|R&D News & Views 11 April 2017
Integration of crop physiology and genetics to close the yield gap in wheat
under climate change
Dr Amarjit Basra, Principle Scientist, Pathways
Importantly, many of them are also keen to foster better collaborations with companies like Plant Impact, recognizing that genetics and breeding alone is only a part of the integrated solution.
Full article -
|Mthead...PI highlighted that the Monsanto/Bayer merger may cause some loss of focus at Bayer, but "reading between the lines" I think that the overall strategy and strong relationship are still firmly in place, and in my opinion only, the opportunities that will emerge once the mergers have all cleared are potentially much larger!
You are entitled to your opinion of course, but clearly and generally speaking we are singing from different hymn sheets, so let's agree to disagree and see who ends up being nearer to things being correct.|
The company is now far too reliant on one partner, on one crop, in one country.
They are spending millions on R&D and have little or nothing to show for it.
In order to support sales they have had to employ an army of expensive agronomists and appear to be presenting the cost of this as R&D spend when to my mind it is simply an additional cost of sales.
They have abandoned their markets in Europe.
There is no real indication of current sales.
It is likely that Bayer is holding large inventories.
They have done nothing with the BugOil product.
They cannot defend their patents.
And despite what you might say to the contrary, there is a clear danger that the Bayer/Monsanto merger could have a serious impact on PIM.|
I have divested enough to have removed most of the risk to my investment here. I continue to hold as I have always believed there is a good chance of PIM being taken up by one of the ag.chem's. At what price is anybody's guess but in my view, there will be further dilution before that can take place.|
|Mthead...Yes I had read that 9th March article, plus a lot more, but you appear to have got your wires crossed! In short, Monsanto are strong on seeds and genetics, but weak on chemistry, hence they bid (unsuccessfully) for Syngenta. Bayer are strong on chemistry and weak on seeds/genetics.
You also appear to be behind the curve, unless you are just being mischievous. To confirm my point above, Monsanto's crop protection offering -
However, you will note that the Latitude link puts you straight into the Roundup page, in other words, they have/are selling it off -
Mitsui to Acquire Latitude® Wheat Fungicide Business from Monsanto
Jan. 6, 2017
|here and there got this right
If one takes notice of charts, and I do, then the 2 year chart in this header is not a pretty sight
Lower highs and lower lows are ruling it
For me the questions are
1. To what extent is this a play based upon the price of Soya beans ?
2. How exposed is this company to Argentina ?
3. How exposed is this company to Brazil ?
here and there
15 Mar '17 - 18:16 - 1019 of 1051 0 0
trading nicely higher, if it breaks 56p then a new uptrend may be in progress, otherwise it will dribble back down to the forties and continue the long down trend.|
|Pug, agreed, not sure why James E dropped off being part of Griffiths team.|
|Shroder:> There was a big restructure of PHC management in 2016 when I think you will find that as a result of the need for further funding the major shareholders forced through big changes -
Agreed the original marketing strategy was diabolic - what I am not sure of is the stength of the new team and more importantly the cost/benefit of the current ranges of products under development.|
In general, the US market post Trump is now undergoing a reversal of regulatory restrictions favouring big lobby groups/companies.
PHC has been a basket case management wise for sometime, the above doesn't help.|
|Given that you are so concerned it would be interesting to know whether you are selling PIM shares as a consequence. Logically you might do so to protect some of your profit above previously indicated 31p break even.
Thank you for the link.|
|The Bayer Mansanto merger is not about concentrating on genetics! The deal is about combining genetics and chemicals with the addition benefit to both of the Climate Corporation -
It will take many more years to understand the mechanisms of resistance to fungicides through the genetic mapping of the fungi. That aside, Genetics alone will not solve Asian Soybean Rust resistance, just as is the case now, it will always be about integrated management.
vol.51 no.5 Brasília May 2016
Asian soybean rust in Brazil: past, present, and future
Asian rust, caused by Phakopsora pachyrhizi, is the most challenging soybean (Glycine max) disease in Brazil. In short, the fungus is able to survive all year-round if a host is available; the disease occurs in the majority of producing regions; and favorable conditions for soybean development are also favorable for epidemics. The adaptation of P. pachyrhizi to fungicides and its ability to overcome resistance genes show that no single solution will be able to maintain the sustainability of the crop. To avoid yield losses, all management strategies must be associated, including public policies for sowing date.
For the full and somewhat heavy read -
|A little more negativity for you all to ponder on !
Monsanto seem to be getting ready to launch asian rust resistant roundup ready soybeans. It will be interesting to see what Bayers new strategy is when they merge with Monsanto, they may concentrate on genetics. They may even have to divest some of their fungicides as part of the merger (Dupont just had to sell off a lot of their pesticides to get the Dow merger through). In any event, for me the Monsanto Bayer merger puts a lot of uncertainty over the PIM relationship.
In the US there is no rust problem, and Bayer do not seem to want it there. Maybe it is a less interesting proposition there?|
|I think it's healthy to see a two-way street in terms of both negative and positive comments/aspects, albeit that some opinions and rationales are better structured than others.|
|Yes - I'd be very happy with 120p then!
I belatedly note that the crucial quarterly crop report on the Grains (including, therefore, Wheat, Soyabeans, corn et al) is published today (April 11th at 5 p.m. London time). That usually means a big jump up or down in price.|
|Horace, sensibly said. I too wondered why mthead is moaning on when he/she/it could have got out long ago (and still do so) making a nice profit on a supposed 31p average. Readers can draw their own conclusions but I do note that mthead has a habit of popping up when the share price is in a down leg...
Wan - thank you for the continued info links.
It would be nice to be back to 60p in time for the investor day but the key thing for me as a LTH is where the share price will be 3yrs hence i.e. at the end of the period that the business plan talked about for launching all these products. If share price is north of 120p in 2020 without dilution then I will be quite happy with 30% CAGR. Trading in and out in the short term (and possibly getting it wrong) does not interest me.|
|The last two wonderful summers in the US Midwest have significantly increased the Supply of Corn, Wheat and Soyabeans and thus depressed the price. For those that read charts based solely on price action (Supply and Demand), Soyabean Futures are currently sitting in a Monthly Demand zone and a price rise is the higher probability trade. The debate above as to the significance of that, is interesting and we'll all form our own conclusions as to the relevance of the product price.
Having said that, I really don't understand why Mthead is still in this share. When (I clearly had more spare time than sense) I looked at his/her ADVFN posts on PIM. The last time he/she said something positive was 2011, although there was a reference to having a break-even holding price of 31 when another poster was bemoaning buying at 60p. Everything else has been critical or negative. You're obviously entirely welcome to express your opinion but six years of negativity appears a bizarre use of time.
Before I get the rosy-tinted label, I AM disappointed that a commercial Wheat product hasn't appeared quicker but the share price and everything else is a vast improvement since John Brubaker assumed control - in 2011. H & T is probably right to observe that the share is "tradeable" until something significant happens but I see PIM as an investment. If I'd sold when we were in the vicinity of 65p, I'd be very pleased and would have bought back in somewhere around now. IF PIM had been (or is) bought out at far higher than 65p, before I got back in, I'd feel stupid. That's obviously the game.
I appreciate Wan and others sharing their diligent research and I personally value his objectivity. Yes, he is mostly positive but why wouldn't he be if invested in a share that he (and I) feel has the potential to significantly rise in price. I also appreciate genuine reports on the share that are NOT supportive of a price rise to see if the upside is too limited to stay.
I'm not going to speculate why you are so consistently negative - it's not as if you can short the share. As noted, if all you want to do is knock the company and its management that dictate the success of your investment then that's up to you. Have fun but please try and spread a little sunshine occasionally...|
|PUGUGLY - Looks like support for PHC has suffered because of a fall in US Revenue.
There may also be fears of of something similar with PIM (mention of lowering inventories)|
|Any possible/likely read across from the PHC fall this morning ? Are agricultural stimulants selling into an increasingly pressured market - re mthead1968 above ?|
|The thing is though, Veritas trial results have shown a limited increase in yield (4.5 bushels). The cost of applying it, even alongside a proven fungicide, will become increasingly prohibitive in a bearish market. It just becomes a difficult sell to farmers with a limited budget and perhaps very little understanding of any synergies involved.|
|Mthead...Conversely, I would also add that farmers cannot afford not to buy certain inputs e.g. fungicides (due to devastating yield loss)!
PI's main thrust in Brazil is now about establishing Veritas as an "essential input" (not a luxury product), as opposed to trial use, or use on only part of the farm.
Perhaps it is not only about the yield advantage of Veritas? Veritas apparently improves the performance of fungicides for Asian Rust. Asian Rust, the most severe disease for soybeans, is a big issue globally. There is of course effective controls by way of applying registered fungicides such as Bayer's FOX fungicide. However, the fungi's resistance to fungicides is an increasing problem, to the extent that many registered fungicides have had their efficacy reduced by adaptation of the fungus.
In December 2016, Brazil's Ministry of Agriculture suspended the use of 63 registered fungicides used to control Asian rust because they were unable to demonstrate effective control, but Bayer's Fox was not one of them, so perhaps this will increase Bayer's market share in Brazil?
Given that Veritas tends to be applied with Bayer's Fox fungicide, it will thus be interesting to see if the combined improvements of yield and fungicide performance (and perhaps improved resistance?) afforded by Veritas, assists PI's efforts in establishing Veritas/Fortalis as an "essential input".|
|Perhaps one reason for the recent fall in share price is to do with concern over our business in Brazil? I don't think there is enough visibility regarding the current level of orders. The falling price of soybean might be impacting on confidence.
If the price is bad, farmers won’t apply luxury product. The PIM product will then be the first thing to get dropped, as the extra yield is not worth that much even with good prices. 4.5 bushels of extra soybean is not worth much, and now it is worth less.
Plus farmers in Brazil evidently have no money, and even Bayer are struggling to get their cash off them. Maybe they won’t need extra stock early this year like last year?
You can have all the world covered with Soybean, if price is bad farmers will cut inputs. If cash flow going into season is bad, farmers will cut inputs. If they have poor income form last years crop farmers will cut inputs.|