Aug
22
Farmland REITs, from Pitt T. Maner III
August 22, 2011 |
Michael Burry, of "The Big Short" fame, mentioned farmland a while back as an (the only?) investment he saw having value.
It appears now that there are companies that are developing and possibly planning the introduction of the "first" farmland REITs. One could imagine that this might have an appeal to the general public looking for an alternative to gold and other perceived "safe havens". Buying a piece of the farm…
Here is one company that has been mentioned as being interested in introducing farmland REITs. Those with experience in this area can critique if such a thing makes sense or not…or whether watching re-runs of "Green Acres" is a better bet for city slickers.
"Our goal is to develop an agricultural and farmland investment vehicle that provides unique value to our shareholders. We seek to achieve this goal by owning farmland that is leased to independent farmers that mostly produce row crops. We own six farms in California, each of which is leased to farmers producing fruits and vegetables."
Stefan Jovanovich comments:
European syndicates wanting to get into the "beef" boom paid for the land and the Herefords and other stock that were brought in to Kansas to improve the breed of the wild Texas cattle that Mr. Hammond, Swift and Armour were slaughtering to great profit. Somehow, the profits were never realized, even though a number of enterprising cowboys got their start with their own spreads by liberating the "half-breeds" that wandered off the Europeans' land. The author of one study described the experience of the Dutch investors as a "long slow ride to nowhere".
Comments
6 Comments so far
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- Older Archives
Resources & Links
- The Letters Prize
- Pre-2007 Victor Niederhoffer Posts
- Vic’s NYC Junto
- Reading List
- Programming in 60 Seconds
- The Objectivist Center
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Tigerchess
- Dick Sears' G.T. Index
- Pre-2007 Daily Speculations
- Laurel & Vics' Worldly Investor Articles
Tulipomania
Until viewing Stone’s Wall Street II, Money Never Sleeps, I had not been aware of the historical significance of the Dutch saga in speculative bubbles.
See… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania
When one reads of ventures such as Gladstone, the question of credulity appears to be as much an issue of the general conditions of the investment environment at present as it does the quantitative relativity of the security itself a la valuation.
SJ’s comment directs us to that central thread…
Is the proposition truly an investment vehicle or merely a flexionic taxi looking to take us for a ride until that first fork in the road?
Growing up around farming, I have witnessed first hand how the suits take the farmers to the cleaners on a systematic basis. Given the deteriorating state of both regional and global marketplaces, it takes little here to make a convincing argument that this scheme smacks as more of the same — only here it is the investor more so than the farmer that will get the horns after being sold the bull…
dr
Farmland in my opinion will be the most valuable aset class n earth in 25 years time.
By then there will be close to 8 or 9 billion people to feed and less productive land to do so with, and with no discerable way to increase yield from existing land.
All in all, when 9 billion people compete for 5 billion people’s worth of food, thos who are growing and selling it will be best placed to profit.
That said of course, new technologies could allow us to increases tiled, but that requires the input of capital to allow farmers to implement new methods and chemicals, which ultimately also means food prices have to rise to fund that.
Buy farmland, they are certanily not naking any more and we certainly will always need it.
Hi FI,
Agreed on the importance of farms and agriculture. However, from an investment standpoint…
The problem with a static set of assumptions, for instance, as assumed in the referenced Gladstone deal, is that the farmland you acquire will be viable 5, 10, 20, 30 years from now.
Global warming is projected to drastically affect that set of assumptions albeit corporate farming issues as if the industry continues to consolidate (or not).
In Maine, there is a rebirth of small independent farms in the past five years. People are seeking alternative, local approaches to food that is not organically altered by man — as an example.
How will such dynamics affect that same set of assumptions?
Is it as the Chair hummed… “Only the Shadow knows…”
dr
Douglas,
I agree with your points. Farmland as an investment asset should be viewed as lng-term, therfore it is essential to consider the viability and value of the asset (i.e. its production capacity) in 10 or 20 years time.
Soil quality and modern, sustainable farming practices and the availability of and rights to use water are all important factros to consider in the longevity of a farmland investment.
Many people overlook the fact that sustainability in practice and protfitability in the long-term are not mutually exclusive concepts and in fact one leads to the other.
DG
DG,
Agreed.
dr
Sorry, but I’ve heard it all before. As one who survived the 80s in agriculture and recently anticipated (and profited from) what I’ve called the thirty year bull in corn, I find this discussion interesting. The saying that farmland should be bought because they aren’t making any more of it comes from at least as far back as 1980, just prior to the inevitable price decline that ruined many farmers in the mid 80s. It is interesting that comments here are so similar to what I remember from that time just prior to the farm depression of the 80s.
Farmland REITs appear to me to be right on time. The last three times we saw something like this in agriculture, once the top was in and we saw demand destruction, it took twelve years - not for the price to go back up - but for the price of corn to stop going down. The declines were from 1920-1932, 1948-1960, and 1974-1986.
Maybe it really is different this time . . . but it sure looks the same to me.