Allied Mills screwing farmers over with dodgy claims?

[crazy_bull]

ADM wouldn't sign up

From what I understood ADM weren’t against it, I have asked the powers that be and they are surprised by this statement.
The NFU wouldn’t sign as they wanted all end users to sign up from day 1, which was not feasible due to many not equipped to do so.

ADM Agriculture are definitely behind the project.


discussions continue and hopefully it will come off.

 

[Hedger]

From what I understood ADM weren’t against it, I have asked the powers that be and they are surprised by this statement.
The NFU wouldn’t sign as they wanted all end users to sign up from day 1, which was not feasible due to many not equipped to do so.

ADM Agriculture are definitely behind the project.


discussions continue and hopefully it will come off.

To clarify this was ADM milling

 

[Steevo]

To clarify this was ADM milling

There are two ADMs?

 

[Hedger]

There are two ADMs?

The two companies operate independently

 

[Steevo]

The two companies operate independently

Which two please?

I assume from your post one is ADM Milling and the other...?

 

[Pieces_of_Eight]

Which two please?

I assume from your post one is ADM Milling and the other...?

He means ADM Milling and ADM Agriculture.

A bit like Frontier Ag and Cargill crush.

 

[Widgetone]

Which two please?

I assume from your post one is ADM Milling and the other...?

Formerly ADM direct and Gleadell = ADM ag

Probably at arms length from each other, bit like Dalgety and Spillers Milling in the old days

 

[An Gof]

From what I understood ADM weren’t against it, I have asked the powers that be and they are surprised by this statement.
The NFU wouldn’t sign as they wanted all end users to sign up from day 1, which was not feasible due to many not equipped to do so.

ADM Agriculture are definitely behind the project.


discussions continue and hopefully it will come off.

If they didn’t sign up from day 1 it was never going to happen.
Truth was they wanted their cake and to eat it.

 

[JCfarmer]

From what I understood ADM weren’t against it

So they weren't for it either!?
Sounds like they should be made to be the dodgy adm bast....s! Do the Russians have some ownership?
Its a complete farce the way this mill operates, has it been mentioned about trading standards or a like getting involved???

 

[teslacoils]

So they weren't for it either!?
Sounds like they should be made to be the dodgy adm bast....s! Do the Russians have some ownership?
Its a complete farce the way this mill operates, has it been mentioned about trading standards or a like getting involved???

Crumbs.

 

[Farmer Barleymow]

I don’t really understand open field. Aren’t you only a member whilst you have grain in one of their pools? It’s not like Camgrain or woldgrain where you actually have skin in the game as you are a share holder?
Openfield accounts have shown losses for a while now but directors bonuses massive, all weird and bad for the reputation of Co ops.

Please check your facts about Openfield accounts, before posting on here, especially if you "don't really understand" them. The fact is, Openfield Group has reported a profit for the last few years. This information is available to everyone on the mutuals register on the Financial Conduct Authorities' website. This is where co-ops report their finances not Companies House. The loss you've probably seen will be half the story and is offset by the wider Group's overall profitability and it's the Group which is owned by the farmer members, not a subsection of it. If you don't understand Openfield, maybe give them a call and find out more before posting on here. Co-ops are on the side of farmers, owned by farmers as it's posts like this that are bad for the reputation of co-ops. Their next results will be out in January, last results were in Farmer Weekly - https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/mark...s/profits-up-at-openfield-but-down-at-grainco

 

[Steevo]

He means ADM Milling and ADM Agriculture.

A bit like Frontier Ag and Cargill crush.

Thank you. I wasn't aware of this so am pleased to learn.

 

[JCfarmer]

Crumbs.

I had been to the pub when I wrote that but I am still very annoyed about the way ADM seem to conduct themselves at times!
Could be owned by Trump come to think of it!?

 

[teslacoils]

I thought that, given the time of the post, there could have been a couple of pints and some simmered resentment in the mix.

 

[ajd132]

Please check your facts about Openfield accounts, before posting on here, especially if you "don't really understand" them. The fact is, Openfield Group has reported a profit for the last few years. This information is available to everyone on the mutuals register on the Financial Conduct Authorities' website. This is where co-ops report their finances not Companies House. The loss you've probably seen will be half the story and is offset by the wider Group's overall profitability and it's the Group which is owned by the farmer members, not a subsection of it. If you don't understand Openfield, maybe give them a call and find out more before posting on here. Co-ops are on the side of farmers, owned by farmers as it's posts like this that are bad for the reputation of co-ops. Their next results will be out in January, last results were in Farmer Weekly - https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/mark...s/profits-up-at-openfield-but-down-at-grainco

Good that they are improving their financial position then. I am a big fan of co-ops and it’s a shame poorly run ones have tarnished the model in the past?
do you buy into Openfield then when you become a member?

 

[JCfarmer]

I had been to the pub when I wrote that but I am still very annoyed about the way ADM seem to conduct themselves at times!
Could be owned by Trump come to think of it!?

I should read posts properly, I was still thinking we were on about Allied!
Apologies ADM but sign up.

 

[MattR]

Sorry to drag up this thread again, but I have a question -

Grain contracts specify certain specs such as moisture, bushelweight, admix etc etc. What they don't (or at least in my experience, mainly selling for feed) state is whether a specification breach is a deduction issue or a rejection issue. Take moisture for instance - any load reported as being just a fraction over 15 would often have a claim for a few pence/ton. It isn't stated where this becomes a rejection issue - 16%? 17%? 17.5%? Same goes for specific weight etc.

I would be pretty annoyed to have a load rejected, particularly after a long haul, for something being very marginally under-spec, but presumably the mill would be within their rights to reject rather than claim a deduction if it suited them at the time?

Do any merchants/mills publish guides of spec breach outcomes, such as (in the case of moisture say, but applicable to sp. wt. etc as well) "xx pence per 0.1% over 15%, over xx% results in rejection" so everyone knows where they stand? (Maybe they do - as i say most of what I sell is for feed so thankfully rarely have these issues).

 

[Brisel]

What does your contract say? It will refer to the AIC contract terms for that commodity. The full Ts and Cs will be available from whoever your contract is with.

That may differ from what the merchant has with the mill. If you had sold milling wheat on a 10.7 protein 74 kg/hl deal you’d have to get after the merchant if you got a claim for 75 kg/hl. I’ve had this, and quickly had a refund when the merchant sent it in on a higher spec contract. Their gain as that’s the deal we had but I wasn’t going to take a hit for delivering what was over spec on our terms.

 

[Lincsman]

Sorry to drag up this thread again, but I have a question -

Grain contracts specify certain specs such as moisture, bushelweight, admix etc etc. What they don't (or at least in my experience, mainly selling for feed) state is whether a specification breach is a deduction issue or a rejection issue. Take moisture for instance - any load reported as being just a fraction over 15 would often have a claim for a few pence/ton. It isn't stated where this becomes a rejection issue - 16%? 17%? 17.5%? Same goes for specific weight etc.

I would be pretty annoyed to have a load rejected, particularly after a long haul, for something being very marginally under-spec, but presumably the mill would be within their rights to reject rather than claim a deduction if it suited them at the time?

Do any merchants/mills publish guides of spec breach outcomes, such as (in the case of moisture say, but applicable to sp. wt. etc as well) "xx pence per 0.1% over 15%, over xx% results in rejection" so everyone knows where they stand? (Maybe they do - as i say most of what I sell is for feed so thankfully rarely have these issues).

Depends on the day, say 5 lorries had tipped at 14% then 1 at 16% wouldnt be an issue, but it would be if the 5 had tipped at 15%... also if 4 lorries are rejected it gets to a point they will take anything to keep the mill running.

Its more practicality's than rules at times... more so when loading boats

 

[teslacoils]

I think over time you get to know what the likely claims are; what the knock-off or tollerences will be and choose location accordingly.