22. Sep, 2015

A Review Of The Final Submissions To The Wool Selling Systems Review.

Only 11 of the 22 final submissions to the W.S.S.R. are worth reading. But I Will list them all.      Only one of the eleven was from a woolgrower, W.C.Freeman, which is worth reading.  The other ten are all from businesses. I will say the best is from Ming Ho Wool Industry Company Ltd. A consice submission with no jargon.

 1 A & J Farran. Not consice as requested, too many assumptions.                                        2/10

 2 R. B. Crawford. Too convoluted, Buyers don't want objectively measured handle, they want to view the sample.                                                                                                                 1/10

 3 Geoffrey Beath.  Who says, or how do you know you can get top prices.                              0/10

 4 Talman Pty Ltd. Saving costs would be great, if possible, how you get higher prices is more             important.                                                                                                                           0/10

 5 N Z X Australian Agribusiness. An advertisement. Nothing useful.                                        0/10 

 6 W.C. Freeman. Very clear submission, best from a wool grower.                                         8/10

 7 United Wool Company.                  Wow that says it all.                                                    10/10 

 8 Australian Superfine Woolgrowers Association Inc.   Growers, store wool on farm, and selling with  certainty of measurements.   No way.                                                                          1/10

 9 Australisn Council of Wool Exporters and Processors.           Spot on.                                 10/10

 10 Australian Wool Testing Authoriity. Basically fine tune the present system.  " will overseas customers accept sampling on farm ?"             NO.                                                                10/10

 11    I Trade Wool.           How to increase costs exponentially.                                               0/10

 12    Ming Ho Wool Industry Company Ltd.           Clear and concise, no jargon.                    10/10

 13  The National Council of Wool Selling Brokers of Australi Inc.    All obvious.                     10/10

  14 Peter Small.       Opposes buyers inspecting samples.                                                       0/10

  15 Stephen Blair.  Prepared by an economist who obviously knows nothing about Wool.       0/10

   16  Techwool Trading.        Great Submission.                                                                   10/10

   17 Wool Producers Australia.           A nothing submission.                                                  0/10

    18 N.S.W. Farmers' Association.    Not concise, and all wrong.                                           0/10

    19 G. Schneider Australia P/L.          Great Submission.                                                    10/10

    20 Modiano Australia.                      Very concise, great.                                                  10/10

    21 Australian Merino Exports.            Great Submission.                                                    10/10

    22 David Richie.                  Another Great Submission.                                                     10/10

   SUMMARY.    There we have it, ten great submissions all from Buyers or Brokers and the A.W.T.A.     Submissions from Growers not much good, except W.C.Freeman's, the best of them. All submissions from proponents of the Wool Exchange Portal, were rubbish. I will unwind on them if they start to get traction.