ELTHAM DAIRY COMPANY.

Taranaki Daily News, 21 August 1922, Page 6

ELTHAM DAIRY COMPANY.

2 THE ANNUAL MEETING. The annual meeting of the Eltham Cooperative Dairy Factory Company wa o held on Saturday, the chairman of directors (Mr. H. D. Forsyth) presiding ofer a large attendance. The report and balance sheet has already been published. The secretary, in making some comparisons of the balance-sheet with that of last year, said an additional £1892 capital had been paid up. and the company's liabilities showed a decrease of £970. The amount paid out for boxes and crates. £6461, was an increase of over £1909, due partly to increased prices and partly to increased production. The chairman, in moving the adoption of the report and balance-sheet, referred to the bad season, which was only partially minimised, by increased production. A large quantity of stocks were in hand, and with reasonable market values they would have been able to pay out a much better return than was shown on the balance-sheet. It was difficult for a factory with a dual plant to know what to do during a season like the past one, which was the hardest yeaY ever experienced by the dairy industry. They had had bad. luck, but had not —as he had heard it said—“missed the ’bus” every time. They were unfairly treated on the other side, and lost £lB.OOO, or 2d per lb butter-fat, on one large consignment. During December the merchants .by “bearing” the market placed the price at the lowest mark for the season, reducing it by 70s or 80s. He was not making excuses, but they had been very unfortunate. However, as this had been the worst year so had th-' previous one been one of the best, and the average pay-out for the two years was 1/10 per lb butter-fat. Mr. Sagar seconded the motion. Mr. T. W. Owen asked why the payout was so low during the past year, despite the fact that the factory jvas one of the best equipped in Taranaki. The chairman said as he had’already explained it was to a great extent due to the ill-luck experienced by their shipments of New Zealand produce in reaching the markets at a time when the prices dropped suddenly. The previous year they had been the reverse —very lucky. On the two years they had paid as good a price as any factory in Taranaki. Mr. McWhirter asked why the pay-

out was so low, when other factories had done better. • The chairman said it was the luck of the shipments. He and his co-director= had done their best; he was not in sol? control of the factory’s business. Mr. McWhirter asked through what sources the company sold its produce. The chairman said half was sold through the marketing association and the other half through Lonsdales. Mr. McWhirter asked if it was not a fact that a large portion of that sold through the marketing association went to the C.W.S. The chairman said it might or might not. He could not say. Mr. McWhirter asked the chairman to give them figures to show how these I sales; resulted. Was it- a fact that the produce sold through the Marketing Association —which the chairman had spoken so favorably of—sold at a much lower price than the remainder.

The chairman said the cheese sold to LonsdaJe realised £668 more than that s>ld through the association, but the butter sold to the association realised £217 more compared with that sold to Lonsdale, and the whey butter £9B moreThis left a difference of £321, but this would be more than covered by a rebate of commission due from the association, which would leave/the sales made by the association ahead by a few pounds. Mr. J. Cocker said assets were gen- 1 erally put down at face value, but the company’s assets would not bring face value. If they were winding up their assets would not bring the va.ue shown. Theirs was. hf believed, tfoe lowest payout in Taranaki. Last year they received a good price, but paid out only a little over 2/6, wliile another company paid out 2/llJd. "He ha'd gone exhaustively into figures and had found that it had cost him over 1/5 for every Ih of butter-fat produced, and they had therefore lost nearly 4d per lb butterfat. Proceeding, Mr. Cocker criticised the small depreciation allowed on lorries, the excessive cost of benzine and wages in connection with carriage of goods. The total was, he considered, approximately £2BOO, while the company’s charges in this respect were only about £6OO. The cost of horse-feed was £25 which he understood was for one horse. They should have economised in these directions. They also had huge stocks of requisites, which was not wise on a falling market. There had been a lot of discussion concerning the C.W.S.. and when it had been brought up at their meeting previously he had opposed it strenuously, on the ground, that the commercial millennium had not yet arrived. This had been proved by results. They had received low prices, he believed, because the other agents wished to penalise them for their connection with the C.W.S. He believed that they were in the hands of the monopolists, and it was of no use to go to the other side with a scheme unless it was strong enough to stand on its own. At present they could only make the best use of the channels available. Tt would cost four or five millions to establish their own selling floors in England. The C.W.S. only approached the New Zealand producers in order to eliminate competition, and the producers were foolish enough to allow themselves to bp gulled. In the meantime they

should stand shoulder to shoulder and combine to improve their position as far as they cortld If they could possess their own cool stores at London, .and by levy and Government assistance procure sufficient finance to do so> they could gain some immunity from the operations of the merchants. They would ialso have to increase production, and should be careful to avoid a movement which he understood was to commence a proprietarv business in Eltham. The chairman said as a going concern the company’s assets were worth fully the figures shown in the balance-sheet. Concerning the influence of the C.W.S.. be was of opinion that the activities of the Marketing Association had kept up Lonsdale’s prices. Five directors were nominated for three seats and the ballot resulted a= follows: C J. Belcher 1621. J. O’Neill 1377. H. D. Forsyth 1304, elected; J. i Cocker 1260 H. A' Blackstock 570. further details are held over.