MAJOR agro-chemicals groups are set to slug it out in a battle for
their share of a flat market. But a price war seems unlikely.
Almost exactly two years after organo-mercury compounds were banned in
Britain, cereals growers are facing an increasingly bewildering array of
seed and other treatments.
Bayer, Ciba-Geigy, and Zeneca, are among the big players all competing
for a share of the #415m-a-year crop protection market, of which seed
treatment comprises a small but useful #17m at trade prices.
The fact that this is almost double the 1992 level, when cheap but
effective organo-mercury compounds were allowed until March 31,
indicates the growing importance of this segment. Pricing has become a
key element in the battle, with most of the new relatively narrow range
treatments falling into the #38 to #44 per tonne band.
But as Bernd Naaf, director of the Bayer Crop Protection Business
Group, said at the unveiling of its offerings in this market in London
yesterday: ''We are going for competitive pricing, but we will not
undermine the pricing system -- and we hope that companies such as
Zeneca will not over-react.''
With about three out of every four tonnes of certified seed being sold
by merchants, it is expected that it is this sector that will come under
most commercial pressure from the agro-chemical firms.
Cereals growers, who face declining prices in the wake of both
European farm policy reform and the Gatt settlement, will have little
option but to pay the higher cost of treated seed from this and other
sources.
However, as Bill Rennie, until recently chief officer of the official
seed testing station for Scotland in Edinburgh, observed: ''It only
needs an increase of about 3% to 4% in yield to cover the cost of
treatment.''
Trials carried out at the station have indicated a good response for
Bayers' new products, which have gone through six years of field work,
Sibutol for winter and spring wheat, and Raxil S for winter and spring
barley.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article