This statement applies to so much in our world. From interest rates to fashion trends, from climate to markets, so much of what we see, hear, do, say, and feel is cyclical.

In meeting with commercial bankers recently, here are some of the points I took special note of in the conversation:

• Many of our clients are struggling through a slow-down right now.
• Very few applications are for growth. Most are to restructure, especially in preparation for increases to interest rates.
• So many of our clients do not understand their balance sheet or how it affects their business.

The first bullet above led to a longer portion of the total conversation. The banker who made this statement went on to describe how the boom years we have recently enjoyed led many people (entrepreneurs and employed folks alike) to create some bad habits, such as not preserving cash (working capital) and increasing their debt. When things slowed down and business got tight, the debt payments still need to be made, as does payroll, and utility bills. Somehow, the elevated lifestyle expenditures that cycled up during times of easy prosperity did not cycle back down when profitability and cash flow did.

A similar sentiment was gleaned from an ag banker (who asked to remain nameless while granting me permission to include the response below) serving North West Saskatchewan and North East Alberta. When I asked about what the trend has been in that part of the province for farm land prices and rent rates, the response included the following:

“Profitability and cashflow has been squeezed the past 3 years, due to a combination of the weather anomalies (in most cases, more moisture than needed), increase in production costs, and financing needs (and in some cases may be “wants” vs actual “needs”).  Those producers/files with the stronger balance sheets and working capital positions, have fared better through this, compared to some others.”

For any of you who think that your business (or industry) is the only one to have to manage cycles, please understand that cycles are industry agnostic. The market does not care what you’ve been through, what your plans are, or what your name is. Your business plan needs to include M.O.C. – Management of Cycles.

Long time readers of my commentaries know that I have referenced Moe Russell of Panora, IA on more than one occasion. It was from Moe that I first heard the term M.O.C. – Management of Cycles. Moe tells the story of how he picked it up during a chance conversation in an airport with Matthias Grundler, the then Head of Procurement for Daimler. When asked, Grundler admitted that M.O.C. (management of cycles) was his greatest concern.

What cycle are we headed into right now? If we knew, if anyone truly knew, business would be so much easier! The risk, of course, is that we tend to get caught up in recency bias:

Recency bias occurs when people more prominently recall and emphasize recent events and observations than those in the near or distant past.

www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/news/…/why-recency-bias-is-dangerous-to-investors.aspx

Drawing up plans to seed just over 6,000 acres this spring, Fred can’t let go of the notion that he needs to be at 10,000 acres. There are a couple of neighbors who’ve hinted that they might not put a crop in this spring, and if Fred could take on both, he’d be at 10,000 acres. That would feel pretty good driving through town letting everyone know he was now a 10,000 acre guy! Heck, he might even put it on the side of his truck like some companies do with their safety awards. They’re proud of their accomplishments and show them off, why not Fred?

As he goes over his crop plan, he starts wondering about where he’ll procure his inputs. If he maxes out the lines of credit at both input dealers in town, and the one at the bank, he’ll be able to get everything seeded, fertilized, and sprayed. “No problem,” Fred thinks to himself. He gets on the phone to get prices from each input supplier so he can decide what to buy from whom.

About a week into April, Fred gets the word he was hoping to hear: both neighbors who were considering retiring will not be seeding a crop this year and will be renting out their land. Fred immediately gets in the truck to pay his neighbors a visit to see if he can secure a rental agreement with each of them. To establish good-will and earn the opportunity, Fred offers each $5 per acre cash rent above what they were asking. They shake hands, and Fred excitedly heads home.

Upon sharing the news with his hired help, Fred is too excited about his “accomplishment” to recognize that his lead hand is not happy about what Fred is telling him: the seeding rig will have to run 24 hours since there isn’t time to buy another air-drill and get it field ready. Fred heads back to the house to update his crop plan and to secure more crop inputs.

Two days later, Fred’s world comes crashing down:

• he is unable to get any more credit to acquire crop inputs for his additional rented land;
• he has been denied a new cash advance because he was late paying back the old one;
• he has lost his new rented land because he can’t get inputs and because the cheque he wrote to each landlord for upfront rent payment has bounced;
• his lead hand just quit to go work for a neighbor who provides a “better work environment.”

To Plan for Prosperity

They key is in the heading title: PLAN

Fred doesn’t plan; he reacts. He is not able to expand his farm even though he thinks he is. He is not as financially strong as he thinks he is because he cannot get more credit when he needs it. He is now short on help to get seeded on his own current acres. Fred wants to be bigger, but he’s overlooked being better.

At risk of “over-flogging” this issue, Fred’s challenge has been lack of working capital. And it is that lack of working capital that has not only directly cost him an expansion opportunity, but indirectly cost him his lead hand.

It’s been said that “if you fail to plan, you’re actually planning to fail.” Fred has become the embodiment of those words. The ramifications of this story go farther than we have time to discuss.

You can avoid falling in with the likes of Fred by enacting control over your future: implement strategic growth using sufficient resources with discipline.

*Fred is a fictional character. The story portrayed above is fictional. Any similarity to a real person or situation is purely coincidental.

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…

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.