Dairy Chit Chat- Please read Mod note in post #1

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I'm wary about discussion groups since the last PM i did was being discussed in the local shop as I was getting a few bits the following morning:(

I told my advisor I was going to put in a figure for wages into mine as I refuse to work for free and would take it off for the DG comparison.

That is really annoying when that happens, you would be very wary alright after something like that. I haven't had any similar experiences (although i just might not have been in the shop when they were talking about me). I suppose with any group there has to be trust that group info stays inside the group.

Use the cost control planner to track money in/out so when starting in January I use the regular payment option for wages so when i give cost control planner to advisor my labour charge will appear on profit monitor.

I would have got a lot of help from teagasc and would feel some of the criticism they receive is unfair but the continued use of profit monitors without including labour is indefensible& devalues all profit monitors. also land charge should be added aswell

Could lads not join kt group a distance away? Sure doesn't everyone know what the neighbour is doing

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I agree with you on Teagasc.

On the labour and land charge, it needs to be included for all outside-farming use but I can see the point of not including it in farm to farm comparisons. An unmarried single lad with no family will have lower drawings than a family man in his 50s with kids in school/college.

your obviously right on the drawing between different people and the strength of the profit monitor is in comparing variable costs and some fixed cost across farms. I think maybe a standardized cost for labour could be used to reflect the replacement cost of labour. Also we need to get a better handle on labour costs as most expansion will be done through hired labour.

Teagasc include a land and labour charge when calculating the full economic cost of rearing a replacement heifer. I think it would be of great benefit if they published the full economic cost of producing a litre of milk, as this is the figure that could be used for outside farming use.

As things stand I'm opting out of kt but hope to continue in our group .tegasc etc getting too much info from our farms and incomes and been too loose with it .my big issue with pm in current format is that it just dose not give a true cop ,because of all the info left out chiefly ,labour (according to it we work for free),no value on land and non accountability of debt repayment .at the very least a figure on cpl has to be put on labour and a value put on land to make it fully relevant before they go posting mikey waving false figures .im betting a lot just got forms filled them in and look forward to the 750 euro without reading small print .my group meeting tomorrow and it'll be interesting to gauge feedback as I know a few in it have same view on pm as me

Opted out of the KT as I have had a long standing issue with the sharing of information ouside the remit for which it was collected. I have pressurised this issue with teagasc and IFA as it is a data protection issue..A legal one.

2 weeks ago I was told that yes there is an issue, but it being looked into and the issue is being rectified...GREAT...

1 week later, I get this KT application in the post with a cover letter asking to sign and return....no advise to read T&Cs. .and what do we see..

The data protection issue is being resolved by getting us all to sign that it's ok now to distribute and share this personal information with a waft of agencies....VERY SLY...

I wasn't on a mission on this and just declined to sign stating that I don't want my PM shared with anuone outside of my discussion groups. ..

I now find out yhat I may have difficulty staying on my local discussion group, a group that I have been involved in with 15 years, covering all the topics that this current KT programme...now I'm pissed....

The whole concept that farmers, who sell product for a living, would let the outside world including the purchasers of their product, know their costs of production is beyond me...It can only lead to being given just enough for your product so that uou can just about stay in business. ...

It's bananas...

And all I can say is farmers can be bought very cheap....

alps wrote: »

Opted out of the KT as I have had a long standing issue with the sharing of information ouside the remit for which it was collected. I have pressurised this issue with teagasc and IFA as it is a data protection issue..A legal one.

2 weeks ago I was told that yes there is an issue, but it being looked into and the issue is being rectified...GREAT...

1 week later, I get this KT application in the post with a cover letter asking to sign and return....no advise to read T&Cs. .and what do we see..

The data protection issue is being resolved by getting us all to sign that it's ok now to distribute and share this personal information with a waft of agencies....VERY SLY...

I wasn't on a mission on this and just declined to sign stating that I don't want my PM shared with anuone outside of my discussion groups. ..

I now find out yhat I may have difficulty staying on my local discussion group, a group that I have been involved in with 15 years, covering all the topics that this current KT programme...now I'm pissed....

The whole concept that farmers, who sell product for a living, would let the outside world including the purchasers of their product, know their costs of production is beyond me...It can only lead to being given just enough for your product so that uou can just about stay in business. ...

It's bananas...

And all I can say is farmers can be bought very cheap....

It would be fairly ironic if a programme designed to promote discussion groups ends up ruining some of the most productive groups in the country. Hopefully common sense will prevail for existing members who don't want into KT can continue in their groups.

alps wrote: »

Opted out of the KT as I have had a long standing issue with the sharing of information ouside the remit for which it was collected. I have pressurised this issue with teagasc and IFA as it is a data protection issue..A legal one.

2 weeks ago I was told that yes there is an issue, but it being looked into and the issue is being rectified...GREAT...

1 week later, I get this KT application in the post with a cover letter asking to sign and return....no advise to read T&Cs. .and what do we see..

The data protection issue is being resolved by getting us all to sign that it's ok now to distribute and share this personal information with a waft of agencies....VERY SLY...

I wasn't on a mission on this and just declined to sign stating that I don't want my PM shared with anuone outside of my discussion groups. ..

I now find out yhat I may have difficulty staying on my local discussion group, a group that I have been involved in with 15 years, covering all the topics that this current KT programme...now I'm pissed....

The whole concept that farmers, who sell product for a living, would let the outside world including the purchasers of their product, know their costs of production is beyond me...It can only lead to being given just enough for your product so that uou can just about stay in business. ...

It's bananas...

And all I can say is farmers can be bought very cheap....

The data protection get around is a standard ploy at this stage. You tick a similar box every time you download a free app. For this reason alone I have none of them on any device.

Bulls away last night. Anything not in calf getting the bullet. There'll always be a few but hopefully won't be many. Must book scanning. Did it through milk recording last year. Found a good few came back 'needs to be re checked ' so you were doing them twice. Don't plan recording this year anyway but it pregnancy diagnosis is a good service if it was a little bit more reliable.

visatorro wrote: »

Bulls away last night. Anything not in calf getting the bullet. There'll always be a few but hopefully won't be many. Must book scanning. Did it through milk recording last year. Found a good few came back 'needs to be re checked ' so you were doing them twice. Don't plan recording this year anyway but it pregnancy diagnosis is a good service if it was a little bit more reliable.

how long were they in for? Will leave my bull in for another couple of weeks, he's not busy. Brakes stuck on in jeep this morning, cows in furthest paddock, an hours walk for me

Wildsurfer wrote: »

If it took you an hour to walk it you should probably park up the jeep a bit more often... A mile should only take 15mins!

zig zagging across a field getting the cows in. Takes 45 minutes with the jeep

mahoney_j wrote: »

Had out monthly dg meeting today where a bit was given at end to kt .a lot of concerns many shared here
1 duplication of work ,items which are standard for h&s inspections and bord bia duplicated

2 profit monitors .same concerns a few of us here been discussed and the way Tegasc loosely divulge it .itvwas felt this info should include ,labour and land charge as standard as our land ain't free and we don't work for anything .and even then it should only stay within group and go no further .no other industry would divulge sensitive info like that and some felt this info is used against us and a tool to hit our milk price


3 why do dept ,bord bia icbf and god knows who else (revenue ???)need all this

4 will there be an option to stay within group but opt out of kt .advisor seems to think yes ,apply for scheme but don't submit pm etc and then you won't be paid at year end

5 there was also a feeling that established groups may totally break away thus robbing new entrants etc of the vast and vital knowledge and experience these guys may have .that far exceeds any monetary value kt will offer

A very good post. The only thing I would add is that there is a value to having profit monitor data collated so farms have a benchmark on costs and output/ha. I have found this info very useful for my own use. If the land charge and labour were included it would demostrate the real costs of production.

done a profit monitor once in ag college, the benchmark farm could not be explained by any teagasc lecturer to me or where they got their figures so i havent used since, can see why they do want farmers information to use as a bench mark but they have abused this information to much in the past

can also see why icbf want it as a proof for their ebi system as how can they currently say one cow is better than another without knowing cost of inputs, but after visiting one of the top ebi herds in the country im beginning to question the system, i got a bull off him but he was on par with my own herd milk stats he just had all of his herd genomicaly tested which seem to give him a huge advantage in comparison to my ebi herd suppose the money spent on research must be paid some how, im worried now his bull will actually knock me back a bit wouldnt no for another 2 years

any chance teagasc would visit all processors and get their costs of production, even out our playing fields, they want to know everything about the farmer who have a good cost base and then they blow that information out of proportion as if everyone can do it, the green field site that teagasc and glanbia set up should be their benchmark (which is struggling to turn a profit this year) we compare ourselves as farmers but we have no comparison for processors....who can produce cheese/casien/powder the most efficiently taking milk price out of equasion (like they do with us with land and labor)