Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

AgVisionTV.com Is Agriculture a Good Place to Invest? What do you think of this speaker's thoughts?

Click on the Play > button to watch the video.


Views: 236

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Karen Mahon on March 17, 2010 at 4:00am
Video broken up wait for every 3 words - taking forever for message delivery.
Permalink Reply by David Kopriva on March 19, 2010 at 4:18am
I just finished watching the discussion regarding the possiblity of low value crops such as grains and probably animal production as an investment strategy for investors. I didn't know whether to laugh at the short sightedness of the potential investor or cry for the future of the grain growers and animal producers. The most recent history of such an analogy has already proven not to work. We have an excellent example with the hog producers across our great nation that have millions of dollars ( per operation) in the most efficient delivery systems possible for growing hogs and the industry just went bust in the past 5 years. the same scenario goes for the corn, and soy operators who invested heavy in the grains for fuel push in the last five years. Although I believe this has the greatest potential of any for using food substance for non food consumption. The biggest loser will still be the producer simply because of the false escalation in land values. There are always winners and losers when you use food as an investment play. And that's the real problem,large corporate investors will hold out a carrot in hopes that they can create enough interest for their own agenda. The sucker is always the producer who does not do his due dilegence on the long term results of his decision to buy over priced land for a low value commodity that someone is telling him they need for their investment scheme. I think we all need to re-evaluate the original concept of commodity exchange as well as futures contracts. the person interviewed makes the claim that there will be a great demand for agricultural commodities in the near future. But based on the continueing price trend for ag commodities I believe we have enough supply to feed the world into the next century. Another issue that was not brought to the table is quality. Proven over and over again is the relationship between quality and mass production of food in general. The nations health is already an epidemic concern and yet we pump this idea in the agriculture industry that industrial food production is good and there are no side effects to spreading mass amounts of synthetic poisons on the ground and the crop before it gets packaged for your table.
It is my view that the corporate investor should stay out of the agruculture discussion when it comes to food production. We first have to fix the the current method of food production for consumers where health of thee end user is of the utmost concern.
Permalink Reply by Roadrunner on March 19, 2010 at 4:53am
I would think most farmers would benefit from outside investment and increased profitability in agriculture production.
If indeed the global demand for food increases faster than we can produce food, energy, etc then it will be difficult to keep outside investors out because it will be a good investor. In that case the value of farmers and farming will increase and it will better than producing under cost of production.
Permalink Reply by Karen Mahon on March 19, 2010 at 2:08pm
Amen!

David Kopriva said:
I just finished watching the discussion regarding the possiblity of low value crops such as grains and probably animal production as an investment strategy for investors. I didn't know whether to laugh at the short sightedness of the potential investor or cry for the future of the grain growers and animal producers. The most recent history of such an analogy has already proven not to work. We have an excellent example with the hog producers across our great nation that have millions of dollars ( per operation) in the most efficient delivery systems possible for growing hogs and the industry just went bust in the past 5 years. the same scenario goes for the corn, and soy operators who invested heavy in the grains for fuel push in the last five years. Although I believe this has the greatest potential of any for using food substance for non food consumption. The biggest loser will still be the producer simply because of the false escalation in land values. There are always winners and losers when you use food as an investment play. And that's the real problem,large corporate investors will hold out a carrot in hopes that they can create enough interest for their own agenda. The sucker is always the producer who does not do his due dilegence on the long term results of his decision to buy over priced land for a low value commodity that someone is telling him they need for their investment scheme. I think we all need to re-evaluate the original concept of commodity exchange as well as futures contracts. the person interviewed makes the claim that there will be a great demand for agricultural commodities in the near future. But based on the continueing price trend for ag commodities I believe we have enough supply to feed the world into the next century. Another issue that was not brought to the table is quality. Proven over and over again is the relationship between quality and mass production of food in general. The nations health is already an epidemic concern and yet we pump this idea in the agriculture industry that industrial food production is good and there are no side effects to spreading mass amounts of synthetic poisons on the ground and the crop before it gets packaged for your table.
It is my view that the corporate investor should stay out of the agruculture discussion when it comes to food production. We first have to fix the the current method of food production for consumers where health of thee end user is of the utmost concern.

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

Study Reveals Heavy Producer Cost to Bunge-Viterra Merger

A new study commissioned by Prairie agricultural groups concludes the planned Bunge-Viterra merger could cost farmers more than $700 million annually. Undertaken by University of Saskatchewan researchers with support from the Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan (APAS), Alberta Grains, SaskBarley, and Sask Wheat, the study found the merger is likely to cause “substantial economic harm” to grain producers. The results support the findings of the Competition Bureau’s review that the merger is likely to result in substantial anti-competitive effects and harm competition in markets for grain purchasing, an APAS news release said. The report examined the impact of the proposed merger on grain export services at the port of Vancouver, the canola crushing sector, and competition at primary elevators, and found worrisome levels of market concentration in all three scenarios. The merger would result in over 40% of Vancouver export capacity controlled by one firm, the repor

Global soybean glut could pressure canola prices

The world will be awash in soybeans in 2024-25, and that could be an anchor on canola prices, say analysts. The International Grains Council is forecasting 75.4 million tonnes of global soybean carryout, excluding China. That would be 13 per cent more than last year and 31 per cent above the previous five-year average. “In the absence of any weather events, these heavy stocks are likely to keep pressure on soybean prices,” Helen Plant, senior analyst with the United Kingdom’s Agricultural and Horticulture Development Board, said in a recent grain market report. “The extent of the impact on (canola) prices will depend on prospects for the 2024-25 (canola) crops.” Canola/rapeseed planting is expected to be down 3.1 per cent in Canada and 3.6 per cent in the European Union, two regions that accounted for 44 per cent of global production of the crop last year. Rich Nelson, chief strategist with Allendale Inc., agrees with the premise that global soybean stocks are on the rise unless

Opinion: Farm economic aspect often ignored

The term “environmental sustainability” frequently lacks definition, though it is widely used by governments, media, retailers and environmental non-governmental organizations. We use the term in our research, where we demonstrate with evidence how environmental sustainability has changed, for better or worse. However, the term has been over-used and often lacks meaning or value. The term is frequently applied to methods, processes and technologies that are used to produce food. The European Union is using its broadness and lack of definition to its advantage in the EU Farm to Fork Strategy. It advocates for significant and negative changes in food production, all in the name of improved environmental sustainability. The strategy trades economics for what the EU deems will be environmental sustainability. Often, governments, media and ENGOs fail to appreciate that without economic sustainability, there will be no environmental sustainability in food production. Farming and food pro

Local CFFO Districts Host Successful All-Candidates Night for Lambton Kent Middlesex By-Election

The Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario (CFFO) districts of Lambton, Kent, and Middlesex recently hosted a successful All-Candidates Night for the Lambton Kent Middlesex By-Election.

Introducing the next generation of farm leaders to advocacy

Canada is in the midst of a generational shift as more and more Canadians reach retirement age and younger generations are moving into leadership roles.

© 2024   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service