pedigree 6 wrote: » Which article from the journal are we talking about now?;) The journal is getting great publicity here now. #clickbait. edit: trumpstyle.
whelan2 wrote: » The poor lad probably after being knee deep in crap for the last few decades spent €80k to have a happy life and people are begrudging him it. Whatever floats your boat.
whelan2 wrote: » The husband needs a toe in the hole
mf240 wrote: » Lads would spend 40/50 grand on a jeep and after a few years it would be worthless.
whelan2 wrote: » Did any of ye read the problem page? The husband needs a toe in the hole
Timmaay wrote: » What sort of unsecure loan rates are an of yas getting? Looking at borrowing 25k over 3yrs for a job on the farm here, boi who my main farm account is with are offering me 6.7% which seems steep enough.
yosemitesam1 wrote: » https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/opinion/95265405/keith-woodford-dairying-the-pastureplus-way
yewtree wrote: » Its an interesting article and I read some of the support stuff at the bottom of it aswell (I am not that busy today), but the message is very similar to Teagasc. once you start wasting grass or using supplement to keep extra cows you will definitely lose money. If you supplement and dont waste grass it will be profitable. The most profitable milk on any grass based farm is got from grass, should be about 4500 litres. After that milk produced from supplement can be profitable provided you know the tipping point where the cost of the milk outweighs the price received.
Water John wrote: » Sam 1, don't think we'd have any consultant/researcher, willing to stand out from the crowd, like that, in Ireland. He directly challenges a named researcher.
yosemitesam1 wrote: » The whole research system worldwide is just a bit of a disaster. There's a lack of accountability and a hierarchy that has to be respected if any sort of career progression is to happen. Add to that the problem of people getting fancy qualifications and the arrogance that tends to come with their few letters, all before they are ever humbled by the sheer complexity of what they're trying to understand. Have emailed a few teagasc lads pointing out how research may have been flawed or pointing out stuff that was plain wrong. Have yet to receive any acknowledgment back as they've no accountability...
yewtree wrote: » I am not sure about that, i think the principles in teagasc are pretty sound, they do a huge amount of research its up to us as farmers to decide what suits our farm, they have no commercial angle. Have always found Teagasc lads fairly easy to get on with and debate things with, never got any sense they had no accountability. Are you involved with teagasc through discussion groups/go to their events?
yosemitesam1 wrote: » It's the real fundamental issues about soil health, sustainability etc that I've my issues with teagasc and they don't reply to any emails questioning these issues as it puts so much of what they've been preaching for years into question. That is where the lack of awareness about the world around them is such a big problem. The majority of them did an age or science degree in Ireland in the last 40 years, haven't done much if any work outside of Ireland and so know nothing apart from maximising the amount of product produced for a protected market with no consideration given to the problems the narrow focus creates We'd have nothing to do with teagasc here as they don't have anything to offer the direction our farm is going in. Maybe they will one day though...
Midfield9 wrote: » Milkflex 4.1 I think. Term has to be 8 years but you can pay it off as quick as you like. There is a setup cost of 1.25%
jaymla627 wrote: » In new Zealand where alot of guys haven't inherited their farms and are paying back huge loans how cheap is grass when this is factored, say a 30 year mortgage on a farm bought back their when land prices had gone sky-high at say 30,000 euro a hectare tag on interest on the loan at another 20,000 euro over its lifetime, so essentially 50 grand our 1600 euro a year capital repayments... Now take a rockstar farmer out their who is utilizing 16ton/ha year in year out he's got costs of 10 cent a kilo of dm in repayments alone now remind me again how grass is a cheap feed, it is if you inherit the land if you go out and buy it its comparable to buying in your feed
Timmaay wrote: » Just reading through the T&Cs, hell of alot of effort for 25k that I will hopefully pay back reasonably fast, workshops, 3yrs accounts, MSAs etc. Think I'll go see will any of the other banks offer me unsecure money at a better rate.
yewtree wrote: » Thats a different argument and there is a valid point in it, I am talking about not wasting grass by substituting with expensive supplements. The more grass wasted the higher the cost of grass, as you are not diluting the costs associated with growing grass. If i pay €10,000 acre for ground i need to max the amount of grass utilized off it to make it pay for itself. If i introduce supplements when i have sufficient grass i will reduce the amount of grass i use and also increase my feed costs that is a sure fire way to go broke.
