Tirlán (glanbia)

Smarter people than me saw this coming the last few years. Their theory was all the rebates and schemes related to buying inputs was to inflate the value of the PLC for the buyout.
Farmers paying more to glanbia for inputs with the attitude of ah shur I'll get it back in rebate instead of searching for competitor prices and forcing glanbia to be competitive.

The group in the article seem to have a reasonable point. If they didn't have the 3.2% margin set in stone they wouldn't be as valuable.

Also GI will have serious investment to make in processing
 
That values Glanbia Ireland at €767 million by my maths.

Seems strong for such a low margin business. Is there some value add sections included or is it purely the dairy/grain and trading sections?
 
as jim gogarty was told by ray burke, "will they f*ck" , whats the big panic about pushing this through ? i,m not voting for it unless there,s a public meeting and i don,t care how long i have to wait for it

Id agree with you . Why break the habits of a lifetime ? Buy low Sell high .
Anything that they are really pushing hard to get over the line , you can be sure that its in their favour .

Milk haulage seems to be a festering sore . Unrest among the hauliers . Just not worth the bother for what Glanbia are paying . If there was money in milk haulage , Glanbia would own the trucks themselves .Though id say its not different with any of the milk processers .
 
Word on the street is it will be pushed through by the yes men and those who owe stupid amounts on their trading accounts
 
Word on the street is it will be pushed through by the yes men and those who owe stupid amounts on their trading accounts
It'll be the dry shareholder votes that will get it over the line as the excessive 40% purchase price and negative implications of a reduced co-op shareholding in the plc will have little impact on their business. They will vote for the spin-out.
 
It'll be the dry shareholder votes that will get it over the line as the excessive 40% purchase price and negative implications of a reduced co-op shareholding in the plc will have little impact on their business. They will vote for the spin-out.
Shareholders who exit milk should be bought out of their shares. They don’t do the lads supplying any favours. Most young lads milking now have very few shares, where as a lad down the road that packed up milking years ago is calling the shots. Probably a controversial post for some here but I believe the lads milking cows should have the final say.
 
Dry shareholders in lakeland dont get a vote.when shares are being past on to the next generation it can only be sold to a milk producer or back into the co op from my understanding of it anyways
 
Shareholders who exit milk should be bought out of their shares. They don’t do the lads supplying any favours. Most young lads milking now have very few shares, where as a lad down the road that packed up milking years ago is calling the shots. Probably a controversial post for some here but I believe the lads milking cows should have the final say.
If it's not in the rules, it can't be done, unfortunately.

But there's nothing stopping shareholders campaigning to vote it in.
 
Shareholders who exit milk should be bought out of their shares. They don’t do the lads supplying any favours. Most young lads milking now have very few shares, where as a lad down the road that packed up milking years ago is calling the shots. Probably a controversial post for some here but I believe the lads milking cows should have the final say.
Grain growing shareholders actively supplying grain to Glanbia are ok too IMO but I'd agree, only members with skin in the game should be entitled to dictate the direction of the co-op
 
That's how a supplier co-operative society should work. they are not supposed to be investment vehicles to benefit the investor, they are supposed to be investment vehicles to benefit the supplier. That's literally the whole point of a co-op

People who complain about sharing up seem to forget that the people who started these co-ops invested a far higher proportion of their income and savings than they are asked to do.
 
That's how a supplier co-operative society should work. they are not supposed to be investment vehicles to benefit the investor, they are supposed to be investment vehicles to benefit the supplier. That's literally the whole point of a co-op

People who complain about sharing up seem to forget that the people who started these co-ops invested a far higher proportion of their income and savings than they are asked to do.
The founding idea behind the co-op structure is precisely that. You'd have to wonder how well and for whom these hybrid models really work. Imho the plc has been inching towards a separation for as long as I can remember. Business gets very raw when you have to answer to shareholders on the quarter.
 
That's how a supplier co-operative society should work. they are not supposed to be investment vehicles to benefit the investor, they are supposed to be investment vehicles to benefit the supplier. That's literally the whole point of a co-op

People who complain about sharing up seem to forget that the people who started these co-ops invested a far higher proportion of their income and savings than they are asked to do.
We'll yes, but it's not simple. I'm a Lakeland supplier and shareholder. I attend the meetings and the dry shareholder votes was trashed out for years. As @Bencroy says the rules were changed and the dry shareholder really has no say in the running of the co-op. The dry shareholder came about mainly because of a huge exit of small scale dairy farmers in the 70's and 80's
All of these would have contributed towards the formation of the co-op at the start, so just because the stop supplying milk is it fair that the have no say in how the co-op is run.
Obviously no grain element to the business up this country.
 
We'll yes, but it's not simple. I'm a Lakeland supplier and shareholder. I attend the meetings and the dry shareholder votes was trashed out for years. As @Bencroy says the rules were changed and the dry shareholder really has no say in the running of the co-op. The dry shareholder came about mainly because of a huge exit of small scale dairy farmers in the 70's and 80's
All of these would have contributed towards the formation of the co-op at the start, so just because the stop supplying milk is it fair that the have no say in how the co-op is run.
Obviously no grain element to the business up this country.

If it's a straight buy/process/sell co op then yes I think you should have no say. I think you should be rewarded for what your investment and the profits off your product built in a share buy back.

If those profits were re-invested into non core activities then there should be some proportionality in that you should have a reduction in shareholding/voting rights. I don't know lakeland's business that well but for example in west cork a number of the co-ops unrelated food processing companies, property investments etc.

The issue as I see it in Glanbia is they went massive into non core activities which has made those that were involved at the time a lot of money in their PLC shares. Many of those no longer supply the co-op so it is fully in their interest to vote for a spin-out at pretty much any cost as it releases equity to them but the suppliers are left with a business that may not be optimally valued that has to operate off the margin between the price their milk is sold to it and the price it can sell it's products for.

the problem is that a lot of these businesses were not structured as subsidiaries as they evolved. A Bandon shareholder should have shareholdings in the dairy co-op, the trading co-op, the cheese processor co-op, the property development co-op.
 
Shareholders who exit milk should be bought out of their shares. They don’t do the lads supplying any favours. Most young lads milking now have very few shares, where as a lad down the road that packed up milking years ago is calling the shots. Probably a controversial post for some here but I believe the lads milking cows should have the final say.
and the lads milking the cows should insist on a 13th payment every year to match those at the top of the milk league, they could find 3.5 % of profits every year why can,t they guarantee matching the west cork gangsters
 
Doesn't impact me but looking on at this as a neutral it amuses me that all the talk is about milk price and nothing about the grain growers despite Glanbia being one of the biggest entities in Ireland. It would not give much confidence.

I still think the valuation is too high and hope the coop wont be writing down a huge amount as goodwill in years to come.

Also do not understand why most of the motions are lumped in together. No need for it at all in particular funding. So little commentary from the Board on alternative funding makes me thing the simple option only was chosen
 
Back
Top