Russia’s 2019/20 wheat production forecast at 67m mt: minister
Russia’s 2019/20 wheat production will come in at around 67 million
mt at its current trajectory, which would be a fall of about 4% from
last year’s output, the country’s agriculture minister said in a meeting
Monday.
“We will probably have about 108-110 million mt (of grain) … We plan
to collect around 67 million mt of wheat,” Minister of Agriculture,
Dmitry Patrushev, told President Vladimir Putin in a meeting transcript
released by the Kremlin on Monday.
When asked about the target for the 2018/19 season’s exports,
Patrushev estimated total grain exports of 42 million mt with wheat
contributing 36 million mt.
Patrushev stressed the goal of becoming an exporter of “high quality wheat”.
The meeting comes on the same day Russia’s agriculture ministry was
due to publish its weekly grain export figures, although it was yet to
publish at the time of writing.
The pace of wheat exports this marketing year has been controversial,
with the government looking at informal ways of slowing sales that have
raced ahead despite output falling by about 20% year-on-year.
The most recent data, published a week ago, put wheat exports 11% higher year-on-year at 25.3 million mt.
AgriCensus Prices Over 500 daily Spot Marker and Forward Curve price assessments for wheat, corn, soy, barley, vegoils, meals and seeds.
“Study grain long enough
and the world shrinks.” Dan Morgan
As some of you may know, I am currently working on a book that will look at the ways in which the grains markets have changed in the forty years since Dan Morgan wrote Merchants of Grainback in 1979.
At the time, Dan had
already identified many of the trends that would drive the grain markets into
the future. On the demand side, he
wrote about population growth, rising incomes, changing diets, and in
particular the increase in demand for meat protein. On the supply side, he
foresaw that agricultural yields would continue to improve. He also foresaw the
increase in international trade that would accompany globalisation.
But what didn’t he foresee? What have been the shifts in the past 40 years that have moulded the current grain trade? To help me answer that question I went to see Arnauld Petit, the Executive Director of the IGC, the International Grains Council, based in London.
By way of introduction, Arnauld told me that the IGC is an intergovernmental organisation that was formed post World War II in order to ensure an egalitarian distribution of wheat. Today, the IGC has 56 member countries, and its mission is to facilitate international cooperation in the grains trade; to promote openness and fairness in the grains sector; and to contribute to grain market stability and to enhance world food security. It does this by improving market transparency through information sharing, analysis and consultation on market and policy developments.
In 2012, the IGC joined the Secretariat of the Agricultural Market
Information System (AMIS), an initiative established at the request of the
Agriculture Ministers of the G20. AMIS covers four crops (wheat, maize, rice
and soybeans) and aims to promote food market transparency and the coordination
of policy action in response to market uncertainty.
The GTC holds an annual conference in London in June that brings together the public and private sector in the world of grain. Last year the conference attracted over 350 delegates from 60 countries. I made a note to myself to attend this year.
When I contacted Arnauld I
told him about my book project, and I warned him that I would be asking him to
list what he considered to have been the top five most significant shifts in
the grain market in the last forty years. He had since given it some thought,
and we got right into the heart of the matter.
“Number 1 on the list,” he
told me, “must be the shift to Asia, particularly the economic take-off in
China. Rising consumer incomes, combined with urbanisation, have had a relevant
effect on diet and food demand. As the Chinese get richer they eat more meat
and fish. This demand for meat has driven the huge increase in vegetable
protein imports, and has been the driver behind the explosion in soybean
production worldwide. Forty years ago, China imported only a marginal quantity
of soybeans. In 2019 the country is expected to import 87.5 million mt, more
than half of the total trade in soya.
“At the same time,” he
added, “Asian people are eating more wheat products. This has in turn increased
their demand for wheat.”
“And Number 2 on the
list?” I prompted.
“Before the First World
War, Russia was a major exporter of wheat, but by the 1960s the Soviet Union
had turned around to become a major importer of grains. In 1979/80, the USSR
imported 12 million mt of wheat and 14.5 million mt of corn; and in 1984/5, the
bloc imported a massive 28 million mt of wheat and 20 million mt of corn. Now
the situation is quite different: in 2018/19 Russia alone is expected to export
more than 36 million mt of wheat and 3 million mt of corn. Meanwhile, Ukraine
is expected to export over 16 million mt of wheat and 28 million mt of corn.
That is an impressive turnaround that nobody would have been able to predict.”
“Do you think Russian exports will continue to grow,” I asked.
“Not necessarily,” he
replied. “Most of the new production is in Siberia where it is too cold to plant
winter wheat. The short Siberian summers leave farmers only a short window to
plant and to harvest; production in the region depends very much on the
weather.
“In the meantime, the
Russian government is keen to move from grain production to livestock
production, mainly pigs. They view this as a way to add value to their supply
chain. If the Russian meat industry continues to expand then we could see a
decline in grain exports. Some people are asking whether we have already seen
peak exports.”
“And what would be third
on your list of structural changes?” I asked.
“It would have to be the
expansion of the biofuels industry. Forty percent of US corn is used for
ethanol production while 50 percent of EU rapeseed is used for producing
biodiesel.”
“Those figures are
surprisingly high,” I interrupted. “Such a big diversion to biofuels must have
had a big impact on prices.”
“Not really,” Arnaud replied. “When the US ethanol industry
started to take off in the mid-2000s there was a big debate in the press as to
whether corn should be used as fuel: the “food versus fuel” debate. Looking
back, it is now evident that that debate was flawed. US ethanol production
hasn’t seriously impacted either the price or the availability of corn for food
or feed.”
“Why is that?” I asked.
“Because corn contains
both protein and carbohydrates; you can use the protein for animal feed and use
the calories to drive your car. When you make ethanol from corn you get a
by-product called “Distillers’ Dried Grains with Solubles” (DDGS), which can be
used as a feed ingredient for livestock. Each 56-pound bushel of corn used in
dry-mill ethanol production generates about 17.4 pounds of DDGS.
“A similar situation
exists in Europe with rapeseed: you use the oil for biodiesel and the high-protein
rapeseed meal as feed for animals.
“But there is another
reason why the whole fuel versus food debate of the early 2000s was flawed.
People forget that in Europe after the Second World War, 70 percent of your
acreage went to feeding (fuelling) your labour force, including feed for your
horses. Today a rapeseed farmer
will see only half of his production going for fuel! The debate was based on
the assumption that the market is fixed, and that we have a choice between
food, feed and fuel. That is incorrect.”
“But what about the
negative environmental impact of using land to grow food for fuel? Aren’t we
losing biodiversity?”
“Not in the EU or US at
least,” Arnaud told me. “Arable Land has been falling as from 2008, while
forestry and urbanisation has increased.”
“Is that because yields
have increased?”
“We saw yield increases in Europe until about 2007, but these have now plateaued, particularly for wheat. Corn and soybean yields have continued to increase in the Americas because of GM technology and new breeding techniques. Remember there is no GM wheat anywhere. Wheat yields depend on the weather: sometimes good and sometimes less good.
“What is 4th
structural shift on your list?” I asked.
“It is the development of
the starch industry for sweeteners and food use. High Fructose Corn Syrup
(HFCS) has taken a significant part of the market for sweeteners in both China
and the US, largely because it is cheaper than sugar. Isoglucose, as HFCS is
called in Europe, has had less impact in the EU, largely because production has
been restricted through quotas. Those quotas have now been lifted, and we will
be watching closely to see how the market develops.”
“And the last one on your
list?” I asked Arnauld.
“Number 5 on the list has to be the big expansion of soybeans. In 1978/19, global soybean production was just 77 million mt, but is set to reach 363 million mt in 2018/19 according to our latest forecasts. This has been achieved through a heavy expansion of acreage around the world, and especially in the US, Brazil and Argentina. Demand and trade have also risen especially strongly and we have seen some significant shifts over the decades, with Brazil now by far the dominant exporter.
The question now is whether palm oil will follow the same path, and compete with soy oil in all its outlets: We are following this carefully. ”
“Thank you Arnauld. Your
comments have been very helpful. Is there anything that you would like to add?”
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Cargill’s CEO said this was a difficult time for agriculture, especially for farmers in the US. He explained that the ongoing trade war, now in its eighth month, had already changed global trade patterns that could be difficult to reverse even in the long run.
The company also announced two new managerial appointments for its North American Protein Business as part of the recent change in the leadership structure. A company official said it highlighted Cargill’s focus on developing the “future of protein.” In Pakistan, meanwhile, Cargill will be investing USD 200 million in the next 5 years to help develop the dairy industry as well as the animal feed market. Louis Dreyfus, on the other hand, reiterated its plan to either sell or shut down its dairy segment as it continues to restructure and focus on its ‘core’ commodities. The CFO said that dairy only represented 1% of the group’s sales but used too much working capital.
Bunge lowered the 2018 earning forecast for its agribusiness by about USD 90-100 million and its sugar and ethanol segment by USD 60-70 million, citing the global grain glut and ongoing trade dispute with China. In addition, it has appointed a new acting CEO, the founding partner of Flatwater Partners, while three board members said they would not stand for re-election.
ADM is buying the remaining 50% stake in UK-based grains trading company Gleadell Agriculture from French cooperative InVivo to merge it with its UK marketing arm ADM Arkady. ADM said the aim was to strengthen its UK presence by increasing origination, storage and end-destination marketing. In Thailand, ADM has tied up with tapioca starch producer General Starch Limited to distribute the latter’s products in the EMEA region under ADM branding.
In Bangladesh, Wilmar and India-based Adani are investing USD 400 million to develop an industrial park in an economic zone. The investment will focus on food and include a waste refinery.
In today’s world, an estimated 20% of plant species are on the verge of extinction but the figure is much higher, at 60%, for coffee plants. An expert from Kew Gardens in the UK explained that wild coffee, although not palatable enough to drink, was key to the survival of the two coffee plant species we do drink – Arabica and Robusta. We depend on wild trees for seeds which can be crossed with domesticated species – something which could be a bit of an issue since the Global Change Biology officially classified Arabica as “threatened.” It expects its population will drop by half by 2088 as a result of climate change.
The good news, on the other hand, is that a new study by the US Department of Agriculture found that beef production, including the production of animal feed, caused 3.3% of the world’s GHG emissions, lower than the 14.5% previously estimated. The study also found that US beef farmers have successfully reduced their footprints and only use 5% of water withdrawals in the country.
Nitrogen pollution, meanwhile, remains a growing problem – about half of the nitrogen used in agriculture is lost into the atmosphere or water. A group of scientists are arguing that it would be much more efficient to regulate the few existing fertiliser producer groups rather than trying to shape the habits of millions of farmers. There are an estimated 2.1 million farms in the US while 5 groups control 80% of urea production in North America.
A new report unveiled in Davos points out the need for the world’s agriculture system to become more circular, which means reducing waste as well as sourcing food locally. If not, by 2050 as many as 5 million people could die every year from pollution, pesticide exposure and other factors resulting from today’s agriculture system.
A study from the University of Connecticut found that junk foods ads in the US disproportionately target Hispanic and black children which in turns means they are more at risk of diseases such as diabetes. Similarly, the US brewing industry is also trying to target more people of colour as well as women in a bid to expand its customer base amid slowing growth sales. As the Brewers Association put it “you cannot simply sell beer to young white dudes with beards.” The association also published a “diversity best practices” to boost diversity within the industry.
Bunge cuts 2018 EBIT outlook on trade war, appoints new CEO
Bunge, one of the world’s biggest agribusiness companies, has cited
the impact of the US-China trade war in lowering its income outlook for
the full 2018 fiscal year ending in December, according to a statement
released Tuesday.
The company rolled the revision into an announcement over the
appointment of a new CEO, with current board member Gregory A. Heckman
revealed as the acting CEO with immediate effect.
Adjusted EBIT will fall by about $90-$100 million in the Agribusiness
segment and $60-$70 million in the Sugar and Bioenergy segment,
compared to the low end of its previous forecast which was $1.045
billion.
“The Agribusiness shortfall was largely due to the reduction in value
of the company’s Brazilian soybean ownership as factors related to
China trade and demand caused Brazilian prices to converge with US
prices,” the company said.
“The Sugar and Bioenergy shortfall was primarily due to lower
Brazilian ethanol prices, and a weather-related reduction in yields as a
poor crop year came to a close.”
The New York-based agribusiness has been suffering from a global glut
of grains and oilseeds in the past year, with its share price falling
over 30% in the past year.
Despite the downward revision in its EBIT outlook, Bunge’s share
price rose 1.5% Tuesday as the company also announced Heckman had
replaced former CEO Soren Schroder who announced in December he was
stepping down after five years in the role.
“I look forward to further collaboration with Kathi (Bunge’s
Non-Executive Board Chair, Kathleen Hyle), the Board and our management
team, focusing on ways to improve performance and create shareholder
value,” Heckman said in response to his appointment.
At the end of October, Bunge – part of the industry’s ABCD quartet of
agri-trading giants – agreed to add four directors to its board after
pressure from investors to create a strategic review committee to
examine the company’s operations.
Last year, the company became a takeover target for Glencore and
rival agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), but ADM’s CEO
debunked that in a January interview with newswire Reuters saying it is
the wrong time for “monster” acquisitions.
In the 2017 fiscal year, Bunge’s turnover rose 7.3% to $45.79 billion, resulting in a total EBIT of $436 million, down nearly 61% on the year, with 60% attributed to its Agribusiness segment, and with the Sugar and Bioenergy making a loss of $12 million.
AgriCensus Prices Over 500 daily Spot Marker and Forward Curve price assessments for wheat, corn, soy, barley, vegoils, meals and seeds.
The recent announcement from Olam that they are exiting the sugar trading business has provoked mixed feelings among those left in the business, especially as it comes fast on the heels of Bunge’s sale of their own sugar trading business to Wilmar. Fewer trade houses may mean less competition, but are these just more rats leaving a sinking business?
Forty years ago, when I joined Cargill, I was told that the company made no money on selling grains to destination: the FOBS to CIF portion in the supply chain. Instead, the company viewed these sales as a necessary evil. The money was made upstream: tiny margins on (at that time) selling seeds, fertilizer and other chemicals to farmers, buying and storing the grain at harvest time, shipping it in barges down the Mississippi, storing it again at the port and then elevating it onto the ships. Cargill also made money by offering risk management services to the farmers, and even executing their transactions on the futures markets.
The final stage of selling and shipping the grain to the final buyer was a mug’s game that you had to play as best you could, without losing too much. As Bunge, Cargill and the other heavyweight trading companies knew 40 years ago, the money was in originating grain, not in marketing it to destination.
After completing my training program I moved to Cargill’s sugar department. There I looked after the futures and kept the position, first in London and then in Minneapolis. It was a sharp learning curve; during my time on the futures desk the sugar price rose from 9c/lb to 44c/lb, and then back down again. We didn’t get every move right, but we made money and had fun doing so!
At that time Cargill was the new kid on the block in the
world of sugar trading. The company had launched the desk a few years prior to
me joining, and then had promptly lost their trading team to Phibros. At that
time, EDF Man, Sucden, Tate and Lyle, Woodhouse Drake and Carey, and Kerry (led
by the King of Sugar, Robert Kuok) were “the big five” companies that dominated
the sugar market.
The big five knew the business inside out, and they had the long-standing relationships that helped them to get trades done. They had all made considerable fortunes in the 1974 sugar bull market (that had seen sugar prices rise to 66c/lb). They were well financed, well connected, well trained and with a considerable depth of experience and expertise. All that the two American newcomers (Cargill and Phibros) could hope for were a few crumbs from the table.
Back in London, Cargill transferred me from futures to white physical sugar. My new role was to buy white sugar from European producers and sell to the MENA region. At that time most sugar-importing countries bought through government tenders. I had a miserable time trying (and failing) to make money by buying FOBS Europe and sell CIF MENA. It was exactly the sort of business that the company had warned me against on my training program.
I found life as a physical sugar trader so tough that I eventually threw in the towel and left to be a broker, first on the futures and then on the physicals. After I left, Cargill gradually expanded their footprint in the sugar sector and eventually invented a profitable business model of leveraging their loss-making physical business into huge profits in the futures markets.
A byproduct of this, however, was to make the standalone physical business even less profitable. As other companies tried to replicate Cargill’s model, the competition to make the physical sales became even fiercer. Over time, traders ended up losing more on the physicals than they gained on the futures. The model broke through overuse, and no one has yet found a satisfactory, and equally profitable, alternative,
Trading companies tend to do well when a market is dislocated— when traditional trade flows are disrupted and buyers have to find alternative supplies. This can occur because of poor weather, or because of government intervention, such as tariffs. Trading companies with a global footprint can really add value in such disrupted markets, but they struggle to make ends meet in dull ones.
If not dull, the current situation in the world sugar market is difficult. Supplies are ample and producers, particularly in India, are sitting on large stocks. Because of the nature of the cane cycle, this situation has lasted longer than many had hoped. All that traders can do is be patient and to wait for the cycle to turn.
What applies to sugar also applies to the companies that trade sugar. New companies enter a market when trading conditions are favorable; old companies leave when conditions deteriorate. Unfortunately this often happens with a lag: new entrants usually appear after markets have peaked; existing participants often leave just as conditions are about to turn up.
Of the “big five” companies that dominated the sugar market in the 1970s, two have disappeared completely. In volume terms the “big three” list today would arguably comprise Alvean, COFCO and Wilmar (including RAW), with EDF Man, Sucden and Dreyfus following closely behind.
The main participants have changed, but this amount of ebb, flow and natural wastage is not out of line with what has occurred in sectors outside of the commodity business. It is less than what has occurred, say, in technology or healthcare.
The physical sugar trade has always been tough, and companies have continually had to reinvent themselves to thrive and survive. Structural change and disintermediation are making things even tougher.
But then no company in any sector can sit back in the belief that what worked in the past will work in the future. As Darwin wrote, “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent. It is the one that is most adaptable to change.”
The world’s four largest food traders seem to have benefited from the change in trade flows amid the US-China trade war and the additional demand for Brazilian grains. In 2018, Bunge maintained its place as the country’s top soybean exporter with 17.7 million mt, a 9.2% increase from the previous year, followed by Cargill with 12.15 million mt, a 1.4% increase on year. The third and fourth place went to Louis Dreyfus and Cofco, respectively, while ADM and Olam also reported significant improvements in exports. The head of ADM is hopeful that the trade war will end this year. He argued that it had made trade flows rather complicated. For instance, Argentina, the world’s third-biggest soybean producer, imported the biggest quantity of US origin soybean.
ADM announced a plan to purchase one of the largest producers of citrus ingredients in the world, Florida Chemical Company, which could happen in early 2019, pending government approval. The company president said the move would help ADM achieve its goal of becoming the biggest nutrition company. The CEO said the group looked on average at 50 companies every year for potential acquisition. He admitted having analysed companies like Bunge, Louis Dreyfus and Cargill but said the time was not right for a ‘monster’ acquisition. He explained that joint ventures, like the one it has with Cargill in Egypt, would make more sense for the time being.
The Brazilian meat giant JBS is also expected to benefit from the trade war as the USDA announced that it will spend USD 5 million to buy 1.8 million lb of its pork, as part of the USD 12 billion aid package announced by the White House. Lobbyists are already complaining that the money is going to a foreign firm, but the USDA highlighted that the funds will be spent to purchase American-made products.
The US President’s farm support could start to waiver as farmers increasingly struggle because of the delay in the distribution of government grants and key USDA supply and demand reports caused by the shutdown. The USDA did, however, find a way to avoid a potential controversy by funding the food assistance program up to the end of February, while the FDA said that essential food inspections will continue, although it remains unclear how long inspectors will work without pay.
Dairy producers, meanwhile, are celebrating as the US government has started undoing efforts by the previous administration to make school lunches healthier. The National School Lunch Program accounted for up 7.6% of all liquid dairy sales in 2017 which helped compensate for a consistent drop in demand, as per capita milk consumption fell 40% since 1975. This marks the return of full-fat chocolate milk served at every school meal. Meanwhile, health advocates warn that one out of three American children is already overweight or obese.
In China, health advocates argued that food and drink manufacturers were successfully steering the obesity debate around the need for more exercise while downplaying the importance of food and drink in a healthy diet, as laid out by a paper published in the British Medical Journal. The International Life Sciences Institute, funded by Coca-Cola and other food makers, has enjoyed a good relation with health officials, the paper noted.
Danone confirmed that it was investing in Epigamia, a yoghurt maker in India, in order to improve its access to the value-added end of the market. Danone had left the Indian market last year after a failed foray but a spokesperson said Epigamia will be run independently. In Latin America, Danone is partnering with a specialised packaging company to develop yoghurt pots targeted to meet the growing health and environmental concerns of consumers.
In the UK, the interest in dairy alternatives and vegan foods has started to surge, as it does every January, as part of what some call Veganuary. But research by the University of Oxford notes that although all plant-based dairy drinks require a lot less land and emit less carbon dioxide, some alternatives have a larger impact than others. Rice and almond milk, for example, require much more water to make than soy or oat milk. The BBC has a useful calculator which will estimate the environmental footprints of certain food products, based on the Oxford study.
In any case, a group of scientists have come up with the “Planetary Health” diet, which would reportedly prevent millions of premature deaths as well as reduce greenhouse emissions significantly. The diet includes reducing by half the amount of meat and sugar consumed while increasing our nuts, fruits and vegetable intake. Beyond getting everyone on board, the scientists conceded that unequal access to food may be a challenge to implementing this diet.
Brazil soybean exports slow as China demand, early harvest disappoints
Soybean exports out of Brazil in January will not reach 2 million mt,
according to Agricensus calculations using export and line-up data.
Brazil exported just over 1 million mt of soybeans during the first
two weeks in January with a further 800,000 mt in the line up data.
And while that will eclipse last year’s record of 1.5 million mt
exported over the whole month, it does not reflect recent expectations
that exports will be much higher due to an early harvest in Brazil’s
southern states.
Sources say the trade war and the uncertain picture of Chinese demand
has deterred buying of soybeans by private crushers, many of which have
been impacted by negative crush margins.
Typically, Chinese crushers would buy US beans for January shipments
to cover March crush, but with US imports taxed at 25%, US bean sales
have been limited to state-sponsored purchases of 5 million mt, leaving a
big question of what China will do for March supply.
“It depends how much of that (5 million mt) finds its ways to
crushers,” said one soybean trader at an international trading house,
adding that if much of it does trickle out then buying will remain
muted.
Brazil remains the cheapest origin for Chinese crushers to buy beans, but trade has been “very quiet” for weeks, according to Brazilian and Chinese sources, with about 20 cargoes being bought since December.
AgriCensus Prices Over 500 daily Spot Marker and Forward Curve price assessments for wheat, corn, soy, barley, vegoils, meals and seeds.
Cargill reported a 20% drop in net earnings in the quarter ending November 30 at USD 741 million in part because of the US-China trade tensions, which also affected its freight transport business. The firm’s starches and sweeteners segment struggled too amid the low ethanol price in the US and the high cost of raw materials in Europe. Looking forward, however, Cargill launched in Europe a brand of artisan chocolate called Veliche Gourmet which is entirely sourced from Rainforest Alliance Certified farms. Chocolate makers will be able to buy the products directly from Cargill’s new e-commerce platform.
Cargill is not the only trading house to struggle with the sugar segment: Olam announced this week it was closing its sugar trading desk. This comes only months after Bunge sold its sugar trading unit to Wilmar and Louis Dreyfus’ Biosev unit in Brazil sold some of its mills and has been looking at selling some more.
In the US, McCain had to recall an estimated 99 million pounds of frozen vegetables in Oct-Nov last year, a record high recall. The company found that all the ingredients that went through its Colton, California, plant since January 2016 were at risk of being contaminated by Salmonella and Listeria monocytogenes. The New Food Economy pointed out that unlike other food recalls in 2018, this one received very little media coverage because it concerned ingredients – a small part in a bigger food system
Meanwhile, Amazon is planning to build more Whole Foods stores in US suburbs in a bid to boost its online pickup services as it aims to expand the reach of its two-hour grocery delivery offered to Prime Now subscribers. This would help boost online sales too, as the stores could also be used as distribution centres.
Going forward, the line between supermarkets and restaurants should become increasingly blurred. A professor at NY University said this was already happening, with supermarkets offering food courts, salad kiosks and cafes. The assumption is that people still want to get involved in the production of the food they consume, notably in the choice of ingredients. That is – if they can afford to. As one expert put it “If you have the time and financial means, you will keep cooking” but with income inequality poised to grow, the number of food deserts and swamps should continue to increase too.
A study in the UK showed that although the majority of consumers are aware that palm oil causes deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions, most of them do not know about the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification. The study also found that labels, even the widely recognised ones like Fairtrade, were not enough to push consumers to change habits. The study concluded that the government needed to make food companies take on the responsibility of sourcing sustainably.
One country where the government is taking a significant step in trying to change consumer habits is Canada. The new Canada Food Guide, which is due for release early this year, will encourage the consumption of plant-based proteins, which has the dairy and meat industry up in arms.
We covered earlier news on the boycott against Danone products in Morocco which started in April last year and cost the group millions in lost revenues. While the boycott was reportedly against high prices, an investigation carried out by the French government suggests Danone was the victim of a troll operation organised by a local company that specialises in digital influence. According to a source, Danone was a “diversion” in a local affair. Another study carried out by a communication agency found that the boycott campaign was mainly political and aimed at the agriculture minister.
Regardless, Danone lost its number one ranking in the milk business to a local competitor as a result. The group has had to make drastic changes to gain consumer trust again, such as clearly communicating the price it pays for milk. Danone also launched a new milk pack which it sells at cost – i.e. with not profit margins. An expert on company communication argued, “The link between a brand and its buyers is very easy to break, much more difficult and time-consuming to rebuild.”
Nestle is facing a similar predicament in India where it is trying to re-establish consumer trust in its Maggi noodle, three years after the government banned the sale of the highly popular instant noodles. The company was cleared less than 6 months later, taking back most of its lost market share, but the Supreme Court has just revived a class action lawsuit for unfair trade practices, false labelling and misleading advertisements. To avoid losing consumer trust again, it launched an ad campaign across all media.
As trade talks kick-off, Sinograin, Cofco buy more US soybeans
After much speculation, Chinese state-owned entities returned to the market on Monday to buy US soybeans, purchasing up to 25 cargoes (900,000 mt), according to several market sources.
Just hours after trade talks between US and Chinese delegates kicked off in Beijing, several sources reported between 20-25 cargoes were bought by state-owned stockpiler Sinograin and Chinese agribusiness Cofco International.
The panamax-sized vessels were bought for loading January and February out of the US Gulf and some vessels loading February and March were heard loading out of the Pacific Northwest.
“The price is estimated at 148 cents per bushel FOB US Gulf over March futures,” said one trader, equating to $394/mt.
A second source said the price for US Gulf was “150 cents per bushel” with PNW cargoes 10 cents per bushel ($3.70/mt) cheaper.
While a third source said the price paid for beans off the Pacific Northwest for February and March loading was 142 cents per bushel over March futures ($392/mt).
Cofco and Sinograin were unavailable for comment.
If true this would be the third round of buying in the past month, with estimates that between 4 and 5 million mt have now been purchased.
In July, China slapped an additional 25% import tax on US soybeans in a retaliation for US taxing some of the nation’s technology exports – effectively blocking US suppliers from the world’s number one buyer of soybeans.
But after talks between President Xi and President Trump last month at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, President Xi pledged to buy more US agricultural goods while negotiations to find a resolution to the trade spat were ongoing.
Chinese state-owned buyers had been rumoured to be in the market last week, but with a government shutdown in the US preventing the release of export data, the market will have to wait for exact details.
AgriCensus Prices Over 500 daily Spot Marker and Forward Curve price assessments for wheat, corn, soy, barley, vegoils, meals and seeds.
Soybean and corn farmers in the US could be looking at a difficult year ahead. A recent study showed that average 2018 returns should turn out higher than the previous year, as excellent yields and early hedging mitigated the effects of the escalating trade war with China. However, farmers will likely bear the brunt of the trade war in 2019 with a forecast for negative margins if prices stay where they are. Brazil has benefitted, on the other hand, with soybean exports surging 23% in 2018, mainly due to demand from China. But corn exports dropped 18% because of the higher logistics costs as a result of the minimum truck rates implemented last year.
These high trucking rates are pushing Cargill, Bunge and ADM to look into buying their own trucks although they said they will wait until a decision from the Supreme Court in the hope the minimum rates are overturned. If the decision takes too long, Cargill said it would go ahead and get its own fleet, while other Brazilian giants, such as Amaggi, Coamo and meat producer JBS have already bought trucks. However, there could be a limit in terms of the production of trucks, and logistics experts pointed out that these fleets were mainly intended for emergencies and not to replace outsourcing. Truck logistics is a completely different business with significant operational and labour costs, an expert warned.
Another conflict taking a toll is that with Iran. Even though the sanctions don’t apply to food, Cargill, as well as Bunge, are among the trade houses that have halted exports to Iran amid payment difficulties. The trading groups used to be able to avoid US sanctions by using smaller banks – mostly based in the EU – but an Iranian official explained that these banks have closed down or have stopped dealing with the country under pressure from the US. Some 16 vessels are reportedly stuck at port unable to offload because of payment issues.
Separately, Cargill announced it would sell its global malt business to the French cooperative Axereal. The unit is composed of 15 factories in four continents. And COFCO has joined a venture announced in October by ADM, Bunge, Cargill and Louis Dreyfus which aims to boost transparency and efficiency through the digitisation of agricultural transactions. The head of COFCO said that one of the goals was to automate execution to reduce costs.
Plant-based meat continues to attract the interest of the world’s largest food makers and distributors as it addresses two key consumer demands: the focus on health and lowering carbon emissions. A senior MacDonald’s executive recognised the value of meat alternatives and revealed that the food-chain – the world’s biggest beef consumer – might look into opportunities in the sector.
Cargill, Tyson Foods and Unilever all recently purchased firms involved in producing plant-based meat. Nestle joined the club this week and announced that it will launch of the Incredible Burger next spring, which is made from soy and wheat protein. The firm hopes to grow its vegan business to USD 1 billion within 10 years.
Meanwhile, the Impossible Burger, made by Impossible Foods, is already sold at 5,000 restaurants in the US. But the firm now faces another hurdle: the FDA said that in its uncooked state, the soy leghemoglobin used to give the burger a meat-like colour and texture would count as a food colouring. Under US law, additives used for colour fall under much stricter norms, mostly because food makers have previously been found to use unsafe products to change colours. Nonetheless, Impossible Foods is still optimistic it will start selling the burger in stores in 2019.
Dairy products represent the next opportunity to switch to plant-based ingredients, and Nestle also announced plans to release a spirulina algae latte and a drink made from walnuts and blueberries. Nonetheless, recent studies reveal that not all plants are equal in the consumer’s eye, as sales of soy-based drinks have been dropping, while oat-based drinks have seen significant increases. Firms are also responding to this change, with Pepsi announcing the release of a Quaker Oat Beverage and Danone announcing three Oat Yeah drinks.
Producers are also responding to another growing consumer demand: cruelty-free products. No-kill eggs, for instance, were recently introduced in Germany. Under a newly developed process, eggs are scanned just a few days after being fertilised to determine the chick’s sex so that males can be discarded before they hatch. And the team behind the eggs seem to enjoy a good pun – they called the scanning method “Seleggt” and labeled the no-kill eggs “Respeggt”.