there was a thread here last year I think on someone who invested in cattle and shared the profit/loss with someone else who looked after them. cant for the life of me find the thread. any clues what to search for?
thanks
thanks
there was a thread here last year I think on someone who invested in cattle and shared the profit/loss with someone else who looked after them. cant for the life of me find the thread. any clues what to search for?
thanks
The passport legally has to be with the keeper, the owner can't retain it.Some auction marts might still do this but most are now too wary of exposing themselves to risk.
But I suppose the more street-wise marts would retain the passports if they did not have complete confidence in their customer. And they would also have control of how the cattle were eventually marketed to their best advantage.
Can't see where there's enough profit for two people hard enough for one to profitthere was a thread here last year I think on someone who invested in cattle and shared the profit/loss with someone else who looked after them. cant for the life of me find the thread. any clues what to search for?
thanks
Two (or more) people take a living on any farm that employs labour. More than one take a share on any farm using borrowed money to buy livestock or feed. Two take a share on any rented farm. On a large tenanted farm with employed labour and an overdraft four parties are taking a cut of profit. Why is a share farming model any different?Can't see where there's enough profit for two people hard enough for one to profit
Yep agree with that there's usually a few around the the table I just don't think the margins are there for to many to be involvedTwo (or more) people take a living on any farm that employs labour. More than one take a share on any farm using borrowed money to buy livestock or feed. Two take a share on any rented farm. On a large tenanted farm with employed labour and an overdraft four parties are taking a cut of profit. Why is a share farming model any different?
Agreed, my only point is if the livestock owner is just replacing the bank or landlord at the table, it is a different rather than extra mouth. The difference is that whilst they may take a larger chunk of profit, they will also share any loss. The bank or landlord are less likely to do this. Same if the keeper is replacing employed labour.Yep agree with that there's usually a few around the the table I just don't think the margins are there for to many to be involved
there was a thread here last year I think on someone who invested in cattle and shared the profit/loss with someone else who looked after them. cant for the life of me find the thread. any clues what to search for?
thanks
That's a nice way to go about it, and not a bad return for them.Reasonably similar to what we do here as well, but our partner is the main stock firm.
They provide finance and the stock, and help with sales - we farm the animals as best we can.
It is much easier than wooing a bank for a term loan based on a bunch of unknown variables, and they make roughly 8.8%pa on purchase cost as a "duration adjustment", this and the purchase price is subtracted from what the stock sell for.
We keep the margin, they own the stock.
Nice one @Highland Mule. I tried to find that thread when the OP started this one, but with no success
I know this is totally off topic but did you use the search facility on here? I've never had much joy with it, either the forum specific bit or the wider Google option.
That's a nice way to go about it, and not a bad return for them.
We have a route for crowd funding, they buy a bond that will cover the cost of the calf and everything inbetween, up till the age of 13mo.
When the animal is sold we pay them out at 8.5% aer, we take the rest of the margin and use it to gradually buy our own stock. They love it and so do we, can't give them enough stock.
It helps to guarantee a return on it as well.
Curious regarding the interest you pay out - it seems high for you to be borrowing money vs. the banking system. Does the lender hold some of the risk of stock death?
It is in reality so incredibly low cost.
We are never burdened with debt, as there are no repayments to make in the meantime, we only pay after we have sold the animal and made our money. You don't get that at the bank.
Borrowing nearly £850k over 1 year is very expensive in terms of monthly repayments, and it wouldn't work at even at 4% apr (£73k per month). We would effectively be able to borrow that same amount for about £70k per year all said and done. So it is an awful lot cheaper for us.
It is about as close to a risk-free investment as you can make, for us and them, as we guarantee the return by factoring in the cost of mortality into the rearing cost.