DAIRYING IN-THE-WAIKATO.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 5, Issue 201, 18 August 1916, Page 4

DAIRYING IN-THE-WAI-KATO.

Rival Organisations.

Mr Goodfellow's Reply to

Criticism.

The following statement has been issued by Mr Wm. Goodfellow, Managing Director of the Waikato Co-operativo Dairy Company, Ltd., in connection with the dairying controversy, viz.:

" A number of circulars issued by a competing Company, making comparisons and reference to this Company, have been received by us. We regret that the N.Z.D.A finds it necessary to issue such an extreme statement of the position. In the first place let me say that the payments quoted include all creamery working expenses. Further, the comparisons made are obviously unfair. For instance, we are reported to have paid our Waipipi and Kohekohe suppliers Id less than the N.Z.D.A., when as a matter of fact we have not yet received a single oan of cream from those places. This will fully demonstrate the absurdity of this so-called "precise comparison." Again, a comparison is drawn between the price paid at the N Z.D.A.'s Waiuku central factory for daily direct cream, and the payment made by our Company for cream delivered from Glenbrook three days a week to railway, and so on.

We believe " our friends " have done well this year. In fact it was imperative they should do better than last year, or the result might have been very disconcerting. It must be remembered, however, that when it comes to a matter of fractions in total payments for the season, that it is quite easy for any company to make a good showing for one year. Obviously the price at which butter unsold is valued at, for instance, would make quite a difference. We hear of another cooperative company that found it advisable this year to absorb reserve funds accumulated during the past 13 years. It has been said that competition between c.o operative concerns is bad business, but it is evident that the farmers find it ensures efficiency, civility and prompt attention to business.

Mr Paeey's remarks re " minor amalgamation" are unfortunate, and hardly likely to briDg about a much to be desired better feeling between the companies. We are not going to discuss the matter further, but will just say in passing that our last letter to the gentleman - io question re amalgamation was to tbo effect that so long as he (Mr Pacey) was associated with the business, there would be no amalgamation with the Waikato Cooperative Dairy Company. Such, we regret, is the almost unanimous desire of our suppliers. Our directors are considering the advisability of at once purchasing tho whole of the original nonsupplier.i' shares by the exchange for '• |ier cent debenture:). Tho suppliers will then <»wn all the j

shares, and the Company thereby save approximately £IBO per year in interest, this amount being the much talked of "huge profits "of drv shareholders.

The one per cent paid by the Cheese Company has nothing whatever to do with the Waikato Cooperative Dairy Company, but nevertheless is a very fair and exceedingly reasonable remuneration, especially when it is recognised that each factory has the right to pull out at the eud of three years when everything is in going order, and further the capital has to be signed for by a joint and several at the bank. Mr Pacey (on principle) objects, it is said, to take such financial responsibility. One per cent from the Cheese Compauy last year amounted to approximately £l5O, with cheese selling at fabulous prices.

All intelligent farmers must have long recognised that Mr Pacey's perpetual and very questionable criticism of a successful competitor is maintained fbr the sole object of diverting the attention of the N.Z.D.A. suppliers from the scrapping of creameries, casine experiments and semi-proprietary dried milk propositions, and possibly other little costly side lines. It is with extreme regret that we have fou nd it advisable to deal with these matters."