6 ms·

If the farmer is willing to accept a $1200 price, then what prevents the land owner from charging $1200 right now? All the factors you list which push the price

If the farmer is willing to accept a $1200 price, then what prevents the land owner from charging $1200 right now? All the factors you list which push the price up apply just as well for the current owner-renter negotiations. The scenario you describe is possible only if there is a lot of land that's severely mispriced / underpriced - in which case the price should and would get corrected, and after that the arbitrage opportunity disappears because, as you say, the land owner can come in contact directly with the farmer and make arrangements.

TeMPOraL 6y ago
> If the farmer is willing to accept a $1200 price, then what prevents the land owner from charging $1200 right now? Basic human decency? These are often long-term relationships between neighbours, whose families lived next to each other for decades or hundreds of years.
- randomdata 6y ago
  But those with such decency wouldn't turn to Tillable to capture an extra buck, so it remains unclear where you think Tillable fits.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    Apparently nobody turns to Tillable. It's Tillable that's turning to land owners and tries to convince them to not renew their contracts with farmers so Tillable can negotiate new contracts with higher prices, likely with the same farmers (as farming is very much a local thing, you can't farm a piece of land from a thousand miles away).
    - randomdata 6y ago
      That only brings us back to the question of why landowners wouldn't go directly to the farmer and ask for the hypothetical $1,200 that Tillable would also ask of them? It is not exactly difficult to figure out who the farmers are in your local area, and it is especially not very difficult to figure out which ones are the hungry ones willing to pay top dollar, if that is your goal. Chances are they have already been hounding you for years. Exactly because people don't normally seek farmland a thousand miles away, where there could potentially be a benefit in new introductions, it remains unclear where Tillable fits.
      - TeMPOraL 6y ago
        And that brings us back to my original answer: why would they? Trying to extract maximum profit from the counterparty is adversarial, whereas a relationship between a land owner and a neighbourhood farmer most likely is cooperative. EDIT: for the same reason, I don't think Tillable has a chance of working, and to the extent it does, it's actively destructive.
        randomdata 6y ago
        And now we're just talking in circles. Before your original 'answer', the scenarios presented were that farmers who: 1. Want to extract as much money as possible will turn directly to the farmers willing to pay top dollar to maximize the take. 2. Want to build solid relationships with farmers will turn directly to farmers to find a suitable fit. The question presented before your original reply was in trying to understand where Tillable fits. Your answer did not provide that information, and your follow up still does not attempt to answer the question. Your edit seems to suggest that they don't fit, as was already established, which leaves us wondering what your original response was for?
      - luckylion 6y ago
        I believe it's similar to smart phones being produced by humans at the other end of the world who live in bunk beds, have 10-12 hour shifts and barred windows + nets below so they don't jump out trying to kill themselves. Most people at this end of the world are not okay with those conditions and do not tolerate them if they know about them. But put a suit at Apple and another suit at Foxconn between the consumer and the producer and they don't know about it. When it comes out, people are appalled and Apple & Foxconn have to shift strategies or face consumers shunning them. Tillable are those suits. Land owners are not in the business of maximizing profits at any cost, but if you approach them with a much better offer for their land, they don't see the ways how you're able to afford that offer, much like the smart phone buyer does not know why it doesn't cost $100 more. When people profit from something, they are usually not too concerned with the details and accept that things happen that they wouldn't allow if they knew about it, by turning a blind eye (blinded by the profit, you might say).
luckylion 6y ago
"Willingness" vs "No other choice but shut down". It's similar to how you're "willing" to "accept" increased taxes. You don't have to, of course, you can leave the country, but I wouldn't consider that willing acceptance. As TeMPOral mentioned in a sibling comment, mostly their long-standing relationship, and his non-predatory business model. Right now, he's a land owner. If he uses Tillable, he's a property investor.
gdhbcc 6y ago
Presumably tillable will make the same dela to every landowner in the area, reducing the competition between landowner and therefore enabling the increase in prices. In essence, tillable becomes the only landowner
YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago
>> If the farmer is willing to accept a $1200 price, then what prevents the land owner from charging $1200 right now? The same reasons that have kept my landlord from raising the rent me and my partner pay in over 14 years now. When we asked him if he didn't want a raise (we were concerned he was not making enough and would have to sell the house) he said that no, he prefers to know that the house is rented long-term and he doesn't have to find a new tennant every few months. So, basically: stability. Some people tend to value that very highly. I know I (and my partner) do, which is btw the reason why we've stayed in the same place for over 14 years. That and all the scare stories of asshole landlords we've heard from friends who moved frequently (we're in the UK btw).

TeMPOraL 6y ago

> If the farmer is willing to accept a $1200 price, then what prevents the land owner from charging $1200 right now? Basic human decency? These are often long-term relationships between neighbours, whose families lived next to each other for decades or hundreds of years.

randomdata 6y ago
But those with such decency wouldn't turn to Tillable to capture an extra buck, so it remains unclear where you think Tillable fits.
- luckylion 6y ago
  Apparently nobody turns to Tillable. It's Tillable that's turning to land owners and tries to convince them to not renew their contracts with farmers so Tillable can negotiate new contracts with higher prices, likely with the same farmers (as farming is very much a local thing, you can't farm a piece of land from a thousand miles away).
  - randomdata 6y ago
    That only brings us back to the question of why landowners wouldn't go directly to the farmer and ask for the hypothetical $1,200 that Tillable would also ask of them? It is not exactly difficult to figure out who the farmers are in your local area, and it is especially not very difficult to figure out which ones are the hungry ones willing to pay top dollar, if that is your goal. Chances are they have already been hounding you for years. Exactly because people don't normally seek farmland a thousand miles away, where there could potentially be a benefit in new introductions, it remains unclear where Tillable fits.
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      And that brings us back to my original answer: why would they? Trying to extract maximum profit from the counterparty is adversarial, whereas a relationship between a land owner and a neighbourhood farmer most likely is cooperative. EDIT: for the same reason, I don't think Tillable has a chance of working, and to the extent it does, it's actively destructive.
      - randomdata 6y ago
        And now we're just talking in circles. Before your original 'answer', the scenarios presented were that farmers who: 1. Want to extract as much money as possible will turn directly to the farmers willing to pay top dollar to maximize the take. 2. Want to build solid relationships with farmers will turn directly to farmers to find a suitable fit. The question presented before your original reply was in trying to understand where Tillable fits. Your answer did not provide that information, and your follow up still does not attempt to answer the question. Your edit seems to suggest that they don't fit, as was already established, which leaves us wondering what your original response was for?
    - luckylion 6y ago
      I believe it's similar to smart phones being produced by humans at the other end of the world who live in bunk beds, have 10-12 hour shifts and barred windows + nets below so they don't jump out trying to kill themselves. Most people at this end of the world are not okay with those conditions and do not tolerate them if they know about them. But put a suit at Apple and another suit at Foxconn between the consumer and the producer and they don't know about it. When it comes out, people are appalled and Apple & Foxconn have to shift strategies or face consumers shunning them. Tillable are those suits. Land owners are not in the business of maximizing profits at any cost, but if you approach them with a much better offer for their land, they don't see the ways how you're able to afford that offer, much like the smart phone buyer does not know why it doesn't cost $100 more. When people profit from something, they are usually not too concerned with the details and accept that things happen that they wouldn't allow if they knew about it, by turning a blind eye (blinded by the profit, you might say).

luckylion 6y ago

"Willingness" vs "No other choice but shut down". It's similar to how you're "willing" to "accept" increased taxes. You don't have to, of course, you can leave the country, but I wouldn't consider that willing acceptance. As TeMPOral mentioned in a sibling comment, mostly their long-standing relationship, and his non-predatory business model. Right now, he's a land owner. If he uses Tillable, he's a property investor.

gdhbcc 6y ago

Presumably tillable will make the same dela to every landowner in the area, reducing the competition between landowner and therefore enabling the increase in prices. In essence, tillable becomes the only landowner

YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago

>> If the farmer is willing to accept a $1200 price, then what prevents the land owner from charging $1200 right now? The same reasons that have kept my landlord from raising the rent me and my partner pay in over 14 years now. When we asked him if he didn't want a raise (we were concerned he was not making enough and would have to sell the house) he said that no, he prefers to know that the house is rented long-term and he doesn't have to find a new tennant every few months. So, basically: stability. Some people tend to value that very highly. I know I (and my partner) do, which is btw the reason why we've stayed in the same place for over 14 years. That and all the scare stories of asshole landlords we've heard from friends who moved frequently (we're in the UK btw).