How much is fair mark up on crop inputs

[darren442]

I would just like to ask the farmers there opinion on what a fair mark up on crop input prudcuts should be. If you could pick a percentage of mark up that is across the board on every product what is fair. 6% 10% ??? on evrything so no matter if it was
46-0-0 or raxil or puma or copper what would get your bussiness. Now this is for no extra service no field visits unles chemical problem. beause this is were all the hidden costs come into play that you pay for and don't get or need.

So what percentage would get your bussiness ???

[parsley]

tower,

Pretend you are a flour miller in Ontario. Or pretend you are a farmer in Quebec, Or pretend you are a barley-pearler in Nunavit.

Every bit of wheat/bly/value-added that leaves Canada or moves interprovinially, is subject to a CWB LICENSE.


Only the CWB can issue it.

How would you react to your recommendation if you own an Ontario flour mill and ONLY DA farmers are appointed to either grant or deny the license to your Ont flour mill?

Or to Ontario Wheat Marketing Board farmers , which DA farmers would then control?

I would tell you to take a bloody flying leap.


Moral of the story: You can not recommend anything workable until you understand what Parliament has legislated the CWB to do.


Parsley

[TOM4CWB]

Tower,

Interesting concept that of getting qualified people who would be;
a) "Designated Area" grain growers,

b) politically connected with the "right" group,

c) intelegent,

d) motivated to work for the good of all growers with virtually no or very little help to their grain farm personally,

e) Understand economics and business management very well, PLUS be a superb; marketer, communicator, morally grounded person,

f) be wealthy enough that the temptations of monopoly powers and economic influence won't corrupt or tempt them to turn selfish, and

g) be Motivational leaders that can actually get the "Designated Area" grain farmer flock of sheep to follow their expert advice!

[mcfarms]

Sorry Tom I'm retired well maybe for a while . (couldn't resist)

[parsley]

mcfarms,

Let's say you are in there for one year.

Both Ontario Wheat Marketing Board and the CWB are gunning for the same sale, to a big buyer.


All the Directors are DA boys. Do they work in the interest of the CWB and not give Ontario the licenses, or do they hand over this lucrative sale to Ontario?

A national licensing duty cannot be serviced by ONE REGION that also has a conflicting marketing duty!! .

Good thing you are retired. We need to retire a few of the Directors serving on the CWB, too.

Parsley

[tower]

I would expect that a wheat board that was working soley for the benefit of the wheat and barley growers would raise some eyebrows and even some ire. Probably not as much as I've seen on the other end because of low grain prices for western producers. Perhaps a new appreciation for the position we are all likely to be in within the next few years, (high prices and difficulty getting crops to grow) might make it easier for the Ontario and Canadian boards to benefit from each others experience.

Highest qualifications,... have a look in the papers, companies that are looking for similar capabilities from their dispatchers. This is a big business and yeah we want people who have a broader perspective than simply getting their own. Fortunately like other employers we will have the opportunity to choose people who best suit the job and by putting them together, have a well rounded board.

Oh I forgot, I'd also like to bring back the quota system.

[TOM4CWB]

Tower,

The goofy part of this is:

If the CWB were to actually provide premium prices... there would be no need to have a legislated monopoly in the first place.

If the CWB were to revert to 1970-80's policies of allowing choice for individual growers to explore and develop their own personal markets, in truck lots or by containers... through seed channels as they did in the past... the CWB could easily garner 99% of the growers support.

What CWB management has done is fool hardy. A simple opportunity to allow growers to maximise returns, if they take the risk and do the work themselves, should not threaten the CWB's existance for one moment.

The mistrust created by bungling PPO Contracting and cross subsidising the pools and contingency fund; has many frustrated enough to fight the CWB orgnisation to the death.

[mcfarms]

Parsley

I always rememered who I was representing when I was more involved than I am now and it served me well I felt.

[mcfarms]

remembered not remmered sorry.

[chaffmeister]

Tower -

The fact that you want to bring back quotas convinces me that you don't know what you're talking about.

Keep tryin'.

[highwayman]

Tower
Good idea. Bring back a quota system that actually discourages production. Farmers that pound the groceries to their crops to maximize production and revenue/acre can sit with their bins full of carryover for years at a time,just like we did through the 70's and 80's while those who choose to mine the land can sit with a smurk on their faces knowing that the top producers out their cant sell any more grain per acre than they can. A truly socialist idea.

[wilagro]

I liked the quota system...it was fair to all. It gave us small producers a chance to sell grain when the bills had to be paid. The big hogs couldn't fill the elevators to our detriment.

Socialistic...hardly.

Fair...yes.

[chaffmeister]

Inefficient? Yes.

Costly? Absolutely.

Fair? Hardly. How can adding costs and inefficiency all in the name of fairness be fair?

[highwayman]

Socialist....to the core. Dont let one man profit from his good production skills or management if it means that the miner gets left behind. Revolutionary thinking. The freedom to be irresponssible. CWB and the NDP

[parsley]

Did your parents immigrate from a farm near Peking, wilagrow?