Discuss The Archers  permalink

Brookfield Farm Accounts Year Ending 31th July, 2011

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 50 of 52
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by Seveek (U13636812) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    ‘Ruth and David are surprised that Josh wants to help his mum with the milking. Ruth gets a bit emotional when she and Josh discuss the history of cows at Brookfield. Josh asks David if he can help with the cows every morning, in exchange for a pocket money rise, and his dad agrees it would be a fair deal. For the long term, David is concerned that the farm can’t afford to support both Pip and Josh. But Ruth encourages him to look on the bright side.’

    David needs to understand his own accounts and I am prepared to help. The farm will easily support him, Ruth, Pip, Josh and Ben. I have previously postulated that Brookfield is both capital and cash rich but that does not seem to be accepted by some posters and now the production team, guided by our erstwhile, agricultural advisor.

    But I thought that I would attempt to put some financial perspective on the farm accounts. I set out below a possible financial view. It is an Aunt Sally; I have been most conservative in my estimates and would welcome opinion as to their accuracy and for comment from the new Agricultural Advisor so that I can flex them accordingly.

    Unfortunately, the MB does not allow presentation in tabular form so I present the tables as best I can.

    This is a summary of Brookfield’s Balance Sheet:

    Total sale:
    Value of land & buildings, £7,500 per acre, 479 acres = £3,592,500
    Milk Quota £39,900
    Farm equipment £200,000
    Total value £3,792,500.00
    Return on investment at 5% = £189,625 per annum.

    Split sale:
    Value of land, £6,500.00 per acre, 449 acres = £2,918,500
    Farmhouse + potential barn conversions, including 20 acres £1,200,000
    Cottage, including 5 acres £500,000
    Bungalow, including 5 acres £500,000
    Milk Quota £39,900.00
    Farm equipment estimate £200,000
    Total value £5,118,500
    Return on investment at 5% = £255,925.00 per annum.

    Milk Quota is based on 1,140,000 litres at 4p = £39,900.00.

    The £ per acres for land only and the whole farm are based on latest Worcester prices.
    The farmhouse with potential is based on a similar property near here at £1.3m.
    Equivalents of the cottage and bungalow are valued hereabouts but minus a few grand for safety.

    There has been a lot of investment in farming in the last ten years by institutions and fund managers. They would expect in excess of my 5% conservative return.

    This is the Brookfield’s Profit and Loss Account:

    Milk. Productive cows 152.00, income per cow £1,950.00, Revenue £296,400, Cost per cow £1,065.01 Revenue £202,351, GP £94,049

    Heifers/followers. 85 animals, Cost per animal £250.00, cost £-21,250.00

    Beef. Sold per year 12, revenue per steer £2,415.60, per herd £28,987.20, cost per steer £500.00, per year £6,000.00, GP £22,987.20

    Sheep. 340 ewes, say, 340 lambs @ £150, revenue £51,000, cost per sheep £80, per year £27,200.00, GP £23,800


    Cereals. Acres 70, yield per acre 3, per ton £160 = Revenue £33,600. Cost per acre £206.60. Total cost £14,461.83, GP £19,138.17

    Oil seed rape. Acres 10, yield per acre 1.88, per ton £375 = Revenue £7,031.25. Cost per acre £200.88. Total cost £2,008.83. GP £5,022.42

    Potatoes. Acres 15, yield per acre 16, per ton £150 = Revenue £36,000.00. Cost per acre £1,440.00. Total cost £21,600.00. GP £14,400.00

    Set-aside. Aacres 8, yield per acre zero.

    SFP, acres 479 at £100 = GP £47,900

    Total Gross profit £206,046.78

    Less Gill's pension £-18,000.00
    Gross Profit £188,046.78

    Revised profit + additional milk if all milked £74,100.00

    New gross profit £262,146.78.

    Equals 5-7% of capital value depending on how valued and feels about right.

    Feed contribution crops.

    Beans, acres 12, yield per acre 6, per ton £185, sale value £13,320.00. Cost per acre £180.00, Total cost £2,160.00. Contribution £11,160.00

    Fodder beet acres, 10, yield per acre 17, per ton £28, sale value £4,760.00. Cost per acre £180.00, Total cost £1,800.00. Contribution £2,960.00

    Forage maize acres, 17, yield per acre 3, per ton £185, sale value £9,435.00. Cost per acre £180.00, Total cost £3,060.00. Contribution £6,375.00

    Total contribution from forage crops £20,495.00. Allowed for in milk costs.

    An exploration of the rationale.

    Milk. They have 190 cows. Litres per year is quoted as 7-9K. I have chosen 7,500 litres – 13,204 pints - and used 26p per litre. The price is probably 27-28p per litre depending on to whom they sell so I am at the lower end A penny a pint would give them a further £3K. Further, I have assumed 10% dry cows and 10% milk for calves so the calculation is based on 152 productive cows. But I think this is wrong as I am fairly sure that the 7.5K litres allows for this so have added it on so that the reader can see both effects. In any event, I have calculated cost based on the whole herd.

    Revenue – 13,204.23 pints per cow at 15p per pint = £1,950 by 152 cows = £296,400.

    I have used published, industry standard matrix for their costs:

    Forage & concentrate £78,916.50, Electric, fuel etc £44,460.00, Eddie wage £4992.00 (2 days at 6 hours per day at £8 PH per year), Vet's bills £33,345.00 (this must be much too high), Building and equipment maintenance £20,007.00, Depreciation on machinery, buildings etc. £20,007.00, replacements £21,118.50 giving a net cost of £222,846.00. Add back the own forage contribution of £20,495.00 gives a total cost of £202,351.00. Gross profit £94,049.

    They have a milk business with a gross profit of around £94K. Not a bad income on its own and we know it is not far away as they were happy to pay Sam and expensive vets a few years ago. Sam’s salary and cost of employment would have been around £35K, which Ruth now gets for 6 hours a day for only 5 days a week. It makes me feel tired. I’ll get a pizza.

    Heifers / followers. They have 85 animals and I estimate an annual cost per animal of £250.00, total cost £21,250.00 from the bottom line.

    Beef. They have 85 steers. I have estimated that they sell 12 per year (it should be nearer 50 as they sell at a rolling 18 months but use 12 as a minimum example). This is a very low estimate but a guide.

    Assuming the carcass is 800 LB, the usable 67.1% is sold to Joe P and the average retail price is £4.50 per LB (as at 27/7/11 and excluding fillet as it skews the average) giving a return of £2,415.60 per steer. The cost per steer is estimated at £500 giving a profit per steer of £1915.60 and £22,987.20 for the year. The cost is for the steer at the point of sale including butchery and selling and is accounted as each beast is sold. The cost of £500 is close if we consider that the ex-farm price for a 1000 lb beast is 76p per pound or around £760 and that farmer makes a living.

    I have not yet looked at the sheep too closely but estimated that they have 340 lambs per year, selling at £150 through Hassett Hills with a cost of £80 per lamb giving a gross profit of £23,800. The fleece sale just about equals the cost of shearing at the moment.

    Cereals. They have 70 acres of cereal. I have used a yield per acre of 3 tons and a price per ton of £160 = revenue £33,600. Cost per acre £206.60. Total cost £14,461.83. GP £19,138.17. I do not know what the crop is; feed or malt barley, feed or milling wheat. The general per acre yield is 2.8 to 4.5 ton per acre so I have used 3 tons. Feed barley is around £149, feed wheat £155-165 and milling wheat £175-185 so I think £160 reasonable.

    The cost per acre comes from a real farm. Seed £18.59, Sprays £63.31 and feriliser £78.99. I have estimated that Adam combines at 35 acres a day at £800 per day giving £34.29 an acre I have no idea about drying costs, and they may not be needed this year, but have allowed £800.00, £11.43 a ton giving a total variable cost £206.60. The GP is £273 per acre and £19,138 per year.

    Oil seed rape. Acres 10, yield per acre 1.88, per ton £375 = Revenue £7,031.25. Cost per acre £200.88. Total cost £2,008.83. GP £5,022.42

    Potatoes. Acres 15, yield per acre 16, per ton £150 = Revenue £36,000.00. Cost per acre £1,440.00. Total cost £21,600.00. GP £14,400.00.

    Potatoes yield 11-15 ton per acre on sandy soil and up to 25 in the Fens, I’ve assumed David’s soil is fairly rich so underestimate at 16 ton. I have used grade 2 Maris Piper for the revenue calculation and that is the current price. If they were King Edwards or Grade 1 then a significant premium would accrue. Published figures give £90 per ton cost.

    They grow fodder crops which I have calculated and added back into the milk calculations:

    Beans. 12 acres, 6 ton per acre at £185.00 = £13,320.00. Cost per acre £180.00 = £2,160.00. Contribution £11,160.00
    Fodder beet. 10 acres, 17 ton per acre at £28.00 = £4,760.00. Cost per acre £180.00 = £1,800. Contribution £2,960.00.
    Forage maize. 17 acres, 3.00 ton per acre at £185.00 = £9,435.00. Cost per acre £180.00 = £3,060. Contribution £6,375.00

    Total contribution of home grown forage / fodder £20,495.

    Set-aside. Acres 8, yield per acre zero.

    SFP, acres 479 at £100 = GP £47,900

    Total Gross profit £206,046.78.
    Less Gill’s pension £18,000.
    Gross Profit £188,046.78
    Plus additional if all milked £74,100
    Total Income £262,146.78.

    So, here we have a couple sitting on 4-6 million pounds of realisable assets with an income before tax of well over £200,000 per annum who feel unable to give their children employment. In the real world, examples available, the children would each be built a house and given a job, even if it meant a bit of diversification or expansion.

    For example, Pip is quite right; if they butchered and marketed their own lambs, they might make another £40K per year which would be a reasonable start for Pip.

    The only problem is, they have more animals per acre than it can sustain but more of that another time.

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by dickie (U2267358) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Interesting.

    Even if you're only half right, they're doing OK (and employing Pip and then Josh would save on wages for Eddie).

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by stolenkisses (U6230663) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    I'm a bit out of touch and taking most of your figs on trust but I think £150 per lamb is optimistic.

    Plus we can't ignore the P&L a/c. Fuel, wages, vets, accountancy...

    sk

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Well that *is* interesting - and what a lot of work.

    I've always said Pip had a right to her input - and her parents have a right to say `no'. A continuation of the inter-generational arguments we've *always* had in TA. Dan/Phil then Phil/David now David/PiPandJosh.

    So you think she has a point then?

    JPBS

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Even if Seveek has correct figures - it won't make a jot of difference to the sws. They want people to think that the dopeys are ordinary people struggling with what life chucks at them so they can't be portrayed as millionaires as brian fulfills that role.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by A Frend (U2249422) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    So what would be Lizzard's cut and Ken'un's if the whole enterprise is sold? It'd be in their interest to see the autioneers on the farm.

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by BlackSheepBoy (U11150138) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Compliments on your hard work, this could keep us going for weeks.

    All this agonising about how many jobs the farm will sustain; I cannot see why that is the specific worry.

    If they are both interested in being farmers, surely the best he can do is to encourage them, and meanwhile it is a compliment to himself that they would like to follow in his footsteps.

    David (or his writer) is speaking as if Pip, and perhaps Josh will arrive, education completed, and he will be committted and obliged to find them work and wages, and ensure their future at Brookfield.

    But surely if at that stage he cannot pay them, then they as young adults will WANT to take resposibility for themselves. They will either join in with him to make the farm more profitable, or alternatively they will choose to work elsewhere where the prospects are better.

    I assume that they will actively see it that way. But at this stage, why does he need to worry, and why does he need to depress their idea of farming?

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by Digitalis lividus et niger (U8605497) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    D'you suppose they'll have taken note, or indeed know about, the generational dispute at Bridge Farm? Pip might well turn into a female Tom, I feel. It's too early to assess Josh's potential.

    Dig

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by Byeeee (U14697115) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    "But surely if at that stage he cannot pay them, then they as young adults will WANT to take resposibility for themselves."

    Oh, you mean after they have studied Tom and Helen as role models? smiley - winkeye

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Dr Toad Leg (U14567813) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Most sincere gratters on your hard work, Seveek.

    Based on your figures, I suggest that the Dopeys send the Pipistrelle on a gap decade or two.

    Sorry if this sounds a bit chippy, but I am listening to Ed Reardon's Week at the moment and I just can't help myself.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Nelson_G (U13801071) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Splendid work.

    Go Pip (I've quite taken to her of late)

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by JacksParakeetBeingDe-Nested (U2979858) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Many thanks for such an interesting tour de force, Seveek. I've not had time to read all the detail, but your conclusions on the bottom line make highly questionable the basic plot assumption that BF is bumping along without producing much of an income for the Archers now employed there, let alone their progeny. It's unlikely that the Agri Advisor would be allowed to break cover and post here in reply, but if it happened I'd love to read it.

    I hesitate to ask a goose to lay another golden egg, but is there any chance you could do the same for Bridge Farm when you have several hours to spare?

    jp

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by Seveek (U13636812) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    ‘I'm a bit out of touch and taking most of your figs on trust but I think £150 per lamb is optimistic.

    Plus we can't ignore the P&L a/c. Fuel, wages, vets, accountancy...’

    Thank you, Stolen. A lady on the radio last year explained how she was getting £60-80 for a lamb carcass but, by having it butchered and marketing herself, the return was £287 and I have articles substantiating this fact.. I have deliberately been conservative in all figures but I reckon they would get about the amount quoted via Hasselt Hills but that our Pip could get £280 odd giving her an interesting job and an income in excess of the national average.

    I’ve been very, very pessimistic about costs. Fuel, wage etc are allowed for in the cost per acre calculation and the cows and sheep. I have allowed for Electric, fuel etc. at £44,460.00, Vet's bills £33,345.00 (this must be much too high), Building and equipment maintenance £20,007.00, Depreciation on machinery, buildings etc. £20,007.00, replacements £21,118.50. Crop costs are all in. They are too high.

    I think I have allowed enough.

    ‘So you think she has a point then?’

    Most definitely she has. Plus, a great experience for her to learn the trade, visit the restaurants and so on. David should nurture their interest, give Pip some freedom and six months and see what she can do.

    ‘They want people to think that the dopeys are ordinary people struggling with what life chucks at them so they can't be portrayed as millionaires as brian fulfills that role.’

    You are not wrong Anna. They have decided, because they read the stories about the 80% of farms with under 100 acres having problems, it must apply to Ambridge. But they are wrong.

    ‘I assume that they will actively see it that way. But at this stage, why does he need to worry, and why does he need to depress their idea of farming?’

    You are right; I certainly would not do that, Larry, without a proper discussion.

    ‘I hesitate to ask a goose to lay another golden egg, but is there any chance you could do the same for Bridge Farm when you have several hours to spare?’

    I find it most interesting to do, Jacks, and my figures are based on current prices and real farmer’s published accounts. I have most information about Brookfield but nothing about Bridge. I do not even know how many leeks Tony pulls in a day.

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by DracoM1 (U14252039) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Lamb prices up here about what you suggest, seveek, so darn sarf might well be marginally better.

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Thank you very much, Seveek; as you have done before, you've made a cracking job of this.

    Do you mind if I take it away from the board and store it to brood over a bit? If I ever quote from it, I will give the credit to you.

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by anagramladysin (U14258840) on Wednesday, 3rd August 2011

    Brilliant and realy helpful, Saveek.
    Thank you -- what a lot of work!
    I've always *known* that farmers are a pessimistic and grumpy bunch but this proves it. It goes back to Shakespeare -- a "farmer that hanged himself on the expectation of plenty". (MacB). When things are tight, the farmers are safe. It's when there's plenty that they have to actually compete.

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 16.

    Posted by Digitalis lividus et niger (U8605497) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Seveek, you're wonderful. (Or haven't you enough to do?.....ducks for cover)
    Can you, or anybody of course, give an idea of what a live meat lamb would fetch nowadays? I got between £35-£45 ten or so years ago, depending on weight, and I'd hate to feel I was Dun! Of course the value added could be enormous when slaughtering, butchering etc are factored in, and raising a lamb costs next to nothing if you let the ewe wean it and have good pasture.
    I await your slings and arrows.

    Dig

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by DracoM1 (U14252039) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Light lambs under 35kg were the dearest on 2nd Aug locally [Eng;land NW ] averaging 186.69p/kg

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by RS Acre (U6057963) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Wow, Seveek, & thank you.

    Also - wot Anna said.


    Cheers all.
    RSy

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by Janluke (U14743200) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Well done on an impressive set of figures.

    Although TA prides itself on its agricultural detail I don’t think they will ever let the facts get in the way of a good story. The country, we’re told, is in recession and we’re all worried about the future and our pensions(although I have met very few people who seem affected or bothered other than a wee whinge about petrol prices). The SWs need to reflect this mood. So while Mr and Mrs Middleincome and their two charming offspring listen to TA while liberally spreading balsamic vinegar and olive oil over bits of stale bread they can take comfort in the thought that we’re all in this together even the dopeys

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 20.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    TA is recession proof. No one is suffering like a lot of rural people are irl.

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by kitty buttoon (U13699996) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Thank you so much, Seveek- what an interesting read, and let's hope the team employ you as a consultant very soon!

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by Digitalis lividus et niger (U8605497) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Thank you so much, Seveek- what an interesting read, and let's hope the team employ you as a consultant very soon! 

    Best idea in a decade.

    Dig

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by PollyGlot (U4652497) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Great stuff Seveek. But what about the CAP payments? Or have I missed something?

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by LilianFred (U14714921) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    I think you're amazing, Seveek! Bows respectfully.

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Happysadarchersfan (U2702014) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Interesting? a bloody amazing piece of work if you ask me.

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 24.

    Posted by Seveek (U13636812) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Thank you. The CAP is under SFP.

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by PollyGlot (U4652497) on Thursday, 4th August 2011

    Thanks for indicating that Seveek. Just think - the Dopeys are rolling..and still they get subsidies...from us!

    What you've done is a great eye-opener and no mistake Seveek.

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 28.

    Posted by dickie (U2267358) on Friday, 5th August 2011

    I don't think that many would defend the Common Agricultural Policy structure of subsidy payments: think how much Brian will be getting!

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by RAFromSw (U14574822) on Friday, 5th August 2011

    I don't know if you're in business, but a tremendous bit of work like that is screaming for an Executive Summary.

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Sallyruth (U14589711) on Friday, 5th August 2011

    May have missed it, cannot see the figure for repayment for the bank loan they got when they bought the land from Phil and Jill? Which paid for the cottage which gives Shula and Liz their share of the money when Jill dies.

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 31.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Friday, 5th August 2011

    Do you know how much the bank loan was sally?
    JPBS

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by dickie (U2267358) on Friday, 5th August 2011

    I think that this was discussed relatively recently and that it is not an enormous figure in the context of the assets as estimated by Seveek. Trying to find the discussion takes more time than I have available!

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by ayrshire-cowman (U2259898) on Sunday, 7th August 2011

    Latest official dairy farm incomes - years to 31st March

    2010 - £56,000

    2011 £42,500

    AFAIK these figures include all income ie diversifications are included ( eg contracting and B&B).

    The average dairy herd is now about 150 cows so = Brookfield size.

    They do not include any payment for manual labour of the business partners , so this would typically include two people`s earnings - eg man and wife , or father and son.

    I don`t think they include finance charges or rent either.

    Thus it is quite possible for the parrtners in a typical dairy enterprise to be earning less than the minimal wage, and certainly working well over 40 hours - say 60-70 hr weeks for no overtime either.

    Plus OP please note , the return from owning land comes from its likely long term appreciation in value. To expect a handsome annual return into the bargain is a non starter.


    Thus after paying a "rental" to Jill of 15K? Ruth and David might have £25,000 to live on for 100 hours plus a week labour, and here is the catch that ALSO includes sums available to reinvest in the business.

    A new milking parlour ( to keep cow numbers rising , and milking times down) would easily be 150-200K)


    There are clear reasons why half the dairy farmers in the UK have given up in the last 12 years - to no advantage whatsoever of the remaining half who are now working twice as hard for less return.


    Please consider that the UK has the lowest farm milk price in all the EU ( as at April 2011).


    That means we are getting less than they do in Poland . Estonia . Eire etc.

    They are even getting more in New Zealand , without having to house their cows or young stock.

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by ayrshire-cowman (U2259898) on Sunday, 7th August 2011

    These are official costings compiled by DEFRA for the UK Gov.

    They do include rent I see now , but they also include the single farm payment , without which these dairy farms would be in severe deficit.

    Thus is the notorius EU subsidy transferred away from the producers , to the dairy processors and ultimately the retailers and consumers. Whose subsidy is it?

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Grimly-Feendish (U2441374) on Sunday, 7th August 2011

    Hmmm! So Brookfield has 479 acres eh? Letting the land to travellers at say, 20 caravans per acre at £40.00 per caravan per week (which is the going rate) = £19,926,400 per year.

    So all their hard work yields a mere £262,146.78 against near £20M.

    Or, have I got my sums wrong.




    It is, as they say in modern parlance, a no brainer. I know what I'd do.

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by ayrshire-cowman (U2259898) on Sunday, 7th August 2011

    Er planning permision for caravans?

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 37.

    Posted by Grimly-Feendish (U2441374) on Sunday, 7th August 2011

    No problemo! If Borcetshire Council would wish to implement planning reg's they would be looking at a bill of millions in legal fees. So the Dopeys could simply "request" a pay-off around £9m to get their "guests" to move on peacefully. A bargain for the council.

    It's all win win for the Dopeys for the first time in their miserable lives.

    Report message38

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 33.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Thursday, 11th August 2011

    I think that this was discussed relatively recently and that it is not an enormous figure in the context of the assets as estimated by Seveek. Trying to find the discussion takes more time than I have available!  Dickie - I've posed a question on N & Q about the bank loan David and Ruth had to take out to finance Phil and Jills retirement ..

    (I just wanted to bump this informative thread also .. )
    JPBS

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by Sallyruth (U14589711) on Thursday, 11th August 2011

    According to The Archers Annual 2001

    David and Ruth would have to find £35,000 a year out of the business before making any profit, £18,000 for Phil and Jill's pension plus around £17,000 for the INTEREST charges on the loan for the land purchase.

    Report message40

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Thursday, 11th August 2011

    Thanks Sallyruth ..
    JPBS

    Report message41

  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by Seveek (U13636812) on Thursday, 11th August 2011

    Phil and Jill retired to Glebe Cottage in 1999, apparently buying it helped by David buying some land from Phil on mortgage. It may well have been £17K PA in interest.

    But I discounted it in my calculations because they subsequently sold Woodbine to Christine in 2005 when she decided not to move into the rebuilt Police House.

    So they should have paid of that debt.

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by Sallyruth (U14589711) on Thursday, 11th August 2011

    **they should have paid of that debt.**

    But we never heard that they did, or if Jill and Phil's pension was index-linked and they popped the money into a trust fund for the pension,


    Although,come to think, didn't they fund the cost of increasing the herd off Swiss Brown's with Aunty Chris's purchase price? Or pay the Agency for Sam? Or was it the Herfords?

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 43.

    Posted by JacksParakeetBeingDe-Nested (U2979858) on Thursday, 11th August 2011

    Around the turn of the milennium inflation was 2% or less AFAIR,and index-linking was not the big deal it has become latterly; so the pension is probably not indexed. Would the pension have reduced upon Phil's death? Can't recall this being mentioned at the time.

    jp

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 44.

    Posted by dickie (U2267358) on Friday, 12th August 2011

    For what it's worth, annual RPI inflation was 2.9% at 31 Dec 2000.

    There was certainly no mention of indexing the pension and I don't recall anything being said of what happened on Phil's death. However, it wouldn't surprise me if the pension was £9k each (this would be sensible from an income tax perspective) and that Phil's pension died with him.

    Report message45

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 45.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Saturday, 13th August 2011

    Just bumping this as it is being discussed on another thread
    JPBS

    Report message46

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 46.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Saturday, 13th August 2011

    Or you could have put a link for it into the other thread, of course, if all OI wanted was to read it.

    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 47.

    Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Saturday, 13th August 2011

    Well OI's found it since the bump, so all's well, and thanks

    Report message48

  • Message 49

    , in reply to message 45.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Sunday, 14th August 2011

    So where are we up to now? Given the sale of the cottage - a plus?

    But increasing the herd and/or Phil and Jills pension - a possible minus?

    Or are there too many unknowns now?
    JPBS

    Report message49

  • Message 50

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by RichCountrySquire (U14573696) on Sunday, 14th August 2011

    Incredible -but I just dont reckon brookfield brings in close to £200K how could it?? and 5% ROC is very nice indeed if coudl get that on my modest investments I would be very happy

    If it were true then they would be chuckling all the way to the bank - but frankly when oh when are we going to get some figures to play with by the SW's on this issue

    But brilliant post btw

    Report message50

Back to top

About this Board

Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

This messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.