2016 year end review

Reviewing 2016

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

We often get so focused on process that we fail to stop to take a look back now and again. If you feel like you’ll never reach your goal of <fill in the blank>, take some time for review to see how far you’ve actually come.

Where were things one year ago? If you were like most, you were highly optimistic about the potential of 2016. While durum was still troubled by fusarium, there was tremendous, widespread excitement to climb abroad the lentil train! After an usually warm and dry winter, from one of the strongest El Ninos ever recorded, the concerns of a potential late and wet start to seeding were quickly cast aside.

The way 2015 started out (with multiple late spring frosts) you might have been cautiously optimistic about the 2016 crop, even though it looked like it was setting up for a repeat of the 2013 record yield. Diligent pesticide applications meant to protect this potential boomer of a crop may have worked well, unless we’re talking about chickpeas and durum. The rain didn’t allow for the desired warm dry autumn, and the 2016 harvest literally became a marathon. While I haven’t done any calculations, I’d be placing my money on an approximate 70-75 day average harvest duration in 2016.

Yields were all over the map, and this has again kept many income statements looking tight. There were far too many discouraging sides to crop rotations everywhere, and many of those farmers who tore up their long term crop plans to chase big returns are feeling a little sore. Fertilizer prices dropped in the summer and stayed low most of the fall, allowing those farms that have strong working capital to buy their 2016 fertilizer cheaper than they have in recent memory. Saskatchewan reelected its government; Manitoba voted in a new one. And we found ourselves gobsmacked by goings on leading up to the US election.

And so, in looking back over 2016 we want to focus on progress, innovations, shortcomings, and of course, lessons learned over the last 12 months.

Direct Questions

What progress did you make on your long term goals? Short term goals?

What innovations did you employ this year?

How have you evaluated results to determine their success or failure?

From the Home Quarter

There was a pointed competitive advantage described in the article above; did you pick it out? In a business that produces commodities, you need to create every advantage possible to give your business the best opportunity for sustained profitability.

Where did your business fall short of expectations in 2016? Where did it exceed? What did you learn from it, and what will you do different?

Does this sound familiar? I wrote something very similar a year ago. One year later, it still applies.

My First Tractor

Why Tractors are Sexier than Spreadsheets

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

Blame Kenny Chesney. He didn’t sing “She thinks my spreadsheet’s sexy.” Across all genres, I’d bet there is no one immortalizing accountants, bankers, and financial analysts in song.

Chesney’s 1999 release, She Thinks My Tractor’s Sexy is one of my favorites. At a time when farming didn’t get much attention and wasn’t garnering a lot of respect, it was a feel good jam that pumped me up every time I heard it. Seventeen years later, it still does.

Please realize that my opening statement above is tongue-in-cheek. I do not hold Kenny Chesney accountable for why tractors are sexier than spreadsheets. But the question still begs, why are spreadsheets unpopular when compared to tractors? Both are tools with specific uses. Both tools are effective, highly powerful, and multi-functioning. Both can create efficiency that is almost immeasurable.

Business owners can hire someone to run either tool, the tractor or the spreadsheet. If you were to follow one of the cornerstones of my advice, “Do what you do best, and get help for the rest,” then you’ve already likely hired someone to drive the tractor, right?

A long tenured ag professional, who will remain nameless, recently during a conversation with me describing one of his frustrating client experiences quipped,”If driving tractors is more important than running the business, we’re very near the end.” We laughed at the absurdity of the words, yet were stymied by their truth.

In a meeting with a client recently, we were discussing their growing ability to gather data from their operations. They shared the question posed by their equipment specialist “What are you going to do with all this data?” I instantly shot back,”Just collect it; we’ll figure out how to use it.” The goal is to make data collection a natural part of business activity, a habit, not a challenging task on the ever growing “To Do List.”

What we will do with that data, collected in part by/from the tractor, is more than likely import it to a spreadsheet. In that spreadsheet, we will be able to delve into the figures, sort them into a usable format, and ultimately make decisions that are more informed than ever before.

Direct Questions

Does running the tractor take priority over running the spreadsheet? Why?

If you’re not running your spreadsheet, who is? Does this pose a risk in your mind?

Do you make equipment purchase decisions without consulting the spreadsheet?

From the Home Quarter

Informed decisions lead to higher profitability. Higher profitability has a way of reducing risk. Reducing risk increases confidence.

Since spreadsheets make for informed decisions which ultimately increases confidence, and since confidence is sexy, doesn’t that make spreadsheets sexy?

Back to you Mr. Chesney…

 

 

Over-Optimism (a.k.a “It Can’t Happen to Me”)

/1 Comment/in , , , , , /by

Recently I’ve sensed great concern from some bankers regarding the effects on the cattle market because of this TB outbreak in Alberta. The effects are still not definitive but could prove devastating.
The fallout from this recent harvest in western Canada is still being measured. Creditors are in full disaster preparation mode so as not to be bombarded by voluminous delinquent payments over the next 5-6 months.

A valuable part of the work I do is to help clients make capital expenditure and credit decisions. After a number of difficult crop years from excess moisture, many farms have great concern over their financial stability and fully recognize that they have very little room for error. Pains are being taken to consider how every decision could affect the farm’s future profitability.

Many long term business decisions have been made on the premise of $12 canola and $8 wheat, or $2/lb weaned calves (as a kid, I sold my first calf for $0.80/lb.) Servicing debt on land and/or equipment payments during the high points of the cycle is easy, but as we’ve seen, the debt often outlives the business cycle.

Some farmers, especially those who are relatively new to farming, have never experienced tough financial times. They have no first hand experience of BSE or the 2004 frost; they know little outside of high yields, good quality and strong grain & cattle markets. Sadly, there are many who have first hand experience of those dramatic market influences yet have permitted themselves to have short memories.

I remember giving a presentation in 2013, in a community I won’t name so that I don’t shame them, where the audience was verbally angry with me for stating that we were a “global average crop, not a bumper crop but an average crop globally from $9 canola and $4 wheat.” They thought I was crazy because, in their opinion, canola had a new floor price and it was $12.

Regularly I am forwarded an article from some US agency (it varies week to week depending on who is forwarding it to me) that provides insight into the rapidly decreasing appetite for risk into grain farming from US lenders, or the sizable decline in land rent rates, and the reduction in land values. I often tweet these articles with the question, “Does anyone think this can’t happen here?”

I am encouraged by a shifting focus among farmers that centers more on ROI (Return On Investment) and less on size & scale. It bodes well with a saying (it’s not mine) that I like to lean on: Better is better before bigger is better.

Direct Questions

How do you view risk and its potential to affect business results when making business decisions?

Have you considered how a major market shock could affect your profitability, and if so, what have you done?

If your profitability will be sub-par in 2016, what adjustments are you planning to make for 2017 and onward?

From the Home Quarter

While no one can deny that “things are different now,” there is still much we can learn from history. Maybe the most important lesson from history is that major business-impacting events are very unpredictable. As such, maybe we should be more prepared for the predictable events so that the unpredictable ones aren’t such a major shock…

success criteria

Success Criteria

/0 Comments/in , , , , , /by

It is always interesting to listen to the variety of different opinions on how each farm views “success.”

For many it is measured by a tangible: number of acres under cultivation, number of combines in the fleet, etc.
For others, it is an intangible: family harmony.
Most of the time though, year by year success is measured in bushels.

Here is my response to a tweet just the other day:

Profit is always the supreme success criteria. Generally, I stop there because so much of the focus at the farmgate is primarily, almost exclusively on production, and it drives me crazy! But we simply cannot ignore the basic tenet of primary production: you need the bushels!

In the commodity business, and I don’t care if it is grains, livestock, oil, or minerals, the only businesses that produce commodities with consistent profitability are those that produce at the lowest cost per unit…period.

What’s the best way to lower your cost per unit? Produce more units, and in this case that means more bushels! Of course, the caveat is that you must produce more bushels without incurring more cost, or at least if costs must increase that their increase is not linear to (ie. less than) yield increase.

I am continually challenging my clients to find ways to reduce their overall costs. In an industry that has dedicated immeasurable amounts of focus on production, it is not unreasonable to admit that many farms are already producing maximum yields for their region, soil type, weather patterns, etc. Without further advancements in plant genetics, increases in yield beyond the average will mostly be achieved by the good fortune of ideal weather during the growing season.

Control what you can control (your costs) and accept what you can’t control (the weather.)

Direct Questions

How do you calculate your Unit Cost of Production (UnitCOP)? Do you calculate it at all?

How do you determine when the chase for more yield is no longer profitable?

What strategies do you employ to reduce your cost per unit?

From the Home Quarter

As read in the tweet above, “How about net profit?” Profit is the reason we’re in business, is it not? A business without profit is not a business, it is a charity!

Business is always evolving, growing, changing…maybe our definition of success should change too.

 

 

swathing-canola

Making Noise on (Emotional) Business Decisions

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

There has been a lot of noise this week about canola seed prices for the 2017 crop. Figures as high as $700 per bag (about $14/lb) for a sclerotinia resistant variety have been thrown around. As a moderate fan of Twitter,  I had to laugh at one particular tweet from @DavidKucher: “I’d have to #SellTheSwather in order to afford next year’s Invigor seed price increase”. This, of course, refers to the now popular production practice of straight-combining canola versus the traditional practice of swathing then harvesting.

This opens up the perennial challenge for farmers: costs are increasing with no guarantee that production prices will increase as well, margins become questionable, and emotional decisions get made. Is it better to keep the swather and plant cheaper canola seed? Or follow through with straight-combining canola, sell the swather, and grow the expensive variety that works better with straight-combining?

Aside from the cost/benefit sermon that would fit very well here, I believe that the real issue is differentiating between emotional decisions and informed decisions.

While I could go into a diatribe that includes harping on the how and why, instead, I’ll offer a list of questions that may help you determine whether or not to “sell the swather.”

  1. Will the more expensive seed provide enough extra yield to offset the added cost?
  2. Have you included the savings to your operating costs from eliminating the expense of swathing the crop?
  3. Does that saving to your operating expense include staff costs for you, or hired help, to run the swather?
  4. Have you considered the cost of owning the swather, and how eliminating it affects your fixed/overhead costs?
  5. How have you substantiated (actually measured) the seed loss from straight-combining and compared it to the loss from swathing?
  6. How cheap can you get new canola seed without sacrificing yield?
  7. What other benefits are you prepared to relinquish by opting for cheaper seed?
  8. Which canola variety matches your crop rotation, pest pressure, and operational timing & strategy?
  9. Which canola variety is most profitable?
  10. If you literally need to sell the swather to afford canola seed, can you see that there are bigger issues at play?

Selling assets to generate sufficient cash to cover operating costs is the beginning of the end. Selling assets that are minimally used to free up cash & leverage that could be redeployed elsewhere is a good strategy.

The answers the questions above are yours, not mine. There is no solution that I am prescribing by posing those questions. The solution will come from your answers. What I am prescribing is taking the time required to make informed decisions.

From the Home Quarter

Emotional decisions, made in haste, like shooting from the hip, will offer benefit…to someone…but not you.

Informed decisions keep you in control, on plan and on task, by ensuring there is benefit to you, your business, and your family.

For personalized guidance on determining if selling the swather is the right decision, call or email and ask about our Farm Profit Improvement Program™.

 

Overspending

Critical State – Overspending

/0 Comments/in , , , , , /by

Cash in the bank is a good thing. Spending it because it is there is the scourge to many farm’s financial strength.

Years ago, when I was still in banking, I was doing what can be argued young bankers should, or should not, do…I was listening intently to some well tenured, long-in-the-tooth bankers. It was good because of the insights they brought. It was not good because of the cynicism they had. One cynical comment in particular stayed with me; it was when that grizzled old banker said, “Farmers hate having money in the bank…as soon as it’s there, they go spend it!”

Maybe that comment showed his lack of insight into how a farm business is run. Maybe he was fairly accurate in his conjecture in how it relates to the psychology and mindset of a farmer. Although, I believe that “hate” is the incorrect descriptor for how farmers really feel about cash.

You may recall reading Spending Less is More Valuable Than Earning More in this commentary a few months ago. I regularly read comments in ag publications and on Twitter about how “farmers are good at making money, but trying to keep some is the hard part.” Not for everyone…

Investing in your business is something not to be taken lightly. Every year, month, week, and day, farmers battle with the decisions of what to grow, how to fertilize it, what to spray, when to spray it, etc. With almost the same frequency, many farmers are also looking at the tools to get the job done (ie. farm equipment.) “Newer, bigger, better” seems to be the name of the game when it comes to equipment. And less frequently, farmers consider expanding the land base. Whether to rent or to purchase is but one of the questions pertaining to land.

It is my belief that the issue of overspending would not be an issue if more discipline was used in ensuring that all expenditures met an ROI (Return on Investment) threshold. I’ve learned about the following instances in the last year that clearly show a lack of understanding the concept of ROI:

  • disastrous chickpea crops despite as many as 6 fungicide applications (at $15-$20 each, that’s an extra $90-$120/ac in inputs)
  • $90/ac rent paid on 640 acres that has only 420 acres available in the entire section due to excess moisture (so he’s actually paying $137 per cultivated acre)
  • inability to make loan payments because the operating line of credit is maxed out.

I have gone on record many times in my prognostication that credit, specifically operating credit, will be difficult to maintain (and likely impossible to get) in the not-too-distant future. Those operations that do not run on cash, therefore relying on operating credit, will face insurmountable hardship when credit policy changes.

Control your own destiny:

  1. Build working capital reserves, specifically CASH;
  2. Discontinue relying on operating and trade credit to cash flow your farm;
  3. Sell your production when it meets your profit expectations instead of when you need to make your payments (cash in the bank allows you to do this!)

Direct Questions

How would you describe the rationale employed when determining how to deploy resources, specifically cash?

As a percentage of your annual cash costs, what is your minimum cash balance to keep on hand?

From the Home Quarter

In a business within an industry that is renown to have multiple cash and cash flow challenges, it is not unusual to learn that adequate (or abundant) cash on hand is not common. And so when cash is available, the need (or temptation) to upgrade this or replace that can be too much to handle. Disciplined decision making, backed by a sound strategy, is often the difference between successful, highly profitable farmers and surviving, occasionally profitable farmers. Which would you rather be?

For guidance, support, or butt-kicking in developing your strategy, and the discipline to stick to it, please call or email my office.

hide and seek

Hide and Seek: How Perfection Kills Success

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

While on holidays in early July, I watched our group of 3-5 year olds playing hide and seek. They were having a ball because each of them is learning to count so being the seeker was their chance to show everyone how high they could count, because the thrill of the chase is invigorating, and because the risk of getting caught (found) adds an element of excitement.

What I found consistent while watching these children play was how all of them, no matter how long the “seeker” counted, kept moving from one hiding spot to another. Yes, these are small kids, aged 3 to 5; yes, they are too young to grasp the strategic concept of the game; yes, they were actually hoping to get found. It appeared as though they would hide, then identify a spot that looked better, so they’d leave their first hiding spot to go to another. Once there, they’d realize that it either wasn’t as good as it looked, or that they see yet a better hiding spot elsewhere. And the cycle continued until the seeker was done counting.

The point is not meant to be critical because it applies to older kids who do understand the strategy of hiding stealthily so that the seeker can’t use his other senses to pick up a hint where the hiders might be. Either by making noise while hiding, or by wasting their precious lead time looking for the ideal place to hide, they often leave themselves vulnerable by trying to find the perfect hiding spot.

These children were exhibiting a behavior that we, as adults, emulate far too often. We regularly short-change ourselves by seeking perfection, or our personal idea of it; we jeopardize success in the now because we we see something that we “think” is better.

The young children playing hide and seek spent their entire hide time, while the seeker counted, their entire hide time was spent moving from spot to spot, often giving up a great hiding spot for a poorer one. The older kids playing hide and seek waste their hide time by trying to find that perfect spot that no one has thought of, and when they can’t find it by the time the seeker announces “Ready or not, here I come,” the hiders are usually not ready and end up settling for a terrible hiding spot just so that they actually hide and aren’t caught just standing there in the open…

How does this apply to you or your business?

  • How much time over the winter is spent researching the “perfect” seed variety to grow?
  • How much time is invested into monitoring equipment prices and inventories to feed the desire of owning a seed tool (sprayer/tractor/combine) which might be “that much better” than the one on farm now?
  • How much time is spent in frustration thumbing through all the resorts available to choose from in the Caribbean so that your winter vacation will be “perfect?”

Direct Questions

Is there more analysis put into short term decisions than long-term or even permanent decision?
(It took 3 months to decide what canola to seed…but we’ll just expand that bin yard over there!)

Is there more analysis put into what we find fun and less into what we don’t enjoy?
(I know precisely how many combines like mine are for sale in Manitoba right now, but I haven’t bothered to consider if I could reduce my interest rates.)

Have you passed by a really good hiding spot because you were trying to find the perfect one?

From the Home Quarter

“Paralysis by Analysis” is a not so old adage that I lean on regularly. It is a challenge for detail guys like me because we want to be sure we’ve got everything right and in place before we take the next step. “Paralysis” because sufferers never take the next step; they justify their inaction because the “analysis” isn’t complete. News Flash: it is never complete!

I have made great strides in shucking that condition. It pokes its head out occasionally…I treat it like “Whack-A-Mole!”

Your farm will succeed if your canola variety yields 3 bushels less, but stands better than the other variety you desired. Seeking a marginally better sprayer probably won’t make enough difference in your overall profitability to cover the added cost. And take the damn vacation…you deserve it, you’ve earned it! Stressing over picking the “right resort” kills part of the fun. It’s like trying to pick the juiciest apple on the tree by looking at them from the ground.

go fishing

If You Are Happy Just Floating Along, Go Fishing

/2 Comments/in , , , , , /by

I wasn’t trying to be funny when I quipped what is the title of this commentary while in a meeting with an excellent banker and the exciting young prospective client he introduced me to. It just sort of rolled off my tongue in the moment. It was a hit; both men enjoy fishing.

The premise of that particular conversation was profit. In my work as a lender and a consultant, I venture to say I’ve looked at hundreds and hundreds, maybe thousands, of financial statements. Those statements have told a vast array of stories, from the depths of successive and devastating financial losses to the opposite end of the spectrum with profits that make you wonder if your’re drunk when reading it. Many hang around the middle, somewhere south of an impressive profit , but still north of a fundamentally adverse loss. It is sad to discover than many farmers create this break-even situation by choice.

The choice is often centered around tax and the great lengths taken to avoid payment of income tax. The list is long and arduous; it won’t be found here.

Let’s put this in real terms. Most farms I’ve analyzed range from approximately $250/acre on the low side to $400/acre (or even higher) as the figure that represents whole farm cash costs. That is the amount of cash required to operate the entire farm for one full year. Now, I got my math learnin’ in a small town school, long before calculators were allowed in the classroom, back when cutting edge computer technology was the Commodore Vic 20, but math is math, so if we consider a 10,000ac farm with $400/ac costs, we’re looking at $4,000,000…each year!

Granted, there aren’t too many 10,000ac farmers who are happy to break-even each year, but they are out there. At the end of the day, I don’t care if you’re 400 acres or 140,000 acres, expect a profit!

Farmers take far too much risk each year to not expect a profit. If you walked $4,000,000 into any bank, could you get a better return than 0%? Of course! You could get a risk free rate in GICs that would probably approach 3% (or maybe 4%…any bankers reading this what to comment???) So I ask why, if you could get a risk free rate of 3% or 4%, why would you take a sh_t-ton of risk to accept a 3% or 4% return farming?

Direct Questions

Investing $4,000,000 in GICs and getting a risk-free 3% annual return grosses $120,000 per year before tax. Could you live on that?

Land owners/investors demand a rent that mimics 5% return on the value of the land. If you invested $4,000,000 in land, you could earn upwards of $200,000 gross in rent, plus enjoy the long term capital appreciation…could you live on that?

What is an acceptable return to demand from your business…based on the amount of risk you take each year?

From the Home Quarter

Farming is not for the faint of heart. Farmers accept the financial risks that come with farming because they understand them. The opposite if often true of stock markets: farmers aren’t typically investors in equity markets because generally they don’t fully understand the risks. But savvy stock investors who do understand the risks still expect a positive return, they aren’t happy “just getting by.”

If you’re happy just floating along, go fishing.

If you expect to get well paid for the risks you take, call me.

 

farming should be like baseball

Farm Management Could Take a Lesson From Baseball

/0 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

If you love statistics, then you probably love baseball. Where else can you know with certainty that your starting pitcher has a propensity to throw more fast-balls than breaking pitches to left-handed batters at home during afternoon games in June under sunny skies with a slight north-west wind? While this is a bit of a tongue-in-cheek poke at the nauseating volume of stats that originate from the game of baseball, such statistics and the subsequent use of those statistics have real world applications.

I’m sure many of you have seen the movie Moneyball. (I’m sure most of you have because I watch VERY few movies, and even I’VE seen it.) As the story unfolded, there many beautiful examples of how the management team of the Oakland Athletics baseball club used statistics to improve their team. In this specific scene (I can’t recall who the player was) Assistant GM Peter Brand (played by Jonah Hill) explicitly instructs the player to “take the first pitch” during every at bat.  The reason was because through the use of statistics, and tracking the data, management knew that this player got on base more often when he took the first pitch. In the movie, it worked, and this player’s on-base-percentage increased almost immediately.

What would have happened had this team’s management not had, or used, such important information? The player may have been released, sent down to the minors, or traded to another team, the manager (bench boss) may have been fired.  Spread those “uninformed decisions” across the entire roster, and failure is sure to proliferate.

Livestock and dairy farms have been heading down the road to improved data management for years already. Average daily gain is not a new concept in beef operations. Robotics in dairy parlors bring a whole new level of data management. In conversation with a farm family that is investigating the benefits of robotics in a dairy parlor, I’ve learned that through RFID technology and a robot milker, they will be able to record and monitor milk volumes and milking frequency (a cow can come to the robot for milking whenever she chooses.) The management team can then compare results across the herd to determine which cow(s) is producing more or less than others cows under similar conditions. Informed decisions can then be made.

Grain farms having been catching up in recent years. With field mapping technology we can create yield maps; overlay that with crop inputs applied and we can tell which areas of each field are more profitable than others.

But that is way ahead of where most of the industry is generally at. By and large, many farm operations still don’t know the true profitability of a specific crop on their whole farm, let alone any given field.

The progression of profitability management, which requires stringent data management, begins at the crop level, advances to the field level, and reaches the pinnacle at the acre level.

Imagine:

  • determining which crops to exclude or include in your rotation by clearly understanding which crop makes you money and which one doesn’t;
  • deciding which fields to seed to which crop, or even which fields to renew with the landlord or which to relinquish based on profitability by field;
  • controlling your investment in crop inputs by acre to maximize your profit potential of the field, the crop, and your whole farm.

None of this is new. All the farm shows and farm publications dedicate significant space to all the tools and techniques available in the marketplace to facilitate such gathering of useful information. Equipment manufacturers and data management companies have invested enormous volumes of time and capital into creating tools and platforms to collect and manage your data. But like any tool, its value is only apparent when it is used to its full potential.

Almost all of the farms I speak with achieve greater clarity in the profitability of each crop in their rotation. I have a 13,000ac client that has taken several major steps toward measuring profitability by field. They have found that the extra work required to COLLECT this information is minimal. The extra work required to MANAGE this information is greatly offset by the benefit of clearly understanding that some of their rented land is just not profitable under any crop. Do you suppose they are looking forward to relinquishing some $90/ac rented land that just isn’t profitable enough to pay that high rent?

Direct Questions

Which of the crops in your rotation are profitable? Which are not? How profitable are they? Do they meet your expectations for return on investment?

Collecting the data is easy; managing the data takes some effort. What effort are you prepared to invest to make the most informed decisions possible?

How are you fully utilizing the tools available to you? If you’re not, why would you have them?

From the Home Quarter

Baseball collects gargantuan volumes of data on players, plays, games, and seasons. Much of it seems useless to laypeople like us, but to those who make their living in “the grand old game,” the data is what they live and breathe by. Agriculture should be no different. We should be creating consecutive series’ of data on our fertility, seed, chemicals, equipment, human resources, etc, for each year we operate, for each field we sow, for each person in our employ. Management cannot make informed decisions without adequate and accurate information. Now, with all the tools, techniques, and support readily available to help farmers collect adequate and accurate information, the last piece that may be missing is, “What to do with all that data?” While it can be boring to analyze data and create projections, I can assure everyone that the most profitable farmers I know all share one common habit: they spend time on their numbers, they know their numbers, and they make informed decisions based on those numbers.

You collect the information. I can help you use it. I’ll make tractor calls (as opposed to house calls) during seeding…as long as you have a buddy seat. Call or email to set up a time.

asset rich cash poor

Asset Rich, Cash Poor (Kim Quoted in the News)

/1 Comment/in , , , , , , /by

A tweet led to an email, which led to a phone call…

It was back in March that I tweeted the following:

This, and the short Twitter conversation that followed it, garnered an email, and then a telephone interview with Jennifer Blair from Alberta Farmer Express.

Below is an excerpt of what she wrote. For the article in its entirety, click here.

” ‘The funny thing about prosperity and successive years of prosperity is it allows people to form some really bad habits,’…

…And for those producers, being ‘asset rich and cash poor’ isn’t going to cut it anymore.

‘When you look back over the last two generations, it seems like the mantra has been that farmers are ‘asset rich and cash poor.’ It’s almost worn like a badge of honour,’ said Gerencser… ”

Direct Questions

What do you think? Have assets, especially equipment, been increased too fast to the detriment of cash holdings and future cash flow?

What is a reasonable level of investment in assets relative to your net profit? Are you earning an adequate return on your investment?

From the Home Quarter

Bad habits can form easily, but like any habit, bad ones can be broken. Chasing equity is something we’ve always done and that may have worked a generation ago, when the risks were as they are today but the volumes of cash at risk each year were far less. We cannot do what we’ve always done and expect a result different from what we’ve always gotten.

Asset rich and cash poor will not suffice through the next business cycle.

I’d like to hear your thoughts; leave a Reply below.