May 13 2018

Source

As of May 7, the rice industry has harvested 86 percent of its 2018 first crop production and it is a bumper crop.The harvesting is 75,137 hectares of the 87,538 hectares sown. This is a significant increase in production from 310,748 tonnes earlier in the year to 448,926 tonnes.

GRDB’S General Manager, Nizam Hassan

General Manager of the Guyana Rice Development Board (GRDB), Nizam Hassan, highlighted the areas that have improved. He said that the first crop was a success and the performance will continue growing from 2017.“What we have seen in the first crop; generally, there have been improved productivity issues. Pests and disease were managed; farmers were being paid faster than previous crops; prices paid were improved from previous crops to $3000 per bag of paddy.”With a bumper first crop, GRDB is highly optimistic going into the second crop.

With the increase of this production from January to April 2018, there has also been an increase in exports with sales increasing by over US$10 million.Hassan compared the current production to that of 2017, noting that the increase is credited to the exploration of new markets.
“For the period January to April 2018, we exported 139,501 tonnes valued at US$57.7 million compared to 120,811 tonnes valued at US$47 million for the corresponding period last year.  So, I’m talking about the first four months of 2018 compared with the first four months of 2017, in terms of the volume, that’s about 15 percent more we’ve exported.
“The increases in the exports have primarily come of course from new markets that we’ve been exporting to.”


One such new market is Mexico, which Guyana began exporting to in 2017, ending that year with 113,525 tonnes of paddy shipped.
For this year up until May, 61,350 tonnes have been exported. The aforementioned combined with 2017’s amount saw 174,875 tonnes valued at US$51.4 million being exported so far.Most regions have harvested over 78 percent of their cultivation so far.Recently, the Rice Board released its “GRDB 15”, a new paddy variety that is promising higher yields.Rice millers had been tagging one of the best yields in recent years for the performance of rice.Guyana would need the good news as the majority of the sectors had underperformed with the exception of gold.The average yield was about 37 bags per acre, it is being reported.

The first crop has been one of the best in year, authorities are disclosing, with more monies earned than the same period last year.

The updated harvest as of May 7, 2018 is as follows:
Region          Paddy Production (M/T)    Percentage of hectares harvested     
Region 2          76,836.8          96.3%
Region 3          43,422.8          97.8%
Region 4          366,126.5          96.7%
Region 5          3,069,376.5          82.7%
Region 6          1,724,427.0          79.1%
Region 9          14,227.2          100.0%

Last edited by Django
Original Post
Reeper posted:

I would not be shouting from the roof tops about bumper crop since $3000 a bag is a far cry form $4500 a bag in 2015 before apnu took over. 

from previous crops to $3000 per bag of paddy.”With a bumper first crop, 

Nagamootoo promised the rice farmers $9,000 per bag for paddy in 2015.  He has $6,000 per bag more to keep his promise.  

Reeper posted:

I would not be shouting from the roof tops about bumper crop since $3000 a bag is a far cry form $4500 a bag in 2015 before apnu took over. 

from previous crops to $3000 per bag of paddy.”With a bumper first crop, 

if they are making a profit @ $3000/bag then they have brought costs down and/or are increasing yields . . . meaning that the industry is competitive

that's far better than sitting on your inefficient ass, saddled with an unsustainable production set up and wishing for $4500/bag

that's Jagdeo sugar economics . . . look where it got we

Last edited by Former Member
ronan posted:
Reeper posted:

I would not be shouting from the roof tops about bumper crop since $3000 a bag is a far cry form $4500 a bag in 2015 before apnu took over. 

from previous crops to $3000 per bag of paddy.”With a bumper first crop, 

if they are making a profit @ $3000/bag then they have brought costs down and/or are increasing yields . . . meaning that the industry is competitive

that's far better than sitting on your inefficient ass, saddled with an unsustainable production set up and wishing for $4500/bag

that's Jagdeo sugar economics . . . look where it got we

How did you arrived at a profit of $3000/bag .

Dave posted:
ronan posted:
Reeper posted:

I would not be shouting from the roof tops about bumper crop since $3000 a bag is a far cry form $4500 a bag in 2015 before apnu took over. 

from previous crops to $3000 per bag of paddy.”With a bumper first crop, 

if they are making a profit @ $3000/bag then they have brought costs down and/or are increasing yields . . . meaning that the industry is competitive

that's far better than sitting on your inefficient ass, saddled with an unsustainable production set up and wishing for $4500/bag

that's Jagdeo sugar economics . . . look where it got we

How did you arrived at a profit of $3000/bag .

That’s not what he is saying.  He’s saying profitable at a price of $3k/bag.  Same question I have but asked in another way.  

We don’t have numbers but behaviors.  If the planters are losing, then why is output increasing?  Is there another magic at work?

i believe productivity and efficiency is having an impact. 

Dave posted:
ronan posted:
Reeper posted:

I would not be shouting from the roof tops about bumper crop since $3000 a bag is a far cry form $4500 a bag in 2015 before apnu took over. 

from previous crops to $3000 per bag of paddy.”With a bumper first crop, 

if they are making a profit @ $3000/bag then they have brought costs down and/or are increasing yields . . . meaning that the industry is competitive

that's far better than sitting on your inefficient ass, saddled with an unsustainable production set up and wishing for $4500/bag

that's Jagdeo sugar economics . . . look where it got we

How did you arrived at a profit of $3000/bag .

Easy, Math  is poison for him.

I wonder why the PPP freaks think that a Venezuela market at the old prices is available.  Venezuelans are literally battling with stray dogs at garbage dumps to find food. Why will the Venezuelan gov't pay more than the world price for rice when they cannot even provide basic services to their people?

I say let private people sell rice to Guyana and then wait for them to squawk when they don't get paid.

Noted that the rice farmers say that they are now getting paid faster.  

ronan posted:
Reeper posted:

I would not be shouting from the roof tops about bumper crop since $3000 a bag is a far cry form $4500 a bag in 2015 before apnu took over. 

from previous crops to $3000 per bag of paddy.”With a bumper first crop, 

if they are making a profit @ $3000/bag then they have brought costs down and/or are increasing yields . . . meaning that the industry is competitive

that's far better than sitting on your inefficient ass, saddled with an unsustainable production set up and wishing for $4500/bag

that's Jagdeo sugar economics . . . look where it got we

Whether they make a profit is still unknown, I supposed you can make the argument they would not invest if they didn't make a profit. Time will tell whether they will continue to plant at these prices. 

Reeper posted:
 

Whether they make a profit is still unknown, I supposed you can make the argument they would not invest if they didn't make a profit. Time will tell whether they will continue to plant at these prices. 

No one expands production if they are losing.  This would mean that they would spend more to grow more, but also lose more because of an unsustainable price.

It appears as if their yields have improved  and in addition they claim that they are being paid faster.  Having to fund their receivables when the PPP was playing games with paying them drove up their costs.

I believe they are profitable, the big ones at least.   Guyana has a high cost and this needs to be addressed.  They need to benchmark with other low cost producers and dissect their cost structure and adopt best practices.

The govt also needs to explore added value down streaming.  As KP said, they should consider bringing back some elements of F in the FCH program.

caribny posted:
Reeper posted:
 

Whether they make a profit is still unknown, I supposed you can make the argument they would not invest if they didn't make a profit. Time will tell whether they will continue to plant at these prices. 

No one expands production if they are losing.  This would mean that they would spend more to grow more, but also lose more because of an unsustainable price.

It appears as if their yields have improved  and in addition they claim that they are being paid faster.  Having to fund their receivables when the PPP was playing games with paying them drove up their costs.

Good point, not sure that yields have improved as there is no mention of bags per acre yield. However if Guyanese farmers are to compete with word market prices, they have no choice but to employ economies of scale and the latest technologies to cut down inefficiencies. 

“What we have seen in the first crop; generally, there have been improved productivity issues. Pests and disease were managed; farmers were being paid faster than previous crops; prices paid were improved from previous crops to $3000 per bag of paddy.”

Baseman posted:

I believe they are profitable, the big ones at least.   Guyana has a high cost and this needs to be addressed.  They need to benchmark with other low cost producers and dissect their cost structure and adopt best practices.

The govt also needs to explore added value down streaming.  As KP said, they should consider bringing back some elements of F in the FCH program.

What about govt subsidies? Put that oil money to use productively. 

Reeper posted:
Baseman posted:

I believe they are profitable, the big ones at least.   Guyana has a high cost and this needs to be addressed.  They need to benchmark with other low cost producers and dissect their cost structure and adopt best practices.

The govt also needs to explore added value down streaming.  As KP said, they should consider bringing back some elements of F in the FCH program.

What about govt subsidies? Put that oil money to use productively. 

Subsidies should be used if and when appropriate and not to prop inefficient operations.  Oil monies should be used to build infrastructure and an efficient power grid to bring down overall cost of doing business. 

Baseman posted:
Reeper posted:
Baseman posted:

I believe they are profitable, the big ones at least.   Guyana has a high cost and this needs to be addressed.  They need to benchmark with other low cost producers and dissect their cost structure and adopt best practices.

The govt also needs to explore added value down streaming.  As KP said, they should consider bringing back some elements of F in the FCH program.

What about govt subsidies? Put that oil money to use productively. 

Subsidies should be used if and when appropriate and not to prop inefficient operations.  Oil monies should be used to build infrastructure and an efficient power grid to bring down overall cost of doing business. 

Question, when the US gives out subsidies to farmers, how do they determine that they are not propping up inefficient operations? Maybe this could be a model to leverage. 

Add Reply

Post

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×