• 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.

Ilta Grain

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

    #51
    What pisses me off is guys looking for that extra penny a pound. ....then losing dollars....big dollars ...that get made up with money that has been checked off my grain cheques from reputable and solid companies. ...


    How the **** can saskpulse be out 50000 dollars .....that's 50000 tonnes....does ILTA do that in a month? If they do what's the problem?

    Comment


      #52
      Originally posted by furrowtickler View Post
      Exactly hobby both your posts are spot on
      I think one very big name on that list is from your neighborhood
      Agreed. They grew the crop, delivered the grain and I think they had no insight of what was to come. Nobody needs this headache when the GOVERNMENT REGULATED body is supposed to process monthly audits on grain processors and line companies. You have to be licensed and bonded with the CGC if you commercially buy grain.
      They get paid to provide this service. They have proven themselves incompetent multiple times.

      What do we need now? A watchdog for the watchdog? Its so ****ing absurd, sue that useless piece of shit CGC. Send a message. Do an audit, physically prove their incompetence.
      If Ilta failed, thats their problem, the CGC should have easily seen this coming. THAT IS THEIR JOB for **** sakes.
      Last edited by hobbyfrmr; Jul 15, 2019, 20:40.

      Comment


        #53
        The CGC is too busy counting its "prudent" reserve to monitor the Companies it bonds.

        Comment


          #54
          DEJA VU: any interest in the short term risk insurance program instead of a bond?

          The Special crop industry floated the idea of short term insurance many years ago, when Ma & Pa shops were only game in town and most of us were neophytes with insufficient capital to finance cash flow and the bond.

          The program was to be based on model used in the USA: temporary insurance available to be purchase on commodity receivables. Short term insurance would be purchased to cover the gap between delivery and cheque clearances at a % of the total. At a % of the net, it would have been bankable.

          There were issues, would it be mandatory, who would cover the short fall in event a claim was made before the fund built up risk capital (government) and indeed the program needed to have a buy in from the mainline elevators which as I understand was not in their scope of concern, alas without a true champion (other than producers off side to the bond) the bill died on the order table.

          Instead, the industry developed a simpler bond process, which is what we have today.
          CGC requires regularly reporting and monitors the bond necessary to cover the receivables. If all is kosher, with more regulated reporting the program should work. However items like canary seed were never included and indeed that is a flaw worth a relook, as is feed grains.

          Ag is risky business, always has been always will be. One could argue even more so today with trade wars and increasing global competition destabilizing both margins and volumes.

          Old timers remember the discussion but can we find cohesive vision in the Canadian ag associations to promote, be inclusive of commodities, like canary and feed grains, hope springs eternal.

          The criteria of the ideal risk management system should be bankable, and simple, and applicable to the diverse commodity profile of production for the future. God willing of course.

          Comment


            #55
            Bucket your math is off. If lentils are .19 a pound that only levy on alittle under 18,000 mt. The rules are that you submit the levy by the 20th of the month for the previous month.

            Very likely 18,000 is a light month. With their infrastructure they should have handled 4 to 500,000 mt a yr.

            I had a bad feeling when they built the two monstrosities. Simply have to bid away too much margin to be able to procure the tonnes needed to pay for them.

            Maybe if lentil production was 10 million tonnes... but its not.

            Comment


              #56
              Risky or not ... you get paid the same day you deliver to a line company..... not up to 6 months..... the pulse industry has been absurd for years

              Comment


                #57
                Hobby anything involving any government agency is a cluster****. Those people just don’t care how they do their job as long as they get theirs. We the farmers always pick up the tab for the incompetence that continues in all industries.

                Comment


                  #58
                  Originally posted by furrowtickler View Post
                  Risky or not ... you get paid the same day you deliver to a line company..... not up to 6 months..... the pulse industry has been absurd for years
                  Yes there needs to be a huge change there truck emptied cheque is issued. Period. We ve carried enough risk to get it grown and hauled in that’s where our risk needs to end.

                  Comment


                    #59
                    Originally posted by FarmJunkie View Post
                    Hobby anything involving any government agency is a cluster****. Those people just don’t care how they do their job as long as they get theirs. We the farmers always pick up the tab for the incompetence that continues in all industries.
                    Yes very true. There needs to be a system where these companies or their buyer put money in an account and they only can buy up to the money in the account in a holding type of situation. And that money should be free of any other obligation than paying the producer. They don’t have rhe money they don’t buy. Plain and simple.

                    Comment


                      #60
                      Originally posted by the big wheel View Post
                      Yes there needs to be a huge change there truck emptied cheque is issued. Period. We ve carried enough risk to get it grown and hauled in that’s where our risk needs to end.
                      Some people could still end up getting a rubber cheque. But at least the A/P account wouldn't get so big before the red flag goes up.

                      Comment

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