Milk Price III

rangler1

Farmer Ed wrote: »

It is a sad reflection on our farm organizations all the same that they seem to be so cozy with the processors.

You're very immature naive if you think anyone is going to advise you, it's like any agreement, you're big boys now, get off your arse and get your own advise and don't be setting up someone to blame if it all goes wrong, Grain growers have been forward selling for years years now and it's time dairy farmers too responsibility for them selves, You're behaving like a spoilt child after thirty years of pampering in a protected sector.
It's a sad reflection on dairy farmers if you're an example

Mooooo

Sam Kade wrote: »

At the start of the year, it's for 3 years.

No, decided against it, I am in the first one that's ending in August.

rangler1

George Sunsnow wrote: »

In the light of Glanbia's poor record on price,the IFA should be recommending to its members not to sign an msa unless there's a commitment to stay in the top 3 of the price audit
The commitment would have to be enforceable by the farmer i.e. Void if that commitment is broken

Fair is fair

You'd be foolish to sign if you're not happy with it, is it compulsory to sign :rolleyes:

George Sunsnow

rangler1 wrote: »

You'd be foolish to sign if you're not happy with it, is it compulsory to sign :rolleyes:

It's quasi compulsary
You lose the cookie jar treats if you don't
But tell me what's the logic in signing an msa or not renewing in this case with Glanbia's poor price record
The majority take no action because the majority are over 50 and when you get over 50 you don't like change

No one over 50 that hasn't already left are likely to leave ,it's win win for the processor
My view is aspirational
That's all you can be in farming

mf240

Anyone know what volume is available.

You'd look well if ya got 4/5k litres and had to buy all your diary nuts off them and renewed your msa at the same time.

whelan2

mf240 wrote: »

Anyone know what volume is available.

You'd look well if ya got 4/5k litres and had to buy all your diary nuts off them and renewed your msa at the same time.

I dont fully understand it you can apply for 10% of your supply but might not get it. Thats what kowtow was saying earlier, to put signing subject to allocation or similar on the application. When is the closing date for this? I want to run it by my solicitor to see what she says.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Mod note:

Easy now folks, a bit more discussion and a bit less taking shots, please.

Thanks in advance,

Buford.

rangler1

whelan2 wrote: »

I dont fully understand it you can apply for 10% of your supply but might not get it. Thats what kowtow was saying earlier, to put signing subject to allocation or similar on the application. When is the closing date for this? I want to run it by my solicitor to see what she says.

You definitely need someone to hold your hand if you sign something that vague,
One thing I learned in IFA is once you agree you're fecked....get it right the first time

Keepgrowing

George Sunsnow wrote: »

It's quasi compulsary
You lose the cookie jar treats if you don't
But tell me what's the logic in signing an msa or not renewing in this case with Glanbia's poor price record
The majority take no action because the majority are over 50 and when you get over 50 you don't like change

No one over 50 that hasn't already left are likely to leave ,it's win win for the processor
My view is aspirational
That's all you can be in farming

Are you considering giving notice to leave?

whelan2

Keepgrowing wrote: »

Are you considering giving notice to leave?

Are you?

mf240

whelan2 wrote: »

Are you?

He's not a Glanbia supplier.:D

Gawddawggonnit

jaymla627 wrote: »

Wouldn't be surprised the rates they are paying are pretty poor, if they are going to try and impose more cuts on rates they're would be war, it's handy enough to get away with paying farmers f all, expecting a lad to run a lorry for break-even our at a loss is a whole different kettle of fish...
Also the hours that lads are having to put in due to delays off-loading during the peak months are getting out of hand, our tanker driver was regularly going from 3.30 to nine at night back in April/may

Crazy hours. Accident waiting to happen.

Water John

There has been a number of them, Gawd. One case with a driver having a child asleep in the cab, in the middle of the night. But management know nothing of these things.

George Sunsnow

Keepgrowing wrote: »

Are you considering giving notice to leave?

In a perfect world I might be but the price of the hassle involved versus putting up with but complaining all the same,means I fall probably into the category of not liking change

If we don't give out from the inside things would be an awful lot worse than they are,I think
I don't think too many will give notice
But for heavens sake it's not too big an ask for something the size of Glanbia Ireland with all its glossy promises of the benefits of majority farmer ownership to be in the top 3 payers for base price,I think you'd agree!

Water John

Glanbia have well proven, they'll give you what they feel like. It's your choice, to stay. It's your choice is to negotiate on an individual, or group of suppliers basis.

jaymla627

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Crazy hours. Accident waiting to happen.

Its lunacy and the funny thing is totally acceptable under the eyes of the rsa as their exempt from having to do tacographs etc, chatting owner driver today, they basically want them to give them a quota system for litres collected A litres get paid at normal rates but once they go over this they get paid B rates which barely cover fuel costs, so even if their supplier route sent in say a extra 20% milk next year they are expected to collect the extra supply for a pittance and at a loss.....
Would love to see the drivers go on strike and make the suits sweat

K.G.

To be fair i dont often knock things but anyone to sign up for this feed thing in glanbia is nuts(pardon the pun).30 e a ton
But off what price.as for fixed price in glanbia the loyalty regime is also wrong. Each scheme should be decided on its own merits and shouldnt be based on previous participation.all that being said you cant sell your Farm and then complain about rent and effectively thats what glanbia and kerry suppliers have done.

Keepgrowing

George Sunsnow wrote: »

In a perfect world I might be but the price of the hassle involved versus putting up with but complaining all the same,means I fall probably into the category of not liking change

If we don't give out from the inside things would be an awful lot worse than they are,I think
I don't think too many will give notice
But for heavens sake it's not too big an ask for something the size of Glanbia Ireland with all its glossy promises of the benefits of majority farmer ownership to be in the top 3 payers for base price,I think you'd agree!

I hear you and agree. It coming up to time to give notice and if you're not happy you should at least put them on notice. I can't really see the hassle. You're probably confined to one processor to move to that being Strathroy.

Most who've moved seem happy but I know of two who aren't and would return but for the fact that they made such a stink of leaving.

Keepgrowing

whelan2 wrote: »

Are you?

No

I am however giving serious consideration to this latest offer. It's a good price base and when inputed into a 5 year spreadsheet works well

alps

Farmer Ed wrote: »

It is a sad reflection on our farm organizations all the same that they seem to be so cozy with the processors.

Farm organisations are driven by the mood of the majority.... and the majority signed up...herd mentality all round ..

Gawddawggonnit

jaymla627 wrote: »

Its lunacy and the funny thing is totally acceptable under the eyes of the rsa as their exempt from having to do tacographs etc, chatting owner driver today, they basically want them to give them a quota system for litres collected A litres get paid at normal rates but once they go over this they get paid B rates which barely cover fuel costs, so even if their supplier route sent in say a extra 20% milk next year they are expected to collect the extra supply for a pittance and at a loss.....
Would love to see the drivers go on strike and make the suits sweat

Interesting that the lorry drivers/subbies have more power than Coop members!

Gawddawggonnit

alps wrote: »

Farm organisations are driven by the mood of the majority....and the government....and teagasc...

Fyp.

George Sunsnow

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Interesting that the lorry drivers/subbies have more power than Coop members!

Of course they do
Cows have to be milked
Lorries don't need to collect milk,there's plenty of other work for them
Besides most CoOp members are auld lads in their 60's if the last Glanbia SGM is anything to go by

George Sunsnow

Keepgrowing wrote: »

No

I am however giving serious consideration to this latest offer. It's a good price base and when inputed into a 5 year spreadsheet works well

I think you'd be selling yourself short (leaving aside the ridiculous feed proposal)
It needs to be inflation (farm CoP inflation) proofed
Otherwise forfeiting better market returns is too much of a risk if you have your own volatility fund and don't do silly things like buy unneeded machinery to save a bit of tax (yet lose net of tax cash flow)
It also needs to be in the mid 30's to be fair
That would be on a CoP of 25c/l a gross personal income on a million litres of near 100k or 60 to 70 ex tax which is reasonable for a 7 day a week job
30k just isn't enough for the hours put in
Employees get more and they get to go home and not think about it until the next day
Glanbia managers certainly get more regardless of milk price and they're off at five

As usual I may aswell say,I'm being aspirational here as the farmer age profile doesn't lend itself to kicking up too much of a fuss
But seriously in the 21st century if you're to get enough replacement farmers then incentives need improving big time

rangler1

alps wrote: »

Farm organisations are driven by the mood of the majority.... and the majority signed up...herd mentality all round ..

Most framers I met on commitees were driven by good farming practise and as I've said before won't go against their own interests (fools if they did)
Herd mentality is everywhere.....I'm laughing all the way to the bank because I didn't invest road money in bank shares and that demonstrates that herd mentality can be ignored

Farmer Ed

Just supposing a co op is making a return from product of x then how will this effect milk price using 2 different payment scenarios.

Co op can return 25 cent and 10% is fixed at 31cent. Then the farmer will get 31cent for 10% and 24.33cent for the remaining 90% of the milk. But the average is still 25 cent

Co op can return 40 cent and 10% fixed at 31 cent the remaining 90% would be paid for at 41cent. But the average is still 40 cent.

Of course there are many other different scenarios that would see some farmers fixed and some farmers not, but at the end of the day unless the Co op has a five year fixed price contract themselves with their customer's as a direct result of fixing the price with farmers, the amount of money available to the Co op to pay the farmers for milk is totally unaffected by fixing a percentage of the farmers milk price.

So my question? How is this being sold as something that is going to guarantee more money in farmers pockets in times of poor milk price? At best its farmers betting against farmers.
The pot that the Co op has to share amongst farmers will remain the same. The only thing that will change is how its divided.

whelan2

Would any other business sign into a five year deal with no price commitment apart from a possible 10%?

Keepgrowing

whelan2 wrote: »

Would any other business sign into a five year deal with no price commitment apart from a possible 10%?

Just don't sign it, simple

whelan2

Keepgrowing wrote: »

Just don't sign it, simple

Aye, for that reason I'm out

K.G.

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Just supposing a co op is making a return from product of x then how will this effect milk price using 2 different payment scenarios.

Co op can return 25 cent and 10% is fixed at 31cent. Then the farmer will get 31cent for 10% and 24.33cent for the remaining 90% of the milk. But the average is still 25 cent

Co op can return 40 cent and 10% fixed at 31 cent the remaining 90% would be paid for at 41cent. But the average is still 40 cent.

Of course there are many other different scenarios that would see some farmers fixed and some farmers not, but at the end of the day unless the Co op has a five year fixed price contract themselves with their customer's as a direct result of fixing the price with farmers, the amount of money available to the Co op to pay the farmers for milk is totally unaffected by fixing a percentage of the farmers milk price.

So my question? How is this being sold as something that is going to guarantee more money in farmers pockets in times of poor milk price? At best its farmers betting against farmers.
The pot that the Co op has to share amongst farmers will remain the same. The only thing that will change is how its divided.

So really all your saying is fixed price has no effect on the price paid for the other milk other than to extagerate the highs and lows and dosent result in farmers being paid less for their milk.