Charging for precision farming data?

[Bumble Bee]

As a contractor, I am increasingly getting requests for data , mainly yield maps by agronomy firms. I also have a friend who does a lot of soil sampling and he is finding the same. He, having already given his customers maps and spreading plans over the years is being asked to do all the legwork to transfer all that data over to somebody else's portal for free.
Data is obviously becoming more important in our industry and also more valuable. This is why firms such as Hutchinson's have brought out Omnia.
Should I as a contractor and my soil sampling friend be just handing this information over to them for free? There is a cost in collecting this data and also an admin element to transferring the data across.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

Bumble Bee

 

[warksfarmer]

As a contractor, I am increasingly getting requests for data , mainly yield maps by agronomy firms. I also have a friend who does a lot of soil sampling and he is finding the same. He, having already given his customers maps and spreading plans over the years is being asked to do all the legwork to transfer all that data over to somebody else's portal for free.
Data is obviously becoming more important in our industry and also more valuable. This is why firms such as Hutchinson's have brought out Omnia.
Should I as a contractor and my soil sampling friend be just handing this information over to them for free? There is a cost in collecting this data and also an admin element to transferring the data across.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

Bumble Bee

I would think if its a request from the supply industry then yes you must charge. If its a request from a customer you have spread for then its theres because theyve paid for it within your acreage charge to them for doing the job.

 

[CornishTone]

Different companies seem to handle this differently. The company I worked for previously always treated it as "the farmers" data and they could do what they want with it. This had exactly the same cost implications that you describe but, it's still their data. However, the big companies often don't see it that way and will charge you or the farmer for everything, and will usually retain ownership of the data. Even one of the soil sampling labs (no names mentioned) write in the small print now that they own your soil data. Data is big business!

 

[Against_the_grain]

This is a great question. I think you are correct in assuming that data has a value. IMO i think it needs charging for, especially if as mentioned before its for a commercial customer. They would certainly charge you if it was the other way round. More and more this data is going to be used as a tool to access additional funding and I think its only fair that you as the one doing the collecting has the right to charge for it.
If you wanted to you could price in a data transfer charge or application data surcharge which customers could choose to pay for or not. £5/Ha sounds reasonable to me for all application/harvest data etc

 

[Chae1]

As farmers/contractors we invest in new technology, but for whose benefit?

I'd definitely charge

 

[puppet]

Data is a huge benefit to corporations. If you had thousands of soil samples showing low sulphur you would have reasonable confidence of selling some. Without the data you are guessing.
Same goes for knowing how many lambs are in the country if you are needing to buy some fof your supermarket.
If I am paying for collection then it is my data. If it is to be shared then there should be a discount at least

 

[Brisel]

I'd charge. At the very least, you have your own time feeding data into their platforms.

"Information is the most valuable commodity" Gordon Gecko, Wall Street. He wasn't worried about where his next meal was coming from...

 

[Terrier]

As a contractor, I am increasingly getting requests for data , mainly yield maps by agronomy firms. I also have a friend who does a lot of soil sampling and he is finding the same. He, having already given his customers maps and spreading plans over the years is being asked to do all the legwork to transfer all that data over to somebody else's portal for free.
Data is obviously becoming more important in our industry and also more valuable. This is why firms such as Hutchinson's have brought out Omnia.
Should I as a contractor and my soil sampling friend be just handing this information over to them for free? There is a cost in collecting this data and also an admin element to transferring the data across.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

Bumble Bee

Yield maps and soil sample maps aren’t quite the same issue. If you are yield mapping someone else's fields then you have 100% of the hardware cost and no payback. Unless specified you are only being paid to harvest the crop. The only payback you can get on the extra kit required is to charge the grower, as the information has a value to them. Equally an agronomy firm will want it for free so they can add value to a service they are going to charge a grower for. So no don’t give yield map data away for nothing.
Soil sampling is a bit different. If the grower has commissioned someone to do grid sampling, then it is only fair to get the sample point coordinates back with the sample values which is the total amount of data that has been captured. However this has been recognised as part of the service and paid for as you can‘t do grid sampling without knowing where the samples came from. It’s then up to the grower then if they want to hand it over to a third party.

 

[PSQ]

OK, whose data is it?
Is the farming client already paying you to collect the data?
While I can see that there might be admin time involved, the reality is that it probably involves not much more than a 'drag and drop' of a file into a Drop Box type application.

It sounds like the real issue here is that the client has moved his precision farming work to Omnia instead of your friend, and the request for data from the new provider for the clients historic data stings like vinegar on an open wound.

 

[Bumble Bee]

OK, whose data is it?
Is the farming client already paying you to collect the data?
While I can see that there might be admin time involved, the reality is that it probably involves not much more than a 'drag and drop' of a file into a Drop Box type application.

It sounds like the real issue here is that the client has moved his precision farming work to Omnia instead of your friend, and the request for data from the new provider for the clients historic data stings like vinegar on an open wound.

My case and my friends case are separate in this instance.
He has provided a soil sampling service and provided his client with all the relevant results. He had to sort our all existing data when he took the client on originally. He is now being expected to send all his information including sampling points to a third party for free. It will involve a lot of time as it is a large farm.

My case is that I harvest, spray and spread and fair enough I have the equipment to collect all this information. But why should I then hand that data to a third party for them to then sell that back to our customer? I should either be charging the customer or the third party for the data.
After all, the equipment I use is not for free and neither is my time, even if it is just 'drag and drop'.

 

[Luke Cropwalker]

My case and my friends case are separate in this instance.
He has provided a soil sampling service and provided his client with all the relevant results. He had to sort our all existing data when he took the client on originally. He is now being expected to send all his information including sampling points to a third party for free. It will involve a lot of time as it is a large farm.

My case is that I harvest, spray and spread and fair enough I have the equipment to collect all this information. But why should I then hand that data to a third party for them to then sell that back to our customer? I should either be charging the customer or the third party for the data.
After all, the equipment I use is not for free and neither is my time, even if it is just 'drag and drop'.

Can you, and/or your friend or the farmer not cut out the 3rd party? What are they bringing to the operation that is so valuable? I haven't done it personally but I understand creating spreading maps isn't difficult.

 

[Bumble Bee]

I guess having all your information on one platform such as Omnia is easier to manage and you could probably get more out of it.

 

[Midnight plough boy]

I never really saw the true value of my own data until I started using Omnia. The benefit of storing it all on one platform which has a massive capability such being able to overlay different data sets to manipulate variable rate drilling maps, or inputting variable costs and machinery operations and using yield maps and output values to produce cost of production maps has yielded massive benefits when drawing up my SFI application. Now make me certain about which areas to put into options, and which areas to continue farming. This will definitely raise farm average yields significantly by taking out the poor performing, loss-making areas.

That said, you have had multiple requests from different clients, presumably to transfer their data to them (possibly requested by a third party technician) to be put onto a number of different digital platforms. As a contractor, if you charge a price per hectare for combining with a yield mapping enabled machine, it would be reasonable to charge the client extra to provide the maps if it isn’t specified as part of the contracting package. But it is a sticky one as it’s ultimately their data, so drilling down, probably an admin fee would be better than a yield mapping charge?

Likewise, your friend’s soil samples have been commissioned and paid for by the client. If results have been provided to them once, potentially on paper rather than digitally, then again I don’t see it as unfair to charge an admin fee to resend.

BUT: If you’re computer savvy and it’s a few mouse clicks to transfer this data, don’t over charge. People won’t take kindly to being charged through the nose for their own data. There is at least one thread on this forum at the moment where a lot of the content is basically complaints regarding the agricultural services industries making too much margin from farmers.

 

[tepapa]

If you've collected the data but weren't asked to as part of the operation/contract, and even though I appreciate that technically it's their data, there is nothing stopping you deleting that data so nobody has it. So in that respect I'd charge the customer for it, since the technology to do the yield mapping and spreading rates etc isn't free. You've had to invest in the technology to do the monitoring and it should pay a return on your investment. Another point is your time isn't free and admin costs time and therefore money it's just a case of if your expected to work for £10/hr or allowed to charge £50/hr. If you were asked to collect the data then it's up to you to set a price that covers the cost and your time on top of the primary contracted work.

Same with the soil sampling. If the agreed work is to supply results and a report and someone then asks to have this data sent in different formats then there's no reason the time shouldn't be charged for. That's how businesses work, you can have a list of options with prices and agree to which options you want to pay for.

 

[ollie989898]

If your time and capital was spent collecting the data, you will have to charge for it. Pure and simple, or else build it into your fee for the service you are providing.

If it's a one-off fee for sending the data to a third party then I can't see why you'd be expected to hand that over free of charge. What if the farmer changes his mind and wants it sending to another third party?