most is that some sort of prepayment scheme might be demanded by farmers. And that is the only real solution that is fair, simple and sustainable.

                The sad truth is that there are cheating unreasonable farmers too; and the entrenched contracting system of ensuring supplies is loaded to the benefit of those whp present those documents (the buyer) to relatively business and information naive "rubes"

                And therein lies the perfect nickname handle for some poster to agriville.
                Perhaps poorboy can consider the change to "poorboy rube"

                Comment


                  #9
                  I know exactly what I expect to hear announced in the next week or so.

                  And if we all hear it; the 66% will totally blame the 0.1% for being the root cause.

                  Guess what I'm seeing as the outcome? Will it have even once crossed any one's mind that it is inevitable because of the way limited companies are structured?

                  And any possible protection remedy wouldn't work because of the slowness of 5 day clearing period of funds transfer transactions; dysfunctional court systems and uncooperative classes of rubes who are full of conceit, self importance, and themselves.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    And yes its just possible that the 1%'ers hold the keys to a more enlightened society; while it is the 66% ers who don't see their personal entitlements for what they are.

                    In fact the 66%ers will never catch on that there are better alternatives that might well benefit everyone...including themselves.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Maybe there is something to be learned from the few business plans which instantly become tremendously successful.


                      Take eBay for example.

                      It encorporates an approval rating system for sellers and feed back that concisely rates key areas of business transactions involving pennies to thosands of dollars. And the buyers have similar reasons to live up to their end of the bargains, if they value their reputations.

                      And the built in insurance protects buyers in a way that does work.

                      Is that not more fresh air ideas than grain buying has been exposed to in a long time.

                      No suprises and the costs upfront and visible. And the purchaser pays it all; retains the decision to enter the contract , or not, and it simply works.

                      Guess what. You almost never have any problems.

                      And yes, my approval rating is 100% on close to 500 unique ratings.

                      From now on I'll ask grain purchasers what their eBay rating is? That should heap more ridicule on the 1%ers.

                      And therein lies another topic within commodity marketing

                      ""What are Farmer's and Grain buyers/brokers/purchasers eBay Ratings""

                      Comment


                        #12
                        I've been through two recieverships where I was owed money. Take the 95% and run. Bankruptcy lawyers can easily eat up 20-50%. Count yourself lucky. One time I waited three years for my money and got 50%. That was after ten calls to an overpaid asshole lawyer in Toronto who billed hours to the proceedings every time I phoned, and a pile of paper about 4 inches thick.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I'd vote for the eBay rating system, accountability,
                          responsibility, respect

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Take it we were used 27000 by a feedlot, went
                            one day to collect got 13500, check was good.
                            Never got a dime more. Should have worked
                            then, I mean went back and talked one more time.
                            Take the money!

                            Comment


                              #15
                              dave4441, I am not sure if a 1%er is good or bad.
                              Is it a compliment, or a jab?
                              Nonetheless, this is a marketing forum and I am
                              trying to help. Getting paid is very important.
                              I have made $140,000 in sales to 2 new buyers
                              due jan 15 of 2013. They are both licensed and
                              bonded. Honey badger don't care. I am covering
                              my ass. $140,000 is a fart in the wind for today's
                              big operators, but my little two bit operation
                              NEEDs that money. That is how I live. I could
                              never survive, paying a lawyer to settle for half
                              that value. Game over. Bad farmer, go get a job!
                              Right or wrong, I have used a/r insurance for new
                              buyers, and situations where I think there is a
                              chance of volatility. Ie. times of high prices but
                              longer terms like 60 days after delivery.
                              Business people have been using this stuff for
                              years. They did not have the convenience of a
                              CGC or a grain act. They have to go and figure it
                              out for themselves.

                              Comment

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