It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Monsanto to Charge as Much as 42% More for New Seeds (Update3)
Aug. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Monsanto Co., the world’s largest seed maker, plans to charge as much as 42 percent more for new genetically modified seeds next year than older offerings because they increase farmers’ output.
Roundup Ready 2 Yield soybeans will cost farmers an average of $74 an acre in 2010, and original Roundup Ready soybeans will cost $52 an acre, St. Louis-based Monsanto said today in presentations on its Web site. SmartStax corn seeds, developed with Dow Chemical Co., will cost $130 an acre, 17 percent more than the YieldGard triple-stack seeds they will replace.
The company is pricing its seeds to share the benefit of increased yields with farmers, said Mark Gulley, a New York- based analyst at Soleil Securities. Prices include seed treatments designed to protect seedlings from pests and disease, Monsanto said. “They are in essence splitting the value of the extra yield 50-50,” Gulley said by telephone.
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
And let's not forget the "terminator" seed
www.ethicalinvesting.com...
that causes the second generation seeds to be sterile.
Ahhh, the luxury of genetics....
Originally posted by KSPigpen
It turnes out, since farmers may get increased yield from the seeds, Monsanto wants their cut of that.
Originally posted by rogerstigers
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
And let's not forget the "terminator" seed
www.ethicalinvesting.com...
that causes the second generation seeds to be sterile.
Ahhh, the luxury of genetics....
Aside from their lousy business ethics, this is one of the things that *really* bothers me about GM seed producers. As soon as they introduce code to limit reproduction, what happens if these cross pollinate with natural plants and in a few generations, the bulk of the natural plants are sterile. We could drive entire species of plant life to extinction "by accident".
[edit on 9-17-2009 by rogerstigers]
Originally posted by pieman
Originally posted by KSPigpen
It turnes out, since farmers may get increased yield from the seeds, Monsanto wants their cut of that.
seems fair to be. the seed costs more because the seed provides higher yeilds. i really can't see the issue.
Originally posted by pieman
Originally posted by KSPigpen
It turnes out, since farmers may get increased yield from the seeds, Monsanto wants their cut of that.
seems fair to be. the seed costs more because the seed provides higher yeilds. i really can't see the issue.
Originally posted by pieman
Originally posted by KSPigpen
It turnes out, since farmers may get increased yield from the seeds, Monsanto wants their cut of that.
seems fair to be. the seed costs more because the seed provides higher yeilds. i really can't see the issue.
Originally posted by pieman
reply to post by captaintyinknots
the thread is about the prices this year compared to last, monsanto didn't allow the saving of seed last year either, so i don't see what difference that makes. frankly, farmers buy the seed knowing they can't save it, if they have a problem with that they should buy a brand of seed they can save.
monsanato may well be trying to establish a monopoly but they haven't managed it yet, and wouldn't at all if the farmers that are being so hard done by just stopped buying the seed.
obviously it's worthwhile for the farmers to buy new seed every year or they wouldn't do it. use your head.
reply to post by Rickster01
yeah, i must learn to believe everything i read, god forbid i do something like think for myself.
reply to post by rogerstigers
farmers know, or should know, what they're getting into. ignorance is no defense. no-one holds a gun to their head and forces them to buy monsanato.
Originally posted by pieman
reply to post by captaintyinknots
the thread is about the prices this year compared to last, monsanto didn't allow the saving of seed last year either, so i don't see what difference that makes. frankly, farmers buy the seed knowing they can't save it, if they have a problem with that they should buy a brand of seed they can save.
monsanato may well be trying to establish a monopoly but they haven't managed it yet, and wouldn't at all if the farmers that are being so hard done by just stopped buying the seed.
obviously it's worthwhile for the farmers to buy new seed every year or they wouldn't do it. use your head.
reply to post by Rickster01
yeah, i must learn to believe everything i read, god forbid i do something like think for myself.
reply to post by rogerstigers
farmers know, or should know, what they're getting into. ignorance is no defense. no-one holds a gun to their head and forces them to buy monsanato.
Originally posted by pieman
Originally posted by KSPigpen
It turnes out, since farmers may get increased yield from the seeds, Monsanto wants their cut of that.
seems fair to be. the seed costs more because the seed provides higher yeilds. i really can't see the issue.
Originally posted by mpriebe81
reply to post by pieman
Way to defend a modern day monopoly!
Monsanto is waaaaay up on the list of corporations that are evil to the bone man, get with it.
Originally posted by lagnar
This is VERY simple.
Farmers are Monsanto's main competition. They WANT to do everything they can to FORCE small farmers OUT of business. "Who gives a ratt's a* how long that land has been in their family?!? This is business, and we want their land for OUR GMOs! Make no mistake. We will have it." - Monsanto souse. And with Codex coming, they will. The government is backing them every step of the hostile [takeover] way.
This is business...it's not personal...right?
Monsanto’s man Taylor returns to FDA in food-czar role