Jump to content

Ali

Members
  • Content Count

    827
  • 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

435 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. Good stuff @Trevor Gillbanks! While I am not presently part of SNI I certainly share some of your viewpoint.
  2. @Bushy it will be a shame to have you missing from this thread. I feel your views have been astute and valuable.
  3. They have only been repeated so often because APINZ and supporters have not given adequate responses or quite often no response. oh...and regards further repeats of what in my opinion are inadequately answerred matters I am just catching my breath for a moment.
  4. He just doesn't seem to get it does he! Address the issues and can the personalised attacks is the message @Frederick. Bullying comes to mind............................. Vote NO
  5. Naive balderdash @Frederick? Perhaps that finger points both ways in this case. We will know in the future I expect. A no vote may or may not effect any change. However a yes vote will reinforce their position to an enormous extent. It is improbable that there is any way back from there for any of us. Take over from within will be an incredibly difficult task to achieve given the vested interest of some current participants. Oh...the new board? I understand it will simply be a slightly expanded one rather than a 'new board'? Do you see all the incumbents as giving up their seats?
  6. Now I'm a "Troll" per the APINZ supporters post. Others are called various other things by APINZ supporters. There really is only one view permitted isn't there! The view of APINZ and/or it's supporters or suffer personal attack and labelling from them. @Frederick I admire you for thinking you can achieve any change with this lot. The only responses I am looking for @JohnF are those that directly address the issues and questions raised. If the answers received so far are the best APINZ can muster than we are all deep in it, for the most part they are hollow, inadequate, smack of lack of effort, lack of vision (there does not appear be to be one aside from setting up APINZ in control) and lack of competent management. Again @JohnF your response does not address in any fashion, in this forum, any of the issues/questions raised. I would be grateful if you could put aside the personalised name calling/labelling @JohnF.
  7. What we have currently is what we should deal with first in my opinion. We do not have a 're-tweaked APINZ and achieving that would be a battle if the levy proposal goes through. First things first. If APINZ were to be re modelled (quite considerably) prior to a levy vote I am sure it would be a positive for us all. Meanwhile we are faced with an organisation that is unsatisfactory to many and insists on pressing on for the good of that organisation and it's small percentage of followers. There is only one effective way currently to express dissatisfaction and that is the NO vote. Only then APINZ may actually listen to the majority of NZ beekeepers and make some changes to it's structure.
  8. I would far rather that APINZ and it's supporters address the issues and questions raised in an honest and forthright manner @JohnF. It seems you don't have the answers that matter to so many and quite frankly appear to rely on being a smart mouth (AliNZ?) which in my opinion only brings further discredit upon APINZ and of course yourself. Anything to distract from the real issues I feel. I am not the one attempting to gain the power over the beekeepers of NZ or to take their money. There has been an absolute dearth of proper response from those who should no better. In the beginning : the membership numbers the real full agenda the voting weight issue the business plan the use of levy funds the issue of packers etc the inequity of contributions binding obligation hive number control It just goes on and on, all without full and proper reponse from APINZ or yourself for that matter.
  9. I would quite happily if in fact they were there. The current situation in one which no right minded business person would entertain for a second. Pay your money and take all the risk is what is proposed in my view. The lack of extensive detailed and disclosed planning, intention and budgetting in some form of binding obligation presents an arena where no right minded person should go unless they are prepared to risk all. I know of a package of shares (bought on the high) now worth about a third of the buy price, that company also has an uncertain future. To buy them now would be a 'punt', a pretty risky one too. A yes vote for APINZ would be simply that... a 'punt'....with a lot to lose!
  10. Well @Ted, I guess I consider I have been vocal (and will most probably continue to be so) and at least 1 other has questioned my elligibility to vote. It is par for the course with what the disparaging type comment I have already alluded to in previous posts.
  11. Only it is a 'hope we can' type utterance. I'm not knocking your outlook in regard this hope but seriously question whether it can ever be brought to fruition. If APINZ is given the power and the money by way of this levy vote we are in a serious risk position frankly without any mitigations currently in place to undo what is done. Scaremongering? Monotonous? Ludicrous? There you go again. Disparaging, belittling, attempting to humiliate? Much better to address the issues really without descending to this stuff @Frederick, it simply reinforces what I have said in another recent post.
  12. Thank the powers that be that APINZ does not have control of this website and forum! It is plain to me that the only voice or opinion that they (and their followers) will allow is their own and if another dares voice anything contrary they have to be heartily disparaged, referred to as doomdayers etc etc etc. APINZ have managed to do themselves quite a bit of reputational damage. The lack of disclosed binding detailed planning and intention does further damage.
  13. You are entitled to your opinion @Frederick however so are all others includinng myself. There is a very real and very large compromise involved for the majority of the people who beekeep in NZ. The vast majority of the people in NZ who have hives have not and do not want APINZ at the helm, in control of our businesses essentially and also do not wish to fund APINZ. A yes vote is a major compromise for this majority of people. We are people in business being led to fund a very vague scheme managed by an entity we don't want. We plan our business activities very carefully, know full well where we are going and what we will achieve as a result. APINZ has only offered vague ideas and are not bound to deliver anything at all that is tangible, nor do they actually offer anything of the same. What sort of business people would we be to invest in something so risky that has a history so far of not delivering any tangible benefit? They have dropped the ball badly in the current circumstances of the industry.
  14. However, this is in the realms of a pipe dream presently. If what you describe was the current situation (horse before the cart as it should be) we may already have a unified industry. APINZ have ensured this is not the case currently. Past performance......etc
×