Posts

dichotomy

Dichotomy

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

Here is a throwback to an article I wrote in August 2015 titled Is Data Management Really Important? where I highlighted a conversation between a friend and I that included his opinion that even large corporations let their “focus (be) primarily growth & profits and how to accomplish it, with information management being thrown together afterwards.”

While I believe that statement to still be true both for large corporations and farms alike, there is something in that statement that opens up what seems to have become the dichotomy of prairie grain farming: growth or status quo.

Let’s not get hung up on “growth’ as a single definition. In March 2015, my article Always Growing…Growing All Ways clearly described a few of the many ways we can achieve growth in our businesses that does not have to be pigeon-holed into the category of “expansion.”

So let’s clarify the dichotomy as “expansion or status quo.”

Now let’s compare a couple different scenarios.

  1. In the spring of 2016, I met with a young farmer who started out in 2000 with nothing but an ag degree and desire. As he prepared to sow his seventeenth crop this spring, he showed me his numbers while admitting that he felt good about his financial position, but didn’t really know if he was good or not. He lost almost 20% of his acres from the previous year, and was happy about it because the cost to farm that land was too high and he knew it.
    When I told him that I’d peg his operation in the top 10%, maybe even the top 5% of all grain farms on the prairies, he paused and said,”OK, so what are the top 5% doing that I’m not?”
  2. There is a farmer who has been calling me off and on for a couple years now. By all accounts, it is quite a feat that he is still operating. Although he’s been farming for well over 20 years his debts are maxed out, leases are burning up cash flow faster than the Fort McMurray wildfire is burning up bush land. He spends more time running equipment that his hired men; he has no clue what his costs are; he has aggressively built his way up to 10,000ac and wants to get to 20,000ac; one of his advisors told me that his management capability was maxed out at 4,000ac.

The first scenario has the farmer focused on growth of profitability, control, and efficiency.

The second scenario has the farmer focused on growth of the number of acres on which he produces.

One would be the envy of 95% of farmers.

The other will never in his entire career get to the point of financial success that the first farmer has already achieved.

Direct Questions

Which are you more like, the first farmer above, or the second farmer?

Which farmer do you want to be like?

What are you prepared to do to get there?

From the Home Quarter

What has been described above is actually a false dichotomy. We’ve been led to believe that farms must get larger in order to survive and that small farms were doomed. What that message failed to deliver was “At what point is a farm large enough?” I am not decrying large farms or the continued expansion of farms…as long as it makes financial sense! The false dichotomy of expansion or status quo need not be black or white, left or right, mutually exclusive. Farms that are not expanding today could be expanding next year, just like farms that are expanding today may not be next year. Some farms that have expanded over the last few years might even be looking at reducing acres in the future.

Growth (expansion) at all costs can often come with the heaviest of all costs.

trickledown effect of too much debt

The Trickle-Down Effect of Too Much Debt

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

One would think we learned something from watching the US housing market collapse at the end of the previous decade. Yet, here we are, seven or so years later and many are making the same mistakes that were made by countless US homeowners.

Granted, the macro factors that helped to create the US housing crisis are not prevalent here in Canada. My favorite term from the US crisis was “NINJA” Mortgage: No Income? No Job? …APPROVED! Lending criteria in Canada isn’t quite that liberal.

What exacerbated the problem in the US was how homeowners were using their homes as a personal ABM, taking cash out whenever they wanted for whatever they wanted from the rapidly growing equity they had in their homes because the house values just kept increasing. They leveraged the “found” equity they had in their homes to feed their consumer appetite.

Here in Canada, and specifically farms on the Canadian Prairies, we’ve seen something similar. Rapidly appreciating farm land is being used to secure more borrowing, and often to secure the consolidation of other loans. The renaissance of farmland value appreciation, especially in Saskatchewan, added a dangerous amount of fuel to a fire of pent up demand. Land “equity” was used for the feverish acquisition of equipment, buildings, and more land.

In the US, while sub-prime mortgages kept payments low, everyone was happy to be ticking along with borrowing and spending to their heart’s content…until the sub-prime period ended and the piper needed to be paid. With a property fully leveraged and no ability to repay the debt, many homeowners resigned themselves to foreclosure. Those who may have had an ability to pay the debt saw the value of their fully leveraged property start to decline because of all the other foreclosures, so when they found themselves underwater, they too went the route of foreclosure.

No one is arguing that things are different here. True. Borrowing criteria is more stringent in Canada. What is similar, however, is the experience of a rapid appreciation in the value of real estate and the leverage of said appreciation to support more (other) debt.

I was talking with a 17,000ac farmer recently who was very aggressive in expansion over the last several years. He has increased the size and scale of his farm in every way: land, equipment, labor, and debt. He made no bones about continuing to leverage all assets, including the appreciating land and his depreciating equipment, to the fullest extent in an effort to facilitate further expansion. The scourge of his actions over these last few years was the incredible drain on his cash flow to service all this debt. This came to light for him when recently he needed land equity to source an operating line of credit so that he could meet his debt payments.

Direct Questions

Have most of the increases to equity on your balance sheet come from appreciation of asset values or have they come from building your retained earnings?

How has your Debt to Net Worth changed over the last few years?

Are you drawing on your operating line of credit to make loan payments?

From the Home Quarter

It amazes me how what was ingrained into our long term memory for so long was so quickly forgotten. The memories of the indescribable hardships of the 1980s and 1990s have seemingly been overtaken by the boom years of 2007-2013. The willingness to replace the history lessons of tight margins and poor cash flow with the euphoria of big profits and cash to burn has led to many farms now facing a debt and cash crisis similar to what was common in the final 20 years of the last century.

The trickle-down effect of debt stems from when debt levels increase as fast as, or faster than, the borrower’s long term cash flow and net income. While asset levels increase, sometimes very rapidly, tremendous growth in debt levels eat away at potential equity and use up available cash flow. While the land base has expanded and late model equipment efficiently farms all the acres, while the bins may be full and the employees are busy, it all trickles down to cash.

When the demands on your cash are a raging river, it is pretty hard to live on a trickle.

 

 

ROI and ROA equipment

Farm Acronym Challenge: ROI and ROA

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

ROI (return on investment) is a metric I lean on heavily when working with clients to illustrate an expectation of profit. Each farm deploys (what feels like) unprecedented volumes of capital every year in an effort to grow a crop; there should be an expectation of profit for doing so, and I expect my clients to demand an ROI that reflects the risk they take. Accepting lesser returns is insufficient and could be realized with less risk by deploying said capital elsewhere.

We can break down ROI by measuring a return on various aspects: crop inputs, investment in equipment, annual cash costs, etc. Some of the many options against which we can measure ROI are highly useful, others less so. We try to decide which metrics to measure based on which gives us the most useful information. Of course, the ability to have an accurate measurement of ROI depends entirely on quality information and your ability to collect it.

ROA (return on assets) is a measurement I will be using more in the future than I have in the past. More and more I am finding that there are excess assets on farms, especially equipment, that are using good capital yet providing an inadequate return.  Here is what I mean.

ROA is defined as a company’s net earnings relative to total assets. By dividing net earnings by total assets, we see how efficient management is at using assets to generate profit. A company that generates $1,000,000 in net earnings on $5,000,000 in assets has a 20% ROA. A similar company generating $1,000,000 profits with $10,000,000 in assets has a 10% ROA. It’s simple math. And the question begs: if you had invested $10,000,000 elsewhere, could you get better than a 10% return on those assets?

Before the argument about land values is thrown out there, let’s just curb it right away. Yes, ROA can be manipulated (as can ROE – return on equity) by owning fewer assets. Banks do it all the time: they sell their owned real estate such as stand alone bank branches and ivory office towers in order to lower their total assets, thereby making their profitability (when measured as ROA) look fantastic.

Today, let’s focus on the asset that gets much love: farm equipment.

How would we measure ROA when it comes to farm equipment? I prefer to use Fair Market Value (FMV) because that figure represents both what it would cost you to acquire said asset and what you could reap should you sell said asset; it is arguably the asset’s intrinsic value. Online searches and blue book values are great ways to validate FMV. I summarize it as “when the auctioneer’s gavel drops, what would you get for that piece of equipment?”

Focusing on ROA as it pertains to equipment only, and excluding land, levels the playing field so to speak. All things being equal, this approach will clarify which farm management team is efficient with how it invests in equipment, and which is not.

Direct Questions

How do you measure the effectiveness of your investment in assets, specifically equipment?

Are you over-invested or under-invested in equipment? What evaluation methods do you use to validate your position?

If you were to invest your capital elsewhere, what return would you expect? What return do you expect from your farm? Is there a difference? Why?

From the Home Quarter

When calculating ROA, consider multiple criteria: all assets (land, buildings, equipment;) land and equipment only; equipment only. The ROA will obviously be much lower when including more assets, but don’t let that sway you into selling land to improve your ROA. Land ownership has been, and will continue to be, the anchor of a farm’s wealth.

What is a target ROA? The jury is still out. Simply put, there isn’t a large enough sample with adequate accurate information available to draw from.

So let’s find out!

With the utmost confidence and maintaining your privacy always, I am proposing an experiment: Email to me your net earnings, your cultivated acres, and your fair market value for each of land, buildings, and equipment for 2015. I will compile the data with no identifying criteria so that you maintain privacy. The compiled data will be available only to those who take part in the experiment. Include 2014 and 2013 as well if you’d like to see how you are trending.

As a thank you for taking part, Growing Farm Profits will offer an analysis with feedback on your ROA  and ROI calculations and trends at NO CHARGE! (Normally a $470 value!)  – Offer expires April 20

 

 

barometer

Farm Business Barometer

/1 Comment/in , , , /by

It’s harvest time. The weather has been uncooperative. The crop is generally not ready to go. Quality is diminishing. The August and September contracts Fred* had in place will not be delivered on time, even though the elevator has room, because his grain is still in the field and not in the bins. (* Fred isn’t anyone in particular. This story is fictional, but we need a lead character and decided to call him Fred.)

Finally, it looks like the weather will break, forecasting two weeks of high pressure, clear skies, and warm temperatures. Fred even has enough help between the hired staff, and family who have offered to come home for a week or so. He must get this crop off quickly, as fast as possible. Fred needs another combine.

Fred cannot afford to think about this for too long; everyone is in the same situation, and they could be looking at adding a combine to their farm as well. He heads into town, speaks with his salesperson, and acquires a quote. It’s higher than he wanted, or was expecting, but Fred is in a bind. He just heard that there are 2 other quotes on the same unit. He writes the cheque for a deposit.

Now comes the hard part – seeing the banker.

Fred recalls the feedback he was given before seeding time: things have been a little tight, and pulling back on any capital expenditures for a couple years would be best. What if this gets declined? How will he get the crop off in time? Is his deposit refundable? Fred scolds himself for not asking when he wrote the cheque.

Fred arrives at the banker’s office unannounced. Luckily she’s in the office today. Thankfully he doesn’t have to wait long. He explain the situation: things are getting worse by the day with poor weather degrading crop quality, and thereby crop price; he has lots of help to run extra equipment to get harvest done in record time…if he had another combine. When she asks if a decent combine can even be found at this juncture, Fred proudly produces the quote he just received no more than a half hour ago. She says she’ll take a look at things, and call right after lunch.

Fred heads home. The temperature is climbing and the wind is blowing; he thinks he could maybe get going this afternoon. Everything is serviced and ready to go; after all, he’s only done 150 ac so far. Fred heads in for lunch early, hoping that will speed up the call he is anxiously awaiting from the banker. He scans his phone for afternoon market updates, text messages from any neighbors who might be rolling, and that critical phone call from the banker that just isn’t coming fast enough.

He can’t sit around; Fred fires up the combine to go out and get a sample. The wheat sample looks bleached. He figures he’ll be lucky to get a #2. Sticking his hand in the pail Fred thinks “It feels close.” He rushes back to the yard to test it: 14.8! That can go in aeration! Let’s go!

Fred reaches for his phone to let everyone know to get ready to go, but realizes he left it in the combine in the field from which he just took a sample. Fred jumps in the semi, and even though it hasn’t warmed up enough yet, he hustles out to the field. Word will get to everyone via the house phone, and they’ll get out to the field right away.

Once back in the combine cab, Fred finds a message on his phone: it’s the banker! She wants him to call her right back. He does, and the call goes straight to voice mail. Fred swears.

She calls back in the time it took to fill one hopper. As Fred unloads into the truck, she tells him that she cannot approve a loan for the combine. She says that Fred’s cash flow is too low and his debt levels are too high to take on another liability for a “nice to have” asset. She talks about other options for this harvest, and offers clear feedback on what needs to happen in the future to not have these kinds of interactions with her again, but Fred has already stopped listening because he’s moved on to thinking about who else he can call for financing, wondering if the dealers program can turn an approval in less than an afternoon…

Fred immediately calls his salesperson at the dealer, and a couple other leasing companies, to ask them to begin an urgent credit application. They’ve got all his information now; he’s been in touch with them a couple times this year already when the banker has denied his other requests. Fred begins to wonder why he even bothered with the bank this time.

An hour later, Fred gets a call from the dealer; their financing division has approved his combine loan application. The interest rate is higher than his other loans, and the payment terms are more rigid, but he is not worried about that now – Fred can get that extra combine!

Jubilation turns to anxiety: the dealer cannot deliver until next week, and it hasn’t been through their shop. Fred will need to invest a half-day to have someone drive it home (who can be freed up to do that now that the harvest is rolling again?) Fred realizes this combine will probably need some repairs and some parts (more trips to town on the weekend.) On top of all that, he realizes that he’ll have to shut down himself to go in to town, sign the loan, sign the equipment sale agreement, and hopefully get to the insurance office before they close for the weekend. At this point, Fred might as well drive it home himself!

Yup, having a 3rd combine will make short work of Fred’s 5,300 acres! He acknowledges that he’ll have a serious amount of harvesting capacity for his farm size, and despite what he was told by the banker in spring and again today, Fred still got approved the loan. And if Fred got the loan, his business can’t be in as bad of shape as the banker says, right?

Direct Questions

Why does Fred exclusively use his creditor’s approval or decline of his credit applications as the barometer of his business’ financial stability and position?

How does Fred account for the differences in lending criteria and motivations between creditors when using their feedback as his business barometer?

What do you use as your barometer of business health?

From the Home Quarter

In our story, Fred clearly does not take the time, nor does he have the interest in understanding the financial ramifications on his business from the emotional decisions he makes. He continues to forge ahead by using any and every source of credit he can grasp. What happens when his requests are denied? Is it only then that his farm is in a position of financial weakness?

When focusing on priorities, I advise my clients that there are often times more important issues than upgrading equipment and constructing more buildings because credit is (relatively) easy to get, and has been for some time. As such, using credit approvals as the only, or primary, business barometer is narrow in scope, biased in feedback, and lofty in risk.

 

equipment efficiency

Managing Operating Efficiency

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

“You can’t manage what you don’t measure.” It’s been said time and time again, by me and many others. Here is an example that should get everyone buzzing.

A client of mine recently shared a sample of information that they collected from their equipment. The information shared with you is specifically from their sprayer:

Sprayer Utilization pie chart

 

A simple pie chart creates an “A-Ha Moment” that no one saw coming. I am sure you can all imagine the conversation around the table when this information was presented. What would your response be if this was your data?

As the discussion progressed, it became clear why the number of hours spent idling was what it was:

Admittedly, no one was tracking the number of idling hours that were attributable to any of those 4 points, but there was little argument that loading and rinsing contributed the largest share to the number of idle hours.

What can be done with this information? Since this sprayer is on a lease contract, the “cost per hour” is very easy to calculate. Now that we know the cost per hour of running this sprayer, we know how much all that idling costs. Now let’s go back to those 3 potential responses to first seeing this original data:

What this client of mine is now doing is evaluating the cost/benefit of putting a chem-injector system on their sprayer. Such an addition will:

To truly test this option, we would need accurate data over the period of at least 2-3 growing seasons measuring:

Naturally, very few, if any, farms record this data. Yet we can clearly see the effectiveness of having such useful information available to make the most informed decision possible. Without it, we are using emotion and our best guess. Obviously, our best guess can be way off, as is seen in just how much this sprayer spent idling in 2015.

Direct Questions

How are you managing and using your business data?

If you are not measuring it, and therefore cannot manage it, what are you using to make business decisions if accurate and useable data is not available?

How many decisions relating to improving efficiency can be made on your farm with better data?

From the Home Quarter

The report that contained this information (including the pie chart above) provides much greater detail to the goings on of that one machine than just usage by hour. Some of it, like the 8,970,000 yards this sprayer has traveled is not necessarily useful, but knowing that the 92.2hrs spent in transport used 910 gallons of fuel is.

While laughing and pointing around the table when comparing similar data from the combines, and identifying “who is the best combine operator” is interesting and fun, it is the action that comes out of the data that has the greatest impact. Positive action can and will impact your bottom line…but then so will inaction.

analyzing finances at the bin

Using Your Financial Information

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Last week, we described how compiling your financial information will be beneficial to you in being able to analyze your previous year’s results so as to equip yourself in making informed decisions in the current, and future, years. This week, we discuss how to use that info.

Critical Balance Sheet Metrics

  1. Your Current Assets should be greater than your Current Liabilities by an amount that at least matches your cost to put in next year’s crop.
    Ideally, the difference between current assets and current liabilities should at minimum match your entire costs to run your farm for one year.
  2. You want your Total Liabilities to be no more than your 125% of your equity after net worth adjustments have been made.
  3. ROE is an acronym for Return On Equity. It is your net income divided by your net equity. Are you happy with the returns you’ve earned in each of the last 5 years?

Critical Income Statement Metrics

  1. First and foremost, is your Income Statement accrued? You can tell if you find an adjustment, up or down, to your income that would be labelled “inventory adjustment.” If your income statement is not accrued, call me for a quick description on how to do it yourself. It’s easy.
    Accruing your income statement is the only way to truly measure your profitability from the crop produced in a specific year.
  2. Did you have a profit? EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest Taxes Depreciation & Amortization) is a very important figure to know. It represents your profitability from operations; it shows you can generate profits. The calculation is Net Income + Interest Paid + Taxes Paid + Depreciation Expensed.
  3. Now that you’ve got EBITDA calculated, divide it by the following figures: Current Portion of Long Term Debt (found on balance sheet) + ALL interest paid (found on income statement) + ALL lease payments made (found on income statement). This is an important indicator for your lenders. This figure indicates to them your capacity to meet your financing obligations.

Critical Cash Flow Statement Metrics

  1. Cash Flow from Operations divided by Gross Sales indicates how many dollars in cash your business generates from every dollar in sales. The higher the figure, the better.
  2. Cash Flow from Operations divided by your “Property, Plant & Equipment” indicates how well your business uses its hard assets to generate cash.
  3. Cash from Financing divided by Cash from Operations indicates how dependent your business is on financing. The higher the figure, the more dependent on external money.

Solvency Calculations

Liquidity Calculations
Liabilities / net worth current assets / current liabilities
EBITDA / loan payments, interest & leases current assets – current liabilities

 

Direct Questions

Does the thought of doing such calculations overwhelm you, scare you, or just plain bore you? If the urgency of knowing these numbers doesn’t strike urgency into you, are you willing to ask for help?

How would you describe the benefit to your decision making if these figures were readily available?

From the Home Quarter

The comment has been made time and time again: “It’s easy to make money in the good times.” With tighter margins of late, more attention than ever before is being paid to management and finances. These calculations above are only a few of the measurements that you can take to gauge your financial strength or weakness.

And if you need a hand figuring out what to do next, contact me any time.

ag excellence

Musings from the Ag Excellence Conference

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Last week, I attended the Ag Excellence Conference. Facilitated by Farm Management Canada, this year’s edition was held in Regina. Touching into 3 days of information sessions, speakers, and networking opportunities, I was impressed by the quality of content and the discussions that arose.  The following are some of the major questions and statements of which I took note during the conference:

  1. Will continued population growth in developing countries be enough to sustain the price and demand levels we’ve currently enjoyed?
  2. Why do we try to hire the cheapest labor available but expect it to meet high expectations?
  3. Are farmers losing their “social license” to farm?
  4. Why is there such a low priority put on advancing business management among farms?
  5. Just how far can automation advance production agriculture over the next generation?
  6. Are our water ecosystems at risk?
  7. How will Saskatchewan land values be affected with new ownership rules taking effect?
  8. Are you entrepreneurial or intrepreneurial, and can you be both?
  9. Physical (crop) yield does not equal financial yield.
  10. Strategy is nothing more than a dream without a tactical plan.

From the Home Quarter

Unlike most agriculture industry events which focus almost entirely on production, the Ag Excellence Conference focused on business management. Attendees recognize the need to elevate management awareness and skills to help ensure the future viability and sustainability of farm businesses.
The questions and statements above were asked/stated explicitly, or simply implied during conversations. These points stemmed from various regions of Canada, and various sectors of agriculture (from grains to cattle, to vegetables, to dairy, poultry, and egg.) Everyone in agriculture is asking the same questions, and raising the same concerns.
Give consideration to each of points above. Do you have a thought or response to any or all? We hope to tackle these and other issues in the coming weeks of Growing Farm Profits Weekly™.

grass

Information Management – Healthcare vs Your Farm

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Of all of the places one can imagine, our health care system is the preeminent entity that I believe
should be leaps and bounds ahead of everyone when it comes to managing data.

Over the last year or so, I’ve listened to my father-in-law’s observations about our healthcare system as
he led the charge relating to the changing needs of his disabled sister. He described how one nurse
would come into the hospital room, ask a series of questions, make some observations, take some
notes, and then leave. Shortly afterwards, another nurse would come into the hospital room, ask a
series of similar questions (getting similar answers,) make some observations, take some notes, and
then leave. At some point, a doctor would come into the hospital room, ask a series of similar questions
(and get similar answers,) make some observations, take some notes, and then leave. Usually these
notes where made on a chart that hung outside the hospital room door.

Some thoughts:

  • The cost incurred to have 3 highly paid and very intelligent individuals gathering similar
    information would likely astound me;
  • All of the information gatherers collected similar information, and compiled it into one paper-based record;
    Could anyone walking by a hospital room with malicious intent grab someone’s chart and leave
    that patient’s caregivers without access to critical information? Why isn’t this electronically
    secure yet (it’s only 2015 already!)
  • Patients get tired of answering the same question over and over;
  • Why wouldn’t the health regions equip each caregiver with a tablet computer that brings up a
    patient’s entire health history with the scan of a QR code that could be found on the patient’s
    wrist band?

Why am I writing about this? How is this important to you? First off, our healthcare should be of great
importance to everyone. But specifically as it relates to this blog, consider the
paragraph and bullet points above, but this time let the patient be your farm and the caregivers be your
business advisor, your lender, and your marketing advisor.

Direct Questions

How much better would it be to have all of your critical business information readily available for your
strategic partners to help you more effectively and efficiently manage your business?

How inefficient is it for each party to have to ask you for the same info? Your time is worth something
too, so wouldn’t you be better off not having to run through the same routine 3 times over?

How much risk is your business at if you were to lose, accidentally or maliciously, your historical business
information?

We’re a decade-and-a-half into the 21st century, and technology is awesome. When are we going to start
trusting it and using it to its full potential?

From the Home Quarter

I believe we have the best healthcare system in the western hemisphere, and I am by no means
criticizing any of our hard working health-care providers. But I do question the bureaucracy and
inefficiency that plagues the system (at least in the eyes of this layman.) I think we could do so much
better, which would then allow those on the front lines to spend more time providing healthcare rather
than administering information.

I believe that Western Canadian farmers are of the most efficient producers in the world, and I am by no
means criticizing any of your advancements and dedication to improving your production. But I do
question the lack of urgency and the failure to recognize the importance of having up to date critical
business information readily at your fingertips. You aren’t making the same type of “life and death”
decisions that are made daily by our health-care providers, but the decisions you make for your business
will effectively set in motion the cause and effect that can lead to life or death of your business.

Call to Action – Rate your current information management practices:

1. Can you produce your working capital figure within 2-3 minutes at your computer?

2. Can you advise what your total fertilizer cost per acre is by field? By crop?

3. Can you produce a current list of all farm assets with market values?

4. Do you keep a rolling list of cash requirements for the next 18 months? (i.e. loan payments,
property taxes, insurance premiums, etc.)

5. If you’re not willing to compile this critical information, are you willing (or can you) hire
someone to do it for you?

If you’ve answered YES to at least 4/5, congratulations, you’re ahead of the curve.
If you’ve answered YES to 3/5 or fewer, then please pick up the phone and ask for help.
(Hint: I always return voice mail messages.)

roi

New Tech and its ROI

/0 Comments/in , , /by

“It wasn’t until 1954 that tractors finally outnumbered horses on prairie farms.”

I learned this interesting factoid from Steve Leibel from FCC’s Management Software division when he
spoke to our local CAFA chapter in Regina earlier this spring. The presentation was on technology, not
economics, so we didn’t examine why it took so long.

Maybe that wasn’t a long time for farmers to adopt the technology of mechanized horsepower versus
literal horse power, but I think it was.

Today, it’s a little different; we adopt technology almost as fast as it can be released. I find that even my
head sometimes spins at the advances of new technology, so I can’t imagine what my grandfather, who
broke land behind a team of oxen, might think.

Much of this technology provides an incredible economic benefit. Others only provide marginal
economic benefit. Who has done the math before investing?

Shouldn’t any investment provide positive return to your farm? Of course it should, but not only should
it provide a positive return, there should be a threshold for that return to meet as well. Surely anything
that provides less than 2% ROI is better off staying on the shelf in favour of a risk free investment. This,
of course, is an extreme example notwithstanding those investment that provide negative ROI.

This winter I listened to Lance Stockbrugger say, “I love technology as much as anyone, but if it doesn’t
make me more money, what’s the point?” How much money do you need to make to invest in new
tech?

For some, there is no concern to the economic benefit of new technology; they just need to have it! For
skeptics, any proof of economic benefit is cast aside as nothing more than salesmanship.

graph12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ROI is a useful starting point for any investment. ROI is important to know because it not only indicates

the net benefit it will also offer insight into how long payback will take. Technology that offers 100% ROI
in the first year would “pay for itself”. Technology that offers an ROI greater than 100% in the first year
would pay for itself and provide positive cash flow above what would have been realized otherwise.
Technology with a 20% ROI would take 5 years to pay back your investment.

So let’s ask again, “How much money do you need to make to invest in new tech?” This also applies to
land, equipment, people, and professional services.

Direct Questions

How do you determine if an investment of your capital is worthwhile?

What is an appropriate ROI for different investment options?

How do you measure the success or failure of your decisions of how & where to invest your capital?

From the Home Quarter

Land investors want 3-7% annual ROI on their investment. Employees should be able to return 200% ROI
(their wage or salary times two) to their employer. What about iron, gizmos, gadgets, etc? Some of this
can be hard to measure: what was the ROI on hopper bins when they first came to market? While it can
be done, it’s not easy to put a financial value on efficiency, safety, and convenience, but those factors
certainly provide an intangible ROI.

I enjoy seeing the increase in confidence that my clients enjoy after we go through an ROI exercise as
they determine how to invest their capital. Reviewing realistic numbers to project the financial benefit
takes the emotion out of the decision.

I bet that early 20th century farmers didn’t do an ROI calculation on having a tractor on their farm versus
horses because if they did, I’d say that tractors would have outnumbered horses a lot earlier.

If you’d like help determining ROI opportunities on your farm, then call me or send an email.

assets

Avoiding Assumptions About Assets

/0 Comments/in , , /by

“If you’ve inherited an asset, you should act more like the custodian, not the consumer, of that asset.”
I was having coffee with Bill Allen, a Sun Life advisor and friend of mine that I met through CAFA
(Canadian Association of Farm Advisors; great organization, check them out www.cafanet.com) and as
we were discussing business, he used that statement above to illustrate his personal values as they
relate to estate planning. I asked Bill if I could write my next article around this statement, and he
consented.

The farm land that is expected to change hands over the next decade is projected to be somewhere
north of $50 billion (that’s >$50,000,000,000.) Much of the land will be sold (enter the farm land
ownership fray) but much of it will be handed down to the next generation. To the chagrin of farming
children, some of that land might get passed down to their non-farming siblings (enter the farm
succession fray.)

To those who inherit land, think about Bill’s statement above.

If You’re a Farmer…

There is blood in that land; the blood of your ancestors who risked it all to come west for a chance at a
new life. To think that it’s yours to do with as you please is…well, I’ll let you fill in the blank. Now land
that you acquired on your own with your own business savvy, hard work, and some good luck…you can
have at ‘er! It’s mighty short sighted to mortgage your “heritage” land for “personal wants.” What about
your legacy? What about your kids?

If You’re Not a Farmer…

The expectation of a financial windfall from the passing of your parents is simply unacceptable,
especially if you’ve been bequeathed the land that was passed down for generations. It is not yours to
sell to the highest bidder; it is an heirloom that must be cherished and made available for the next
generation again.

When my grandmother immigrated to Canada as a child, some of her older siblings stayed back in the
old country. Their descendants are distant cousins who we had kept in touch with many years ago. I
recall that the “flat” in which they lived was not owned, but was still passed down through generations.
Ownership of their own home, something which we take for granted in Canada, was not realistic for
them at that time in history. And yet what they had, despite unowned, was bequeathed.

When I began farming I promised my dad, who was a recent widower at the time, that I would never
allow the original land to be jeopardized for expansion or otherwise. Now that I’m no longer actively
farming, I can only hope that my siblings who are carrying on will stick to that.

There is a way to minimize the risk of inherited land being sold off: complete a succession plan.
Call it whatever you like: transition plan, continuity plan, longevity plan, whatever! No matter what you
call it, just get started. Getting started is the hardest part, and there is help available to get you started.
You will eventually secede from the farm, and the activity of planning for it will force you to talk to your
family about what they want.

Direct Questions

Does your entire family know what happens to the farm if you were to pass away tomorrow? Ask them.
If their answer doesn’t match yours, then you haven’t done a good job of this.

Do your non-farming children even want to own land? If they don’t, why burden them with it? If your
assumption is “Why wouldn’t they want land,” then talk to them…now.

Can you afford to hand down the land without needing the food bank in retirement?

From the Home Quarter

When I was a kid, the standing joke was “I can’t give my kids the farm; I’ll get charged with child abuse!”
Today, land is a hot and sensitive topic. Over a century of blood, sweat, and tears is awash in homestead
land and to trade it for a fat cheque seems an indescribable tragedy when something as simple as a
conversation with family could circumvent such heartbreak.

Succession isn’t easy. It forces us to consider a future that we may not be ready to face. But ready or
not, the future is near, so it’s best to be prepared.

Whoever said it, this rightly applies: “We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from
our children.” Sounds like they were having coffee with Bill too.

If you’d like help planning your farm for business and personal success, then call me or send an email.