Poll

[cottonpicken]

And the conservatives GIVE billions to the auto industry but were all going to vote for them again eh?

But a company the government owns but wont back is sound policy to?

I feel cixelsid.

[cottonpicken]

I agree with CP on this one.

We all do what these farmers did.

How many on here cut a cheque at year end to a retailer that you have no inventory for??

How many have put money down at a local dealer to hold equipment for you without having the equipment??

And someone please correct me if I'm wrong. But is this any different than Spudco?

[Hopperbin]

Big sky is a publicly traded corporation.
Correct me if I am wrong but the gov't only has shares in the corporation and not a liability to cover debt because they own likely common shares which are not supposed to carry with them liabilities in case of bankruptsy. I guess this should be a wake up call to all feed grain sellers selling to cattle feed lots also, time to start asking for money up front as hard as it is to do, otherwise beware the risk.

[skhadenuf]

As much as I feel for the guys getting screwed here, there can't be a payment made otherwise every other person screwed by any other company should get paid. Pretty much close to fraud as can get since obviously company knew they would not be able to pay yet kept taking grain, but that can be said by other grain companies that have done the same in the past to others.
What bugs me also is that the NDP preached how these things were so competitive in the world market, demand was limitless and they gave grants to these individuals to expand, from what I have heard basically made the original owner overnight millionaires with taxpayer money and now that millionaire has all their grant money secured in the bankruptcy while the farmer is screwed. The premise for this whole situation is flawed to begin with, when these barns were expanding we were told they'll eat up all this grain causing a rise in feed grain price, and that is a reasonable assumption but when the grain price goes up that makes these things not competitive on the world stage with other countries warmer climate, lower labor costs near to market etc etc. So how this ties into Cais is this, changes were made to Cais originally that gave these barns millions while most farmers got nothing then as their averages started to reflect what was happenning to farmers that lost their crops in multiple years cais wasn't even working for them just like cattlemen and thousands of farm families that had multiple years of crop loss. As a result here we are. (although I don't believe these units ever should have been allowed in Cais)
Those that are bullshitting that cais is good yeah it might be if you have 5 good years in a row and then have a loss but I suggest if you had only one loss in 5 years you shouldn't be needing any money from anyone if you can manage the program so well to get money you sure as hell ought to manage 1 year of loss on your farm without help. Yet those that have multiple losses get Fu%% all. Complete bullshit and something yippidy dippidy ditz claimed in opposition should be fixed.

[mbratrud]

CP if you owned shares in Nortel before they went broke. Would you want creditors to come to you personally to collect unpaid accounts simply because you owned shares in the company? The Sask gov't simply owned shares in Big Sky.

Just like any investment there are risks, not sure what the govt exposure is today they may have sold alot of their shares over the years who knows.

I feel for anyone that has been affected but its no different than producers stung by Neigbors, Cancom, Borch Farms, and many other companies that have gone broke in the past. Just because the governement is an investor shouldn't make this one any different.

Do your homework folks before you sell, make sure you get unload information in a timely manor and then makesure you are monitoring your payments. Give questionable companies a credit limit ie. $20000 would be roughly 3 loads of Barley. Never have more than that outstanding at a time. If a company cannot live with terms like that they are to risky to deal with. Depending on what your selling you may have to allow more credit to cover a few more loads but thats when its even more important to do your homework.

[cottonpicken]

If your a government who owns seventy percent of something and then turn around and abandon the people who you where trying to support in the first place-is very goofy to me.Think of how underhanded this was to keep taking farmer shipments while behind the scenes some people new the ship was going down.

This is same lack of morality that has infected global corprate structure.

And now everyone wants to be apart that EVIL?Because they didnt do their homework-so screw em i'll take their money?

We are talking 70% GOVERNMENT ownership.Not private.

No they shouldnt have been involved in the first place but they/we are.

[skhadenuf]

I understand your point and will sound wishy washy because I really hope that those farmers would get their money it's a hell of a screw job in underhanded fashion as far as I am concerned BUT this is a business transaction just like any other business that goes broke and doesn't pay their bills they know their going broke long before it happens and yet still go on putting others in jeapardy. It doesn't matter that it is government or not the same rules should apply. What I think should happen is that some of those rules should be changed for example the guys sitting with the government grants that started the company and have their grant money as the first secured creditors that should not be the case. The idea of these barns was to help the farming community therefore the farmers delivering the grain should be the first line of secured creditors, those barns are full of hogs surely those hogs would cover the cost of the grain, those sitting behind a desk owning this thing should run the risk of loosing their government grant not the farmer. Interesting that those running the barns first comments were if we declare bankruptcy that will put us on firmer ground well yah hoo of course don't pay the farmer what you owe then you're on firmer ground? No matter how this turns out I wouldn't deal with those bastards if there was no where else to sell my grain, far as I am concerned shut them all down.
How is this going to go down in re gards to cais, guys grew the grain but are only going to get pennies for the dollar if that, so how does cais value this grain? maybe if you have had no crop losses higher margin, you can now qualify for a cais payment because if you sold alot for pennies? Yet the guys who had multiple crop loss no marging would get nothing from cais even if you got only pennies from your grain? Sound fair???? Maybe we'll all pay for this anyway through cais to some at least.

[parsley]

Farmers need to have read government's "large view"..their goal.. in order to understand what is the result from it.

Federal Liberals wanted to cut back smal pissy farmers, partnership with the large farmers to guarantee their success, and support large operations, hence go the federal payments.

Little farmers, like small business create a lot of wealth and ask little in return.

Central planning in agriculture, results in Big Sky manager types, full of themselves, not caring about rural communities, and skimming director profits before they declare bankruptcy, with governments too embarrassed to regulate.

I don't mind "big".

But I despise "big" established because of and sustained by government tax-welfare.

[fjlip]

"Everyone needs to do their homework before they deal with someone." But your home work could have been the day before the lawyers started the proceedings. It's all risk. We have prepaid and always asked for a bank reference. That is still as of the day you call, some risk.
So are there any other buyers or suppliers we should be wary of? How safe are COOPs? Let's help each other. There could be a website to share rumors or experiences with businesses. Is the BBB an option? How current or detailed is their rating?

[fjlip]

If any government makes any special rules or tax laws to benefit "big", are they not screwing with business and the market? There would be a natural size limit if not for favoring all corporations such as Big Sky Pork. It never should have been allowed to change name to "farm".