Midge Tolerant Wheat.

[parsley]

Big.

I guess we need more General Motors and AGI's. Frannies and economic Frankensteins.

Especially the big corporate entities that eat tax money like popcorn.

All those stupid little Mom and Pop ventures paying income taxes will want their tax dollars poured into BIG tax guzzlers. Pars

[furrowtickler]

have a pulse, the more I read your poast the more I think you have to be kidding, right? The same attributes you describe for corperate farms are the same for most well managed family farms. No one can demand a return on investment in farming in western Canada, thats is imposible unless you control the weather and grain oilseed prices.

[haveapulse]

Let me further elaborate furrowtickler;

I did not imply that management skills were less or more in the anology for Ma & Pa farms or for large corporate farms.
That was your interpretation.

And I do note that the line between corporate farms and family farms merges as most family farms today are incorporated, and superfarms are also mostly Ma & Pa family operations, in fact many large farms have woman partners who are often very involved and committed to the operation.

The difference between these two operations; smaller units of land versus the super farm model lies mostly in the amount of equity one has in the operation. Generally speaking a larger farm has a higher percentage of
rented or leased land, or less equity in land ownership. Most super large farms rent a higher % of their land than do smaller operations.

Rent is a cash expense. Therefore, depending upon the debt on owned land, the amount of paid for land assets
varies the fixed costs of land on a smaller farm.

The difference I am noting here between farm sizes and costs of operation lies in the cost of the % of rented land as a variable on fixed costs.

I note that most farms do not calculate ROI on owned land as a fixed cost.

While one can argue there are some economies of scale, I doubt these savings would offset equity of a farm with a higher % of owned land.

Therefore, when the super wonderful seed and the super wonderful chemicals do not cover all the costs the super large farm gets a super large wake up call.

That is my point.

[cris]

It is very important to calculate the return on owned land. That land has an opportunity cost, That land could be turned into cash and pay a dividend as a bond or stock. If the farm is not covering the opportunity cost, plus paying a wage to the farmer(s),someone else should be tipping that dirt.

[gregpet]

I beleive all farms regardless of size will try to maximize profits. Owned or rented one will want to extract as much income as possible.

I just do not understand your position haveapulse.

[may-be]

Haveapulse, The % of rented land as a variable on fixed costs was not the only difference i found years back when i tried to get big. I found my labour costs per acer really grew. Had intrest cost on line of credit. My repair bills realy grew because of pushing harder, help not as carefull, no time to repair or manufature parts myself. Payments on equipment and bins. The equipment i bought also had higher depreciation which did not help in bringing up my total net worth at the end of the year. My feul costs were up from running around hells half acer. Takeing longer to get the crop off also came with more expenses. Some down gradeing from cereals takeing longer to get off. Canola longer in the feilds sometimes get cought in winds. More drying costs. Less time for management also had it's costs. Working more hours and net worth not gaining much more made me feel like i took a big pay cut. My dad had two quarters of land and gave me one. I bought the rest. Did well farming my own land as i can retire now if i wanted at 48 years years old. One thing i noticed though is that some thing that works for one farmer don't always work for the other.
Some big farms around me are going to be the last generation because their kids think there is more to life than working all the time and the money involved is overwhelming to them. The parents also know this and are getting to the point were they want to engoy what life they have left.

[ado089]

I've never left crop in the field over winter, yet a few years ago I was out sledding with one of these so called super-farmers and it got awfuly rough all of a sudden. Turns out it was canola swaths and it was a field belonging to the guy I was sledding with. When we next stopped I asked him why he'd left that field? His reply was "oh, I must have forgot this one". I don't know how that falls under the good management column, and it is quite a common occurance among these so called super farmers. Besides that, renting land is like masturbation, it feel good for a while but altimately all you're doing is wasting time. The end game of farming should be to own realestate, at least that way you have something to show for at the end of the. Renting land should be a tool to maximize effiecencies during transitions, be it equipment upgrades, or periods of expansion and not relied upon as a land base.

[haveapulse]

In the end we all choose our own success. For some it is a huge farm for others it is not. No matter what the size each operation must find a way to navigate in a low margin industry with high risk; managing that risk is a different scenario for each farm, but necessary for survival.

However I do note that today Cat cloaned the sentiment with the add
YOur going to want to farm more land, the machines today are amazing and enabling the farms to get bigger without the same dependancy on labour.


Either way, it is a challenge and that is why it grows on us...

All the best of seeding!

[may-be]

Right on the money. That's the way it's allways been. The guy that likes to keep his machines new need more land to justify the purchases. I also have to expand to keep my profit levels up. Usually do this when markets are poor is my difference. That's when there is more land for sale whith alot less buyers. Plus more equipment that's affordable to me.
Looking at the average age of farmers that are going to retire in the near future makes me think who is going to farm all this land? Everybody needing more land has to come into play to keep land values reasonable down the road in my opinion.