Jump to content

Ali

Members
  • Content Count

    846
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Seller statistics

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

Ali last won the day on June 25 2018

Ali had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

457 Excellent

About Ali

  • Rank
    House Bee

Converted

  • Beekeeping Experience
    Beginner Beekeeper

Location

  • Location
    Wanganui

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. An 8% (or greater) increase for packers/exporters may well be on the cards given the reduction in the price for the product paid to the primary producers.
  2. Not all but quite a few seem to have taken a break from what I have seen. Late summer nectar shortage? Just too darn dry until now.
  3. Would shaking the whole lot through a Queen excluder be a good plan? Before the new Q is added.
  4. Possibly is @Philbee. Certainly pause for thought over the very large amounts of money (millions per annum) owner/directors/significant employees have had the pleasure of drawing from the larger outfits. I suspect that did not reduce last season and probably not this season despite declared losses in running hives. If the smaller operators fold the big guys will have the field of course. Conspiracy theorists might say this is exactly what is being engineered currently. If smaller beeks were to operate cooperatively (as a business entity not particularly as a coop) I think stronger positions could be created. This is nothing new of course there are a few examples already out there in one fashion or another. Well, we all pay into the fund with a right to begin withdrawing at a certain age ( as controlled by Govt). I look at it the same as a private scheme, you spend a good number of years paying in so that when the times come you can reap the benefit. The seniors have done their share of paying in.
  5. There we have it in a nutshell I think. Yes there are problems in regard a current small surplus of most honeys, not as much blending, competition in world markets etc etc. That said, just how much of the current low offer business going on is about packers/exporters maximising their profits? I think quite a bit in all. I think it would be right to say that most of the largest packer/exporters have their own hives and produce a fair whack of their own honey. I would imagine these folk have increased their hive holdings significantly over the past years and seem to be only looking for honey they can't produce themselves or perhaps not enough of some seasons.
  6. I wonder at the possiblity of the Minister being influenced by some in regard the style of levy and in fact I wonder in regard the relationship between MPI, the Minister and influencers with attachments to APINZ. In my mind the whole APINZ levy raising issue was strongly motivated by building an entity of larger financial and political power seemingly strongly influenced by persons with a desire for a large share of the monies rightly or wrongly (the research lobby). Others I am sure would have had more altruistic intentions (industry good in a real sense) while others I am sure would have seen job security and increased earnings accordingly in a more financially sound entity. A slightly jaundiced view perhaps but........the timing of the new AFB Managment Agency money raising matter was seemingly exquisitely timed in relation to the failure of the Honey Levy money raising gambit. The Management Agency is of course APINZ is it not? How much of this is about the entity that is APINZ and it's growth/viability? Is there too much cross pollination between AFB.org and APINZ? I suspect so. Anyway it is water under the bridge until the next gambit that is raised.
  7. I wonder where you gained that understanding @Kiwi Bee? I think quite a few of us had gained that understanding. Was it from a APINZ forum post? I seem to recall one that explained that the Minister would not support a percentage type basis.
  8. I think the subject is certainly a sensitive one! That said, I also think that serious allegations require serious evidence or they probably should not be aired publicly here or anywhere for that matter. Just saying.
  9. From an NZ standard perspective.....back to the future?
  10. Why do I find you such an abusive man @JohnF ? Do you carry on like this to everyone who asks direct questions and expects direct answers? The hate campaign here John is pretty much led by you. Why don't you just cut it out. It has become outright internet bullying. Put an end to it @JohnF.
  11. We are back in the territory of not really addressing the question in a direct and forthright manner I feel @ApiNZ Levy Proposal. Thus I will make a gambit and state below what I see as the real situation. A vote for any increase in the levy will be by weighted voting. Please feel free to clearly state if am in fact wrong.
  12. @ApiNZ Levy Proposala clear statement whether the vote is by way of weighted voting or a 1 person 1 vote method is what I am asking for. There are majorities and majorities depending on the intention of the writer.
  13. @ApiNZ Levy Proposal this explanation is more honest I think. When someone says a 'majority vote of levy payers' most expect it is a majority of registered beekeepers who qualify for the levy payment. This is patently not the case as you have explained.
  14. @ApiNZ Levy Proposal, I read the same rule statement. Please confirm that this is in fact what APINZ's rules say or explain?
  15. @ApiNZ Levy Proposal can you please state for the record is the quoted post attached correct or not?
×
×
  • Create New...