Right to Repair

[Tones]

Banks and Futures markets would love information like this. There have been many farms sold by the banks just near harvest time, was strange how they knew but not now

 

[AusDave]

What can be done with that kind info? Who would pay money for it?

We’ll apart from banks and other financial entities, grain traders, agro chemical companies, fertiliser companies, IRS/Taxation entities, by subterfuge other competing machinery companies, machinery attachment and component companies, various dealership networks, your neighbours with an interest in buying your farm, the list is endless.
Some of the above will pay big dollars for precision data and JD rakes it in.
And what do you you get for supplying all this valuable data? You get to pay JD to come and repair the electronics which sends the data to them.

 

[Truck Shop]

Wilbur Ellis, McGregor, ADM, Harvest States, Monsanto.

 

[John C.]

How would that data be used? The amount of grain being produced is evident what it is sold. No one needs to pay John Deere for that info. The amount of fertilizer used is known when it is purchased. The amount of land being farmed is general knowledge. What benefit would anyone outside of the individual farmer get from the kinds of data being produced by a tractor or combine?

 

[Birken Vogt]

I think the idea is that the entities listed above would know how much is being harvested way before anybody else. Sure it is incomplete data but it is also very advanced data. If the farmer decides to sit on that grain for a while before selling, they already have an idea how much he is sitting on.

 

[AusDave]

You would also know what sort of crop farmers had over the entire country, state by state county by county right down to the farm gate. If you're wanting to target your sales of whatever farmers need, you'll want to start with those who have the most cash and able to buy. This is especially important if you have a actual sales team of real people on commissions rather then shotgun mail outs.

 

[terex herder]

What can be done with that kind info? Who would pay money for it?

There are billions of dollars traded on the Chicago Board of Trade. Having hard data will give an edge. Deere planters phone mother deere with the numbers of acres planted. A few years of data from big operators from several locations all the sudden you can handicap the weekly crop progress report that USDA publishes every Monday afternoon during the season. Some years it wouldn't make a difference, but very wet or very dry years it can matter. Same thing with acres covered with the field sprayer. Yield reports can also give an edge to those who can afford to buy the data. You don't even need the yield numbers, the length of time the unloading auger was on and harvest speed will give the same information.

Deere claims it needs the information to improve the usability of the equipment. Its much easier to set the price point at what the farmer will pay if you can put a value on the productivity gains. Cost of production has nothing at all to do with the list price.

Knowing the location of the equipment also helps john deere finance locate equipment with late payments.

 

[John C.]

I don't see anything there that would be of any actual monetary use to anyone. All that information is available for nothing or a small fee through farm organizations and such. I get some of that data from a couple of farm related magazines.

 

[terex herder]

Wilbur Ellis, McGregor, ADM, Harvest States, Monsanto.

Monsanto doesn't exist anymore. Bayer bought them.

 

[terex herder]

Its the timeliness of the data. Not that long ago I saw a report that managed money had a net long position in Chicago corn of about 350,000 contracts. Each contract is 5,000 bushels at a value of about $6.50, so corn alone is over $11 Billion.

 

[John C.]

I'll need some sort of proof to believe any of those explanations. What I've seen of Deere is that everything is top secret. They might use the information looking at their own production schedules for new machines, but I doubt very highly they would give or sell any of that information to anyone else and I still don't see anyway for anyone to use that info for profit.

 

[Tones]

I don't see anything there that would be of any actual monetary use to anyone. All that information is available for nothing or a small fee through farm organizations and such. I get some of that data from a couple of farm related magazines.

Late last year I helped my bro in law with the barley harvest. He reconded on getting 60 bushels to the acre, a fantastic crop. In fact he got 90 bushels to the acre off 9500 acres and is storing the lot. He runs old school tractors and headers but has fitted auto steering. So someone off farm will know exactly what he has and can use it for leverage if they so desire. Remember farmers are price takers not price makers.

 

[Truck Shop]

Monsanto doesn't exist anymore. Bayer bought them.

what's the difference? none.

 

[Truck Shop]

That's insider trading.

 

[dieseldog5.9]

Deere CEO should be ashamed of himself taking a 30 million dollar bonus on the backs of the Farmer and the American Auto Worker.

 

[Tones]

That's insider trading.

Is that still a thing?

 

[Truck Shop]

Is that still a thing?

Always has been and always will be.

 

[John C.]

It's pretty close to a monopoly now. They own the largest chunk of the chemical business concerning agriculture.
The workers went on strike because of that and got most all that they were asking for in the negotiations. I do agree though that they will argue about about a few cents in raise and modest improvement in benefits and then give the lions share to the executives. They are also stealing money from the shareholders when they do that.

 

[56wrench]

I think a lot of the comments are overthinking this. To play devils advocate, i will look at this from a warranty aspect. Most of my neighbors who run new or relatively new iron are their own worst enemy. They buy the biggest machine of their favourite colour but always want to 'chip' everything. Trucks, pick-up trucks, combines, tractors, sprayers. Did i miss anything? Then have reliability issues and bitch that warranty doesn't want to cover the cost of repair. As long as the machine is on warranty, it should be 'hands off' unless its regular maintenance. Many years ago i had to deal with customers who did all sorts of crap and then wanted warranty to cover the cost of what they screwed up. 99% of the farmers i know only know how to do basic repairs. That's one reason why they trade regularly. Access to software beyond certain parameters is asking for trouble from a service point of view. Hey, after the warranty is off a machine or engine, who cares if they double the hp and grenade other components. That's their problem and they can factor that cost into their bottom line

 

[Tinkerer]

As long as the machine is on warranty, it should be 'hands off' unless its regular maintenance.

No truer words were ever said or printed !
The software access in machines under warranty should be locked in some manner.
An encrypted password comes to mind, with each dealer having their own password.