PGW’s loss SFF’s gain – again

PGG Wrightson’s misguided attempt to buy into Silver Fern Farms last year cost the rural servicing firm $40 million last year.

Another unfortunate deal with the meat company has cost PGW $9.6 million and made a major contribution to its $30.7m loss for the year to June.

In 2009, the company entered into a 10-year supply contract for livestock to Silver Fern Farms. To the extent that the company was unable to meet the annual agreed level of supply, in certain circumstances it was required to make a payment to SFF related to the shortfall.

Due to the level of supply and current livestock market trends, a provision of about $9.6 million had been made, representing the best estimate of PGGW’s expected liability for shortfall payments over the remaining contract term.

Stock agent’s are supposed to get the best deal for their clients. They can’t do that if the company they work for has tied itself to one meat company.

The huge loss of lambs after the snow storm last year combined with increased demand and much higher prices would have made it a difficult season for PGW anyway and the deal with SFF compounded its problems.

PGW’s loss has been SFF”s gain again.

SFF was on its knees before Craig Norgate led PGW’s merger bid. The penalty payments when that deal collapsed helped the meat company back into the black last year.

We’ll have to wait for SFF”s results to discover the importance of the amount PGW contributed to its bottom line this year.

3 Responses to PGW’s loss SFF’s gain – again

  1. gravedodger says:

    So many Eagles have gathered a bit of the farming carcas but found it Toxic with no nutrition when they ignored the salient fact that a farmers loyalty is on the other side of a hand shake.
    The pure business model is stranded on rocks when the tide goes out.

    Like

  2. Richard says:

    Perhaps they have now employed a Risk Manager

    Like

  3. Brent says:

    The requirement to make a provision against potential payments to SFF is lamentable, and primarily a function of the changed supply scenario since the agreement was entered into. However, the first obligation of PGG Wrightson’s stock agents is always to our farmer clients for whom we are acting as agent. The interests and financial returns of our clients take precedence. We operate on a transparent basis with our clients and our job is to get them the best deal we can; so ultimately the client makes the final decision as to which processor or programme to supply into. We do not, therefore, have any intention to force Livestock Reps to direct stock to SFF.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: