blackdog1 wrote: » Teagasc get a research levy on every litre produced on farms. They will effectively double their income if we double milk production. That's in a good year or bad they levy stays the same. Of course their pushing everyone into milk and producing more. To me it's wrong. We have a small population and we need diversity in farming we don't want to be like nz with 7m plus cows and export driven.
pedigree 6 wrote: I think producers here in Ireland just don't know what to expect. It feels like we've been left out in the cold with the gov and teagasc telling everyone about the bonanza that was going to happen with milk quotas going. We don't know if this is the bottom and prices will start rising again or if we're about to fall off a cliff and for how long nobody knows, past performance doesn't garrentee future performance.
pedigree 6 wrote: » I think producers here in Ireland just don't know what to expect. It feels like we've been left out in the cold with the gov and teagasc telling everyone about the bonanza that was going to happen with milk quotas going. We don't know if this is the bottom and prices will start rising again or if we're about to fall off a cliff and for how long nobody knows, past performance doesn't garrentee future performance.
frazzledhome wrote: » They aren't comparing us to NZ. They are trying to get us to use our resources better just as they do. We have our own system that's unique in Northern Europe with only ourselves, parts of Wales and SW England. I think we took the best knowledge they have and developed a better system. Having worked in NZ when they hadn't a pot to piss in on farm, do not underestimate their resilience on the ground nor their ability to embrace failure and re bound. Only a small number are in any way under threat. This is a cycle and we need to get fit for it. We need to get used to swings from 20c to 36c. This is the new reality.
blackdog1 wrote: » http://businessetc.thejournal.ie/irish-dairy-board-us-1536677-Jun2014/ I think a couple of irish owned plants out there
frazzledhome wrote: » GIIL have no milk plants in America The Kerrygold is made on contract and DG and others also manufacture butter
blackdog1 wrote: » Don't they own milk plants in the us? If so that kerry gold butter could be manufactured in the us with US milk
WheatenBriar wrote: » Yes but as I said earlier that does not include any home mortgage which most farmers under 50 have,so you can add another 100k plus average to that on an average land holding of probably a tenth that of new zealand.. And for anyone saying to forget non farm loans,thats up there with dont include any pay for the farmer in doing the figures
farmerjj wrote: » Always wondered why Teagasc and co keep comparing us to new Zealand, I sure wouldn't like to follow them down there road of high borrowing ,maybe its time we try and do something right ourselves and not follow some other countries flawed example
pedigree 6 wrote: » Teagasc always work off averages, average farm size, average cows milked, average cost of production. Whatever cost of production for that year, add in average industrial wage for that year, ask the trade unions they'll tell you what it is and divide by number of litres on average farm and add on. You can make it as complicated as you like and you'll get nowhere. You'll also have to work out how many labour units on average farm.
WheatenBriar wrote: » In fairness, there couldn't be too many part time dairy farmers so thats no excuse I get the SFP issue alright but again It is transparent how much of that was related to milk output on the farm,so only include that
Buford T. Justice V wrote: » Well, you can. But then they wanted to include the SFP as well as that's farm income also. And then the figures get badly skewed as the SFP varies hugely between farms and then the issue of how to divide the SFP between diferent farm enterprises which will muddy the waters even more. And there are probably more reasons than we can think of that would mess up the figures even more. Like, what target figure do you use? Average industrial wage is fine but does that mean there should be no return on capital ie the farm itself? Should it be average industrial wage +20%? +25%? What should be done with part-time farmers, should their part-time wages be included or not? Should a bigger return on capital be included as they wouldn't be totally dependent on the farm for income? Should a wage for a working wife/husband off farm be included? Should a bigger wage be included for a spouse working part time/not working at all?
mahoney_j wrote: » The major loans there are for land and stock ,we've not the same chance to squire large land blocks here and more is spent on yards ,parlours,cubicles slurry storage and other things dept and environmental regulations require us to
pedigree 6 wrote: » I don't buy it. It's not rocket science to include average industrial wage on farm costs.
Buford T. Justice V wrote: » I did a bit of asking around about not having figures for wages included in farm costs. Apparently the trade off was if they include a farm wage in the Costs Of Production, then they would also have to include the SFP in it also. You can't have it both ways, tbf.
pedigree 6 wrote: » A competitive milk price
WheatenBriar wrote: » Yes but as I said earlier that does not include any home mortgage which most farmers under 50 have,so you can add another 100k plus average to that on an average land holding of probably a tenth that of new zealand..And for anyone saying to forget non farm loans,thats up there with dont include any pay for the farmer in doing the figures
WheatenBriar wrote: » Kerrygold is already enjoying a huge fridge space in supermarkets from Miami to Seatle, so thats not the answer Oh and guess where most of the butter from that comes from? Yes GII.. Remind me what they're paying again?
whelan2 wrote: » There's an article in todays business part of the sunday indo, apparently the average borrowings of irish dairy farmers is 62,000 euro while the average new zealand farmer has borrowings of 4million euro:eek:
