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.
awaywithyou wrote: » how are you getting on with the scheme??? have you had positives... false positives... or are all negative........??
yewtree wrote: » 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
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.
pedigree 6 wrote: » I don't think the opposition to the kph is sharing profit monitors between members of groups. It's the undertakings (iv) I undertake to keep all necessary records pertaining to the knowledge transfer dairy programme and the farm improvement plan for verification by the facilitator and inspection by department of agriculture, food and the marine up to and including of 18months after the end of the programme. (vi) I understand and agree that knowledge transfer data will be shared with Bord Bia, Animal Health Ireland, ICBF, Teagasc, Health and Safety Authority for the purposes of compliance with this Knowledge Transfer Programme (Appendix 4).
Buford T. Justice V wrote: » Isn't all that data available to them by default bar AHI and ICBF and a lot would be involved in programmes with both so their data would be available anyway? As I understand it, the plan is in place but there isn't any penalty for not following the plan, only for not having a plan.
mahoney_j wrote: » 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
rangler1 wrote: » i can't see how people can't understand that, I bought a jeep in 2012, sheep tunnel in 2013, a car in 2015, tractor in 2016....all just for the hell of it, how could my fixed costs be relevant to other sheep farmers in a profit monitor. My shiny metal disease is nearly as bad as the dairy farmers were pre quota
fepper wrote: » To show them how this man went bankrupt In 2017 and never do the same as him ever
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....
alps wrote: 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. ...
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.
whelan2 wrote: » 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!
mahoney_j wrote: » +10000 every concern u have there is one I have .why we as farmers should allow info like that to public domain is beyond me and why Tegasc think its ok to publish it is worse .i feel a lot of long standing Tegasc discussion groups will break up because of this .um in one for over 5 years and 2 non Tegasc ones and they've been of massive benefit to me ,dep money was an added bonus but for me a good group shouldn't need a cash incentive to continue or bring new members .
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
yewtree wrote: » 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.
alps wrote: » You really only need to benchmark against your colleagues, those that you know and understand their business ecumen. ....For the rest of the the world it is sensitive commercial information... If I sound like I'm paranoid and think it's an "us and them" situation. ..... It is.......and don't anyone be naive enough to think it's not...
