Any more ex-Fonterra suppliers out there?

[oldrider]

It's fun being in the middle of a situation when an MBA equipped account manager suddenly realises that's the opportunity he's missed. The means of production is key to everything in any economic equation. It's been ideologically diminished. In the meantime I'm collecting the kudos for preventing disasters and saving a million or so off a client's annual bill because we treat them with respect, not as a cash cow. The long view is something Western society does not value.

Wouldn't the sole purpose of production be consumption? (or why bother) - all else is relative - develop need exploit greed. The American dream?

[scrivy]

Surely all suppliers to Fonterra have penalty interest payments in their supply contracts for late/overdue payments?

Damn phone....

[slofox]

I wonder what would happen if I tried putting all my creditors on a three month wait for payment deal...bet I'd end up in the shit.

[sidecar bob]

I wonder what would happen if I tried putting all my creditors on a three month wait for payment deal...bet I'd end up in the shit.

Yes, you would have the equivalent of three months bill payments in the bank, make the mistake of assuming you had far more money at your disposal that you actually had, going out & wasting it on frivolous whims, ending up broke & properly in the shit.
Paying your bills on the due date gives you a very realistic idea of your actual financial position.
Even one month at my small place would be worth a whole lot more than a nice brand new sports or adventure bike from most manufacturers.

[Ocean1]

Surely all suppliers to Fonterra have penalty interest payments in their supply contracts for late/overdue payments?

Damn phone....

Probably. I wouldn't know, I've never had a contract with them.

Which leaves, (as far as written agreement are concerned) my terms and conditions on one hand and their correspondence of several months ago on the other, elements of which which directly contradict a whole raft of stuff in my terms and conditions.

If it went to court I assume their lawyers would have been seen to be more "correct" in their handiwork than the std Auckland Law Society based content of my terms and conditions. Which is why they can be confident there will be no formal legal challenge to their policy.

It matters not a jot, simply because when it all boils down to basics I don't agree to supply them services or goods on the basis of their new policy, carefully articulated via their correspondence or otherwise. Nor will I do so.

Free market in action.

[Gremlin]

Which is why they can be confident there will be no formal legal challenge to their policy.

There are plenty of instances where business tries to pull a fast one, relying on the fact that not everyone would challenge them, but a few might, and that's an acceptable trade off...

[Ocean1]

Yes, you would have the equivalent of three months bill payments in the bank, make the mistake of assuming you had far more money at your disposal that you actually had, going out & wasting it on frivolous whims, ending up broke & properly in the shit.
Paying your bills on the due date gives you a very realistic idea of your actual financial position.
Even one month at my small place would be worth a whole lot more than a nice brand new sports or adventure bike from most manufacturers.

I'm pretty conservative when it comes to managing cashflow, to the point where I usually pay on receipt of an invoice. There's a bunch of my suppliers who just can't handle that and get horribly confused by it all, but it means that at any given time I can look at my bank balance and know that it's almost all actually mine.

The one that usually sneaks up on me is ACC levies, which seem to arrive at completely random times demanding sums of money having little to do with either turnover or class of activity involved.

[Ocean1]

There are plenty of instances where business tries to pull a fast one, relying on the fact that not everyone would challenge them, but a few might, and that's an acceptable trade off...

Aye. That's the basis on which whole industries operate. Sell crap knowing it's crap but sell it at a high enough margin that the returns are already accounted for.

I often wonder how it is that their marketing overcomes their reputation to the extent that places like Te Wharehori and Michael Hill can still function.

As far as legal standing's concerned there's one thing I wonder about, isn't it the creditors that get to set the terms of the loan? Not the debtors? And let's face it that's exactly what a commercial account is: a loan.

[scrivy]

Aye. That's the basis on which whole industries operate. Sell crap knowing it's crap but sell it at a high enough margin that the returns are already accounted for.

I often wonder how it is that their marketing overcomes their reputation to the extent that places like Te Wharehori and Michael Hill can still function.

As far as legal standing's concerned there's one thing I wonder about, isn't it the creditors that get to set the terms of the loan? Not the debtors? And let's face it that's exactly what a commercial account is: a loan.

More precisely a credit account.
As with Romalpa clauses you still own the goods until paid for. ...

Damn phone....

[Ocean1]

More precisely a credit account.
As with Romalpa clauses you still own the goods until paid for. ...

Damn phone....

Quite right.

What's puzzled me over the years is the extent that there seems to be far better discounts available for those on a credit account than for those paying cash. Yes I know it reflects the higher turnover likely from account holders but the link is more tenuous than it used to be, so surely it'd make more sense to discount based on the size of last month's account than how it's paid.

Not to mention the significant fact that a cash purchase has zero risk associate with it and zero financing cost...

Oh, and more on Fonterra's new ethos: http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/7822...coops-business

Which I don't have a problem with, but they're already seen as somewhat mercenary, predatory. And the whole concept shows a typical blindness to anything but costs, missing the fact that defining the work to be done adequately would save at least as much...

Also, if there's ever a death rattle for a business it's the announcement that they're going to cut maintenance costs by 20%.

[sidecar bob]

More precisely a credit account.
As with Romalpa clauses you still own the goods until paid for. ...

Damn phone....

But seriously, how much is a used coffee machine locked in someone else's business worth to you? About the same as a used wheel bearing in someone else's car that can't be removed without an hours labour & total destruction of the part in question is worth to me.
Romalpa clauses are bullshit in the real world.

[scrivy]

But seriously, how much is a used coffee machine locked in someone else's business worth to you? About the same as a used wheel bearing in someone else's car that can't be removed without an hours labour & total destruction of the part in question is worth to me.
Romalpa clauses are bullshit in the real world.

Yip.
But the threat of having $8k of commercial crockery taken from a client that is overdue and ready to be used for a packed restaurant at a busy time 😈😈😈.
Just have a cop present.
Funny how businesses pay up then. ..

Damn phone....

[Grumph]

Quite right.

What's puzzled me over the years is the extent that there seems to be far better discounts available for those on a credit account than for those paying cash. Yes I know it reflects the higher turnover likely from account holders but the link is more tenuous than it used to be, so surely it'd make more sense to discount based on the size of last month's account than how it's paid.

Not to mention the significant fact that a cash purchase has zero risk associate with it and zero financing cost...

As a functioning member of the cash carrying underground, i can confirm you're correct. A couple of the places I deal with are prepared to give a discount for on line payments but not a cash purchase. Doesn't make any sense unless they want your contact details to bury you in offers.

Personally I'm resisting the move to a cashless society.

[Ocean1]

As a functioning member of the cash carrying underground, i can confirm you're correct. A couple of the places I deal with are prepared to give a discount for on line payments but not a cash purchase. Doesn't make any sense unless they want your contact details to bury you in offers.

Personally I'm resisting the move to a cashless society.

When we're all lined up ordering lunch somewhere up country I'm the one that gets funny looks when I pull out some cash rather than a card.

One of the Stupid Worlders will be among shortly to insist that it's not my cash anyway and Big Coffee is conspiring against us all...

There's a dozen or so of my suppliers that I have accounts with simply for the discounts. One of them won't actually deal with you otherwise but in spite of several applications to set up a proper account has failed to do so but nonetheless emails me the instant I fail to pay an invoice within 7 days.

[MarkH]

I'm not their fucking bank

I agree, cunty move by Fonterra. It is good that you are in a position of being able to tell them to go fuck themselves, I imagine there are some businesses hurt by the later payments that can't afford to walk away from the volume of work they get from Fonterra.