Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New resources
Latest activity
Trending Threads
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
FarmTV
Farm Compare
Search
Tokens/Searches
Calendar
Upcoming Events
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New Resources
New posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Opinion Harvester Survey - Red Tractor
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Grass And Grain" data-source="post: 8202329" data-attributes="member: 23184"><p>I'd have to refresh my memory and look back through the standards to check that. Think the markets must be RT assured, no choice of a different assurance scheme.</p><p></p><p>RT are dominant in the marketplace of assurance. They have retailers and processors invited to be on their boards, then the retailers specify RT, then the farmers and processors and livestock markets must be RT to supply.</p><p></p><p>There's certainly not a lot of free competition in the assurance sector. Is inviting processors and retailers onto your board perfectly acceptable, or does it create an anticompetitive system by which all processors and farmers must pay up to RT? Doesn't sit well in my mind.</p><p></p><p>Edit. Then Mr Supermarket doesn't say "you've to be assured by one of several assurance schemes". They say you've to be RT.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Grass And Grain, post: 8202329, member: 23184"] I'd have to refresh my memory and look back through the standards to check that. Think the markets must be RT assured, no choice of a different assurance scheme. RT are dominant in the marketplace of assurance. They have retailers and processors invited to be on their boards, then the retailers specify RT, then the farmers and processors and livestock markets must be RT to supply. There's certainly not a lot of free competition in the assurance sector. Is inviting processors and retailers onto your board perfectly acceptable, or does it create an anticompetitive system by which all processors and farmers must pay up to RT? Doesn't sit well in my mind. Edit. Then Mr Supermarket doesn't say "you've to be assured by one of several assurance schemes". They say you've to be RT. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Farm Business
Agricultural Matters
Opinion Harvester Survey - Red Tractor
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top