#soyb

[bonguri]

20201101 Kakukyu 3 by Bong Grit この北蔵が一番古い蔵なんだとか。 @Kakukyu, Okazaki city, Aichi pref. （愛知県岡崎市 カクキュー） https://ift.tt/394qBam

[lizthefangirl]

me: [listens to castle on the hill]

me: [suddenly ginger, weeping] i miss my friends

[datoulaoshi]

WEAT 小麥新股來不及注冊，好機會檢便宜貨！

WEAT來不及注冊新股，證交所要WEAT批好（很快）才能賣新股。目前只能買賣舊股。沒事，我們撿便宜： 各位一老師一直介紹的「黃小玉」小姐，有跌都可以買一些:買遠一點…「黃豆SOYB小麥WEAT，及玉米CORN！如有賺也可以先平倉袋袋平安先！明天又是新的一天！大家要預設止損點.並控制風險！

View On WordPress

[ohitsjustsimon]

Soyb - Agdal

[cushydiet-blog]

China retaliates for U.S. tariffs, slaps duties on soyb... - https://wp.me/p8XyML-nqz - #China, #Duties, #Retaliates, #Slaps, #Soyb, #Tariffs

[cpirrong]

Cargill: Still Private After All These Years to Solve Agency Problems, or Because of Them?

The commodity trading sector is remarkable for the prevalence of private ownership, even among the largest firms. My recent white paper discusses this issue in some detail. In a nutshell, publicly-held equity is a risk sharing mechanism. The ability of commodity traders to share some of their largest risks-notably, commodity flat price risks-through the derivatives markets reduces the need to rely on public equity. Moreover, private ownership can mitigate agency problems between equity owners and managers: the equity owners are often the managers. As a consequence, private ownership is more viable in the commodity trading sector.

The biggest cost of this ownership structure is that it constrains the ability to fund large investments in fixed assets. Thus, private ownership can impede a firm’s ability to pursue asset heavy strategies. As I note in this white paper, and my earlier one, commodity firms have used various means to loosen this constraint, including perpetual debt, and spinoffs of equity from asset-heavy subsidiaries.

Another cost is that owners tend to be poorly diversified. But to the extent that the benefits of high powered incentives exceed this cost, private ownership remains viable.

Cargill is the oldest, and one of the largest, of the major privately held commodity traders. (Whether it is biggest depends on whether you want to consider Koch a commodity trader.) It is now commemorating its 150th anniversary: its history began as the American Civil War ended. Greg Meyer and Neil Hume have a nice piece in the FT that discusses some of Cargill’s challenges. Foremost among these is funding its ambitious plans in Indonesia and Brazil.

The article also details the tensions between Cargill management, and the members of the Cargill and McMillan families who still own 90 percent of the firm.

The last family member to serve as chief executive retired in 1995, and now only one family member works full time there. This raises questions about how long the company will remain private, despite management’s stated determination to keep it that way. The families are already chafing due to their inability to diversify. Further, at Cargill private ownership no longer serves to align the incentives of owners and managers, in contrast to firms like Trafigura, Vitol, and Gunvor: even though Cargill is private, the owners aren’t the managers. Thus, the negatives of private ownership are becoming more prominent, and the benefits are diminishing. There is separation of ownership and control, with its associated incentive problems, but there is no compensating benefit of diversification.

Indeed, it is arguable that the company remains private because of agency problems. Current management, which does not own a large fraction of the firm, is not incentivized to de-privatize: there would be no big payday for them from going public, because they own little equity. Moreover, as long as the families can be kept happy, management doesn’t have to worry about capital market discipline or nosy analysts. Thus, management may be well entrenched in the current private structure, and the number of family owners (about 100) could make it difficult to form a coalition that would force the company to go public, or to craft a package that would make it worth management’s while to pursue that option.

In sum, Cargill is a marvelous company, and has been amazingly successful over the years. Its longevity as a private company is remarkable. But there are grounds to wonder whether that structure is still efficient, or whether it persists because it benefits management.

Print Friendly - See more at: http://streetwiseprofessor.com/#sthash.YkzyzpMw.dpuf