Milk Price- Please read Mod note in post #1

Farmer Ed

alps wrote: »

And by the farmers themselves to be fair. ..

Yes true but there has been a lot of money spent in swaying farmer opinion using PR consultants.

http://www.prca.ie/files/award_two.pdf

Under the principles of the McKenna judgment, I'm not sure a lot of these so call democratically made decisions would even hold up.

kevthegaff

pedigree 6 wrote: »

Which is better a CEO on 250k returning 25 c or a CEO on 600k returning 20 c?

But he's returning for the private shareholders that's all that matters...

pedigree 6

kevthegaff wrote: »

But he's returning for the private shareholders that's all that matters...

Who are the majority of shareholders though?
Don't like shares though.Which puts more money in your pocket shares or milk price?
Shareprice before your supplier of milk.;)

alps

Looks like nearly all countries are pushing on into oblivion....being led by yous truly...

Reckless abandon....

Dawggone

atlantic mist wrote: »

If we are selling to commodity markets why the need for such big high paid management teams, all they seem to b able to manage is to process the milk and dump it on market at any given price they lack imagination we all knew over supply would b an issue post quota, were milking the cows the machines are doing the processing what is management job .....all current management are easily replaced they are not anything special and the base during difficult period just highlight to us what our management teams are made of and what planning they have done for scenarios like we have currently.

Helluva post!

pedigree 6

I see on the IFJ that farmers on the boards of the dairy co-ops are getting about 30,000 Euro per year.
No wonder they won't open their mouths.
If I was getting that i'd be fairly quiet too and that's the truth.

Water John

Dairygold Board members getting €35K.
Carbery Board members getting €17K.

Don't know added expenses for either.
Some Directors also on other Boards. eg two Mid Cork boys as per The Dealer today. Don't know payments and expenses for these.

Dairygold going south.
Carbery going north.

red bull

Water John wrote: »

Dairygold Board members getting €35K.
Carbery Board members getting €17K.

Don't know added expenses for either.
Some Directors also on other Boards. eg two Mid Cork boys as per The Dealer today. Don't know payments and expenses for these.

Dairygold going south.
Carbery going north.

Farmers are just fools, ( sorry slaves, ) who work hard to keep others in well paid jobs

Bass Reeves

keep going wrote: »

Dont get too excited about carbery results , a number of accounting reconciliation s in that.which is better a ceo on 100k returning 20 cent or a ceo on 500 returning 23 to suppliers

Water John wrote: »

Dairygold Board members getting €35K.
Carbery Board members getting €17K.

Don't know added expenses for either.
Some Directors also on other Boards. eg two Mid Cork boys as per The Dealer today. Don't know payments and expenses for these.

Dairygold going south.
Carbery going north.

The question is answered......

Farmer Ed

Water John wrote: »

Dairygold Board members getting €35K.
Carbery Board members getting €17K.

Don't know added expenses for either.
Some Directors also on other Boards. eg two Mid Cork boys as per The Dealer today. Don't know payments and expenses for these.

Dairygold going south.
Carbery going north.

If you added up all the remuneration and experiences some of these serial board men are on some of them must be pulling in well north of 100k for doing their civic duty representing the rest of us. Your Hart would bleed for them if they have to take a 10% pay cut

Water John

Under the Tagline 'we have to be realistic' on milk price.
The Three Amigos on Agriland

https://www.agriland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Dairygold-1024x717.jpg?4b448f

Between them they earn about €1M a year.

Anyone try a value for money audit???

Farmer Ed

Water John wrote: »

Under the Tagline 'we have to be realistic' on milk price.
The Three Amigos on Agriland

https://www.agriland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Dairygold-1024x717.jpg?4b448f

Between them they earn about €1M a year.

Anyone try a value for money audit???

Ah John I'm sure you wouldnt get one of those geniuses for that.
I hear Apple are looking for people with dairy science degrees to develop a butter making app for the iPhone and Pepsi are are looking for them to develop a new drink called total bull and the banks are crying out for dairy scientists to advise them how to take more cream from the top.
John we need to be careful or we could lose them

Buford T. Justice XIX

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Ah John I'm sure you wouldnt get one of those geniuses for that.
I hear Apple are looking for people with dairy science degrees to develop a butter making app for the iPhone and Pepsi are are looking for them to develop a new drink called total bull and the banks are crying out for dairy scientists to advise them how to take more cream from the top.
John we need to be careful or we could lose them

Coke are actually releasing a flavoured milk based drink to improve their market share atm.

Farmer Ed

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Coke are actually releasing a flavoured milk based drink to improve their market share atm.

We need to give the boys a pay rise so or we will definitely lose them all to coke. Not sure their qualifications would make them management material for coke? I'd say they would be more qualified for adding the milk to the coke part of the business.

whelan2

Very good letter on the letter page in the journal from Edmond Phelan about Glanbia, maybe someone could link it

freedominacup

whelan2 wrote: »

Very good letter on the letter page in the journal from Edmond Phelan about Glanbia, maybe someone could link it

What's Felix saying now?

whelan2

freedominacup wrote: »

What's Felix saying now?

http://www.farmersjournal.ie/letter-re-glanbia-agm-salaries-and-milk-price-207021/

freedominacup

whelan2 wrote: »

http://www.farmersjournal.ie/letter-re-glanbia-agm-salaries-and-milk-price-207021/

He's right. That shareholding is worth north of 100k per shareholder net of cgt. It's called taking your money off the table and they'd be queuing around the block form all quarters but esp icos and financial services to tell us how mad we are. I would only be talking about the shareholding in glanbia plc atm. We're stuck with GII I think but having control of our processing to some degree is probably a good thing.

kowtow

freedominacup wrote: »

He's right. That shareholding is worth north of 100k per shareholder net of cgt. It's called taking your money off the table and they'd be queuing around the block form all quarters but esp icos and financial services to tell us how mad we are. I would only be talking about the shareholding in glanbia plc atm. We're stuck with GII I think but having control of our processing to some degree is probably a good thing.

Sensible letter that.

It's bad enough watching the snouts in the trough in these jumped up agribusinesses but being patronised by having your own savings dribbled back to you "when you need it" takes the biscuit.

I assume the strategy in the co-op is to hang on to the PLC shares so they can be used in a placement when the time comes to buy out the other half of GII?

I can't see these characters voting to make their little empires smaller when the day of reckoning arrives.

Buford T. Justice XIX

freedominacup wrote: »

He's right. That shareholding is worth north of 100k per shareholder net of cgt. It's called taking your money off the table and they'd be queuing around the block form all quarters but esp icos and financial services to tell us how mad we are. I would only be talking about the shareholding in glanbia plc atm. We're stuck with GII I think but having control of our processing to some degree is probably a good thing.

That x 1000.

I think Kerry suppliers would have to be looking down the road of keeping enough plc shares to buy back the processing in the not-so-distant-future.

freedominacup

kowtow wrote: »

Sensible letter that.

It's bad enough watching the snouts in the trough in these jumped up agribusinesses but being patronised by having your own savings dribbled back to you "when you need it" takes the biscuit.

I assume the strategy in the co-op is to hang on to the PLC shares so they can be used in a placement when the time comes to buy out the other half of GII?

I can't see these characters voting to make their little empires smaller when the day of reckoning arrives.

As long as the co-op has that shareholding kt the value placed on the plcs shareholding in GII will be think of a number and double it. And if that's not big enough to bring the co-op shareholding in the plc below 10% stick another 100 million on the asking price. If we wait until then we are going to get turned over so badly future generations will curse us. We (or certainly older generations ) built this business. If it's going to be sold it can only be sold once and we need the absolute max cash return for the effort.

WheatenBriar

Dont be silly guys,Mr Bergins buddy ,the current CEO of the plc wont agree to her friends fiefdom being bought out by the CoOp for fear he might have to answer to farmers....

Farmer Ed

http://www.independent.ie/business/farming/dairygold-executive-pay-totals-27m-to-compete-with-apple-and-pepsico-34666957.html

They may even be head hunted by a formula 1 team. Being able to drive the 64km from mitchelstown to ringaskiddy in 25 minutes is pretty impressive. Either that or someone should be getting penalty points.

Remember the story about the boy no one would believe? I think it was called the boy who cried Wolf? Correct me if I'm wrong.

freedominacup

WheatenBriar wrote: »

Dont be silly guys,Mr Bergins buddy ,the current CEO of the plc wont agree to her friends fiefdom being bought out by the CoOp for fear he might have to answer to farmers....

Lookit if we were to be anyway vindictive and put the whole lot of our shares up to a few prefered bidders amongst the global dairy players Siobhan would have her own skin to worry about. Bil works at a fairly high executive level for a multiational. They were bought out a couple of years ago. A couple of weeks later big meeting with the new CEO of the combined outfit. He told them not to worry if they were having difficulties adjusting to the new systems and management practices. There'd be no bother replacing them as he had at least 10 people on his side of the group for every one on their side at each level so get with the programme or the door is over there. Imagine the culture shock in any Irish business id that happened not to mind a business as cosseted as glanbia's Irish operation.

Water John

Roll up, Roll up, 3 for 1 offer.
Carbery, we'll give ye these three for one of your's, Dan McSweeney.

The Three Amigos. not the three monkeys.

https://www.agriland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Dairygold-1024x717.jpg?4b448f

We'll even pay their wages, but its a great offer, Pleeeeze, Pleeeeze.


Lads, we have two parallel stories here, but Glanbia and Dairygold are the stars of the show, the ugly sisters.

Chiarrai_abu

I see the IFA are looking for "Membership Development Agents" in the Journal this week.
We have a few surplus to requirements Directors on our top heavy Kerry Co Op board that could fill the role perfectly.
Ours might fall back based on their milk contract drafting skills as the role requires "strong attention to detail"

atlantic mist

im afraid we have no control over gii, the make up of the board alone shows that with the voting power evenly split between plc and coop with gii ceo making the deicing vote even though we are the majority shareholder in gii, how many shares has he in plc...vested interest as he wants share appreciation in the plc and he get a nice salary from gii, whats his focus!!! the lads at board meetings deciding milk price are pretty much getting told whats happening

has the coop an exit plan if glanbia becomes a take over target? our shares are not trad able like other investors so we will be slow to react which lower the value of coop shareholding, as minority interest shareholder we have no say anymore, aggressive growth while can be rewarding is a high risk strategy and all it takes is one poor investment to kink the armour

the price set if we do want to take over remain balance of gii is structured in a way that makes it very difficult/costly to take full control and so the current status quo will remain i dont see it happening can see us eventually getting so sick of it that we find a buyer to come in for the remaining 40% much easier said than done, there was no plan to buy out balance at time of spin out so doubt much has changed now

farmers/coop members were so impressed with john maloney they wanted him on the gii board which was crazy from a business point of view, great for the arse licking that goes on, to have 60% control and somehow have the ceo of gii making a deciding decision is not logical, (john maloney did a great job getting farmers shareholding below magic number, congrats on that id have a lot of admiration if i was a shareholder and he sold a nice bundle of shares which one could says a lot about how he views the company in the future...cash in he did, he still has a nice shareholding and i would take the view he sold to give that exact impression to the coop suppliers in the hope they sold too

dwag was saying about a super cycle and he could be right a bit early to tell, us back buying stocking up on crude, china while they have slowed and they have stock piles of ore in the ports they are just now able to show there power and the effects they alone can have on world markets (a bit of screwd politics me thinks, there sending there kids to us and eu colleges gives them great insight) they are building mad out in Africa and Caribbean and there workers are all out there flat out with loans given to the countries by Chinese so there winning both ways. dont think milk will follow oil this time consumption is obviously not there even though thats the line we keep getting fed about growing populations, they might be growing but can the afford and or tolerate milk, were in a trade war and the battle fields are our farms

Water John

Well put, Atlantic.
Milk is a very inelastic commodity. Making powder of it is really an attempt to give it some. But 98% production v demand is a scarcity, 98% demand v production is a glut.
Lots of other comm can be stored or left in the ground.
The provision of cows is a cycle in itself with a long response time.

Bass Reeves

atlantic mist wrote: »

im afraid we have no control over gii, the make up of the board alone shows that with the voting power evenly split between plc and coop with gii ceo making the deicing vote even though we are the majority shareholder in gii, how many shares has he in plc...vested interest as he wants share appreciation in the plc and he get a nice salary from gii, whats his focus!!! the lads at board meetings deciding milk price are pretty much getting told whats happening

has the coop an exit plan if glanbia becomes a take over target? our shares are not trad able like other investors so we will be slow to react which lower the value of coop shareholding, as minority interest shareholder we have no say anymore, aggressive growth while can be rewarding is a high risk strategy and all it takes is one poor investment to kink the armour

the price set if we do want to take over remain balance of gii is structured in a way that makes it very difficult/costly to take full control and so the current status quo will remain i dont see it happening can see us eventually getting so sick of it that we find a buyer to come in for the remaining 40% much easier said than done, there was no plan to buy out balance at time of spin out so doubt much has changed now

farmers/coop members were so impressed with john maloney they wanted him on the gii board which was crazy from a business point of view, great for the arse licking that goes on, to have 60% control and somehow have the ceo of gii making a deciding decision is not logical, (john maloney did a great job getting farmers shareholding below magic number, congrats on that id have a lot of admiration if i was a shareholder and he sold a nice bundle of shares which one could says a lot about how he views the company in the future...cash in he did, he still has a nice shareholding and i would take the view he sold to give that exact impression to the coop suppliers in the hope they sold too

dwag was saying about a super cycle and he could be right a bit early to tell, us back buying stocking up on crude, china while they have slowed and they have stock piles of ore in the ports they are just now able to show there power and the effects they alone can have on world markets (a bit of screwd politics me thinks, there sending there kids to us and eu colleges gives them great insight) they are building mad out in Africa and Caribbean and there workers are all out there flat out with loans given to the countries by Chinese so there winning both ways. dont think milk will follow oil this time consumption is obviously not there even though thats the line we keep getting fed about growing populations, they might be growing but can the afford and or tolerate milk, were in a trade war and the battle fields are our farms

It is very unlikely that GII will become a take over target with the Co-op having a 40% interest. For a hostile takeover to succeed the bidder needs to acquire 70% of the shares. with the co-o[ owning 40% this figure cannot be attained. Even if the co-op went below 30% again it is unlikely that a hostile take over will succeed as there are farmers that hold shares.

The real issue with co-op that have plc's attached at present is that they seem tied to supplying milk to these company's only. Maybe it is time for the boards to start looking at different buyers for there milk. For instance Glanbia co-op could have done a deal with Stratroy last year and instead of suppliers leaving Glanbia co-op the co-op could have sold milk to Stratroy. Kerry is similarit is time for co-op that are supplying plc's to start looking for to diversify there supply structure. This should start to happen when the next upturn takes place or when the present GII/Glanbia co-op contract ends

kowtow

Bass Reeves wrote:

The real issue with co-op that have plc's attached at present is that they seem tied to supplying milk to these company's only. Maybe it is time for the boards to start looking at different buyers for there milk. For instance Glanbia co-op could have done a deal with Stratroy last year and instead of suppliers leaving Glanbia co-op the co-op could have sold milk to Stratroy. Kerry is similarit is time for co-op that are supplying plc's to start looking for to diversify there supply structure. This should start to happen when the next upturn takes place or when the present GII/Glanbia co-op contract ends

I may have asked this last time we discussed GIIL in detail but have we ever seen the sales agreement between coop GIIL and PLC?

keep going

Lorry driver told this morning 2 guys giving up milking near here, both younger than me.if it was possible for carbery to take over/amalgamate with dairygold and gii , would ye be in favour

Bass Reeves

keep going wrote: »

Lorry driver told this morning 2 guys giving up milking near here, both younger than me.if it was possible for carbery to take over/amalgamate with dairygold and gii , would ye be in favour

You might but Carbery suppliers would not touch either with a 40'.......sorry 140' pole. Usually what happens in a case like this is that everything falls to the lowest common denominator. It would only be lose lose for the Carbery suppliers.

WheatenBriar

kowtow wrote: »

I may have asked this last time we discussed GIIL in detail but have we ever seen the sales agreement between coop GIIL and PLC?

Not much chance of seeing that when as a shareholder you're not even allowed to see GiiL's p&l

pedigree 6

Water John wrote: »

Well put, Atlantic.
Milk is a very inelastic commodity. Making powder of it is really an attempt to give it some. But 98% production v demand is a scarcity, 98% demand v production is a glut.
Lots of other comm can be stored or left in the ground.
The provision of cows is a cycle in itself with a long response time.

There's been some talk here of milk being a commodity now.
Especially in this country and price linked to the NZ auctions and how if co-ops don't pay that price they're supporting milk price here and loosing money.

The thing that really interests me is that article rightturnclyde put up about how this whole milk price boom and bust could have been planned by the Chinese government. I know everyone wants to blame someone else for their problems and not take any responsibility esp in this country.
But just to look at the china thing if it was planned it was well done.
China puts money into banks. Calls the shots, Rabobank etc.
China goes into a buying spree on milk powder and unknown to dairy farmers stockpiles it. This was all planned to coincide with milk quotas going in Europe.
NZ dairy auction goes up. Dairy farmers out there used to easy credit go on a spending spree and buy farms and equipment and all is planned that milk will never go down in price again.
China then stops buying and with quotas going in Europe the milk price plummets.
Now with NZ and aus farms borrowed to the hilt and high cost systems in place or just loans taken out for expansion. The banks (Chinese) start to look for their money back meaning farms have to be sold to clear the debts.
The Chinese who have been on land buying spree already for the last 10 years come back in and buy the farms as there is now no local opposition.
The Chinese then have a secure food supply and provide employment for Chinese people on these farms and keep the money in Chinese circulation.

While nothing to do with irish farms we just got caught in the crossfire with tying our milk price to the NZ auctions.

It's an interesting conspiracy theory none the less.

freedominacup

WheatenBriar wrote: »

Not much chance of seeing that when as a shareholder you're not even allowed to see GiiL's p&l

When was the last time you contacted your board member about this. When was the last time a board member in your county was put under pressure never mind to say removed? No point bitching. I'm told that in certain counties,notably Kilkenny, a man (and it's always a man) will be elected sometime between 35-45 and simply left collecting his cheques for the next thirty years because the suppliers/shareholders couldn't be arsed to do anything about moving them

kowtow

pedigree 6 wrote:

While nothing to do with irish farms we just got caught in the crossfire with tying our milk price to the NZ auctions.

Unfortunately there's nothing else it could be tied to as long as we are determined to produce so much of it that we can't drink or turn into premium food products......

FWIW I don't buy the idea of a knowing conspiracy by China at all... unknowing, perhaps - the Chinese government is constantly trying to fool it's own markets in order to prevent the mother of all meltdowns, witness the current activity of off balance sheets vehicles in Chinese domestic commodity markets which is driving a strong retracement in metals for example...

Every time they try this the consequences are disastrous... but it takes time to learn free markets and the populace isn't often prepared to allow governments that time.

The Chinese are holding a lot of western paper and wondering what the hell to do with it while trying to keep the hopes and expectations their own population of "new capitalists" in a place where the elites can retain their traditional power.

Frankly they have much bigger things to worry about than milk.

It's a bit like us trying to solve the Irish banking crisis by manipulating the price of wasabi.

pedigree 6

kowtow wrote: »

Frankly they have much bigger things to worry about than milk.

It's a bit like us trying to solve the Irish banking crisis by manipulating the price of wasabi.

But they are worried about food security.
It's not that long ago that there was a famine there. There's even famine in the country next to it. NK.

We here here think of food as just a commodity. They think of it as food and will use it that's it's used by western markets as a commodity as a means to an end.

What did someone say when you take out a loan. There is a 5 yr review and the bank can change the t&c's.

WheatenBriar

freedominacup wrote: »

When was the last time you contacted your board member about this. When was the last time a board member in your county was put under pressure never mind to say removed? No point bitching. I'm told that in certain counties,notably Kilkenny, a man (and it's always a man) will be elected sometime between 35-45 and simply left collecting his cheques for the next thirty years because the suppliers/shareholders couldn't be arsed to do anything about moving them

Is there any point?
They usually agree with you on the phone and then go off to the board meetings to vote against you citing the law on fiduciary duties regarding board decisions

keep going

Bass Reeves wrote: »

You might but Carbery suppliers would not touch either with a 40'.......sorry 140' pole. Usually what happens in a case like this is that everything falls to the lowest common denominator. It would only be lose lose for the Carbery suppliers.

Why lose, lose.fair enough at the moment we are a head but we re not stupid enough not to know that the scene is changing around us and in the scheme of things we have a scale problem

atlantic mist

kowtow wrote: »

FWIW I don't buy the idea of a knowing conspiracy by China at all... unknowing, perhaps - the Chinese government is constantly trying to fool it's own markets in order to prevent the mother of all meltdowns, witness the current activity of off balance sheets vehicles in Chinese domestic commodity markets which is driving a strong retracement in metals for example...

Every time they try this the consequences are disastrous... but it takes time to learn free markets and the populace isn't often prepared to allow governments that time.

The Chinese are holding a lot of western paper and wondering what the hell to do with it while trying to keep the hopes and expectations their own population of "new capitalists" in a place where the elites can retain their traditional power.

we are all guilty off off balance sheet vehicles now look at ireland inc, nama stayed off our balance sheet, no one like to show the full picture

interesting shift of 5% in their chinese currency reacting quickly to us dollar change the other day well outside of their norm of 2%, us want to be number 1 and dont like china being there and they do want the manufacturing to return back to us...oil would help that...handy drop in price lately..... so much at play in world economies

Dawggone

kowtow wrote: »

Unfortunately there's nothing else it could be tied to as long as we are determined to produce so much of it that we can't drink or turn into premium food products......

FWIW I don't buy the idea of a knowing conspiracy by China at all... unknowing, perhaps - the Chinese government is constantly trying to fool it's own markets in order to prevent the mother of all meltdowns, witness the current activity of off balance sheets vehicles in Chinese domestic commodity markets which is driving a strong retracement in metals for example...

Every time they try this the consequences are disastrous... but it takes time to learn free markets and the populace isn't often prepared to allow governments that time.

The Chinese are holding a lot of western paper and wondering what the hell to do with it while trying to keep the hopes and expectations their own population of "new capitalists" in a place where the elites can retain their traditional power.

Frankly they have much bigger things to worry about than milk.

It's a bit like us trying to solve the Irish banking crisis by manipulating the price of wasabi.

+1.

freedominacup

WheatenBriar wrote: »

Is there any point?
They usually agree with you on the phone and then go off to the board meetings to vote against you citing the law on fiduciary duties regarding board decisions

In two words Brendan Hayes. There's no law on fiduciary duties afaik. I don't think there's even stock market rules governing tbh.

WheatenBriar

freedominacup wrote: »

In two words Brendan Hayes. There's no law on fiduciary duties afaik. I don't think there's even stock market rules governing tbh.

That's incorrect,Glanbia Plc board members have fiduciary responsibilities which prevent them promoting farmers interests versus the plc's interests


https://www.cro.ie/conversions/companies-act-2014/directors-duties

Specifically:


Fiduciary Duties

The principal fiduciary responsibilities of a director are set out in Part 5 of the Companies Act 2014.

There is a requirement on a director to act in good faith, to act honestly and responsibly and to act according to the company’s constitution. There is a requirement for the directors to have regard to the interests of the company’s employees as well as to the interest of the members. Under section 231 of the Act, there is a duty on directors to disclose any interest they have in contracts made by the company. The duties set out in the Act are not exhaustive and will still require directors to consider obtaining legal advice concerning compliance with their duties.

Section 228 states: 1) A director of a company shall—

(a) act in good faith in what the director considers to be the interests of the company;
(b) act honestly and responsibly in relation to the conduct of the affairs of the company;
(c) act in accordance with the company’s constitution and exercise his or her powers only for the purposes allowed by law;
(d) not use the company’s property, information or opportunities for his or her own or anyone else’s benefit unless—
(i) this is expressly permitted by the company’s constitution; or
(ii) the use has been approved by a resolution of the company in general meeting;
(e) not agree to restrict the director’s power to exercise an independent judgment unless—
(i) this is expressly permitted by the company’s constitution; or
(ii) the case concerned falls within subsection (2);
(f) avoid any conflict between the director’s duties to the company and the director’s other (including personal) interests unless the director is released from his or her duty to the company in relation to the matter concerned, whether in accordance with provisions of the company’s constitution in that behalf or by a resolution of it in general meeting;
(g) exercise the care, skill and diligence which would be exercised in the same circumstances by a reasonable person having both—
(i) the knowledge and experience that may reasonably be expected of a person in the same position as the director; and
(ii) the knowledge and experience which the director has; and
(h) in addition to the general duty under section 224 (duty to have regard to the interests of its employees in general), have regard to the interests of its members.
(2) If a director of a company considers in good faith that it is in the interests of the company for a transaction or engagement to be entered into and carried into effect, a director may restrict the director’s power to exercise an independent judgment in the future by agreeing to act in a particular way to achieve this.

(3) Without prejudice to the director’s duty under subsection (1)(a) to act in good faith in what the director considers to be the interests of the company, a director of a company may have regard to the interests of a particular member of the company in the following circumstances.

(4) Those circumstances are where the director has been appointed or nominated for appointment by that member, being a member who has an entitlement to so appoint or nominate under the company’s constitution or a shareholders’ agreement.

case885

keep going wrote:

Why lose, lose.fair enough at the moment we are a head but we re not stupid enough not to know that the scene is changing around us and in the scheme of things we have a scale problem

How is scale going to affect us? Bigger is not always better especially when it comes to dairy farming, efficiency is what will separate the best and worst. Carbery are paying the best price because of the diversification of the business, there's a good mix of liquid milk, cheese, whey protein so they don't hedge they're bets.

Water John

Yes, Fiducary responsibilities are the key governance of how a Director of a plc is to behave. He/She must act in the best interests of the Company and through that, the shareholders.

It is diifferent for a Director of a Coop. He/She must act with responsibility to the shareholders first and through them the Coop.
Of course the shareholders should have a vested interest in any coop. That is it should be a trading part of his business.
Dry shareholders in a coop are a perversion.
There is also a higher responsibility on Directors of a coop. They must safeguard the coop in the interest of the shareholders.
Pleading ignorance, or deferring to the views of management without challenge is not good enough.

Carbery have over a long period positioned themselves. They have not got everything right. that's fair enough. One always takes some risk in business.

They would have no miracle wand to use the large supply of either DG or Glanbia. I suspect, over time they would.
A reverse T/O of DG might work.
There would be a fair bit of ass kicked.
They could supply management to DG and keep the entities some what separate. It would be a long term strategy.
Would not rule any ideas out.


I think however, a strategic alliance by Carbery with similar minded coops, Arrabawn and Lakeland for example might be the best strategy for these coops.
Maintaining independence and yet having strength.

kowtow

WheatenBriar wrote: »

That's incorrect,Glanbia Plc board members have fiduciary responsibilities which prevent them promoting farmers interests versus the plc's interests

+1

And - quite apart from the specifics of the Companies Act - the duty to act in Shareholders interests requires Directors to act in the interest of all the shareholders qua shareholders in other words regardless of their particular role in life (farmer, investor, or whatever). This is the case regardless of the numbers of each which make up the shareholders register.

Take an extreme example by way of explanation. If a company happened to own a hydroelectric dam, and 90% of it's shareholders would be flooded out by expanding it (at no cost to the company, and legally)... the Directors would in the first instance be duty bound to do the most profitable thing for the shareholders pockets, rather than their properties, which might well end up destroying their houses.

It sounds stupid and is unlikely to happen - but your interests as a shareholder often differ from your interests as a farmer or supplier and boards must act only in respect of the shareholder interest. This is one of the things never pointed out when the shiny PLC shares are handed over and board appointments are talked about, and one of the reasons it's really not enough to give up the farmers co-operative and hope to make money back on the shares. Somebody has to lose in these deals, and it's the farmer supplier most of the time.

WheatenBriar

kowtow wrote: »

+1

And - quite apart from the specifics of the Companies Act - the duty to act in Shareholders interests requires Directors to act in the interest of all the shareholders qua shareholders in other words regardless of their particular role in life (farmer, investor, or whatever). This is the case regardless of the numbers of each which make up the shareholders register.

Take an extreme example by way of explanation. If a company happened to own a hydroelectric dam, and 90% of it's shareholders would be flooded out by expanding it (at no cost to the company, and legally)... the Directors would in the first instance be duty bound to do the most profitable thing for the shareholders pockets, rather than their properties, which might well end up destroying their houses.

It sounds stupid and is unlikely to happen - but your interests as a shareholder often differ from your interests as a farmer or supplier and boards must act only in respect of the shareholder interest. This is one of the things never pointed out when the shiny PLC shares are handed over and board appointments are talked about, and one of the reasons it's really not enough to give up the farmers co-operative and hope to make money back on the shares. Somebody has to lose in these deals, and it's the farmer supplier most of the time.

This is where the Plc status farmers voted to create all those years ago has come back to bite them a million fold
The only benefit they get is a rare spin out-only 4 in my memory in 30 years,two of which were only worth chicken feed for the first 20 years,all the while the new big honchos were feathering their own nests with salaries expenses etc etc and maximising farmer price reduction misery as much as possible to boot,shoring up said feathered nest

Farmer Ed

keep going wrote: »

Lorry driver told this morning 2 guys giving up milking near here, both younger than me.if it was possible for carbery to take over/amalgamate with dairygold and gii , would ye be in favour

The DG chairman has floated the idea on a number of occasions that there might be the possibility that "the Chinaman" may come with his cheque book and buy Dairygold. If that happens it might be a good idea for DG farmers to buy some pictures of the Chinese leader to put on their wall now. When it becomes compulsory and everyone has to buy them, they may well go up in price.

So much for Co Op etous, I'm gob smacked every time I think about a Co Op chairman even contemplating such an idea.

pedigree 6

Way way off topic. But I think if I endured this.
I'd be guaranteeing food supply and buying land in different parts of the world to spread any risk. Especially if the land in china is f*ecked from past practises.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine

Way off topic but links in with other posts I did.
Whether true or not is a different story.:rolleyes:

Pacoa

On the subject of china, heres an interesting article I've just been reading.

http://theglobaldairy.com/noticias/bought-out-chinas-attack-on-agriculture-46516/