Once again --Land prices

SDJIM

SDJIM

New member
Had another out of this world land sale---40 acres 1.5 miles south of Platte SD
Winning bid just over $7000.00 per acre--its still insane. :eek:

We won't be adding any acres to our holdings, not at these prices. :D
 
Did a local farmer buy it or some outside investor?
 
SDJIM said:
Had another out of this world land sale---40 acres 1.5 miles south of Platte SD
Winning bid just over $7000.00 per acre--its still insane. :eek:

We won't be adding any acres to our holdings, not at these prices. :D
Click to expand...

That is nuts. 7000 per acre. Well, Who ever sold it is happy. I would not pay that. :eek::eek::eek:
 
Well if this "investor"s not the last to do such a cockamamie thing, he can sure see the end of the line from there! May be his great grand children will make some money with it, or sell it at a loss, and buy a coal gasification plant.
 
Nice price for a peace of property. I am guessing for what ever reason someone wanted that land probably for a special purpose. I heard of some land that may sell in Lyman County for a special purpose at $8000/acre.

Some land is going to set a pretty high mark, more so than other land as there will be a special purpose for it other than farming/hunting. I think the hunting market is not a driving force on land value as much as farming and location of said property.

Being a land owner I like the idea of higher values but wishing to buy more I wish it was not as high as it is currently.
 
Another aspect to consider on land prices some pieces of property may only come up for sale every few generations which may not be in one's lifetime again. So, if you want that piece of property and can get the financing you may really stretch yourself financially to get that piece of land and if competing with a like minded individual the price certainly will go much higher.
 
niceshot said:
No worries, he'll collect $5.60 a bushel X 180 average corn yield in taxpayer subsidized crop insurance.
Click to expand...

Really??? Where can I sign up for this. I just sat down with our insurance broker this last month and we did not have this option.
 
niceshot said:
Who bought it? A poor farmer. What did he pay for it? $280,000. Did he borrow the money from a bank? No, he wrote a check. Where did he get the money? From selling corn to the ethanol plant. What's he going to do with it? Grow corn and beans on it. What if there's a drought this year and he doesn't get a crop? No worries, he'll collect $5.60 a bushel X 180 average corn yield in taxpayer subsidized crop insurance. Where did he get the rest of his land? It was given to him by his grandfather who worked very hard. What happened to his other brothers and sisters? I don't know, you'll have to ask him?
Click to expand...

Wow I guess he was a real scum ball :eek: Ya know how those FARMERS are, the rich sob's. Guess I know what ya think of me and my wife. :(

What a negative reply--makes me sorry I posted it.
 
With 4 dollar corn not sure how any farmer could justify that purchase. I can see if the land had some special value other than farming but otherwise it is going to take a long time to see a profit from that parcel.
 
SDJIM said:
Wow I guess he was a real scum ball :eek: Ya know how those FARMERS are, the rich sob's. Guess I know what ya think of me and my wife. :(

What a negative reply--makes me sorry I posted it.
Click to expand...

You could by a new shiny truck and take a vacation if you planted all that pheasant cover on your farm! :cheers:
 
Now I have a serious reply. First of all most people underestimate the gigantic investment in farming. First you buy land, machinery, have to guess right on crops, have some help with the weather. Most farms are on a 65% or less debt schedule. Most less. Most all of it's assets are pledged to a bank or insurance company, there are really no options, if you crop fails, you might recover the input costs, but not the profit. If you have a great year, and you sell your crop to the commodity market or the ethanol plant, you might save some back to ward off another bad year! The point being, and I have said this before, there is COST, big gigantic cost to provide wildlife habitat. I think people who are not farmers, are envious of the guy with ground, especially in South Dakota, they seem to think it's a golden go! Sell a good higher than market corn crop, win! weather knocks down the yield, the government will bail you out, win again! Not quite that simple. In the older generation, we were all farmers, or had been before we settled the suburbs, had an appreciation of what it was like. Now with the allure of pheasant habitat across the horizon out the back door, is a dream scenario to the guy who doesn't have it. Like looking at Kate Moss! Unreachable, but so desirous! A lot of these farmers would have hedgerows, meandering streams, a forty or two left vacant.... if he can afford it! We ought to thank our lucky stars that some who can, save what they have, realize the land is better with it, make do financially, to ensure that they can keep it that way. Profit margin for wildlife will not work currently, most of the people in the country are more concerned about the price of milk, not overly concerned about pheasant cover. Restoring VAST quantities of specific grass pasture is a non-starter. It would take a superlative vision of a degraded ecological future to achieve, basically, scare them now, to avoid the wasteland. It may be true, a few may see it, but the national will, predictably , will ignore the problem until the jolt of a Pearl Harbor apocalypse. It's short sighted to blame it all on an unspecified generic farmer. We do not have the will, nationally, or the cost, to turn the ship around. Those who have the land are fortunate, but a large inordinate portion of the responsibility in this battle, is on them! What we need is scientific advances that make less ground necessary, to produce the product, just like the dust bowl times, new ideas to harvest that ground with less invasion, like the old strip farm idea. Supply and demand, will allow a respite for land, in that if it's to expensive to farm, and there is a lot of crop provided, reducing the cost, that ground will be fallow, or be used for cattle pasture. Better for it, better for pheasants, better for water.....now you have an economic value and that will work!
 
oldandnew said:
You could by a new shiny truck and take a vacation if you planted all that pheasant cover on your farm! :cheers:
Click to expand...

I could buy a shinny new truck and go on vacation if I wanted too :D--with out touching my pheasant cover. Lots of hard work and savings made it so--me and my wife have done the following---put up a new house---paid off most of the debt to the point where the total debt load to the land value is at less than 4%--and have a 140 acres of habitat to boot. It took a lot of hard work, doing without at times and making good decisions. No I don't feel like I owe anyone anything, it just gets me how some people seem to think chasing the American dream does not apply to farmers.
 
SDJIM, you should be proud of yourself for setting a good example to us all. Thanks for sharing the story of your success as it gives guidance by example.
Congratulations and again thanks!!
 
SDJIM I own farm dirt where there are NO pheasants I only wish that I would have the drive and desire that YOU have to farm for pheasants when you do have wild birds !!! there some of us land owners that know the cost that farmers like you are paying !!!! I for one say THANKS !!!!
 
oldandnew said:
Now I have a serious reply. First of all most people underestimate the gigantic investment in farming. First you buy land, machinery, have to guess right on crops, have some help with the weather. Most farms are on a 65% or less debt schedule. Most less. Most all of it's assets are pledged to a bank or insurance company, there are really no options, if you crop fails, you might recover the input costs, but not the profit. If you have a great year, and you sell your crop to the commodity market or the ethanol plant, you might save some back to ward off another bad year! The point being, and I have said this before, there is COST, big gigantic cost to provide wildlife habitat. I think people who are not farmers, are envious of the guy with ground, especially in South Dakota, they seem to think it's a golden go! Sell a good higher than market corn crop, win! weather knocks down the yield, the government will bail you out, win again! Not quite that simple. In the older generation, we were all farmers, or had been before we settled the suburbs, had an appreciation of what it was like. Now with the allure of pheasant habitat across the horizon out the back door, is a dream scenario to the guy who doesn't have it. Like looking at Kate Moss! Unreachable, but so desirous! A lot of these farmers would have hedgerows, meandering streams, a forty or two left vacant.... if he can afford it! We ought to thank our lucky stars that some who can, save what they have, realize the land is better with it, make do financially, to ensure that they can keep it that way. Profit margin for wildlife will not work currently, most of the people in the country are more concerned about the price of milk, not overly concerned about pheasant cover. Restoring VAST quantities of specific grass pasture is a non-starter. It would take a superlative vision of a degraded ecological future to achieve, basically, scare them now, to avoid the wasteland. It may be true, a few may see it, but the national will, predictably , will ignore the problem until the jolt of a Pearl Harbor apocalypse. It's short sighted to blame it all on an unspecified generic farmer. We do not have the will, nationally, or the cost, to turn the ship around. Those who have the land are fortunate, but a large inordinate portion of the responsibility in this battle, is on them! What we need is scientific advances that make less ground necessary, to produce the product, just like the dust bowl times, new ideas to harvest that ground with less invasion, like the old strip farm idea. Supply and demand, will allow a respite for land, in that if it's to expensive to farm, and there is a lot of crop provided, reducing the cost, that ground will be fallow, or be used for cattle pasture. Better for it, better for pheasants, better for water.....now you have an economic value and that will work!
Click to expand...

I do not disagree with much of what you say, but the scientific advances to get more out of an acre have only lead to the thought that why not get more out of more acres? Hence every little waterway and slough in my neighborhood has been razed the last three years.
 
Uncle Buck said:
I do not disagree with much of what you say, but the scientific advances to get more out of an acre have only lead to the thought that why not get more out of more acres? Hence every little waterway and slough in my neighborhood has been razed the last three years.
Click to expand...

I hope that the glut in the grain market will cure these guys from sucking eggs! All those sodbusters in the thirties are Californians now. With National Grasslands as a witness. Nothing is sure, but the fact that we will repeat the mistake of failed history lessons repeatedly, and continually, mostly because we are now wiser? and that won't happen again!
 
Uncle Buck said:
I do not disagree with much of what you say, but the scientific advances to get more out of an acre have only lead to the thought that why not get more out of more acres? Hence every little waterway and slough in my neighborhood has been razed the last three years.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree with both of you in much of this. Scientific advances are mostly genetic in nature. There are issues and problems in this. Cost is a very big factor in farming some years are a total bust, so many factors come into play. This is a very interesting thread. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top