Milk Price III

jaymla627

Buckmickley wrote: »

93% yes vote
There was no opposition at all
A few speakers from the floor alright mostly council members

On milk price,one lad ,perhaps from this parish (Laois ) rightly gave a dig about the milk price needing to pay the farmer too i.e. Keep us sustainable as Glanbia spoke a lot about sustainability in all other areas

The top table didn't want to talk about that
2700 people there and only 2 spoke about milk price...

Regardless let's hope they sell us the other 40% soon so we can make fair trade decisions on price

Had the hand up to ask a question from the start was told would be up in a few minutes, never got around to us, the choir boys where only allowed to speak it seems

pedigree 6

jaymla627 wrote: »

Had the hand up to ask a question from the start was told would be up in a few minutes, never got around to us, the choir boys where only allowed to speak it seems

Were you near the front or back?

I was in the middle and the spotters came as far as me anyway.

All the guys asking questions were all mostly at the front and Henry I know could see them and he was calling out which paddle number was next for a question.
But there was a tillage guy in front of me (middle ways) and I know Henry couldn't have seen who that was unless the spotter was making some gesture to him and he got a question in.

There was a period at the end when Henry said any other questions and maybe you could have stood up and waved your arm.

Thinking back though the answers given were like a story and seemed to be all in line.
Except for some of the tillage ones were trying to make a point and one from here seemed to be straight to the point of milk price.

The tillage answers from the top table were produce higher value products.

The young farmer answer was that shares should go to active farmers.

If what you say is true and I can only surmise that the spotter or Henry knows and has something against you. Which is desperate form.:mad:

Anyway I wonder is there any point in asking what were or would you have said today?

The floor is yours jaymla.

Edit: there was too many "going forward" used in the questions and there was really only about 10 or 12 questions from the floor.:(

jaymla627

pedigree 6 wrote: »

Were you near the front or back?

I was in the middle and the spotters came as far as me anyway.

All the guys asking questions were all mostly at the front and Henry I know could see them and he was calling out which paddle number was next for a question.
But there was a tillage guy in front of me (middle ways) and I know Henry couldn't have seen who that was unless the spotter was making some gesture to him and he got a question in.

There was a period at the end when Henry said any other questions and maybe you could have stood up and waved your arm.

Thinking back though the answers given were like a story and seemed to be all in line.
Except for some of the tillage ones were trying to make a point and one from here seemed to be straight to the point of milk price.

The tillage answers from the top table were produce higher value products.

The young farmer answer was that shares should go to active farmers.

If what you say is true and I can only surmise that the spotter or Henry knows and has something against you. Which is desperate form.:mad:

Anyway I wonder is there any point in asking what were or would you have said today?

The floor is yours jaymla.

Edit: there was too many "going forward" used in the questions and there was really only about 10 or 12 questions from the floor.:(

Was in relation to gap scheme and just simply wanting to know will the 95 odd million the co-op has in its kitty from it be used to fund a good chunk of the stainless steel they are planning...
It's looking likely it will and given the fact the co-op will lose 4.3 million plc shares if the bond exchange is exercised it's looking like it's a going to be a nice sneaky way to further reduce the co-op shareholding in the plc without any need for a vote....
Would be fairly sure I was "overlooked" as always like to ask some sticky questions, the funny thing looking around the room today and all the blasé about 30% plus expansion that's going to occur who's going to milk all these cows down the line their was a serious lack of youth their today and a lot of lads in attendance where knocking 60 plus, can't remember from the survey a few months back was this issue properly delved into but I don't recall it been

Water John

Should have told them, 'going forward' was so last year's phrase.

Keepgrowing

freedominacup wrote: »

Sounds a bit like a press release from some banana republics government just after the polls close on their free and fair election.

Lol, really does

Keepgrowing

jaymla627 wrote: »

Was in relation to gap scheme and just simply wanting to know will the 95 odd million the co-op has in its kitty from it be used to fund a good chunk of the stainless steel they are planning...
It's looking likely it will and given the fact the co-op will lose 4.3 million plc shares if the bond exchange is exercised it's looking like it's a going to be a nice sneaky way to further reduce the co-op shareholding in the plc without any need for a vote....
Would be fairly sure I was "overlooked" as always like to ask some sticky questions, the funny thing looking around the room today and all the blasé about 30% plus expansion that's going to occur who's going to milk all these cows down the line their was a serious lack of youth their today and a lot of lads in attendance where knocking 60 plus, can't remember from the survey a few months back was this issue properly delved into but I don't recall it been

Do you know the scenario in which the shares will be converted in the GAP scheme?

Had you a question regarding today's business? Do you really think your question was so tricky that it couldn't be handled?

pedigree 6

Re the youth question a bit worrying alright.
But maybe they were at home doing the work.

The young farmer question came from a comrade of mine who was in the same year in Kildalton and that's not today or yesterday!

I'd have no worry about who's going to produce this extra milk though.
Everyone wants to milk cows atm it's the ticket to becoming rich or so it seems.
Give it two years and all this extra production coupled with the fact that it's bloody hard work and perhaps a price on the floor and a fall out will occur again.
The hoof pairer here reckons there'll be as many getting out of milk as getting in.

I think this is reality now in dairying and with the moves today inside and outside the farm gate this country has just copied New Zealand. Expect more rationalization and mergers now that we have to compete with fonterra.

Keepgrowing

pedigree 6 wrote: »

Re the youth question a bit worrying alright.
But maybe they were at home doing the work.

The young farmer question came from a comrade of mine who was in the same year in Kildalton and that's not today or yesterday!

I'd have no worry about who's going to produce this extra milk though.
Everyone wants to milk cows atm it's the ticket to becoming rich or so it seems.
Give it two years and all this extra production coupled with the fact that it's bloody hard work and perhaps a price on the floor and a fall out will occur again.
The hoof pairer here reckons there'll be as many getting out of milk as getting in.

I think this is reality now in dairying and with the moves today inside and outside the farm gate this country has just copied New Zealand. Expect more rationalization and mergers now that we have to compete with fonterra.

The older farmers are the shareholders, plain and simple. It's a massive issue and if it weren't for that I'd be all for a full and total spin out of all shares.

jaymla627

Keepgrowing wrote: »

Do you know the scenario in which the shares will be converted in the GAP scheme?

Had you a question regarding today's business? Do you really think your question was so tricky that it couldn't be handled?

I'm nearly sure it's at the discretion of the bond holder weather they take shares our cash at the end of the five year period, I've asked this question before and was fobbed off, maybe I'm just a tad paranoid that 45 odd million that was ment to support co-op farming members as a loan is now been used as part of the co-op overdraft it doesn't sit well with us and wasn't the intended purpose of the gap scheme....
It's a considerable amount of money all things been equal, the rabble of financing future stainless steel out of cash-flow is pretty haphazard too and will only result in milk price paid out to members been raided to fund it

Keepgrowing

jaymla627 wrote: »

I'm nearly sure it's at the discretion of the bond holder weather they take shares our cash at the end of the five year period, I've asked this question before and was fobbed off, maybe I'm just a tad paranoid that 45 odd million that was ment to support co-op farming members as a loan is now been used as part of the co-op overdraft it doesn't sit well with us and wasn't the intended purpose of the gap scheme....
It's a considerable amount of money all things been equal, the rabble of financing future stainless steel out of cash-flow is pretty haphazard too and will only result in milk price paid out to members been raided to fund it

They take the cash/shares but it will be cash unless the shares hit €23.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Keepgrowing wrote: »

The older farmers are the shareholders, plain and simple. It's a massive issue and if it weren't for that I'd be all for a full and total spin out of all shares.

Jaysus, don't you start as well:mad:



:P:pac:

Dwag

pedigree 6 wrote: »

The tillage answers from the top table were produce higher value products.

Funny that...

Keepgrowing

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Jaysus, don't you start as well:mad:



:P:pac:

But unlike ye we've separated agri, consumer food and milk processing;)

freedominacup

Keepgrowing wrote: »

The older farmers are the shareholders, plain and simple. It's a massive issue and if it weren't for that I'd be all for a full and total spin out of all shares.

What difference does it make who holds the shares if you're spinning them out? My tuppence worth would be that any new producer is able to buy the minimum for voting rights at face value from the co-op in the same manner as everyone else over the past century. Anyone getting out of farming should have their shares cashed out at a fair value or another mechanism developed similar to what happens to small shareholders who try to hold out in the event of a plc takeover. I have no problem whatsoever with dry shareholders having voting shares but non farmers should not have any co-op shares and no transfers to non farmers should ever be approved. If someone wants to transfer shares to a nonfarmer cash out the co-op shares and buy plc ones.

Buckmickley

Wait,can the extra leeway down to 28% that we voted for today (for as they said 'be used in a hurry without the trouble of having another vote)

Can that be sold to meet gap commitments?
I'd regard that eventuality as the height of double crosses ,a severe betrayal of members interests/bad management

kowtow

pedigree 6 wrote: »

Edit: there was too many "going forward" used in the questions and there was really only about 10 or 12 questions from the floor.:(

Ugh.. "going forward" ... even the dot commers gave that one up ten years ago.

It's up there with "leveraging vertical synergies and picking low hanging fruit"

kowtow

jaymla627 wrote: »

I'm nearly sure it's at the discretion of the bond holder weather they take shares our cash at the end of the five year period, I've asked this question before and was fobbed off, maybe I'm just a tad paranoid that 45 odd million that was ment to support co-op farming members as a loan is now been used as part of the co-op overdraft it doesn't sit well with us and wasn't the intended purpose of the gap scheme....
It's a considerable amount of money all things been equal, the rabble of financing future stainless steel out of cash-flow is pretty haphazard too and will only result in milk price paid out to members been raided to fund it

It's convertible to shares if the share price exceeds a threshold by a trigger date (actually I think there is an accelerated conversion with an alternative threshold and trigger as well, but I don't have the termsheet to hand).

From memory the trigger came out at 18/19 E or greater but I could be totally wrong.

Edit:

What are they going to do with the 7% who voted no?

1. Give them a chance to vote again?
2. Put them on an intensive "re-education" programme?
3. Just shoot them?

jaymla627

kowtow wrote: »

It's convertible to shares if the share price exceeds a threshold by a trigger date (actually I think there is an accelerated conversion with an alternative threshold and trigger as well, but I don't have the termsheet to hand).

From memory the trigger came out at 18/19 E or greater but I could be totally wrong.

Edit:

What are they going to do with the 7% who voted no?

1. Give them a chance to vote again?
2. Put them on an intensive "re-education" programme?
3. Just shoot them?

Glancing through 2016 annual report if Glanbia plc share price increases above €23.26 before 9 June 2021 the maturity date of the bond, the owners have the option to exchange their exchangable bond holding into the pro-rota amount of pledged plc shares, however Glanbia co-op can provide the bondholders with the cash equivalent value of the pledged shares to settle the outstanding bond.....
Given we are be told that planned expansion is coming from cash flow and net cash held by the society at the end of 2016 only amounted to 94.3 million if share price was to spike to say 30 euro a share that would leave the co-op having to come up with 120 odd million to retain these shares, if the money wasn't available to meet this wouldn't I be right in saying the owners of the exchangeable bond have banked the shares and Glanbia co-ops shareholding in the plc reduces by another 1.75%

kowtow

Yes pretty much. The bondholders got a call option.. albeit one which was a fair bit out of the money.. as a sweetener.

What's the price now?

Edit.. also fairly sure there is an early option too, but in either case the principle is the same.

Farmer Ed

kowtow wrote: »

It's convertible to shares if the share price exceeds a threshold by a trigger date (actually I think there is an accelerated conversion with an alternative threshold and trigger as well, but I don't have the termsheet to hand).

From memory the trigger came out at 18/19 E or greater but I could be totally wrong.

Edit:

What are they going to do with the 7% who voted no?

1. Give them a chance to vote again?
2. Put them on an intensive "re-education" programme?
3. Just shoot them?

The father of it all. This guy refined the most powerful weapon ever. But even by his standard 93% is very impressive. Best democracy money can buy no doubt.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_(book)

Farmer Ed

Probably a better example of how PR can be used . https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torches_of_Freedom

whelan2

Got a call this morningg that those of us supplying for uht milk daily will get an extra payment next week. Went to my local fmp man about it in January

Mooooo

whelan2 wrote: »

Got a call this morningg that those of us supplying for uht milk daily will get an extra payment next week. Went to my local fmp man about it in January

Will cover the cost of extra washing etc?

whelan2

Mooooo wrote: »

Will cover the cost of extra washing etc?

They got teagasc to do the costings. Thanks to override who used to be on here for the heads up

pedigree 6

whelan2 wrote: »

Got a call this morningg that those of us supplying for uht milk daily will get an extra payment next week. Went to my local fmp man about it in January

I'm starting to feel I'm loosing out here by being a creamery milk supplier!

How do you become a liquid milk supplier?

My milk is going down the road a couple of miles and being sold (by Glanbia) to someone else and turned into probiotic yoghurt.
I wonder what do I do there to get an extra payment?

whelan2

pedigree 6 wrote: »

I'm starting to feel I'm loosing out here by being a creamery milk supplier!

How do you become a liquid milk supplier?

My milk is going down the road a couple of miles and being sold (by Glanbia) to someone else and turned into probiotic yoghurt.
I wonder what do I do there to get an extra payment?

What we will get won't be much. It's strange we had to go looking for it when we should have been getting it all along

Mooooo

pedigree 6 wrote: »

I'm starting to feel I'm loosing out here by being a creamery milk supplier!

How do you become a liquid milk supplier?

My milk is going down the road a couple of miles and being sold (by Glanbia) to someone else and turned into probiotic yoghurt.
I wonder what do I do there to get an extra payment?

It's the Washing every day is the extra cost, if it was the other way around and your tank was too small no doubt they would try and charge you. Glanbia milk going to Danone in Macroom as well, only 15 min drive from me. I think there is milk going from another coop as well, used to be just dairygold

whelan2

Mooooo wrote: »

It's the Washing every day is the extra cost, if it was the other way around and your tank was too small no doubt they would try and charge you. Glanbia milk going to Danone in Macroom as well, only 15 min drive from me. I think there is milk going from another coop as well, used to be just dairygold

Drogheda plant is about 5minutes down the road from me. My milk goes to lough egish about an hour away

pedigree 6

Mooooo wrote: »

It's the Washing every day is the extra cost, if it was the other way around and your tank was too small no doubt they would try and charge you. Glanbia milk going to Danone in Macroom as well, only 15 min drive from me. I think there is milk going from another coop as well, used to be just dairygold

I'm not on about Danone. It's a lot smaller and specialist than that.

I've also had milk from here go to Bailey's in Cavan in the autumn.
Still same commercial price.:rolleyes:

I think I may become a Communist.

kowtow

Perhaps it is just me, but doesn't the statement from Corbally yesterday incorporate everything which is wrong with the agribusiness industry, taken to almost laughable extremes:

but basically we are here to feed the world. We are here to turn our farmers’ produce into viable food, that we can sell at a reasonable profit and pass back as much of that as we can to our Glanbia farmer shareholders,” he said.

The italics are mine.

There is an underlying assumption here that what the farmer produces is not food (not even "viable") until the genius of agribusiness gets its hands on it. There is a further assumption that - for our own good - the profitability, and of course the salary bill and investment plans, of the processor must be protected first, before the farmer is paid - presumably because without it the farmer would be finished.

Apart from the extraordinary hubris of the statement, it is an almost perfect inversion of the original co-op model, which is to carry produce to the nearest and best market to the shared benefit, and at the shared expense of the farmer members.

I have nothing against Henry Corbally, indeed in his position I might be saying similar things - but I will make the following observation. If the current deal represents a move away from the plc and back to a farmer driven co-operative, these do not sound to me like the words of a farmer. It's going to take a big cultural shift, I think, as much as a financial and ownership change, to end up with a co-operative which really recognises the value of the food it's farmer members are producing and is able to demonstrate that is has repaid the trust of its members and done justice to that produce in the marketplace.