Archive for April, 2010

Commodity Policy & Energy Policy and Their Affect on the Corn Market

Wednesday, April 28th, 2010

In the fall of 2006, corn was hovering around $3 per bushel and farmer’s cash flows were tight.  Up until that point, corn had been thought of as a commodity used primarily for feeding livestock. Suddenly, a shift in government policy encouraged the use of ethanol as a “home-grown, cleaner burning” alternative to petroleum. Corn was the natural input used to make ethanol as it was plentiful and easy to convert.   Shortly thereafter, corn prices rose to $6 per bushel and the feed versus fuel debate began.

Even though corn prices have dropped back into the $3 range, the discussion of the merits of corn-based ethanol continues.  Only now, the question is whether corn should be viewed in the context of agricultural policy or energy policy (or both!).  The University of Illinois recently published an article (Will Corn Prices Follow Energy Policies Or Commodity Policies) that addresses this issue.  In a nutshell, farmers and traders will need to determine if corn prices are more likely to follow the direction of the oil market, or the oil seeds (commodity) market.  The ability to understand the affect that both markets will have on corn demand, may be the difference in locking in a profit or a loss in the future.

Let’s be honest – in less than 4 years, corn-based ethanol has created both incredible prosperity (for grain farmers) and unmitigated disaster (for livestock farmers and ethanol producers) at the same time.  It has driven farmland prices and cash rents to record levels that may or may not be sustainable in the future. I believe that corn-based ethanol will continue to be a key component of our country’s energy policy well into the future.  How it is ultimately viewed (and manipulated?) by policy makers, is yet to be determined.

Making Organic Farming Profitable

Wednesday, April 21st, 2010

We have discussed organic farming before, in both our Market Updates section as well as our Land Facts newsletter, and we have some great positive feedback from landowners who are currently implementing organic practices into their operation, or are exploring the possibilities.  We have also had the opportunity to work with a few organic landowners and land buyers over the last few years.  It seems as if this at one-time perceived fad has turned into a viable alternative niche market to conventional farming practices.

A recent article posted on the University of Illinois Farm Gate website (Organic Crops May Pay, But Your Timing Must Be Perfect) studies some research performed on the profitability of organic farming.  Is organic farming really more profitable than traditional farming?  What about when factoring in the years needed to become certified?  How do the premiums gained in selling organic produce offset a loss in yields?  The study, done by Purdue University economists, attempts to answer questions such as these.

What the study found is that because of lower input costs and the higher premiums, organic crops generate higher net returns than conventional ones.  However, the author cautions to do your homework before jumping into the organic market.  Keep in mind that the higher premiums associated with organic crops don’t become realized until the farm is considered certified, which is a 3-year process.  Also, you will need to take make sure there is somewhere close where you can market your newly harvested organic produce.

Are any of you practicing organic farming?  What pitfalls did you experience before becoming fully certified?  Have you found the premiums to be as much as described in the article?  Let us know your thoughts!

A Land Market Lesson

Tuesday, April 13th, 2010

Many would argue that farmland in today’s market is relatively expensive.  I’m sure you’ve read or heard about various sales that have surprised you by the strength in their sale price.  On a recent message board, there was much discussion about how how “crazy” it is to see $8000/acre land prices in places. 

But $8000/acre farmland pales in comparison to what has occurred in the marketplace in the collar counties around Chicago.  A recent article, As the housing boom dies out, land prices drop, by Cindy Wojdyla Cain in the Plainfield Sun, describes the current state of affairs for the land market in and around the village of Plainfield, Illinois, one of the southwest suburbs of Chicagoland – and previously one of the fastest growing areas in the United States.  To sum up the article, let me just say that land values can go down – a lot. 

The impact of the severe drop in land values in that area is far reaching.  Many developers have gone bankrupt – jobs gone.  Many banks that financed the planned developments are becoming owners of property they really never wanted – and are struggling to find new buyers.  The local municipalities are also hurting financially, as they’d become accustomed to the generous revenue streams that the previous go-go days of development had provided.  And I haven’t even mentioned the impact on the local homeowners of that area, who have seen property values suffer in the well-publicized economic downturn.  Some would say that those who are suffering deserve it.  In an ironic twist, the article also discusses some of those who are benefitting from the mess, including many local farmers who’d previously sold their land for development, but who are now buying back tillable parcels for pennies (or dimes) on the dollar.

Personally, I believe this is an economic cycle that every economy – local, regional, national, global – will go through.  This is a “cleansing” of the marketplace, of sorts, that happens from time to time.  Is this downturn larger and more painful than most?  Without a doubt.  And I personally hate to see anyone suffer – economically or otherwise.  But this situation can teach us lessons.

  • Every market can go down – stocks, bonds, condominiums, and yes, rural farmland.  It seems like history always repeats itself, just in slightly different ways.  The turmoil around Plainfield reminds many observers of a microcosm of what happened to too many folks in the farm community during the 1970’s and 1980’s.  So use others mistakes and recognize what can happen in the rural land market.

 

  • You’ve heard this one – never bite off more than you can chew.  Leverage can be a great thing when it’s working for you – but it can provide equally painful results when it works against you.  And I’ve never heard of a foreclosure happening to someone who doesn’t borrow money.

 

  • Timing is everything.  You’ve heard about the 3 most important things in real estate – location, location, location.  But a close runner-up is to location is timing.  Some very smart and savvy people have been financially destroyed by bad timing.  Keep that in mind in your business.

 

  • Decisions have consequences.  I concede it may be somewhat hard to see the validity of this point when we consider the state of our “bailout nation”.  But when the politicians eventually get out of the way, the market will again get back to proper functioning – with the reality that all decisions have consequences.

 

The darkest situations for some often offer the best opportunities for others.  And if you’ve been damaged in some way by this economic downturn, always remember that failure is not permanent.  Just make sure you don’t miss out on the chance to learn from your mistakes, and the mistakes of others.

European Land Values Remain Strong

Wednesday, April 7th, 2010

The media, the government, and land grant universities have always done an excellent job in reporting trends in farmland values across the Midwest.  And at certain times, stories about agricultural land in South America hit the news.  What you don’t read about as often is how farmland is doing “across the pond”.  How do the Europeans view this asset class and do investors view this as a viable investment alternative?

An interesting article I read this week in Agrimoney , Farmland Prices Hit Record High in England, addresses some of these questions.  Similar to the U.S., agricultural properties there are currently at record levels (they increased 5.4% in the first quarter) and further appreciation is expected in the foreseeable future.

The reasons for this market strength are also remarkably similar to the U.S.… 1. Very few properties are available for sale (down 18% from 2009); 2.  There’s an increased demand for tangible assets; and 3. There’s a fear that infighting in the government may cause problems for their currency, thus making land a more attractive investment to outsiders.

Through our farms our physically separated by the Atlantic Ocean, it appears that farmers and land investors in the two countries may have more in common than you think.